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.

 

alien rovers 1966 montana wilderness USA humanoid encounters

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2018 @ 06:45 PM
link   
INTRODUCTION
quick one today due to all the interest generated by springer's visits to skinwalker ranch and other active threads
CASE


(case occured on august 20) Dan Duggleby was up in the hills with a .22 caliber rifle when he heard a "whooshing" noise and looked up to see a large rocket-shaped object about 60 feet in diameter and 300 feet tall, which landed close by. An opening appeared in the side of the cylinder and a ramp slid out, and five robotic metal "boxes" with small wheels on the bottoms and four "arms" on the sides came down the ramp. One took ground samples, while three of the others took air, grass, and flower samples and the last one "just stood there." When finished they rolled back up the ramp, the ramp slid in, and the ship took off straight up and vanished in the fog. The witness had seen disc-like UFOs on many previous occasions.

source: www.ufoinfo.com... (scroll down until the second 1966 entry)
COMMENTS BY HUMANOIDLORD
while its an very short report, its still quite interesting, for one this is the only report i have ever seen of NASA style rovers exploring the countryside, one could make the case that we are truly dealing with something extraterrestrial, due to the priority of robotic exporation over manned exploration here but there are 2 problems:
1: why is this the only report of its kind that i have ever seen (and is probally the only one that exists)? as of the year (2018) of this writing we have sent 4 rovers to mars (with an failed soviet one that used skids on the place of wheels)
2: there were some nasa concepts of exactly that time that showed very similar rovers, spanish investigator jose caravaca proposed that the trickster entity behind the ufo phenomena uses whatever is floating around pop culture and scientific beliefs at the time to use in the sightings
edit on 14-4-2018 by humanoidlord because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 14 2018 @ 07:09 PM
link   
the old boy in England worked for the forest service and got attacked by the rovers yep, that one had bad rovers



posted on Apr, 14 2018 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord

Sounds a bit like the Robert Taylor incident.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 14 2018 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

there are quite a bit of robotic encounters, taylor being one of them
however this is the only one that involve rovers



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord

Have you ever heard of the story of some people that observed a landed UFO from a distance and there were humanoids performing some kind of work or repair on the craft?
I saw it in one of my many books and I cannot seem to find it again.
If I remember right, the beings were under the craft that was on legs and they were lowering and raising a part of it trying to get it to fit right or something.
The people could hear hammering sounds coming from the activity.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: gortex

there are quite a bit of robotic encounters, taylor being one of them
however this is the only one that involve rovers

If you define "rover" as something with wheels then I guess that's true but I would argue any autonomous vehicle leaving a craft for the planets surface is a rover regardless of its method of travel.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: RazorV66

there are like thousands of encounters like this one, repairing and sample collecting are the most commonly observed activities in ufo experiences
in relation to reapiring i can remenber off my head currently one in saskatcwhan canada in 1933 (i think) and this one: caravaca102.blogspot.com.br...
however there are thousands of repair ce3, very very hard to know what is your mistery case



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

including floating , walking or just sliding in the ground or even "flooping" like penguins (these is what i can remenber off my head)?
there are too much robotic encounters to have such an vague explanation, so i define an rover as an vehicle with wheels like the NASA ones
edit on 15-4-2018 by humanoidlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 05:09 PM
link   
You can travel the galaxy's and land without issue but have rovers with wheels????

Nope

Nope




posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

or better we are dealing with trickster interdimensional beings



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

We traveled to another planet.

We dropped some stuff with wheels.

???

Show me your data set for advanced remote scientific equipment that won't use wheels.

Circular wheels make sense from engineering terms. All high gravity celestial objects appear as circles to an observer from far away. Big spheres far away, are flat circles.

Lowest possible resistances for movement of a mass object, upon a mass object, would dictate a circle on a circle.

Gear setups are very very close, to the same mindset of the tangents of a wheel and a celestial object, which in general, form as spheres.

You want to burn your anti-gravity, lift, or propulsion fuel to have a few rovers zip around!?!?!? Wasteful.

Wheels are low energy, high efficiency in terms of circle on circle, or spheroid on spheroid contact. Low resistance, while providing the correct range of tangent motion for low energy propulsion.

The cost of a wheel on a wheel movement, will always be less than the cost of having to act against gravity without direct solid to solid contact. I don't care how advanced your technology gets.

