By: Creaking Door
- 21st May 2015 at 13:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but I wonder when NASA started tracking all the junk; was the technology even available on some of the earlier Space Shuttle missions? I don't dispute it is all tracked now.
Did you read all the posts in this thread?
My 'anti-gravity spaceships and particle-beam weapons' joke was in reference to a completely outlandish claim made in the original post.
By: Bruggen 130
- 21st May 2015 at 18:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Creaking Door;2227263]Yes, but I wonder when NASA started tracking all the junk; was the technology even available on some of the earlier Space Shuttle missions? I don't dispute it is all tracked now.
Did you read all the posts in this thread?
My 'anti-gravity spaceships and particle-beam weapons' joke was in reference to a completely outlandish claim made in the original post.[
Yes I read it all, and I agree with you it's bull****. just lifted this from NASA site.
More than 500,000 pieces of debris, or “space junk,” are tracked as they orbit the Earth. They all travel at speeds up to 17,500 mph, fast enough for a relatively small piece of orbital debris to damage a satellite or a spacecraft.
By: Creaking Door
- 22nd May 2015 at 10:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
'Director of the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works confirms technology transfer from UFO and Aliens'
Crap. Nobodyconfirms anything of the sort!
In the first instance there is no first-person testimony in this video whatsoever; the man in this video could say that the people he spoke to (or claims he spoke to) could have said anything he wanted them to say, particularly as the people he spoke to are (conveniently) dead so cannot deny anything.
In the second instance what those people (apparently) said was that there was technology that was 'out of this world' or that they had stuff that would 'make George Lucas jealous' and that was 'better than Star-Trek'!
Those are expressions.....not statements of fact, and certainly not confirmations!
And, by the way, taking a lot of interest in high-security aircraft plants, where they work on classified aircraft projects, is likely to make the security services check up on you (in the same way that going into a bank wearing a ski mask and carrying a gun is likely to get you arrested); it is not, as this author seems to suggest, evidence of some vast government UFO conspiracy!
I didn't watch the other video; I don't have forty-nine more minutes of my time to waste. If this is the best 'evidence' that you can produce to support your claim that NASA has secret three-hundred-seat space shuttles then I'm sorry but it is rather pathetic.
I am very happy to have a rational argument with you but I'm not going to waste my time watching endless YouTube videos that you imagine support your claim.
By: Moggy C
- 31st May 2015 at 21:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Using the "we must not have closed minds" argument to support giving any credence to tosh like this must, by extension, find you in flat earth, fairies, angels, supreme beings and creationism.
Go there if you wish. I prefer to use what little intellect I have been gifted to think logically about the world.
There was a very lengthy thread on historic caused by people opening their minds to something that had no possible connection to reality.
By: Creaking Door
- 1st June 2015 at 00:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Open mouths and closed minds...
Oh come on! Did you actually read any of the claims made in the original post?
It is one thing to have an 'open mind' but when you get to the point that your mind is so open that you believe everything is true, despite how circumstantial the 'evidence', then you are no better at discerning the likely truth than anybody else.
By: 1batfastard
- 2nd June 2015 at 17:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
I am sorry that those of you who just see the claims of certain theories on subjects as this cannot be open minded as you claim to be, if you are then you would just accept it as a possibility. The fact you cannot and refuse to entertain such notions just shows that you are not open minded about these subjects at all IMPO, having said that what I believe in and what you believe in are just opinions at the end of the day, even J.A.Hynek one of the biggest sceptics of all time on the UFO and Alien craft had to admit that a % was unexplainable and it was this small % that made him think twice after his in depth investigations on the subject.;)
By: SolarWarden
- 3rd June 2015 at 03:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm pretty sure senior officers who were veteran airmen in WW2 who just about saw everything man made in the air made a mistake when they
decided to go to the media and announce they have in their possession a crashed disc, only to confuse it for a balloon, right?
By: Creaking Door
- 3rd June 2015 at 09:43Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OK, let us look at the evidence in the radio report that you have just posted.
A 'flying disc' has been recovered, no size is given but the radio report clearly states that the 'disc' is going to be flown to the 'AAF Research Centre at Wright Field, Ohio'...
...this was in 1947; how big could this 'flying disc' be if it could fit inside a cargo aircraft from 1947?
