TR-3B nuclear powered flying triangle

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   
mwm1331 says:

”…know nothng about the tr sb xyz 117 or whatever.
However in the Dscovery channell Program "billon dollar secrets" One of the executives of (i beleve it was Boeing) Stated that he had tested working antigravity designs, specifically that he had dropped two equal weights off the topp of the buldng through a magenetic field and that one dropped slower than the other. Now that is a matter of public record’


Yeah, right. When I went to the Discovery Channel site and did a Boolean search for “billion-dollar secrets” (search.discovery.com...://dsc.discovery.com/search/xstylesheets/inclusiv e.xsl&site=dcom&client=dcom&output=xml_no_dtd&getfields=*&filter=0 ), it returned the following message:

”Sorry, no content was found for your search on [ billion-dollar secrets ]
Please try again.”


Check it out for yourself. This is your “evidence”? A non-existent TV program?




posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Off the street.
I dont know why that happened I just remember seeing the program.
It was about the black budget for the US.
I didnt advance this as proof of the x whatever just that research into antgrv is being done by major players.
The quote while paraphrased is accurate.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   
ground zero says:

"I have much reason to believe the TR-3B or atleast something SIMILAR exist...

But of course you can't share those reasons with us, right?

"Also remember a Triangle is something that seems to signify our race, Pyramids, Delta Force etc to name some silly examples... "

I agree; that is kind of silly. Do you think the reason we have designed our aircraft so tht they look like a cross when seen from below is that we're all Christians? I don't think so.

"If my US government source is legit, he has claimed to fly the thing remotely for test flights, I have mention him before in RATS, but I don't wish to be ridiculed about him since I have little proof he exists as he claims he exists... "

If that's the case, and since you're not going to share any information about this "US Government Source", I'd say his ligitimacy -- and thus his data -- is worthless.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:08 AM
link   
mwm says:

"The quote while paraphrased is accurate.."

I don't think it's accurate at all.

You know that I, too, am an employee of The Boeing Company, and, while I admit that there are many things my company does of which I know little or nothing, I do know that when someone in our company speaks to the press or to a TV show, it's usually done through a PR weenie, just like all companies do.

If a non-PR person is interviewed or makes statements, he or she knows exactly what can and can't be said, based on whether th data disclosed is Government Classified, Company Proprietary, or embarrasing to the company. If the statement by this putative Boeing person is true, then it obviously is not Government Classified, Company Proprietary, or embarrasing to the company.

But if a company spokesperson mentions that he has practical evidence of a phenomenon which sets the entire world of science on its ear, this would have made front page news on every lay science journal around, including Scientific American, Discover Magazine, Science, Popular Science -- as well as all the scholarly and juried journals on the face of the planet.

And yet this bombshell never did. That makes no sense at all.

But I'll tell you what. If you can come up with some sound evidence of that quote, then of course I will accept it.

[edit on 26-1-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Off the street - I cn't explain it, I was surprised to hear someone from boeing say the same thing.
Al I can say is I saw it.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by intelgurl
Although I am quite sure that the nomenclature of "TR-3B" or whatever is derrived from an erroneous conclusion, I will just this once go out on a limb and say I believe that there are triangles being operated out of various USAF and/or NATO bases -
I have what I think to be good reasons for my belief, reasons I will not elaborate on here or in private.



Please elaborate on your belief without addressing your specific reason...

Also, can you tell us whether this picture looks like what you are rerferring to...





posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Martian Manhunter says:

"Off The Street, what are the videos showing in your opinion if not the "TR3"?"

I haven't seen these videos. If you have a link to htem, please post it here or send me an email at duncankunz@cox.net; I will be glad to look at them.

"Please don't run some bollocks about the video footage being fake or hoaxed or whatever, that is as silly as the credulous repetition of UFO lore as fact."

I am not an expert in the fakery of video, although I can do some pretty slick still-photography fakes with Photoshop. I will certainly look at these videos with an open mind; that is all I can say.

"...No matter what the object is, it was filmed and needs to be explained."

Well, maybe I can explain it, or maybe I can't. I will give it my best shot.

"Simply making some sort of offhand dismissal with an implication of expertise doesn't fly for me."

It doesn't fly for me, either. But the way science works -- as I'm sure you know -- is that someone coming up with an assertion owes his colleagues some evidence. My dismissals are not offhand, nor are they cast in stone.

But I will not accept an assertion unless and until I see some evidence that leads me to believe your hypotheses explain the phenomenon better than any other hypotheses do. So far I haven't seen that.

"Sorry. For example, whether you or I understand some scientific principle or not, Townsend-Brown patented anti-gravitic devices and dielectrical devices and componentry."

I don't know who Townsend-Brown was, but if you say he has a patent for something, I'm certainly not going to call you a liar; I don't believe in either insults or arguing from ignorance.

