UFO Thread

[Mr Whippy]

I genuinely think there are unexplained/unexplainable things out there.

But these more recent materials from military people and the like just feel like misdirection.



The flow chart looks like this:

Always been here, so what’s new? >> carry on as normal.

All made up, so what changes? >> carry on as normal.

All made up by government for nefarious purposes? >> change government.

Government pissing off aliens when previously they weren’t pissed off >> change government.


It’s kinda irrelevant if they exist or not in my view. What matters is why governments are dealing with it in this bizarre way.


It just reeks of more divide and conquer rubbish. Keep the plebs confused about reality so they don’t see the clear reality in front of their actual faces… which is their government are utter to55ors.

[skwdenyer]

dukeboy749r said:

I suggest something might have been hovering over Vandenburg Air Force base but in 2003 and not one photo.

It just stretches credibility that this wasn't (and still isn't) major news - if it were more than is being suggested.

I'd welcome evidence that we can all see/touch and verify that the assertion that we have been visited by extraterrestrial life in spacecraft. I'd be first back onto this thread to admit I was wrong.

I may be waiting some time, however.

Cameras weren't ubiquitous in 2003. I suspect they were banned amongst base personnel. Until phones like the Sony Ericsson C905 came along, decent quality cameras in your pocket just weren't a thing - that was in 2008 (I still have mine on my desk as it happens - it really was a game-changer at the time) - and even then, their performance at long distances wasn't great.

[MBBlat]

skwdenyer said:

dukeboy749r said:

I suggest something might have been hovering over Vandenburg Air Force base but in 2003 and not one photo.

It just stretches credibility that this wasn't (and still isn't) major news - if it were more than is being suggested.

I'd welcome evidence that we can all see/touch and verify that the assertion that we have been visited by extraterrestrial life in spacecraft. I'd be first back onto this thread to admit I was wrong.

I may be waiting some time, however.

Cameras weren't ubiquitous in 2003. I suspect they were banned amongst base personnel. Until phones like the Sony Ericsson C905 came along, decent quality cameras in your pocket just weren't a thing - that was in 2008 (I still have mine on my desk as it happens - it really was a game-changer at the time) - and even then, their performance at long distances wasn't great.

Isn’t it strange that as more and more people carry around devices capable of decent still and video footage the number of UFO sightings has fallen? It’s almost as if the excuse that I didn’t have a camera on me when I saw the UFO is no longer believable.

[skwdenyer]

MBBlat said:

skwdenyer said:

dukeboy749r said:

I suggest something might have been hovering over Vandenburg Air Force base but in 2003 and not one photo.

It just stretches credibility that this wasn't (and still isn't) major news - if it were more than is being suggested.

I'd welcome evidence that we can all see/touch and verify that the assertion that we have been visited by extraterrestrial life in spacecraft. I'd be first back onto this thread to admit I was wrong.

I may be waiting some time, however.

Cameras weren't ubiquitous in 2003. I suspect they were banned amongst base personnel. Until phones like the Sony Ericsson C905 came along, decent quality cameras in your pocket just weren't a thing - that was in 2008 (I still have mine on my desk as it happens - it really was a game-changer at the time) - and even then, their performance at long distances wasn't great.

Isn’t it strange that as more and more people carry around devices capable of decent still and video footage the number of UFO sightings has fallen? It’s almost as if the excuse that I didn’t have a camera on me when I saw the UFO is no longer believable.

Is that true, that sightings have fallen? And if it has, has their credibility dropped off? For instance, the Police helicopter crew in Wales, the crew of which all filed first-hand reports in 2008?

The thing that's changed at the same time as smartphones is the internet. Whereas in the past perhaps people would have contacted their local paper to report something, now they're more likely just to post something on Facebook. Without public access to the "fire hose" of Facebook posts, its impossible to know if the incidence of reports has increased or decreased.

[tuscaneer]

skwdenyer said:

Is that true, that sightings have fallen? And if it has, has their credibility dropped off? For instance, the Police helicopter crew in Wales, the crew of which all filed first-hand reports in 2008?

