It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: Sublant
Nowhere in my post did I state that the RQ170 was what was observed during the nimitz and later sightings.
It was an example of different aspects of the military not sharing information, I made this rather clear.
originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Celty, did you ever try to make that graph yourself as I suggested back on page 89, to confirm these PhD's (and a retired computer programmer named Larry Cates) claiming something other than what that graph shows are incompetent?
Ok so essentially you are stating that Kevin Knuth, Robert M Powell, Pete A. Reali, The three reviewers of the manuscript....and the entire NAVY's Analytics Department who characterize this video as an UAP are freaking IDIOTS....??
Hhhmm I need to think about that...
originally posted by: IMSAM
Mayhap we will see a new 9/11 but this time it will be a ufo doing the aggression. Reagan said 3-4 times we would be united if aliens attacked,MacArthur said the same. Now enter delonge who says invest because aliens are not benign, but invest because even though the end of the world might come long live capitalism.
War is needed from nations to control their people, When the new 9/11 happens more freedoms will be sacrificed in the name of national security.
originally posted by: Guest101
The Navy has nothing to do with this. All they ever stated is the object in the ATFLIR video could not be identified. They never claimed the ATFLIR video demonstrates ‘otherworldly’ performance.
The claim of ‘otherworldly performance’ is only supported by eye-witness accounts, like it has been for the past 70 years.