Tangent point, to tangent point, with rotational movement that allows for adequate movement, with low energy resistance IS the advanced intellectual method.



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Archivalist

I'd like to add on to this, that you can assume whatever you want about energy costs and power generation.

If we don't do it, and it hasn't been done, you only have theoretical speculation and an idea.

Meanwhile, I have Sojourner, Curiosity, and Opportunity as my main points of evidence here.


I have no reason to believe we will hit some magical breakthrough on power density allowing us to have vehicles capable of lift in ANY atmosphere, with a cheap enough energy cost to justify flying around on every body we land on.

I mean, our best batteries in mass production for nearly TWO DECADES are stagnant.

Lithium Ion, is the best we've done since alkaline Duracell, in terms of production cost, and ability to mass produce with minimal harm. (Nuclear sources while more efficient, have great costs of tragedy for mistakes.)

I'm not going to delude myself into believing that Moore's Law will somehow scale to power density and energy storage.

It only has to do with our computational and transistor technologies. Batteries don't get better, just because tiny chip power needs go down. If you need a motor, you need power. If you need motion, you need a motor.

Motors aren't aided by tiny transistors.
edit on 15-4-2018 by Archivalist because: out to our, spelling error



posted on Apr, 15 2018 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell



We hopped to the closest planets and dropped a bunch of odds and ends on the way. They came in a rather large object and landed then left without a trace. Small wheeled rovers in the Montana wilderness. I have been there many times a small wheeled rover isn't going very far.

Just saying





posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: mikell

The size of a wheel is irrelevant, relative to the drive velocity/rpm, at high enough rpm a small wheel can go as far, just as quickly as a larger one.

In this specific incident, which the thread refers to; these rovers did not travel "very far".

So your point, isolated, is moot anyway.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
If you define "rover" as something with wheels then I guess that's true but I would argue any autonomous vehicle leaving a craft for the planets surface is a rover regardless of its method of travel.

As far as we know, those were the aliens themselves. Aren't we frequently saying around here that our AI and robots will probably be exploring space a lot farther and longer than we meatbags ever will? Maybe that's what they were. Either from an alien civilization or from our own future after being whipped backwards around a spinning black hole or something.

Sounds like humans. Three guys working, one guy standing around "supervising."
edit on 16-4-2018 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord

One of my favorite "golden age" "UFO" sightings involved a "landed craft"
with "little people" in it, who asked a passing human for flour and water,
so they could bake cookies.

After the baking was done, the "alien" gave a "cookie" to the human.

Ah.. how innocent our imaginations were back then... to help
co-create such an incident.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

This one ?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The good old days.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

I"m sure it was a cookie.. but there may have been two such
incidents and my memory is conflating the two.

yes.. it was a wonderful time..

How rancid and nasty UFOlogy has become since then.

Kev

PS:

In 'Encouters with Star People" the native Shaman told the author
that the "good spirits had left" and the "bad spirits had come"
the time frames seem to match the end of the golden age of
UFOs.

Now what that actually means is anybody's guess.. but it seems
to be an accurate, but vague depiction.
edit on 19-4-2018 by KellyPrettyBear because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Archivalist
a reply to: mikell

We traveled to another planet.

We dropped some stuff with wheels.

???

Show me your data set for advanced remote scientific equipment that won't use wheels.

Circular wheels make sense from engineering terms. All high gravity celestial objects appear as circles to an observer from far away. Big spheres far away, are flat circles.

Lowest possible resistances for movement of a mass object, upon a mass object, would dictate a circle on a circle.

Gear setups are very very close, to the same mindset of the tangents of a wheel and a celestial object, which in general, form as spheres.

You want to burn your anti-gravity, lift, or propulsion fuel to have a few rovers zip around!?!?!? Wasteful.

Wheels are low energy, high efficiency in terms of circle on circle, or spheroid on spheroid contact. Low resistance, while providing the correct range of tangent motion for low energy propulsion.

The cost of a wheel on a wheel movement, will always be less than the cost of having to act against gravity without direct solid to solid contact. I don't care how advanced your technology gets.

Tangent point, to tangent point, with rotational movement that allows for adequate movement, with low energy resistance IS the advanced intellectual method.


Dam man, you just made the wheel sounds as COOL as I have ever heard. I mean that seriuosly

S+F

Thanks OP for another perhaps, open your mind type thread



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Archivalist

i think its clear we are dealing with something intedimensional trying to disquise as alien




top topics



 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join