Also many of the original reports from Roswell talk about 'rubber' or 'tin-foil' being recovered from the crash-site; those reports do sound like they could be related to a balloon don't they?
Most balloons carry a payload; couldn't the payload have been shaped like a 'disc'? And the payload of a balloon would almost certainly fit into a 1947 cargo aircraft wouldn't it.
The military certainly were trying to cover-up something about what crashed at Roswell but that doesn't mean it was a crashed 'UFO'; couldn't the payload of the 'weather balloon' have been something that the military wanted to keep secret? They certainly declined to describe it and as far as is known nobody photographed it...
...which is a bit strange in itself; if you found a crashed 'UFO' wouldn't you at least photograph it?
By: SolarWarden
- 3rd June 2015 at 14:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OK, let us look at the evidence in the radio report that you have just posted.
A 'flying disc' has been recovered, no size is given but the radio report clearly states that the 'disc' is going to be flown to the 'AAF Research Centre at Wright Field, Ohio'...
...this was in 1947; how big could this 'flying disc' be if it could fit inside a cargo aircraft from 1947?
Also many of the original reports from Roswell talk about 'rubber' or 'tin-foil' being recovered from the crash-site; those reports do sound like they could be related to a balloon don't they?
Most balloons carry a payload; couldn't the payload have been shaped like a 'disc'? And the payload of a balloon would almost certainly fit into a 1947 cargo aircraft wouldn't it.
The military certainly were trying to cover-up something about what crashed at Roswell but that doesn't mean it was a crashed 'UFO'; couldn't the payload of the 'weather balloon' have been something that the military wanted to keep secret? They certainly declined to describe it and as far as is known nobody photographed it...
...which is a bit strange in itself; if you found a crashed 'UFO' wouldn't you at least photograph it?
By: Creaking Door
- 3rd June 2015 at 17:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Talks about more than one craft...
Really, where exactly?
And does 'more than one (alien) craft' make the UFO explanation more likely?
I've never seen any other UFO theory than 'crashed UFO' at Roswell. So what is the theory behind 'more than one craft'; a race of super-intelligent alien beings cross billions of miles of interstellar space only to suffer crashes of two or more craft at Roswell?
Careless!
New
Posts: 4,796
By: ZRX61
- 3rd June 2015 at 20:04Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LOL!!! The 300 people comment was made to describe the size of the cargo bay in the space shuttle. It's 60x15ft, so yeah, 300 people standing up will fit in it.
By: 1batfastard
- 3rd June 2015 at 20:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
This is about opening your mind to other possibilities nothing more nothing less, the fact that he above Roswell incident happened and was then retracted and subsequently those involved along with it made to look stupid is neither here or there, you either believe or don't simple but you cant just stand by and ignore 100% of the testimony's that various professional people from all backgrounds through the years up till today and say that 100% of them are not true, even if only 1% could proven that is still proof but then I suppose that would not be enough for some sceptics would want more which proves that many sceptics that say "well I have an open mind" just don't more importantly have their own agenda possibly whatever that may be.
There is an abundance of evidence that supports all the claimed Alien aircraft let alone UFO sightings, yes their is also an abundance of fake evidence which has done nothing to help those who can accept the possibility of Aliens/Craft. As I have mentioned before UFO just refers to something flying you cannot identify, it does not mean it's an Alien craft which contains little green men (No their running around the Ukraine:D) which is what everybody tends to jump to when mentioning UFO's so those who witness and believe in these events are more often than not lambasted because of what they witnessed.
Are the sceptics really saying that every Airline Pilot/Military Pilot/Civil Pilot/Politician/Policeman/Doctors/Nurses/Firemen/Navy Admirals/Captains & Other Ranks/Army Generals/Colonels/Majors/Captains/Lieutenants/Sergeants/Cpl's/Servicemen etc.etc. etc, from around the globe through out history are complete morons and are either inventing these sightings up or are completely off their rockers ? As I mentioned they are lambasted because others do not want to face an alternative which if true would prompt questions that put simply governments have no answer too and that these craft on a regular basis penetrate all airspace with impunity, that whatever country's defence are seemingly made redundant, in particular government top security top of the line defended air bases that have had their fare share of intruders infiltrate do what ever they are doing then just go away ? with many personnel I may add having being threatened by whoever with the threat of deadly force to be used if ever they discuss what happened time and time again.
