Discussion
The biggest clue is that the Earthlings primitive radar system can track them, if you're 100,000's of years more advanced than us and you can defy our known physics and travel the stars, well you must have forgot to tick the stealth option on your alien drone or flying saucer, amateurs!
My huge what if speculation or conspiracy, would be some secret squirrel new hologram technology, that can be radar locked because it mimics physical form, you beam these things down by satellite and have some fun, why would you do that to your own navy? I have no idea, there must be some alternative reason, if it's even such a thing.
My huge what if speculation or conspiracy, would be some secret squirrel new hologram technology, that can be radar locked because it mimics physical form, you beam these things down by satellite and have some fun, why would you do that to your own navy? I have no idea, there must be some alternative reason, if it's even such a thing.
Edited by Skyrocket21 on Saturday 29th May 19:52
I was reading something earlier about the mass of UFO sightings around Area 51. It was saying that back then civilian aviation had a ceiling of about 20k ft and military 40k ft. Then you had the U2 that was now flying at 60k ft with its wings reflecting the sun and looking strange. Then OXCART came along on now you have commercial pilots causing over Nevada and seeing a shiny odd shaped object shooting passed them at 2000 mph.
So there is history of secret military stuff being seen by others and being unexplained at the time, but had a secret truth that wasn't that extraordinary.
I'm sure the vast majority of the military knew absolutely f
k all about the A12/SR71 as it was top secret.
So there is history of secret military stuff being seen by others and being unexplained at the time, but had a secret truth that wasn't that extraordinary.
I'm sure the vast majority of the military knew absolutely f
k all about the A12/SR71 as it was top secret. CNN Business news.
Bill Nelson at NASA has now asked NASA scientists to look into UFO videos. Shame about the ET slant on the interview but I think some of you should find this very interesting.
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/business/2021/06/04...
The Telegraph yesterday had yet another big article on the topic.
It’s pleasing to have confirmation that this subject clearly belongs in Eric’s Science! forum.
Bill Nelson at NASA has now asked NASA scientists to look into UFO videos. Shame about the ET slant on the interview but I think some of you should find this very interesting.
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/business/2021/06/04...
The Telegraph yesterday had yet another big article on the topic.
It’s pleasing to have confirmation that this subject clearly belongs in Eric’s Science! forum.
Edited by RegMolehusband on Sunday 6th June 08:58
steveT350C said:
Nick Pope article today....
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/comment/77852/w...
Shame about his injury, I'd have picked him over Pickford for the Euroshttps://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/comment/77852/w...
GroundZero said:
...
and the whole point of the exercise given that Earth has been pumping out radio/TV signals at the speed of light over the past few decades for which any extra-terrestrial intelligence (within the light-year distance these signals have travelled) could simply sit back in their armchair and consume Earth's daily activities via the news reports, science documentaries, etc., sort of makes the whole notion of the idea extremely benign.
I am pretty sure you would only be able to pick up the carrier wave; the modulation would be impossible to decipher by the time you got out past Jupiter let alone over light years. So while "they" might be able to determine that there was something a bit odd about that yellow star over there, they wouldn't be watching the original broadcasts of Dad's Army. Luckily.and the whole point of the exercise given that Earth has been pumping out radio/TV signals at the speed of light over the past few decades for which any extra-terrestrial intelligence (within the light-year distance these signals have travelled) could simply sit back in their armchair and consume Earth's daily activities via the news reports, science documentaries, etc., sort of makes the whole notion of the idea extremely benign.
rxe said:
...
Then they decide to have a poke around Earth. Despite being super intelligent, they leave the landing lights on when they depart their hidden mothership.
...
Ah well you see, rules is rules. It says here "Navigation Lights are to be displayed at all times". More than my jobsworth to turn them off y'see.Then they decide to have a poke around Earth. Despite being super intelligent, they leave the landing lights on when they depart their hidden mothership.
...
daveco said:
Interesting vid of a pilot recording a 'UAP' in 2020. Compared to the usual terrible footage, it's pretty interesting.
Hmmm, impossible to say anything from that. Some background on the equipment would be nice (camera, platform, etc.). Looked like some planets when I overreach the magnification of my telescope!Another video of extremely low quality that starts at a convenient point for the narrative to run over the top. 
The software that picks up the information from the camera sensor on a digital camera tries to resolve an image based up on if it can make out defined edges. When there is not enough light entering the camera sensor then the software struggles to do this and will go back and forth on its focusing range ability to try and resolve a defined edge.
