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.
Originally posted by gfad
John you seem to dismiss these memos without comment (I'm ignoring your irrelevant sarcastic post), and you seem to joke that they don't even show anything. Do you understand the difference between actual and anecdotal evidence? Do you know which stands up better?
All you have produced is the testimony of these people who, I think strangely, are quite willing to break the secrecy clause in their contracts. Don't you think that makes them unreliable?!
Please Unisol, tell me you are joking! We do not KNOW that Aurora exists infact me and a sizable proportion of the people on these boards believe that it doesnt exist and never did, at least not in the way the myth describes. You cant use the uncertain existance of one mythological plane to validate the existance of another one!
Originally posted by pavil
One thing I do find strange is that while the Airforce had stealth, the Navy did not? Wouldn't stealth tech be even more vital to a Navy craft? I know there are tons of people who have served on Carriers as well. Most of them do not report an F-19. Secrets would be hard to keep on a Carrier I assume. Either way it seems strange to me.
Originally posted by johnlear
What I meant was that if we have been mining on the moon for the past 45 years and were able to keep that a secret then its unlikely that we would be able to turn up any evidence of a plane that the government might wish to keep secret.
Originally posted by johnlear
This is a conspiracy thread not a thread to confirm government lies, misdirection and propanganda. So, yes, government lies, misdirection and propaganda are much easier to prove.
Originally posted by johnlear
No and gfad you what a sizeable proportion of the people on these boards believe does not make it the truth. As a matter of fact just the opposite.
Auroa existed, it went Mach 12 at 250,000 feet and they made 5 of them.
That is an opinion, I have no proof and it has the same validity has any opinion that Aurora does not exist.
Originally posted by waynos
Unisol, just stop and have a think.
Aurora (first rumoured 26 years ago!) can do mach 12?
So why all the fuss over the small, unmanned, B-52 launched X-43 a couple of years ago?
Originally posted by pavil
One thing I do find strange is that while the Airforce had stealth, the Navy did not? Wouldn't stealth tech be even more vital to a Navy craft? I know there are tons of people who have served on Carriers as well. Most of them do not report an F-19. Secrets would be hard to keep on a Carrier I assume. Either way it seems strange to me.
Originally posted by gfad
I'm sorry, Ghost. You know I normally like your posts and I think you know your stuff, but I don't see what new information or assumptions you are stating.
All that I can see is a photo of a model that is decades old and a summary of arguments which the same posters say every time this topic is brought up.
The photo of your "F-19" model is ridiculous. With knowledge of current aircraft design even an amateur can spot large features of the plane which are redundant and dont fit in with textbook stealth and propulsion design. For example this plane exhibits stealth features which are decades old. At a glance I'd guess that if it was real it would have a higher RCS than the SR-71.
Also i think your proposition that the SR-71 replaced the A-12 is also wrong. The A-12 was developed by Lock-Mart for the sole use of the CIA whereas the SR-71 was the AF version of the A-12.
I dont doubt the fact that there is a secret supersonic plane flying round over nevada but there is NO way it looks like that and chances are it isnt call the F-19.
don't forget that many, many aeronautical 'experts' and science writers, when shown the first pictures of the F-117 pronounced it to be the new Mach 5 Aurora or some high speed interceptor.
Originally posted by gfad
Finally, although you may think that ending your posts with the phrase "thanks for your input" is mature, following it with a smiley definately is not. The sarcastic tone makes you seem derisatory and dismissive.
Originally posted by Stoo
Given that you know all of this information John, can you provide any evidence which can be verified by third parties?
Such as which carriers the F19 operated from in rough time frames for example?
Without anything which can lead people onto bigger discoveries and eventually the truth, all you'll end up doing is creating more and more circular arguments on various discussion boards.
From what I've seen so far you appear to hold all the cards to the truth but seem unwilling to provide people with any means of moving forward, instead replying with a "hey, I know I'm right, you're either just uninformed or stupid if you don't believe me" type attitude?
What does that actually accomplish at the end of the day?
[edit on 30-3-2007 by Stoo]
Originally posted by Stoo
Given that you know all of this information John, can you provide any evidence which can be verified by third parties?
Such as which carriers the F19 operated from in rough time frames for example?
Without anything which can lead people onto bigger discoveries and eventually the truth, all you'll end up doing is creating more and more circular arguments on various discussion boards.
From what I've seen so far you appear to hold all the cards to the truth but seem unwilling to provide people with any means of moving forward, instead replying with a "hey, I know I'm right, you're either just uninformed or stupid if you don't believe me" type attitude?
What does that actually accomplish at the end of the day?
Originally posted by Canada_EH
I ask again Mr Lear please respond to the civil questions from Stoo and myself all we ask for is information or some way to move this beyond word vs word and actually say record testimony or get your friends to join here on ATS even if its for just the purpose of the F-19 myth and to provide counter evidence to the Gov papers on this thread.