Of coarse if all this is not true then why are so many people afraid of speaking out while in service and the majority only coming forward in later years ? just ask yourself these questions after :- You witness something you cannot explain,all normal explanations you come up with just do not categorise what you observe, How can you prove what you are seeing is real ? Did anybody else witness the event ? What evidence do you have other than your own words ? Do you tell all ? Do you tell Family/Friends/Neighbours ? Do you tell the authorities ? Will you be taken seriously ? Will you be made fun of ? Will others even family think I have gone mad ? then place yourself in the shoes of those who have actually witnessed events, it's not as easy as many imagine to come forward and claim to have seen A/B or C occur unless you truly believe without a shadow of a doubt and have an open mind as to what you may or may not have seen.;)
By: charliehunt
- 3rd June 2015 at 21:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
An open mind is an empty mind, Geoff, but an enquiring mind seeks answers to the inexplicable. The bottom line is proof. And we haven't seen much of that.
By: John Green
- 3rd June 2015 at 21:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1batfastard
During the 52 years that I've flown the skies of Northern Europe, neither I or, my companions have ever seen anything that we could not explain.
You would have thought that, at some time during that period, there would have been something that I could have described as inexplicable. But no, nothing, not a flicker.
All that I have ever personally seen, fixed firmly to the ground, were crop circles, the intricacy of the design being a thing of wonder.
By: 1batfastard
- 3rd June 2015 at 22:27Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
JG,
Can I ask if not being to nosy are you a pilot by trade ? I can only repeat that while not all pilots observe any occurrences a lot do, it is the same as why a lot of Cosmologists/Star gazers/Astronomers call them what you will ? Everybody would expect them to observe these events on a regular basis but in reality they do not I like to think it's because they are focusing on a particular part of the sky but who knows why some observe and some do not ?
As far as crop circles go well there is to much evidence being faked in all honesty as to whether or not Alien are involved they are judged the same as Alien Craft and suffer the same ridicule ? Who knows that is one part of the mystery that I cannot see sense in a being traveling all this way from wherever just to draw for all intensive purposes pictures in a filed, having said this if it is it is trying to communicate I would guess this is one way but until some proves for definite much like Alien Craft I am open minded on the subject and not empty as Charlie thinks mine is....:D
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 21st May 2015 at 13:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, but I wonder when NASA started tracking all the junk; was the technology even available on some of the earlier Space Shuttle missions? I don't dispute it is all tracked now.
Did you read all the posts in this thread?
My 'anti-gravity spaceships and particle-beam weapons' joke was in reference to a completely outlandish claim made in the original post.
Posts: 1,751
By: Bruggen 130 - 21st May 2015 at 18:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Creaking Door;2227263]Yes, but I wonder when NASA started tracking all the junk; was the technology even available on some of the earlier Space Shuttle missions? I don't dispute it is all tracked now.
Did you read all the posts in this thread?
My 'anti-gravity spaceships and particle-beam weapons' joke was in reference to a completely outlandish claim made in the original post.[
Yes I read it all, and I agree with you it's bull****. just lifted this from NASA site.
More than 500,000 pieces of debris, or “space junk,” are tracked as they orbit the Earth. They all travel at speeds up to 17,500 mph, fast enough for a relatively small piece of orbital debris to damage a satellite or a spacecraft.
Posts: 234
By: SolarWarden - 22nd May 2015 at 03:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 22nd May 2015 at 10:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
'Director of the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works confirms technology transfer from UFO and Aliens'
Crap. Nobody confirms anything of the sort!
In the first instance there is no first-person testimony in this video whatsoever; the man in this video could say that the people he spoke to (or claims he spoke to) could have said anything he wanted them to say, particularly as the people he spoke to are (conveniently) dead so cannot deny anything.
In the second instance what those people (apparently) said was that there was technology that was 'out of this world' or that they had stuff that would 'make George Lucas jealous' and that was 'better than Star-Trek'!
Those are expressions.....not statements of fact, and certainly not confirmations!
And, by the way, taking a lot of interest in high-security aircraft plants, where they work on classified aircraft projects, is likely to make the security services check up on you (in the same way that going into a bank wearing a ski mask and carrying a gun is likely to get you arrested); it is not, as this author seems to suggest, evidence of some vast government UFO conspiracy!
