Black Triangle UFOs and an Alleged Breakaway Civilization- Discuss

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: mbkennel
Who knows maybe some sorta crazy ray or beam or haarp like thing.

"Proteus"? oh crap!

a reply to: mbkennel

I'm thinking it's perfecting a system meant to find needles in the noise and signal pollution haystack that is Los Angeles. If it can do it here. Then send her abroad to really get the scoop so to speak. Also would be great for Eyes on. Creating attack corridors like the companion. Hoovering up data and Sig Int.

hey anybody remember a few months back (8 or so) LAX whole radar system got scrambled and shut down. They gave the lamest excuses as to what it could be. What if the pilot forgot to turn of his "screw with em beam" and that's what happened? Whoops!

Maybe they do keep it at Edwards. The south base looks like it's got enough going on right now with two other aircrafts. But their are a Crap load of hangars to the east near the NASA facilities. Lots of hangars. Maybe there.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

You're on the right track with LA but wrong platform.

a reply to: Baddogma

I see... ding, ding... winner! Makes sense ... well, enough sense for an armchair wannabe like me,

Does it?

How? I'm very curious about what that makes sense of for you and how.

Thanks, Baddogma.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I like that idea. Clever.

Now I think the bits of A*0's story are coming together..... It's 80% B.S. but perhaps intentionally deceptive yet partially based in fact BS, all because it's based on this project.

It's clear that A*0 had some actual reasonably professional aerospace knowledge. He popped an interesting SBIR or something from 1990 about engines from somebody I've never heard of and I've forgotten now. Checked out.

So now They are making these triangles and they'll be testing over populated areas. And more people will see them. How do you cause confusion? Science fiction story to the gullible conspiracy theorists, mixed in with just a bit of fact.

A*0 says that they are supercomputers beaming up your dreaming thoughts. Well, not quite, but they are heavily electronic and they are beaming up your tweets & calls.

Suppose you got the IMEI of the phone of a particular turbaned doer-of-evil on a certain List.

What if you could fly really fast, and your targeting computer could dynamically listen for that one particular cell phone (has to be pretty short range) in real time and geolocate it, and transmit it right into the firing solution.

Another weekend, another fly-by shooting in South LA again.

SAM site, cell phone, whatever---if it squawks it talks. At such low altitudes possibly could it pick up the 'idle' of a SAM site radar and computer even when they're not officially transmitting through the powerful beam?

a reply to: Zaphod58

The green lady shut down LAX's radar instead?

Or it's not a EW platform?

IM's are cool.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Wasn't her either. It was a platform that shall not be named as they're really twitchy about it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Is L.A. a hotspot bc it has something to do with its EM field being stronger due to leylines and em energy vortexes?
Or are you familiar with this theory of the geomagnetic grid?

originally posted by: tetra50
a reply to: Zaphod58

Is L.A. a hotspot bc it has something to do with its EM field being stronger due to leylines and em energy vortexes?
Or are you familiar with this theory of the geomagnetic grid?

I'm familiar with the theory of aerospace manufacturing geography.

Or maybe they're going to collateral damage the Kardashians.

a reply to: mbkennel

Quite obviously, they have other less obvious means of creating collateral damage out of the Kardarshians….
Provide people a platform to show whom they are, and they will.
But LOL, anyway.

But if you were working of EM thruster tech, then it would seem to me that L.A. being a reported energy vortex per the geomagnetic field, it may explain why the sightings there, in particular.

Or maybe they're going to collateral damage the Kardashians.

Oh please oh please. Write it off to systems error. DO the world a favor cool AF pilot, please have an unfortunate accident with a bomb bay malfunction.

a reply to: tetra50

Is L.A. a hotspot bc it has something to do with its EM field being stronger due to leylines and em energy vortexes? Or are you familiar with this theory of the geomagnetic grid?

Why are you cribbing this from FL's bad science fiction? Don't tell me that you take their unreadable posts at face value?

Here, here is some Paul Devereux. TheGUT mentioned that his stuff might come in handy; I think he was right...

