posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 02:15 PM
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.