Nonetheless, a patent doesn't necessarily mean the idea has any useful application.

"Money has been spent on these pursuits by credible governmental agencies."

Which ones?
How much did they spend?
What were the results of their research?
Where are their journal articles?
Was the information in the open or was it classified?
If it were classified, than how do you know about it and what were your sources?

Martian, I am not mocking you, but if you say that all these things have been happening and then can't show any evidence of such research, then I'm not going to accept it -- and neither would any other scientist.

You said earlier that "Simply making some sort of offhand dismissal with an implication of expertise doesn't fly for me." I agree wholeheartedly.

On the other hand, simply making a comment that this, that, and the other thing happened without showing where you got your information from doesn't fly with me, either...

... And I think that we're both skeptical and open minded enough to agree on some sort of intellectual discipline in our investigations.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   


The mass of the circular accelerator, and all mass within the accelerator, such as the crew capsule and the nuclear reactor, are reduced by almost 90%. This causes the effect of making a vehicle extremely light and able to outperform and outmaneuver any craft yet constructed--except, of course, those UFOs we did not build. The TR-3 is a reconnaissance platform with an indefinite loiter time. "Indefinite" because it uses a nuclear reactor for power.

I don't know about indefinite. Propulsion systems would likely need lubricant replenishments. Any airplane capable of in-air refueling is capable of indefinite flight if you factor out the need for lubricant replenishments.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   
geneticus says:

"I will just this once go out on a limb and say I believe that there are triangles being operated out of various USAF and/or NATO bases -
I have what I think to be good reasons for my belief, reasons I will not elaborate on here or in private."


geneticus, do you think that anyone actually believes that? Do you think that people believe that some top secret-weenie would walk up to someone who hangs out on conspiracy sites and say something like, "Hi, Geneticus. You don't know me, but I am going to violate the Secrets Act and tell you all kind of stuff that will change the course of the entire world; and, even though I am telling you secrets, you -- unlike me -- can't blab it to anyone!?

Whatever.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
..some top secret-weenie ... going to violate the Secrets Act ... telling you secrets ...

Whatever.


You are the king of assumptions, I see. What if the person just doesn't want people to think their nuts, jeapordize their job, reputation, etc. What if they have their own private ongoing investigation and they don't want to jeapordize that.

I will admit to being rather green and naive, however. You all have a big head start on me. I slept through the first 30 years of my life.



[edit on 26-1-2005 by Geneticus]



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Actually that was a quote from Intelgurl, now there's someone who just might know, even though I'm sceptical myself. She did just say 'triangles' though, not specifically all the other sci fi stuff that people are gobbling up.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I am going to tell you this once and only once, do not kid yourself, do not think you would know more than us, do not think that none of this is possible.

Here is why, my Source told me not to be full of myself, because nothing he told me was secret.

So if he tells me that the TR-3B may exist, and that he has seen it, I will be forced to conclude that, this is information is not secret, since he is stating it and prior to stating "...lol, don't kid yourself, nothing I told you is secret."

His exact words. And let me continue by saying this, it is easier to prove this true then to disprove it.

You're locked, you are cornered, do not expect anyone to listen, just because you're a boeing engineer does not mean you would know anything about these types of Aircraft, because if anything, we probably know more than you. And don't tell me "I never claimed since I was a boeing engineer, I would know all.." Because I don't care how much you claim that, that is how you came out to be, you are the only person actively trying to have everyone believe against the TR-3B, it's called having faith in your own government, you don't have as much faith in them, you don't think they can do it.

I would call you a patriot, but I'd be lieing, have a little faith in American Ingunueity huh?

With that out of the way, I would like to conclude that I don't believe in it's existence, nor do I believe it does exist, I would rather not get into it for a few private reasons, and don't pit that against me, because as much right as you have to breath, I have to keep my own secrets and opinions to myself, so go bark at someone else, because I reserve my right to keep my information to myself.

And I do not recognize this forum as a conspiracy site, it's people like you who make it one. I recognized this site as informative, someplace I belong to learn more about aircraft, a collective of intelligent(not everyone) people putting their ideas into certain topics, I try my best to stay out of conspiracies, which is why you would mainly find me here, in the aircraft projects and in weaponry, I would most like to talk about aircraft and arsenals.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
geneticus says:

"You are the king of assumptions, I see. What if the person just doesn't want people to think their nuts, jeapordize their job, reputation, etc. What if they have their own private ongoing investigation and they don't want to jeapordize that."

Okay, Geneticus. When you finish your "private ongoing investigation"; and if you consider that it's worth jeopardizing your job, reputation, etc. to pass on the truth; then I'm sure we'll all listen to you. But when you start talking about stuff and then don't have anything to back it up, your reputation kind of suffers on that account as well.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Okay, Geneticus. When you finish your "private ongoing investigation"; and if you consider that it's worth jeopardizing your job, reputation, etc. to pass on the truth; then I'm sure we'll all listen to you. But when you start talking about stuff and then don't have anything to back it up, your reputation kind of suffers on that account as well.