I didn't watch the other video; I don't have forty-nine more minutes of my time to waste. If this is the best 'evidence' that you can produce to support your claim that NASA has secret three-hundred-seat space shuttles then I'm sorry but it is rather pathetic.
I am very happy to have a rational argument with you but I'm not going to waste my time watching endless YouTube videos that you imagine support your claim.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 22nd May 2015 at 16:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"argument that's rational? That'll be a first !
Posts: 459
By: Flying-A - 25th May 2015 at 01:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
300+ passenger spaceships may not seem so far-fetched when you consider these mid-sixties proposals from a major aerospace firm:
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/rombus.htm
http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/IthacusSSTOCatalogPage.htm
For details, see here:
http://pictures.depop.com/b0/1663161/139539835.jpg
Read it and sigh at what might have been.....
Posts: 3,654
By: 1batfastard - 31st May 2015 at 19:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
Open mouths and closed minds seems to be the common thread of most arguments against any theories on this subject...:sleeping:
Geoff.
Posts: 16,832
By: Moggy C - 31st May 2015 at 21:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Using the "we must not have closed minds" argument to support giving any credence to tosh like this must, by extension, find you in flat earth, fairies, angels, supreme beings and creationism.
Go there if you wish. I prefer to use what little intellect I have been gifted to think logically about the world.
There was a very lengthy thread on historic caused by people opening their minds to something that had no possible connection to reality.
Moggy
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 1st June 2015 at 00:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Oh come on! Did you actually read any of the claims made in the original post?
It is one thing to have an 'open mind' but when you get to the point that your mind is so open that you believe everything is true, despite how circumstantial the 'evidence', then you are no better at discerning the likely truth than anybody else.
Posts: 3,654
By: 1batfastard - 2nd June 2015 at 17:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
I am sorry that those of you who just see the claims of certain theories on subjects as this cannot be open minded as you claim to be, if you are then you would just accept it as a possibility. The fact you cannot and refuse to entertain such notions just shows that you are not open minded about these subjects at all IMPO, having said that what I believe in and what you believe in are just opinions at the end of the day, even J.A.Hynek one of the biggest sceptics of all time on the UFO and Alien craft had to admit that a % was unexplainable and it was this small % that made him think twice after his in depth investigations on the subject.;)
Geoff.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 2nd June 2015 at 19:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well tried, Geoff, but you'll have to try harder to convince us that any of this tosh has any substance in truth.:)
Posts: 234
By: SolarWarden - 3rd June 2015 at 03:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm pretty sure senior officers who were veteran airmen in WW2 who just about saw everything man made in the air made a mistake when they
decided to go to the media and announce they have in their possession a crashed disc, only to confuse it for a balloon, right?
No in my America.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 3rd June 2015 at 09:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OK, let us look at the evidence in the radio report that you have just posted.
A 'flying disc' has been recovered, no size is given but the radio report clearly states that the 'disc' is going to be flown to the 'AAF Research Centre at Wright Field, Ohio'...
...this was in 1947; how big could this 'flying disc' be if it could fit inside a cargo aircraft from 1947?
Also many of the original reports from Roswell talk about 'rubber' or 'tin-foil' being recovered from the crash-site; those reports do sound like they could be related to a balloon don't they?
Most balloons carry a payload; couldn't the payload have been shaped like a 'disc'? And the payload of a balloon would almost certainly fit into a 1947 cargo aircraft wouldn't it.
The military certainly were trying to cover-up something about what crashed at Roswell but that doesn't mean it was a crashed 'UFO'; couldn't the payload of the 'weather balloon' have been something that the military wanted to keep secret? They certainly declined to describe it and as far as is known nobody photographed it...
...which is a bit strange in itself; if you found a crashed 'UFO' wouldn't you at least photograph it?
Posts: 234
By: SolarWarden - 3rd June 2015 at 14:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Talks about more than one craft.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 3rd June 2015 at 17:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Really, where exactly?
And does 'more than one (alien) craft' make the UFO explanation more likely?
I've never seen any other UFO theory than 'crashed UFO' at Roswell. So what is the theory behind 'more than one craft'; a race of super-intelligent alien beings cross billions of miles of interstellar space only to suffer crashes of two or more craft at Roswell?
Careless!
Posts: 4,796
By: ZRX61 - 3rd June 2015 at 20:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LOL!!! The 300 people comment was made to describe the size of the cargo bay in the space shuttle. It's 60x15ft, so yeah, 300 people standing up will fit in it.
