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.

 

Does a "Pentagon UFO video" show a NASA hypersonic X-43A test flight?

page: 1
12

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Several investigators are tracking down a possible connection between one of the recent 'Pentagon UFO videos' and a NASA hypersonic vehicle test flight in the same general area at about the same time -sort of. I'm undecided on this suggestion but definitely think it's worth watching, even if [as I suspect] it's a dead end. Meanwhile, nobody seems to have seen the original video material incorrectly claimed to have been 'released by the Pentagon' but actually released by a private fund-raising effort.

badufos.blogspot.com...




posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

If the X-43a is capable of stopping midflight, hovering, and then accelerating at a rate so high it can reach its mach 9 velocity in a matter of seconds, including rapid changes in altitude, evading optical wavelength detection, and possible aquatic capabilities, then yes, it was probably the X-43a.

If not?




edit on 6112018 by CreationBro because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

very very interesting!
the interview with harry read is fascinating.

what-the-government-knows-about-ufos



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

Have NASA also managed to produce Human Bodies that are capable of surviving the G Forces ?



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

Jim, this is an absurd concocted hit piece on a legit object of nonterrestrial origin.

Id say nice try but it isnt even that.



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: JimOberg

Have NASA also managed to produce Human Bodies that are capable of surviving the G Forces ?


That's irrelevant if the craft has either inertial dampening or antigravity technology.



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: trollz

Or is unmanned, as the X-43 was.



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: trollz




That's irrelevant if the craft has either inertial dampening or antigravity technology


Stuff of science fiction more like.



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   
André Skondras comments
Jun 10 at 3:36 PM

> Hi, all:
>
> I recently stumbled across a posting from a Michael Huntington on FB’s AATIP Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Group. This Michael Huntington is someone who apparently likes to post links and images of X-planes. In that specific posting, he contemplated the following:
>
> "NASA’s X-43A Hyper-X Scramjet - near Mach 10 (7000+ mph). Achieved November 16, 2004 off of the LA/San Diego coast. Where was the Nimitz during this historic event? Was the Nimitz somehow involved in this project which was conducted in the encounter zone? Was the Nimitz Group involved in tracking or recovery for this project? How close were any encountered UAPs to this test? Was NASA involved in the Nimitz Encounters in any way? Was NASA provided an assessment of the encounters leading up to this test? Did NASA observe or record any UAPs in their area of operation? Not saying it’s a “Tic-Tac” but it puts more aircraft in the air, puts an experimental aircraft in the encounter zone, puts NASA in the picture, and gives us a vehicle that exceeds Mach 4.”
>
> youtu.be... (reached Mach 7, capable of reaching Mach 10)
> www.youtube.com... (X-43A Hype-X Third Mission Post Flight Briefing NASA Dryden FRC November 16, 2004. A Navy P-3 Orion Surveillance Aircraft collected data from launch to 14 minutes after)
>
> As a result of Michael Huntington’s posting about the November 16, 2004 NASA’s X-43A Hyper-X Scramjet test, several other articles were posted on social media. I selected the following two articles including one by our dear CSICOP debunker Robert Sheaffer contemplating this possibility: "Could a NASA Hypersonic Aircraft be the "Tic Tac UFO”??” My reaction to his posting was: “Explanation of the uninvestigated as opposed to the investigation of the unexplained.” His reaction was: “Investigating all possible explanations, until each one can either be established, or else ruled out.” Perhaps he should ask the individuals involved in that 2004 Tic Tac event, like the Navy pilots who saw the object(s) with their own trained eyes from fairly close by: www.youtube.com... I assume that the Nimitz and the Navy pilots were (made) aware of NASA’s X-43A Hyper-X Scramjet test? Besides, the U.S.S. Princeton had already been tracking mysterious aircraft for two weeks. And what about the “object” below the sea’s surface which caused a visible disturbance on the water? Can dear Robert Sheaffer explain these relevant details in a satisfying and objective fashion? I assume he cannot, because he does not care about relevant data or evidence punching holes in his latest theory. He is more interested in theoretical constructs which support his CSICOP dogma.



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: JimOberg

Jim, this is an absurd concocted hit piece on a legit object of nonterrestrial origin.

Id say nice try but it isnt even that.


You've confirmed that, have you? You know with absolute certainty that this object is of "nonterrestrial origin"? How did you manage to do that? Do you have some sort of insider knowledge that leads you to know that?

I'd say nice try, but it isn't even that.



posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

Right. We don't know for certain, its all speculation at this point in time.

I have my conclusions on it, but id be foolish to say I know for sure.

I cannot speak for Urantia, however. Perhaps they are privy to something we are not (in which case id certainly be interested in knowing what this is).



edit on 6112018 by CreationBro because: (no reason given)







 
12

log in

join