If the object being targeted is small then just about all camera software struggles to recognise an 'edge', even when the sensor is asked to 'zoom in' - which on the majority of phone cameras is nothing more than "digital zoom" - ie. based up on the original image but just scaling that image up to make it look bigger. Doing this does not create additional clarity for the sensor.
To me the "pulsating orb" is nothing more than a night star that can not be focused well with whatever digital camera is being used in the video.
The software is continually trying to resolve the image, in doing so creating a 'pulsating effect'.
Their commentary was "a shooting star that suddenly stopped". So possibly when their eyes were transitioning from cockpit focus range to outside focus range their eyes caused external light sources to appear to 'move' in comparison to whatever other external light sources their eyes were also trying to focus on?
Finally the "he's turning colours" comment; this can happen when cloud cover passes between observer and visible star. Light is dispersed, reflected and some wavelengths are absorbed by the cloud, the remaining composition of wavelengths that make it through will result in a slightly different colour to the original observation.
So the above explanation could be one possible scenario that occurred in this video - or, there is another possible one that some may want to use, and that is a huge jump, ignoring typical electronics and physical effects that we are used to (or at least have a decent explanation for), and make that jump straight over to Mr. ET.
The software that picks up the information from the camera sensor on a digital camera tries to resolve an image based up on if it can make out defined edges. When there is not enough light entering the camera sensor then the software struggles to do this and will go back and forth on its focusing range ability to try and resolve a defined edge.
If the object being targeted is small then just about all camera software struggles to recognise an 'edge', even when the sensor is asked to 'zoom in' - which on the majority of phone cameras is nothing more than "digital zoom" - ie. based up on the original image but just scaling that image up to make it look bigger. Doing this does not create additional clarity for the sensor.
To me the "pulsating orb" is nothing more than a night star that can not be focused well with whatever digital camera is being used in the video.
The software is continually trying to resolve the image, in doing so creating a 'pulsating effect'.
Their commentary was "a shooting star that suddenly stopped". So possibly when their eyes were transitioning from cockpit focus range to outside focus range their eyes caused external light sources to appear to 'move' in comparison to whatever other external light sources their eyes were also trying to focus on?
Finally the "he's turning colours" comment; this can happen when cloud cover passes between observer and visible star. Light is dispersed, reflected and some wavelengths are absorbed by the cloud, the remaining composition of wavelengths that make it through will result in a slightly different colour to the original observation.
So the above explanation could be one possible scenario that occurred in this video - or, there is another possible one that some may want to use, and that is a huge jump, ignoring typical electronics and physical effects that we are used to (or at least have a decent explanation for), and make that jump straight over to Mr. ET.
To counterbalance all the UFO hype recently there was this article in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun...
Personally I am very skeptical that UFOs are anything but man made or natural phenomenon. Outrageous claims require outrageous evidence. Eye witness accounts and grainy videos don’t satisfy that criterion.
Reminds me of spontaneous combustion. I read about that in a number of magazines and books when younger. The articles tried to say how spontaneous combustion defied explanation by normal physics. Yet many years later I read that such cases could be explained using the wick affect and experiments using pigs had demonstrated it. Made me much more skeptical of outlandish claims.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun...
Personally I am very skeptical that UFOs are anything but man made or natural phenomenon. Outrageous claims require outrageous evidence. Eye witness accounts and grainy videos don’t satisfy that criterion.
Reminds me of spontaneous combustion. I read about that in a number of magazines and books when younger. The articles tried to say how spontaneous combustion defied explanation by normal physics. Yet many years later I read that such cases could be explained using the wick affect and experiments using pigs had demonstrated it. Made me much more skeptical of outlandish claims.
Esceptico said:
To counterbalance all the UFO hype recently there was this article in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun...
Personally I am very skeptical that UFOs are anything but man made or natural phenomenon. Outrageous claims require outrageous evidence. Eye witness accounts and grainy videos don’t satisfy that criterion.
Reminds me of spontaneous combustion. I read about that in a number of magazines and books when younger. The articles tried to say how spontaneous combustion defied explanation by normal physics. Yet many years later I read that such cases could be explained using the wick affect and experiments using pigs had demonstrated it. Made me much more skeptical of outlandish claims.
I think if you read back through the thread hardly any of us have claimed its aliens. I think we are all pretty much on the same page that it's man made secret tech.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun...
Personally I am very skeptical that UFOs are anything but man made or natural phenomenon. Outrageous claims require outrageous evidence. Eye witness accounts and grainy videos don’t satisfy that criterion.
Reminds me of spontaneous combustion. I read about that in a number of magazines and books when younger. The articles tried to say how spontaneous combustion defied explanation by normal physics. Yet many years later I read that such cases could be explained using the wick affect and experiments using pigs had demonstrated it. Made me much more skeptical of outlandish claims.
