Confirmation of Existence of Aurora?

page: 7
1
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
If you require bets or apologies for false information which doesn't exist, too bad.



How can information that doesn't exist be "false?" All false information must exist. Your falseclaim that I didn't take the photos, for example, is information that exists. Further photos exist and are sitting on my hard drive, reading for uploading at a moment's notice.

Sigh. Some people... more interested in insulting others than in learning...




posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   
By all means, post these pictures, I don't want to see them on another site either there. They will need to be on up-ship.com. Why? Because I don't believe you own the site, and I don't believe you own the pics.



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
By all means, post these pictures, I don't want to see them on another site either there. They will need to be on up-ship.com. Why? Because I don't believe you own the site, and I don't believe you own the pics.


And the hits just keep coming.





posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Okay...junior high kiddo. (That was so immature)

So you took them, THANK YOU. But this pic is still not of a real aircraft.



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
Okay...junior high kiddo.


I left junior high... aw, crap, two decades ago (suddenly I feel old). Been an aerospace engineer for more'na decade now.



Originally posted by Shugo
(That was so immature)


So is claiming someone else is a liar based on *no* evidence.


Originally posted by Shugo

So you took them, THANK YOU.


Huzzah! Progress.




Originally posted by Shugo
But this pic is still not of a real aircraft.


Hmmm...








posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
They are not of a USAF Aircraft...how many times to have I have to pound it into you? Perhaps some more senior members than I should let at you.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
They are not of a USAF Aircraft...


Did I say they were USAF?

Sheesh.

By the way: the evidence for what these photos show should be plainly visible to you, given all the surfing around you've been doing. It's made... quite clear.

Of course, *asking* might work, too.

Ah, well, it's late.

[edit on 4-2-2006 by Orionblamblam]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   
If you're so old, loose the immaturity.

Secondly: Okay, fine, again answered my question, how hard was it to just say it?

Third:
How does this count as proof of existance? Because you have models of it, it HAS to exist? How does this support this thread, and how is it important?



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:28 AM
link   
I figured I’d chime in...So its not completely a 2-person thread.


Orion...What did you take the craft with...Since the camera would obviously be a very expensive one.

And yeah...its obvious you own the site...Since the other day I deleted the 3 (at the end of the Aurora pic address) and replaced it with a 4 to see if you were hiding any other photos...and there was no 4...and now there is.

You said its not USAF??? Then who do you think owns that aircraft?
Whats the white smudges on the pics...dont tell me that the AF wouldn't keep its hypersonic spyplane it top condition...I'm sure after billions spent...they could splash on some new paint.
How many pics do you have?
Whats up with the mini pics? We want Hi Res.

Any from head on, and from behind?
Are you a photographer?
Are you a Skunkworks employee?
Why do you think it will be revealed soon?

I find it a little strange that an aeronautical engineer that takes pictures of "black" aircraft would also run a website that has 3d modeled concept aircraft on it.........Dont you?

Asking those questions doesn't mean I believe you...after all, AURORA has being a virtual myth on the internet for over a decade. So you shouldn't be surprised by people like "Shugo" who will debate you till the end. My own thought is leaning towards fake...But I've been a member of this site for awhile...and in that time you see a LOT of headlines and pictures stating its the "Real Aurora".

For me, general curiosity has gotten the best of me...So regardless of what your stating is real or fake...I still want to know.


[edit on 4-2-2006 by Murcielago]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

Orion...What did you take the craft with...Since the camera would obviously be a very expensive one.


As I said, a Toshiba PDR-3320 digital camera. A few years old. Nothign fancy.


Originally posted by Murcielago

You said its not USAF??? Then who do you think owns that aircraft?


I do, as it turns out.





Originally posted by Murcielago
Whats the white smudges on the pics...



Quick question: what makes you think the smudges are white? And what, exactly, makes you think that the photos aren;t negatives?

Just asking...







Originally posted by Murcielago
Why do you think it will be revealed soon?


Basic economics.



Originally posted by Murcielago
I find it a little strange that an aeronautical engineer that takes pictures of "black" aircraft would also run a website that has 3d modeled concept aircraft on it.........Dont you?


Oh, heck no. I also publish a magazine (well I did... it's over now) that covers *unbuilt* aircraft and spacecraft projects.


Originally posted by Murcielago
Asking those questions doesn't mean I believe you...


GOOD! Skepticism is a wonderful (more precisely, NECESSARY) thing, and to be excercised often. However, one should be careful in how one *expresses* that skepticism. And one should also be careful to understand just what it is they're dealing with before getting all emotional. Sometiems the answers are staring you in the face, but you don't see them because you're looking at them wrong.



