It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Giant UFO's

page: 5
44
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger
Disclaimer: Although I am fascinated by UFO's/ETs/USO's/etc and love to read/watch/talk about them, I think that Earth has been visited exactly zero times by beings from other worlds.

Regarding the "giant" UFO's (forgive me if my memory is a little fuzzy)....

I remember several years ago watching a documentary about UFO's and numerous people, spread out over miles and miles, all reported seeing the same "giant" object. If I recall correctly, it was one of those "football field" size vehicles you mentioned in the OP. It was completely black, huge with a few lights and was COMPLETELY silent.

Then, a few years later I was watching a documentary on some vehicles the US government was working on/testing. One of the vehicles was a huge floating blimp (not like the blimps from the 1930's). This thing was very modern looking, and huge. If I remember correctly, advantages were that it used very little fuel for a craft that size because it's lift was caused by gas an lateral motion was by fans.

As soon as I saw the latter documentary, I thought of the first one.

I can't comment on the miles-wide UFO's because I simply haven't learned much about them. I will say (as I see some others have said) that IF something like this exists and has visited our planet, I suspect that their technology is not simply far more advanced than our... but that it is fundamentally different. When I ponder things like this I always remember being a young child playing with those small cylinder magnets and being fascinated how the opposites attracted and the others resisted each other. My point is, there is SO much "energy" (for lack of a better word) out there. Why couldn't a technology be developed that interacts with magnetic fields of the Earth, not unlike similar sides of a magnet? There is TONS of "energy" and radiation in space. Why couldn't that be harnessed. (Clearly, I'm no rocket scientist but I hope I was able to get my point across).

Final note: Great topic, by the way. ATS needs more of this.




posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 07:28 PM
link   
I'm curious as to the psychology of the sightings. I don't for a second believe in a society that captures every human indiscretion on film that no one has footage of objects with sizes being reported.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Yes they are there, one day I will have the courage to tell my tale.
Thanks for the thread. So far people have been kind and informative, an interesting read.
WIS



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 11:49 PM
link   


Something like this??? I only recall coming across this image a little while ago...
Odds are photo shop yes? I am still learning how to discern the difference.

Fantastic thread OP, I do personally love the topic of Giant UFOs myself... and also USOs as well



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger

Yes, S@F for you Op.

Too tired right now to post, so hopefully I can find time to come back and report what I know about the size of Craft witnessed by USAF back in the late 70's. Of course what I may or may not say is for entertainment purposes only.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen



This might be a stupid question, and I don't know if I can ask it without being confusing, but if these craft travel interdimensionally rather than through space, would they be able to use that technology to lessen the effect of their mass on our physical world? In other words, exist in this world and yet not in it, simultaneously? Or, would they even have a physical mass in this dimension?


It's not stupid at all and you've made some great points throughout the thread. Nobody can answer these questions without knowing what's behind the reports. If even one report was a craft, someone would have to have access to its workings to answer the question.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger




Some reports over the years have been that big.

But yeah, I bet seeing a city sized craft in the sky would take your breath away and be a pretty frightening encounter. It would be hellaciously intimidating.


I have seen some pretty interesting SOHO images of "anomalies" that are orders of magnitude larger than our entire PLANET. Seriously....who's to say what a culture that has had millions of years to develop its technology could be capable of?



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: wagtail


Something like this??? I only recall coming across this image a little while ago...
Odds are photo shop yes? I am still learning how to discern the difference.

Fantastic thread OP, I do personally love the topic of Giant UFOs myself... and also USOs as well


At first I thought explosion, but it is much too large for an explosion.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Does this recent NUFORC report sound similar?



Wadley, Georgia, Monday, June 29th, 2015, @ 0128 hrs. (EDT)—Enroute from their home in Georgia to their new assignment location in Colorado Springs, Colorado, a husband and wife report witnessing a bizarre looking, disc-shaped, metallic-appearing craft cross the highway in front of their vehicle.  The husband, who has 15 years of service in the military, estimated that the object to have been perhaps as long as 250 meters in length.  He also reported that it was “spewing” flames out the trailing edge of the disc.  The object appeared to accelerate, ascend, and then it quickly disappeared in nearby clouds.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: wagtail


Something like this??? I only recall coming across this image a little while ago...
Odds are photo shop yes? I am still learning how to discern the difference.