There's no such thing as "ley lines".

From 1960 the ley theory took on a new lease of life, one that has led to the modern New Age notion of 'ley lines'.

An ex-R.A.F. pilot, Tony Wedd, was very interested in flying saucers, or UFOs. He had read Watkins' The Old Straight Track and also a French book, Flying Saucers and the Straight Line Mystery (1958) by Aimé Michel, in which it was (falsely) suggested that the locations where flying saucers landed or hovered very low during the 1954 French flying saucer outbreak or 'wave' fell into straight lines or 'orthotenies'.

Wedd made the excited conclusion that Watkins' 'leys' and Michel's 'orthotenies' were one and the same phenomenon. He had also read an American book by Buck Nelson called My Trip to Mars, the Moon and Venus (1956) in which Rogers claimed to have flown in UFOs, and to have witnessed them picking up energy from 'magnetic currents' flowing through the Earth.

a reply to: tetra50

I've heard a little about it. LA sees a lot due to Edwards. Plant 42, and the NG facilities are a stones throw from there, and Edwards does a lot of testing.

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: BASSPLYR

I like that idea. Clever.

Now I think the bits of A*0's story are coming together..... It's 80% B.S. but perhaps intentionally deceptive yet partially based in fact BS, all because it's based on this project.

It's clear that A*0 had some actual reasonably professional aerospace knowledge. He popped an interesting SBIR or something from 1990 about engines from somebody I've never heard of and I've forgotten now. Checked out.

So now They are making these triangles and they'll be testing over populated areas. And more people will see them. How do you cause confusion? Science fiction story to the gullible conspiracy theorists, mixed in with just a bit of fact.

A*0 says that they are supercomputers beaming up your dreaming thoughts. Well, not quite, but they are heavily electronic and they are beaming up your tweets & calls.

Suppose you got the IMEI of the phone of a particular turbaned doer-of-evil on a certain List.

What if you could fly really fast, and your targeting computer could dynamically listen for that one particular cell phone (has to be pretty short range) in real time and geolocate it, and transmit it right into the firing solution.

Another weekend, another fly-by shooting in South LA again.

SAM site, cell phone, whatever---if it squawks it talks. At such low altitudes possibly could it pick up the 'idle' of a SAM site radar and computer even when they're not officially transmitting through the powerful beam?

Very interesting thoughts.

But I'm not sure how the fiction aspects fit in especially since that was apparently a long and fairly complicated process that included convincing dozens they were forevermen? I understand the 75/25 concept, but so far I'm having trouble making it work with the behind the scenes details that have been reported.

originally posted by: The GUT
But I'm not sure how the fiction aspects fit in especially since that was apparently a long and fairly complicated process that included convincing dozens they were forevermen?

I understand the 75/25 concept, but so far I'm having trouble making it work with the behind the scenes details that have been reported.

A*0 himself said (much earlier, and when he was a skeptic and no woo) the 75/25 rule, which means that you can talk about 75% truth if you fill the rest with at least 25% bull. I think A*0 is at least other way around.

Forevermen? Recruits, who feel privileged and special, to keep the story going long after Elvis leaves the building.

It may just be one long troll for entertainment....not any official effort.

a reply to: Bybyots
Do you accept that geomagnetism is a real thing?

At any location, the Earth's magnetic field can be represented by a three-dimensional vector (see figure). A typical procedure for measuring its direction is to use a compass to determine the direction of magnetic North. Its angle relative to true North is the declination (D) or variation. Facing magnetic North, the angle the field makes with the horizontal is the inclination (I) or dip. The intensity (F) of the field is proportional to the force it exerts on a magnet. Another common representation is in X (North), Y (East) and Z (Down) coordinates.[12]

Intensity[edit]
The intensity of the field is often measured in gauss (G), but is generally reported in nanotesla (nT), with 1 G = 100,000 nT. A nanotesla is also referred to as a gamma (γ).[13] The tesla is the SI unit of the Magnetic field, B. The field ranges between approximately 25,000 and 65,000 nT (0.25–0.65 G). By comparison, a strong refrigerator magnet has a field of about 100 gauss (0.010 T).[14]

A map of intensity contours is called an isodynamic chart. As the 2010 World Magnetic Model shows, the intensity tends to decrease from the poles to the equator. A minimum intensity occurs over South America while there are maxima over northern Canada, Siberia, and the coast of Antarctica south of Australia.[15]

That's from wiki. But here's an interesting site on it: USGS National Geomagnetism Program
I would embed a map, but that skill is currently eluding me….

a reply to: tetra50

Do you accept that geomagnetism is a real thing?