The thing that's changed at the same time as smartphones is the internet. Whereas in the past perhaps people would have contacted their local paper to report something, now they're more likely just to post something on Facebook. Without public access to the "fire hose" of Facebook posts, its impossible to know if the incidence of reports has increased or decreased.

First hand reports you say! Oh well then... It's a wrap, must be true!

[juliussneezer]

tuscaneer said:

skwdenyer said:

Is that true, that sightings have fallen? And if it has, has their credibility dropped off? For instance, the Police helicopter crew in Wales, the crew of which all filed first-hand reports in 2008?

The thing that's changed at the same time as smartphones is the internet. Whereas in the past perhaps people would have contacted their local paper to report something, now they're more likely just to post something on Facebook. Without public access to the "fire hose" of Facebook posts, its impossible to know if the incidence of reports has increased or decreased.

First hand reports you say! Oh well then... It's a wrap, must be true!

Anecdotal evidence aka Not real evidence at all.

[tuscaneer]

juliussneezer said:

tuscaneer said:

skwdenyer said:

Is that true, that sightings have fallen? And if it has, has their credibility dropped off? For instance, the Police helicopter crew in Wales, the crew of which all filed first-hand reports in 2008?

The thing that's changed at the same time as smartphones is the internet. Whereas in the past perhaps people would have contacted their local paper to report something, now they're more likely just to post something on Facebook. Without public access to the "fire hose" of Facebook posts, its impossible to know if the incidence of reports has increased or decreased.

First hand reports you say! Oh well then... It's a wrap, must be true!

Anecdotal evidence aka Not real evidence at all.

I'm parked up outside school now waiting to pick the little un up.... You won't believe it.... Everything went black then a beam of light sort of lifted me out of my car and pulled me up to this shiny disc... Once inside I was frozen still but fully conscious... Next thing I know there's all sorts of stuff being shoved up my arse then in a flash I was sitting back in the car.... Well, no I couldn't get my phone out of my pocket as I was frozen in a trance but surely you'll take my word for it!!!??

Edited by tuscaneer on Friday 26th April 15:00

Edited by tuscaneer on Friday 26th April 15:01

[Stan the Bat]

tuscaneer said:

juliussneezer said:

tuscaneer said:

skwdenyer said:

Is that true, that sightings have fallen? And if it has, has their credibility dropped off? For instance, the Police helicopter crew in Wales, the crew of which all filed first-hand reports in 2008?

The thing that's changed at the same time as smartphones is the internet. Whereas in the past perhaps people would have contacted their local paper to report something, now they're more likely just to post something on Facebook. Without public access to the "fire hose" of Facebook posts, its impossible to know if the incidence of reports has increased or decreased.

First hand reports you say! Oh well then... It's a wrap, must be true!

Anecdotal evidence aka Not real evidence at all.

I'm parked up outside school now waiting to pick the little un up.... You won't believe it.... Everything went black then a beam of light sort of lifted me out of my car and pulled me up to this shiny disc... Once inside I was frozen still but fully conscious... Next thing I know there's all sorts of stuff being shoved up my arse then in a flash I was sitting back in the car.... Well, no I couldn't get my phone out of my pocket as I was frozen in a trance but surely you'll take my word for it!!!??

Edited by tuscaneer on Friday 26th April 15:00

Edited by tuscaneer on Friday 26th April 15:01

Exact same thing happened to me....twice.

[PRTVR]

NASA propellant less propulsion.

[TGCOTF-dewey]

Stan the Bat said:

tuscaneer said:

juliussneezer said:

tuscaneer said:

skwdenyer said:

Is that true, that sightings have fallen? And if it has, has their credibility dropped off? For instance, the Police helicopter crew in Wales, the crew of which all filed first-hand reports in 2008?

The thing that's changed at the same time as smartphones is the internet. Whereas in the past perhaps people would have contacted their local paper to report something, now they're more likely just to post something on Facebook. Without public access to the "fire hose" of Facebook posts, its impossible to know if the incidence of reports has increased or decreased.