This feels like a US ploy to increase defence spending. All of those ‘official’ videos from the US Navy have been successfully debunked for me.
And the cast of characters involved with the AATIP revelations are like something out of an X-files episode. Add to that the connections with the same people who brought us Bob Lazar, now they only need to wheel out that hairdo Giorgio Tsoukalos, and we’ve got the alien trifecta.
I’d love it to aliens. I really would. But the evidence just isn’t there.
And the cast of characters involved with the AATIP revelations are like something out of an X-files episode. Add to that the connections with the same people who brought us Bob Lazar, now they only need to wheel out that hairdo Giorgio Tsoukalos, and we’ve got the alien trifecta.
I’d love it to aliens. I really would. But the evidence just isn’t there.
Edited by BorkBorkBork on Wednesday 23 June 21:46
BorkBorkBork said:
This feels like a US ploy to increase defence spending. All of those ‘official’ videos from the US Navy have been successfully debunked for me.
And the cast of characters involved with the AATIP revelations are like something out of an X-files episode. Add to that the connections with the same people who brought us Bob Lazar, now they only need to wheel out that hairdo Giorgio Tsoukalos, and we’ve got the alien trifecta.
I’d love it to aliens. I really would. But the evidence just isn’t there.
You're very likely right.And the cast of characters involved with the AATIP revelations are like something out of an X-files episode. Add to that the connections with the same people who brought us Bob Lazar, now they only need to wheel out that hairdo Giorgio Tsoukalos, and we’ve got the alien trifecta.
I’d love it to aliens. I really would. But the evidence just isn’t there.
Edited by BorkBorkBork on Wednesday 23 June 21:46
They'll admit they don't know what these crafts are and that there needs to be "increased surveillance of the phenomenon, by expanding already established channels in our military, federal, and exploratory agencies"
That, or they'll admit Roswell happened, the aliens wanted the bodies and wreckage back but we didn't oblige, and they've been abducting people and annoying various navies and armies as payback ever since
So the report has been dropped on "take out the trash day", why who knows as it says nothing.
Basically it says there is some stuff we can't explain. We don't think aliens, so must be Chinese or Russian secret tech, it's definitely not US military tech. One was a flat weather balloon, the rest we don't know.
So guess the conclusion is it's secret US military tech.
Basically it says there is some stuff we can't explain. We don't think aliens, so must be Chinese or Russian secret tech, it's definitely not US military tech. One was a flat weather balloon, the rest we don't know.
So guess the conclusion is it's secret US military tech.
I find it odd that in this day an age when manned flight has been around for nearly 140 years, many assume that UFOs mean aliens.
I've only ever witnessed one FO that I couldn't explain and it was fantastic to see but both my wife and I immediately assumed it was man made.
It was some kind of object in flight below us as we looked down into a valley but travelling at incredible speed to be so low but clearly controlled flight and it made no noise. It was an alien sight to us to see something so fast, so low and change direction so quickly all without noise but there was clearly some kind of propulsion system at the back of it. A real WTFWT moment.
I've only ever witnessed one FO that I couldn't explain and it was fantastic to see but both my wife and I immediately assumed it was man made.
It was some kind of object in flight below us as we looked down into a valley but travelling at incredible speed to be so low but clearly controlled flight and it made no noise. It was an alien sight to us to see something so fast, so low and change direction so quickly all without noise but there was clearly some kind of propulsion system at the back of it. A real WTFWT moment.
Pistom said:
I find it odd that in this day an age when manned flight has been around for nearly 140 years, many assume that UFOs mean aliens.
I've only ever witnessed one FO that I couldn't explain and it was fantastic to see but both my wife and I immediately assumed it was man made.
It was some kind of object in flight below us as we looked down into a valley but travelling at incredible speed to be so low but clearly controlled flight and it made no noise. It was an alien sight to us to see something so fast, so low and change direction so quickly all without noise but there was clearly some kind of propulsion system at the back of it. A real WTFWT moment.
I would imagine that part of the alien theory is based around the performance and directional changes that some display, I've only ever witnessed one FO that I couldn't explain and it was fantastic to see but both my wife and I immediately assumed it was man made.
It was some kind of object in flight below us as we looked down into a valley but travelling at incredible speed to be so low but clearly controlled flight and it made no noise. It was an alien sight to us to see something so fast, so low and change direction so quickly all without noise but there was clearly some kind of propulsion system at the back of it. A real WTFWT moment.
things that exhibit characteristics that are beyond our present understandings of physics are hard to comprehend and as such are even harder to explain.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff