UFOs or Unidentified Submerged Objects: WHATAYATHINK?

I am not in possession of any information wrt UFOs one way or another; but there is something you should keep in mind while reading those stories...

Most of the stories you read originate around 1947 - 1949. What was going on in America in those days was that people flying around in piston-engined aircraft were seeing jets for the first time. Granted some of our WW-II era piston-engined fighter planes could hit 400 or 430 mph as a top speed, they didn't CRUISE at that speed; they cruised at 250 or 300, and the first jets were flying around at 500 - 600.

First jets would have included our own F80, captured jet Messerschmidts, and German swept-wing designs which were in early stages before Germany lost the war and which our own skunk works would almost certainly have gone ahead with and which might could have hit 900 - 1200 mph.

In other words, handsfull of people in prop-driven planes would have been seeing jets go by at two to four times their own speed.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

I am certain that the genuine article is out there...

They're out there all right, but you have to grasp the reality of the basic density of space to have any sort of an idea of the likelihood of any of them ever coming to visit. The basic density of space INSIDE a galaxy like ours is about like one dust mote every four or five miles; that is, if you scale our solar system to about a yard across at which point our sun would look like a dust mote, the next such dust mote would be four miles away.

1 Reply

@NickFun,

Quote:

I suppose anything even stars and distant galaxies could be put into that same mindset. We have only the observations of respected scientists telling us they exist. We have only basic photographs and theories. Nonetheless, I do not doubt their existence. Respected astronauts, airline pilots, former President Carter and the list goes on have seen these things.

Stars are completely different Nick. We already know Stars exist. We know a lot about them. They sit still and allow multiple different observers to observe them with a huge variety of scientific equipment. Your analogy is as far off base as I can imagine.

0 Replies

@NickFun,

Quote:

A friend of mine worked for the department of defense for many years. This past weekend he and I were discussing this very topic. He told me most UFO's can be explained away. But there is the genuine article out there and the government knows about it.

I would ask him how he knows this. Upon what evidence does he base his statement?

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

For my part,
I am certain that the genuine article is out there,
what with there being so many millions of stars
and millions of gallaxies. Whether or not thay
have opted to come HERE, is a distinct question.

I believe there's other life in the Universe as well, and I believe there's other intelligent life. But I have no evidence for it, and believing it doesn't add any credence (or value) to UFO's.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

Quote:

They're out there all right, but you have to grasp the reality of the basic density of space to have any sort of an idea of the likelihood of any of them ever coming to visit. The basic density of space INSIDE a galaxy like ours is about like one dust mote every four or five miles; that is, if you scale our solar system to about a yard across at which point our sun would look like a dust mote, the next such dust mote would be four miles away.

Sometimes you're actually correct. For some reason that worries me. Wink

2 Replies

@rosborne979,

We are looking at the view of the cosmos with our current understanding of physics, which may be a shallow understanding. We have discovered e=mc2 only within the past 100 years. To a civilization thousands of years advanced beyond us treveling to another solar system could be like walking the street. I believe the truth will come out. Hopefully in my lifetime.

2 Replies

@NickFun,

Quote:

We are looking at the view of the cosmos with our current understanding of physics,
which may be a shallow understanding. We have discovered e=mc2
only within the past 100 years. To a civilization thousands of years
advanced beyond us treveling to another solar system could be like walking the street

Very good point

0 Replies

@NickFun,

Quote:

Re: rosborne979 (Post 3404053)
We are looking at the view of the cosmos with our current understanding of physics, which may be a shallow understanding. We have discovered e=mc2 only within the past 100 years. To a civilization thousands of years advanced beyond us treveling to another solar system could be like walking the street. I believe the truth will come out. Hopefully in my lifetime.

I agree, hopefully within my lifetime. But I've been waiting a long time now, so fuzzy blobs on photo's and lame stories of UFO's just aren't cutting it. I guess that's why I get frustrated when people start to think of UFO reports as anything exciting, when in fact they tell us nothing. There's no meat on them bones.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Quote:
"Completely irrelevant" to what ?
IMO, accurate knowledge is valuable for its own sake.

But it's not accurate knowledge. It doesn't tell us anything. We don't know what these things are. We don't even know if they are physical objects, equipment anomalies, hoaxes, hallucinations or figments of imagination. In order for information to be of any relevance it must teach you something.

Well we know they're not figments of our imagination when credible people report the same instance. As far as equipment anomalies and hoaxes, it's important to keep in mind all of the cover-up that is apparently going on.
Evidence of this is refusal by NASA to declassify documents pertaining to Et's and Ufo's.
Certain documents have been declassified recently, including step by step instructions for encounters with physical et's and their physical ships.

The number one reason we don't see all the evidence is because we close our eyes to it, if the gov't says these things are fake, they must be.

It's getting late in the game now to try and deny that which has been reported on, thousands and thousands of eyewitness acounts. People who worked for the gov'ts who cover up have admitted to the cover-up and disinformation, thousands upon thousands of videos and photos (although many many copycats and hoaxes), that certainly does not discredit those which are not hoaxed.

If you want a flying saucer to crash in your backyard as proof, it's highly unlikely that will happen. But if you at least open your mind to the possibility and take it out of crackpot conspiracy territory, perhaps you'll start to see what is so obvious to most people nowadays.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Quote:
I would say the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, particularly intelligent life which may be visiting us, is of extreme scientific importance.

I completely agree. But we don't have any evidence of that at all. Hearsay and blurry pictures are useless. And unfortunately, that's all we have so far.

Actually we have much more, some who are ignorant to the subject will refuse to look.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Quote:
The simple fact that there are unidentified flying objects in space, a place where nothing should be able to survive, should warrant further investigation.

You are obviously easier to convince than I am.

I'm not convinced all of these reports are really flying objects. Some of them are undoubtedly reflections or distortions or hallucinations or errors or lies. Maybe they are a collection of all those things. Maybe not a single report has ever been accurate. We have no way to know, because there's no evidence. So the reports are meaningless.

Reports are not meaningless Ros, when they come from people who are experts in the field of aircraft, the atmosphere, travelling through it, identifying flying objects.

REALIZE, these objects are often called 'unidentified' not because the viewer is a fool and is pretending he/she sees something, but because it is an obvious flying aircraft with apparent design and technology of which has never been used or harnessed by humans, in all of our great, wonderful scientific technological clout.

To deny our own observations would have left us in the dark ages. The scientific evidence you so loved came from observations just like the UFO ones. Believe it or not, humans are not at the top of the intelligence pyramid, were just arrogant enough to believe we are.

0 Replies

Here's an incident which NASA refuses to explain. The famous Tether Experiment which failed because of hundreds of UFOs!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuFBUS0kiSA

0 Replies

@CarbonSystem,

CarbonSystem wrote:

Actually we have much more, some who are ignorant to the subject will refuse to look.

You have a knack for implying that other people are missing something without ever providing any evidence for your statements.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

CarbonSystem wrote:
Actually we have much more, some who are ignorant to the subject will refuse to look.

You have a knack for implying that other people are missing something without ever providing any evidence for your statements.

First the astronauts and their accounts:
Gordon Cooper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvPR8T1o3Dc&feature=related
Edgar Mitchell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5upFvipUAXs
France on disclosure
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070322143210.oy201j5u
Brazil on disclosure
http://www.ufodigest.com/brazilrelease.html
FBI documents, declassified, giving specific instructions on how to handle a situation with an et or it's craft.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/govtdocs/index.asp
Argentina crisp photograph
http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2010/04/disc-shape-ufo-photographed-over.html
One in five people would agree with me.
http://pr-usa.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=370616&Itemid=34
Stephen Hawking
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100425135601ianb.nb/topstory.html

