It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


GOV. Operated UAP Collection Systems REVEALED

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 15 2019 @ 08:49 AM

originally posted by: celltypespecific
a reply to: Caver78

Not disagreeing that "some" UFO's probably aren't ours, but once Chris Mellon hitched his wagon to Tom Delonge all credibility he had went right out the window.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water......

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face....

I am also highly suspicious of Hal Putoff, Eric Davis, Tom Delonge, Semivan, and to a certain degree Elizondo...

The only reason I am interested in TTSA is because of Chris Mellon and Steve Justice.... they have no rational reason to tarnish there illustrious legacy/reputation by affiliating with TTSA unless there was some form of DISCLOSURE in the works.

Here's the thing.
These guys so far are like a bad re-run of all the previous dis-info guys from the 40's-50's-60's. They tell you they "have the beef" they string you along yet ultimately like every con man nothing tangible is ever produced. Just snippets of things that only lead to more questions.

For the paradigm to change we need to call BS unless someone comes straight out with solid, tangible information.

So far, aside from enlightening us to a past Govt project, I don't really think any of them can tell us anything other than
"Something's going on" because in all honesty I don't believe ANYONE has any hard answers. Not any Government, not any agency.

That said, there is also no reason to LINE ANYONES POCKETS concerning a "Mystery" that affects both the public sector as well as Naval and Air Force personnel. In fact THAT is nothing but a red flag and should stop people cold.

I've been watching people jump on this train since the beginning and it's amazing how quickly they give up their "self authority/critical thinking skills" just because the new version of the Con is by people who give lip service to disagreeing with the LAST bunch of Con Men!!!

For the record I'm not your typical skeptic.
I actually DO think something is going on, I just can't watch more of the same old shenanigans being perpetuated without pointing it out. We already have had disclosure. Just not hard answers.
Most people are confusing the two.

Here's a link to another ATS thread with an article that was most informative.

posted on Nov, 16 2019 @ 11:23 AM
Civilian Capture of Tic-Tac Ufo

edit on 16-11-2019 by celltypespecific because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 16 2019 @ 06:07 PM
a reply to: TheAlleghenyGentleman

Haha, I've seen some out there threads on here but that one's got to be near the top of the list. Thanks for the link.

posted on Nov, 16 2019 @ 08:23 PM
a reply to: NewArcadian

It is an amazing thread. It has a few related threads that are also out there. It’s great stuff.

posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 08:52 AM
a reply to: Arbitrageur

People can probably argue all day long what the white spec is in the video. More likely a bird than a balloon as it gives off a white hot IR. It's hard to follow the video. If the plane is 25000ft@4.11nm and the ocean is base at a right angle 90 then the other angle is 55. The object in the HUD says 3.4nm distance of the object. So he's taking the sine of 35 and multiplying by the hypotenuse and subtracting that from the 25000ft? The opposite of the known angle is the opposite and base of the right triangle. If that is true then the hypotenuse is smaller than the sides of the triangle?? That makes no sense, I may be wrong, but that gives the distance of length of the base not any information where the object lies on the hypotenuse line. Furthermore, people need to remember that this video is a heavily sanitized part of the original version.

posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 06:38 PM
I went back to the "Go Fast" video and I believe I found the mistake in the equation. He used SIN instead of COS. From his example he took sin35*h=opposite and then subtracted that opposite base of the triangle from the adjacent (height of the plane). That is wrong. Using his equation only establishes what the base of the triangle would be in nautical miles distance from each other IF the plane and the object was at sea level. We must use COS to draw a new opposite line base for the triangle to give us a new adj line height of the plane in regard to the hypotenuse and then to subtract that height from original height.

25000ft = 4.11 Nautical Mile's
Angle 35

The new adjacent line would be cos35*3.4=2.79
4.11-2.79=1.32nm UFO height from sea level. So about 8,020FT

Does that prove or disprove anything? In my opinion NO it does not! Lets calculate the number precisely at lock with the plane flying straight with the horizon at 4.4 hypotenuse range and camera angle at 26 degree's.

4.11nm - 3.95nm = 0.16nm = 972FT Height of the UFO from Sea level.

That's a big difference 972ft and 8,020ft elevation within a frame of a couple seconds. So is it a bird a balloon or superman??

Well it's not a balloon it has a white hot heat signature in IR. So we can debate what it is all day long and how fast it is actually moving, but one thing people have to remember this is not the entire video. We have no idea what other heights it flew or how fast it traveled before or after the clip or anything else the military pilots witnesses. So overall I don't see how this video really debunks anything. Actually it just reinforces the oddity of it. It climbed in elevation pretty darn fast.
edit on 22-11-2019 by sean because: (no reason given)

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in