Fantastic thread OP, I do personally love the topic of Giant UFOs myself... and also USOs as well


It's a photo taken inside a Brazilian planetarium, which was running a meteor explosion simulation. The black object is the planetarium projector rather than part of the ISS or any other satellite.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: WalkInSilence




Yes they are there, one day I will have the courage to tell my tale.
Thanks for the thread. So far people have been kind and informative, an interesting read.
WIS


I feel confident in saying that the vast majority of us would love to hear your story...I know I would. We can learn much from each others' experiences if we refrain from clouding the issue with impatience and intolerance.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: deadcalm




I have seen some pretty interesting SOHO images of "anomalies" that are orders of magnitude larger than our entire PLANET. Seriously....who's to say what a culture that has had millions of years to develop its technology could be capable of?



Exactly...we humans tend to forget that what we know to be Universal laws and unequivocal "fact" is not necessarily the way things work all over the Universe, and trying to measure another world that we know nothing about by our own standards is a mistake. We can't travel through interstellar space or inter-dimensionally to distant worlds, yet we think that those out there who can are bound by the same physical limitations as we are?

If they have the means to come here in craft larger than two football fields it would stand to reason that they would have the technology to keep them aloft...somehow they've solved the problem of mass or they would never have gotten here. And there is always the possibility that "they" are actually "us" in the future, and not some alien race at all.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky




It's not stupid at all and you've made some great points throughout the thread. Nobody can answer these questions without knowing what's behind the reports. If even one report was a craft, someone would have to have access to its workings to answer the question


Thank you, and thanks for replying.
I feel lost sometimes on these threads because I do not possess the technical knowledge that some of you guys do; I can picture things in my head but lack the proper terms to describe what it is I'm thinking. I'm always afraid I'll make no sense whatsoever...too bad "thingamajig" isn't a technical term.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: wagtail


Something like this??? I only recall coming across this image a little while ago...
Odds are photo shop yes? I am still learning how to discern the difference.

Fantastic thread OP, I do personally love the topic of Giant UFOs myself... and also USOs as well


It was the a recreation in the planetarium of the impact that killed off the dinosaurs which of course resulted in the inevitable rise of a dumber race of creatures going by some of the BS on here US!

Then promoted as a GIANT ufo to add support to because of the LACK of REAL evidence of giant ufo's



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie




The one question I have is why are there no sonic booms?


If the theory that they would have zero mass is true, they would not compress the air and create the shockwave...and even if they did have physical mass of some kind, it would likely be of a completely alien molecular makeup; they wouldn't be bound by our laws of physics, or else they wouldn't have been able to travel here in the first place.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 02:09 PM
link   
I speculate, that during the majority of aerial nighttime operations of alien starships that use photon propulsion in our atmosphere, they require photons for fuel --- And due to the major lack of starlight photons at nighttime...they (ET's) possibly use a magnetically contained plasma shield, as a fuel source for the photon propulsion unit onboard the starship.

Since the starship is hidden inside the rectangular or spherical fusion plasma shield...it can be hard to determine the rough size of the alien starship, unless it stops the fusion plasma process --- and flies in free momentum impulse --- or a starship that has already landed and has no need for the plasma shield; including daytime operations that possibly have no need for a plasma shield because the micro-mini black hole photon propulsion unit receives photon starlight from our sun.

So...based on the majority of actual nighttime aerial Foo Fighter sightings, the only course is for eyewitnesses to try too determine the diameter or size of the lighted plasma shield --- with the alien starship safely encased inside it --- And I also mean safe from: bullets, laser cannons and nuclear bomb laden ground to air/air to air missiles.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
In the Condon Report and even before, explainers suggested that a fast-moving grouping of bright lights in the sky MIGHT be occasionally misperceived as lights mounted on a large structure. How can such a theory be experimentally tested? What results would either refute it, or alternately, confirm its plausibility?



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

In that scenario would the multiple moving lights be attributed to aircraft, or something else that could easily be recreated? And how "occasionally" are we talking about...enough for it to be a fairly common thing? It would seem that if that were the case it wouldn't be too awfully hard to replicate...similar weather conditions, identical type and number of aircraft (or whatever the light source is), observation from the same coordinates at the same time of day/night...right?

Sometimes I think there are too many assumptions being made about the sightings that are reported...on both sides of the argument. For example, just because someone reports a UFO sighting doesn't mean that they automatically think it is of extraterrestrial origin. They are seeing a UFO, in the truest sense of the term: something flying in the air that they cannot identify. Yet, the term UFO invariably draws some kind of line in the sand for people...the non-believers automatically start with the eyerolls and "woo woo" comments, the believers feel (often rightly so, but sometimes not) that they are being dismissed as kooks and become defensive, and absolutely nothing is actually learned from the experience. Any hope of working together to uncover the mystery is lost to human ego and the burning desire to be "right".

When that happens, that divisive line hinders us all from finding the truth...whatever that truth may be. And it would literally, at that point, take an exact (or the closest approximation possible) reenactment of the event to prove or disprove anything. On the flip side of that, people who just chalk sightings up to being nonsense and dismiss them right out of the gate are not helping either...I always feel like there is going to be a scenario where this is the one time they're dead wrong about it being "nothing" that is going to be the time where they really should have made the effort to investigate, rather than blow it off as just someone's imagination running away with them. And once that line is drawn, each side will stick to their guns stubbornly, regardless of how ridiculous they may sound while doing it. It is counter-intuitive, from both sides, if what we are really after is the truth.

I personally believe that beings exist on this planet who come from other worlds, but I do not believe that every single anomalous thing I witness is of some alien origin. I lean more toward the idea instead that if there are ships up there flying secret sorties or whatever, they are more likely the result of reverse engineering of craft that have been recovered from crashes, etc., rather than something actually piloted by alien beings. Same thing with the Fake Sky...if there are behemoth ships up there, projecting/reflecting/whatever a skyscape that is artificial (and it is artificial), it's being done by our own people...not aliens. It may have been their technology, but there is no good reason why they would be using it to trick us...however, our own government could have numerous reasons for deceiving us, and that is what makes it frightening.

I think if exact reenactments could be done of the sightings that are believed to be due to an optical illusion or something like that, and presented in a way that is not demeaning to anyone...no "I told you so" attitude, in the spirit of learning versus winning a pissing contest, it would go a long way toward mutual understanding. And I also think that if some sightings can be explained away that easily, it should be equally as easy to recreate them and lay any misconceptions to rest. It would require tolerance and a willingness to accept other possibilities, and we are historically not very good at that, but if we want to know the truth we are simply going to have to find a way to work together.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimOberg
In the Condon Report and even before, explainers suggested that a fast-moving grouping of bright lights in the sky MIGHT be occasionally misperceived as lights mounted on a large structure. How can such a theory be experimentally tested? What results would either refute it, or alternately, confirm its plausibility?


This is what *some* people thought the Hudson Valley Triangles *could* have been. People flying ultralight aircraft with lights attached.

I personally never bought that theory about that particular case though.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodydagger




This is what *some* people thought the Hudson Valley Triangles *could* have been. People flying ultralight aircraft with lights attached.

I personally never bought that theory about that particular case though.



Do you think that if people felt confident enough to dismiss it as being lights on aircraft that they should be able to reasonably duplicate the effect...for posterity? Because there are lots of "easy" answers out there, yet nothing concrete to back it up, and that leaves everything open to interpretation. Wouldn't it seem that if people truly believed that their explanation was correct, they'd be willing to prove that...or at least try as hard as they could to do so?



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join