Originally posted by Murcielago
after all, AURORA has being a virtual myth on the internet for over a decade.


And now it's a physical reality. But be careful of your assumptions...



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 01:23 AM
link   
It still is a myth. There's nothing that says anythings solid, no ones gotten enough on the project (not even me or the entire research team) that leads to any firm existance of the craft.

While I believe it DOES exist, I don't think that there's anything there that I can use to backup that it exists. As far as the project goes, there are far too many possibilities and explanations, so my decision now is to believe it.

The pics you've posted, what I've posted in the past, and this thread don't make EVIDENCE, or somewhat of a reality. A model kit doesn't mean anything either. So, we have a person here who published that magazine, you knew it was fake, you knew it was a model, so why was it such a big deal I guess is my main question? And why circulate rumors in a magazine, a method of informing the public with backed information, and news, of an aircraft that may or may not exist, with only proof using your current existing knowledge? And how can you justify with your job that any information you have is any greater than the others posted here on ATS?



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
It still is a myth. There's nothing that says anythings solid...


Really? Huh. Considering that I laid hands on it *yesterday,* you again surprise me.

But perhaps you should be more precise on what you mean by "it."


Originally posted by Shugo
The pics you've posted, what I've posted in the past, and this thread don't make EVIDENCE...



Sure they do. The photos are good evidence of the existence of something called Aurora.

Heck, the following photo is *also* confirmation of the existence of Aurora... which is the thread topic, after all.




Originally posted by Shugo
And why circulate rumors in a magazine...


I suggest you take a look at the information on the magazine, and the topics it covered. My magazine was not in the "rumor" business. It was in the hard-facts-backed-up-by-design-documents business.

Articles on topics such as the WS-110.



ATS board rules prohibit me saying much of anything further.


Originally posted by Shugo
And how can you justify with your job that any information you have is any greater than the others posted here on ATS?


Not justifying anything with my job. Using the photos for that.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Okay, let me define it for you, as we're no longer on the topic of your "model" pics. The discussion isn't a piston airplane, it's not an aircraft model, it's a hypersonic aircraft, and your pictures do not prove of this aircrafts existance. Why? Because they aren't of the aircraft in question, we aren't for certain what it looks like.

If your magazine is based on hard facts, then explain why it never decoded or released Aurora? Why is it that the Aurora is shreaded in mystery to this day, if your magazine, which is or was distributed, to the population? Pointless huh?



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   
(bulked post sorry)

[edit on 2-4-2006 by Shugo]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Orion, you remind me of a cat playing with a mouse here, and you are clearly enjoying it. So will you answer me a straight question with a straight answer?

Are you proving the existance of Aurora in the form of a hypersonic spaceplane or in the form of a representative model of one?

If neither, in what form are you proving the existance of Aurora?

In your earlier post stating 'sheer economic necessity' (I may be paraphrasing) would this be the economic necessity of you needing to flog some kits?



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
So will you answer me a straight question with a straight answer?


Hey, neat! A straight unambiguous question. A rarity these days.


Originally posted by waynos
Are you proving the existance of Aurora in the form of a hypersonic spaceplane or in the form of a representative model of one?


The latter, and quite clearly I thought. I mean, who would have thought that photos like these would be of anything *but* a model?






Originally posted by waynos
In your earlier post stating 'sheer economic necessity' (I may be paraphrasing) would this be the economic necessity of you needing to flog some kits?


Well, if people don't know something exists, they can't buy it. (Unless you're talking about government programs, of course...)

But ATS forum rules say "no advertising," so there it is. Nevertheless, the photos do confirm the existence of Aurora. Sorta.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
If your magazine is based on hard facts, then explain why it never decoded or released Aurora?


Because apart from design studies, there is no hard evidence on Aurora to release.


Originally posted by Shugo
Why is it that the Aurora is shreaded in mystery to this day, if your magazine, which is or was distributed, to the population? Pointless huh?


Ummm... what? One more time, in English please.


Ox

posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Ok.. I'm all for the exsistence of Aurora.. believe me I would love to see it and know that it is real.. But I have to pose this question after reading this thread..
Is it possible that "Aurora" is the name for a series of projects? Not just one individual project? Could "Aurora" be the project name for the next generation of Military Aircraft, Any black project that that is being built by a specific company or uses a specific type of propulsion?.. Could that be a possibilty?



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   
or is it possible that this thread is a giant Ad for a model. waste of freakin time and i hope the mods lock the freakin thing.


Ox

posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Wow.. that was a positive post.. Way to add to the thread..
How about being a little more optomistic?





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join