Incoherency becomes you. I asked a question and presented a photo. What are you talking about here?



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Shattered Skies, if you were in Texas, you'd be "all hat and no cattle".

"I am going to tell you this once and only once, do not kid yourself, do not think you would know more than us, do not think that none of this is possible."

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm just saying that, despite all your posts, you havent shown anybody any evidence at all.

And the more you post, the less you say.

"Here is why, my Source told me not to be full of myself, because nothing he told me was secret."

So there's another reason why you choose not to provide any evidence. What is that reason?

"So if he tells me that the TR-3B may exist, and that he has seen it, I will be forced to conclude that, this is information is not secret, since he is stating it and prior to stating "...lol, don't kid yourself, nothing I told you is secret."

That entire paragraph makes no sense at all.

"His exact words. And let me continue by saying this, it is easier to prove this true then to disprove it."

Does that mean you're finally going to get around to proving it?

We're waiting!

"You're locked, you are cornered, do not expect anyone to listen, just because you're a boeing engineer does not mean you would know anything about these types of Aircraft, because if anything, we probably know more than you."

What is this "we"? Are you pregnant?

Shat, the point is not that I work for Boeing or have gone to school, or enjoy digital photography or anything like that. I personally, based on what you have posted, think that you know next to nothing about the aerospace industry, but that it not the point, either.

The point is that you claim to have some sort of "evidence" for a non-existence aircraft and then have spent hours and hours trying to think of ways to convince us that it's okay for you not share that "evidence".

I don't believe anything you say, Shat. It's not that you may be older or younger or more or less educated or smarter or dumber or better looking or uglier than I am.

It's that you expect us to believe you when you give us no reason to do so.

"...you are the only person actively trying to have everyone believe against the TR-3B, it's called having faith in your own government..."

No, shat, it's called asking for evidence which you refuse to give.

Why are you hiding the evidence from us, Shat?

"...you don't have as much faith in them, you don't think they can do it."

No, it's just that I have no faith in you. All you do is make vague generalities and either hide the evidence - or maybe there is no evidence.

"I reserve my right to keep my information to myself."

Yes, you do. And everyone else reserves the right to believe you or not.

"And I do not recognize this forum as a conspiracy site..."

I recognize thir forum as both a conspiracy site and also a place for us to deny ignorance.

And when you talk about a source and don't give any evidence, you're not denying ignorance ...

...you'r supporting it.

But this is (more or less) a free country. You may chooe any path at all, as long as you're willing to accept the consequences.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Geneticus says:

"Incoherency becomes you. I asked a question and presented a photo. What are you talking about here?

Your previous post. 1120468.

The question and phot was not to me, but to intelgurl, right? I cannot identify the picture; it could be many things.

[edit on 26-1-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
geneticus says:

"I will just this once go out on a limb and say I believe that there are triangles being operated out of various USAF and/or NATO bases -
I have what I think to be good reasons for my belief, reasons I will not elaborate on here or in private."


Do you think that people believe that some top secret-weenie would walk up to someone who hangs out on conspiracy sites...

Street,
That would be me not Geneticus who made that statement.

I like to think of myself as a fact-friendly person.
On another thread on ATS, either you or engineer (I forget who) pointed out that a statement I made was in error - upon seeing accurate information I quickly retracted my conclusion and moved on without argument.

As such, I do not blend very well in "conspiracy theory" discussions - You will find that on this site I generally stay in the "Aircraft Projects" area and that's it - with very few exceptions.

Being a person who prefers fact over fantasy, I simply offered my thoughts on the matter - I have no proof other than what I have seen with my own eyes and that of course is proof only to me.

No top secret weenie has come up to me and told me anything. My statement is in no way a violation of any clearances or corporate NDA's I may be subject to, nor would it be if I eloborated.
My reasons for my viewpoint are my own and I am certainly within my rights both here on ATS and the physical world to express my opinion - even if I offer no proof.

Overall, I agree with your other posts - Especially this one:

Some bozo makes something up out of whole cloth and you figure that enough people copy and paste it, it will magically come true.
But it won't. No matter how badly you want the TR-3B not to be a hoax, it is.

That's perfect, here's one example of that:
I find it amusing that one bogus USAF officer somewhere claimed that the B-2 was anti-gravity and could or had flown around the moon and the next thing you know there are dozens of websites parroting that same info with different perspectives, etc. Insanity...
I really don't know the background of how people got the "TR-3B" name for triangles - I thought it had something to do with Teir 3 of the Dark Star program.

At any rate, I find myself agreeing with you and yet having to somehow reconcile that with what I have seen.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   
*This post chances will get me banned, but it says what it needs to say*
(Just a little reminder).