A quick word about your 'fuzzy photographs' beef.
Seems to be your buzzword for discrediting the existence of ufo's.
How can any photograph ever produced ever prove a ufo's existence in your mind?
The capabilities of our digital technology can create any image. Including making fat women skinny, dogs look like cats, people with three eyes. Any image. Even in our court rooms, photographs are harder and harder to produce as evidence. That's not to say it's irrelevent, a photograph of a man buying his murder weapon is not false just because a picture of a catdog is possible.
The same is true with UFO's
That is why you don't see me posting a thousand links to images of ufo's, because even if they're valid you could never prove it to your standards of "evidence"

I ask, besides a ufo landing in your backyard, what kind of evidece do you seek?
What evidence have you personally witnessed for the earth being round?

And the account of a certified, experienced expert like Dr. Edgar Mitchell is not hearsay. He is an expert witness. He's not a farmer in the cornfield claiming something wild, as the cliche image seems to be. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in aeronautical engineering and a Doctor of Science degree in Aeronautics and Astronautics. He has left this atmosphere and walked on another celestial body.
His mind is far sharper than yours or mine, as were his eyes. Because it's a well known fact that astronauts were tested rigorously on mental and physical abilities.
One person in a related post here referenced him as 'a cranky astronaut' who ought not convince anyone of anything; I would say that is a terribly ignorant statement.

And of course, what of my eyes, and 3 others who saw the same object as me, 2 of whom were over 4 miles away? I witnessed a ufo myself, called my friend who looked up and described back to me exactly what I saw, real-time.

Cloudless day.
Erratic movement ruled out the possibility of a plane.
Disappearing and reappearing continusously for a span of over 2 hours.
A metallic, spherical object appeared, still in the sky, at first I though it was some sort of planet out. Then it moved, very fast, in all directions, stopped, dissappeared, reappeared, repeat.

You can very easily tell these things are not planes or weather balloons. As planes travel on a plane, they're are travelling one direction, and a turn is obvious and slow.

At this point, I find it hard to believe that people can even deny the possibility. It would be in everyone's best interests not to ignore an obvious trend. The day the US officially announces the past and present contact with et's and their crafts, the better.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

the history channel has about the same credibility in reporting valid science/history as does the home shopping network.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Most of the stories you read originate around 1947 - 1949. What was going on in America in those days was that people flying around in piston-engined aircraft were seeing jets for the first time. Granted some of our WW-II era piston-engined fighter planes could hit 400 or 430 mph as a top speed, they didn't CRUISE at that speed; they cruised at 250 or 300, and the first jets were flying around at 500 - 600.

It seems you specifically reference Roswell as 'most of the stories we read'.
But I would point to evidence posted above of thousands of reports, long after that time, across multiple continents. Brazil, France, Argentina, India, China.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Quote:
They're out there all right, but you have to grasp the reality of the basic density of space to have any sort of an idea of the likelihood of any of them ever coming to visit. The basic density of space INSIDE a galaxy like ours is about like one dust mote every four or five miles; that is, if you scale our solar system to about a yard across at which point our sun would look like a dust mote, the next such dust mote would be four miles away.

Sometimes you're actually correct. For some reason that worries me.

Or perhaps you've matched the ignorance I've seen you crudely accuse gunga of Wink

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

the history channel has about the same credibility in reporting valid science/history as does the home shopping network.

they are owned and operated by the media conglomerate afterall, true. People often don't cite history channel in scientific dialogue, but it still give interesting new perspectives which may be valid.

1 Reply

@CarbonSystem,

Quote:

interesting new perspectives which may be valid

yes, of course, whenever I'm curious about what's going to happen in 2012 I can always check the history channel to find out what Nostradamus predicted or where to find Noah's ark. The History channel is a wealth of valid information.

0 Replies

UFOs or Unidentified Submerged Objects: WHATAYATHINK?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know