Sure, why not? It's not the same thing as "ley lines", though, is it?

the intensity tends to decrease from the poles to the equator.

And that would make L.A. an EM-filling-station for black triangles how?

Sounds like your quote has made any point you were trying to make about L.A. being "a hotspot bc it has something to do with its EM field being stronger due to leylines and em energy vortexes?" moot.

?

a reply to: mbkennel

Yeah, after rereading your post I realized there is more of a foothold there for some of the things bothering me about that part. It fits better now. I'll review it all with that in mind.

Ya' know...a timeline would be very helpful here. Anyone?

originally posted by: mbkennel Well, not quite, but they are heavily electronic and they are beaming up your tweets & calls.

...

At such low altitudes possibly could it pick up the 'idle' of a SAM site radar and computer even when they're not officially transmitting through the powerful beam?

Problem. How am I hoovering up all these signals (especially trace signals in the presence of background noise while using plasma actuators to reduce drag, for flow control, or in leiu of control surfaces, or to manipulate shockwave formation? The sort of charge differential I imagine would be necessary to turn the craft into a giant ionocraft to create enough thrust to physically propel it as has been proposed here would be, uhm, problematically large. Like very problematic. Like frying people and systems large.
You're going to have to produce that charge, too. Even the (relatively) small power needed for actuators for flow control is going to be a technical problem -- certainly not impossible, but a design hurdle. Certainly plausible. Has LockMart quietly unlocked fusion an installed it to provide the sort of mind-numbing electrical power to push the aircraft through the air like a horizontally aligned ionocraft?

Emitting or receiving through all that plasma is going to be a problem.

Am I using a giant antennae or vast arrays of smaller ones (which are by default unstealthy) so I can pick up weak signals from outside (again I'm not sure how possible that's going to be, but let's roll with it being technically solved)? The area and gain of the antennae are directly related to the RCS. You're going to be reradiating every signal (especially those from the nasty SAM sites, though the weaker signals too, to some degree) that reaches the antennae.

I've got a serious problem buying in. Stealth blimp? Sure. Plasma for all sorts of useful application, including reducing drag and signature, and enhancing thrust (generated more conventionally)? Definitely. This weird particular combination of a graphene rigid airship, using ions for thrust and sound waves (how are we physically moving things to create the sound waves again? I'm not sure what the efficiency of moving something by sound is compared to a turbofan engine, but I'm confident it compares extremely poorly), all while quietly hoovering up EM signals through the large amounts of plasma while cruising over LA? You've lost me, but I'm willing to be educated if someone's up to it.

originally posted by: _Del_
I've got a serious problem buying in. Stealth blimp? Sure. Plasma for all sorts of useful application, including reducing drag and signature, and enhancing thrust (generated more conventionally)? Definitely. This weird particular combination of a graphene rigid airship, using ions for thrust and sound waves (how are we physically moving things to create the sound waves again? I'm not sure what the efficiency of moving something by sound is compared to a turbofan engine, but I'm confident it compares extremely poorly), all while quietly hoovering up EM signals through the large amounts of plasma while cruising over LA? You've lost me, but I'm willing to be educated if someone's up to it.

Stealth Blimp also carries us pretty far back in history so that the modern BT sightings make more sense, too. The technology and logistics in this instance seem to be cutting-edge if they exist and as such don't explain the entirety of the phenomena. I can think of some "workarounds" to make the story more cohesive but they seem pretty shaky so far.