First hand reports you say! Oh well then... It's a wrap, must be true!

Anecdotal evidence aka Not real evidence at all.

I'm parked up outside school now waiting to pick the little un up.... You won't believe it.... Everything went black then a beam of light sort of lifted me out of my car and pulled me up to this shiny disc... Once inside I was frozen still but fully conscious... Next thing I know there's all sorts of stuff being shoved up my arse then in a flash I was sitting back in the car.... Well, no I couldn't get my phone out of my pocket as I was frozen in a trance but surely you'll take my word for it!!!??

Edited by tuscaneer on Friday 26th April 15:00

Edited by tuscaneer on Friday 26th April 15:01

Exact same thing happened to me....twice.

Twice... You weren't actually picking up your child the second time, where you.

Edited by TGCOTF-dewey on Wednesday 1st May 06:39

[skwdenyer]

PRTVR said:

NASA propellant less propulsion.

That sounds fantastic, and the headline assertion of “above 1 gravity” makes the breathless in this video gush about UFOs…

The problem? This is a material generating 1g, not a craft. It may never be possible to generate more force than is required to merely offset the weight of the material.

Cool stuff however if valid, and may be genuinely useful in a space probe context.

[PRTVR]

skwdenyer said:

PRTVR said:

NASA propellant less propulsion.

That sounds fantastic, and the headline assertion of “above 1 gravity” makes the breathless in this video gush about UFOs…

The problem? This is a material generating 1g, not a craft. It may never be possible to generate more force than is required to merely offset the weight of the material.

Cool stuff however if valid, and may be genuinely useful in a space probe context.

I agree, in a weightless environment its a game changer,
the main reason I posted it was just to show when we think we have everything understood we are still learning.

[shakotan]

PRTVR said:

skwdenyer said:

PRTVR said:

NASA propellant less propulsion.

That sounds fantastic, and the headline assertion of “above 1 gravity” makes the breathless in this video gush about UFOs…

The problem? This is a material generating 1g, not a craft. It may never be possible to generate more force than is required to merely offset the weight of the material.

Cool stuff however if valid, and may be genuinely useful in a space probe context.

I agree, in a weightless environment its a game changer,
the main reason I posted it was just to show when we think we have everything understood we are still learning.

Even in a weightless environment its not a 'game changer'. Just because something has no weight, it still has mass, and you still need enough energy to overcome the current status of the mass. You can't just blow on the ISS and send it off trajectory.

[Bill]

Let's see what independent testing shows. It sounds like something similar was debunked in 2021...

[skwdenyer]

Bill said:

Let's see what independent testing shows. It sounds like something similar was debunked in 2021...

The Em Drive wasn’t in fact debunked, but it’s the same problem - net thrust alone isn’t everything.

[annodomini2]

skwdenyer said:

Bill said:

Let's see what independent testing shows. It sounds like something similar was debunked in 2021...

The Em Drive wasn’t in fact debunked, but it’s the same problem - net thrust alone isn’t everything.

EM Drive has been debunked.

https://newatlas.com/space/emdrive-dead-thrust-ref...

Net thrust is everything when you're building a propulsion system.

[skwdenyer]

annodomini2 said:

EM Drive has been debunked.

https://newatlas.com/space/emdrive-dead-thrust-ref...

Net thrust is everything when you're building a propulsion system.

For anything that must be launched from Earth in order to be used, weight is an important part of the equation when designing a propulsion system. In addition to net thrust

Re the Em Drive, I’d missed that paper. Thanks. So it has now been debunked. Even if it had not, the weight of the whole system made the idea hard to justify.

[annodomini2]

skwdenyer said:

...Even if it had not, the weight of the whole system made the idea hard to justify.

It was more that it would point to some gap in our understanding of physics, the practicality of the device, as it stood, was irrelevant.

[Bill]

It isn't the first time someone's made exaggerated claims in the face of a funding crisis, particularly as it looks like other people are doing tests and will go public with their results.