There's a piece of one* sitting in the garage
*a space shuttle, not a person...
Posts: 3,654
By: 1batfastard - 3rd June 2015 at 20:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
This is about opening your mind to other possibilities nothing more nothing less, the fact that he above Roswell incident happened and was then retracted and subsequently those involved along with it made to look stupid is neither here or there, you either believe or don't simple but you cant just stand by and ignore 100% of the testimony's that various professional people from all backgrounds through the years up till today and say that 100% of them are not true, even if only 1% could proven that is still proof but then I suppose that would not be enough for some sceptics would want more which proves that many sceptics that say "well I have an open mind" just don't more importantly have their own agenda possibly whatever that may be.
There is an abundance of evidence that supports all the claimed Alien aircraft let alone UFO sightings, yes their is also an abundance of fake evidence which has done nothing to help those who can accept the possibility of Aliens/Craft. As I have mentioned before UFO just refers to something flying you cannot identify, it does not mean it's an Alien craft which contains little green men (No their running around the Ukraine:D) which is what everybody tends to jump to when mentioning UFO's so those who witness and believe in these events are more often than not lambasted because of what they witnessed.
Are the sceptics really saying that every Airline Pilot/Military Pilot/Civil Pilot/Politician/Policeman/Doctors/Nurses/Firemen/Navy Admirals/Captains & Other Ranks/Army Generals/Colonels/Majors/Captains/Lieutenants/Sergeants/Cpl's/Servicemen etc.etc. etc, from around the globe through out history are complete morons and are either inventing these sightings up or are completely off their rockers ? As I mentioned they are lambasted because others do not want to face an alternative which if true would prompt questions that put simply governments have no answer too and that these craft on a regular basis penetrate all airspace with impunity, that whatever country's defence are seemingly made redundant, in particular government top security top of the line defended air bases that have had their fare share of intruders infiltrate do what ever they are doing then just go away ? with many personnel I may add having being threatened by whoever with the threat of deadly force to be used if ever they discuss what happened time and time again.
Of coarse if all this is not true then why are so many people afraid of speaking out while in service and the majority only coming forward in later years ? just ask yourself these questions after :- You witness something you cannot explain,all normal explanations you come up with just do not categorise what you observe, How can you prove what you are seeing is real ? Did anybody else witness the event ? What evidence do you have other than your own words ? Do you tell all ? Do you tell Family/Friends/Neighbours ? Do you tell the authorities ? Will you be taken seriously ? Will you be made fun of ? Will others even family think I have gone mad ? then place yourself in the shoes of those who have actually witnessed events, it's not as easy as many imagine to come forward and claim to have seen A/B or C occur unless you truly believe without a shadow of a doubt and have an open mind as to what you may or may not have seen.;)
Geoff.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 3rd June 2015 at 21:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
An open mind is an empty mind, Geoff, but an enquiring mind seeks answers to the inexplicable. The bottom line is proof. And we haven't seen much of that.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 3rd June 2015 at 21:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1batfastard
During the 52 years that I've flown the skies of Northern Europe, neither I or, my companions have ever seen anything that we could not explain.
You would have thought that, at some time during that period, there would have been something that I could have described as inexplicable. But no, nothing, not a flicker.
All that I have ever personally seen, fixed firmly to the ground, were crop circles, the intricacy of the design being a thing of wonder.
Posts: 3,654
By: 1batfastard - 3rd June 2015 at 22:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi All,
JG,
Can I ask if not being to nosy are you a pilot by trade ? I can only repeat that while not all pilots observe any occurrences a lot do, it is the same as why a lot of Cosmologists/Star gazers/Astronomers call them what you will ? Everybody would expect them to observe these events on a regular basis but in reality they do not I like to think it's because they are focusing on a particular part of the sky but who knows why some observe and some do not ?
As far as crop circles go well there is to much evidence being faked in all honesty as to whether or not Alien are involved they are judged the same as Alien Craft and suffer the same ridicule ? Who knows that is one part of the mystery that I cannot see sense in a being traveling all this way from wherever just to draw for all intensive purposes pictures in a filed, having said this if it is it is trying to communicate I would guess this is one way but until some proves for definite much like Alien Craft I am open minded on the subject and not empty as Charlie thinks mine is....:D
Geoff.