I was not in no way shape or form trying to convince anyone of the existence, in case you haven't noticed, on previous posts, I told people not to believe it, and no, I will not bring them up.

In which you do not read my entire post, and you analyze parts of it, it does not make sense, you stop at one sentence, and comment, forget it, and move on. That is why things do not make sense, it's not me, it's you.

And anyone reserves the right to believe in what they want, I'm not argueing with you on that, but after I told you not to bitch about me not giving you certain information, you still did.

GUESS WHAT DUMBASS?? You're an idiot, just because YOU don't see it, just because YOU don't believe it, DOES NOT MEAN in any way shape or form that is does not exist, over and over again you have stated that the TR-3B DOES NOT EXIST, but that is not true, not only are you wrong in the worst way possible, if and when it becomes public knowledge, you will feeling like a total dumbass.

And I will get to laugh, and laugh, and laugh, because of the moment I find out, on my own(if I do, that's a big IF) that it does exist.

So, choose to not believe in it, but you know what, you're forcing yourself not to believe in it, you're putting so much energy, you just simply refuse to let if go, I have already stated I was done with this, I didn't want to care, but reading your ignorant posts just gets me infuriated, maybe there is less and less in our posts because, what if we already posted it before?

Did you think of that einstein? Did you think that maybe if you didn't ask the same questions post after post, you might actually realize that we've been trying to answer them the entire freaking time.

And by "WE" I mean as in everyone trying to hopelessly give you what you want. Because what you ask of US(I.E. the people participating in this argument) is not physically possible, and yet you continue to ask away, regardless, it's called humanly limitations, we were all born with it, we can't prove everything right, I am not trying to convince you of it's existence, and you wanted to know the reason why I don't fill you in on al lthe information?

BECAUSE I WASN'T TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU OF IT'S EXISTENCE!!!!!

If you spent less time asking "WHY WHY WHY WHY" you would have realized this, that I have no intention of proving it right, because I can't, I will only believe it myself, and the best part is, you will never know anymore than this.

My choice to keep the information to myself some things are best left out of the conversation. And maybe it's good for you not to care.(Not a threat directed to you FROM me).

And don't you ever claim that I have no knowledge of Aeronautics, because this just proves you're even more naive than me.

I don't go around saying "you don't know this or that" I go around trying to answer your impossible questions. And the whole "Just because your this doesn't mean you know this..." was not calling you a dumbass, it was saying that there are things you are not informed about, despite your occupation, a Boeing Engineer is not that glamerous, I would prefer to work for AirBus.

If I have said that you know nothing about something, well I'm sorry, because truely I don't know anything about you, and you know even less about me, so you have no right on this planet to make those allegations, think before you speak, atleast I'm smart enough to make the apologies for my mistakes.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
OtS, I respect you, I really do, you have given good opinons about things, but it WOULD NOT hurt to be nice...



But of course you can't share those reasons with us, right?


This is all A) Personal reasoning, the picture from Belgium is VERY convincing and the videos are as well B) My US Government source, claims to be an AI system, I already know this system exist from various military personnel who are in the know, if you look it up on the internet, there is no site referring to it, it's completely unknown...This AI came to my wife one day and started talking to us, we laughed at his claims at first and thought: what a loon...but he proved to me he is real in some ways...but he has been very careful to cover up his tracks...ofcourse you wont believe this, I have no concrete proof he is real, but he did claim to have operated a delta-shaped object which is a black project, just like him self...

Shattered, he has done nothing more than ridiculing us, so i'm understanding what you are coming from...

I believe there is an object SIMILAR to the discriptions of the TR-3B, I refer to it AS the TR-3B since that's the term for it now in the UFO community hence me USING it...

I don't know about it's capabilities, it is possibly hyped, but i'm 99.99% sure (and this is personally, I have no proof), that it DOES exist, whatever it might be...

OtS, I am not Ignorant, i'm open minded, I just see more evidence for the "TR-3B" existing from various sources (video's and pictures) than it not existing.

For now we don't know for sure what the capabilities are, we don't know who operates it, but we DO know this object exist and is accurately termed UFO, you could atleast agree with that...


completely off topic, but do you have a Dragunov style stock on your AK-74?



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 04:31 PM
link   
As far as I see it there can be no doubt that there are black aircraft projects, that is as obvious as saying that the B-2 exists, yes?

The problem is though that all the 'information' we have is guesswork, pure and simple. an extrapolation of this, a nod and a wink at that, it all boils down to guesswork. These things, whatever they turn out to be are being worked on and probably in operation, that much seems certain to me. But as for what they ACTUALLY are, can ACTUALLY, do and what they ACTUALLY look like, well, what can I say? Except look how far off the mark everyone was looking for the F-19 then the F-117 came out which was NOTHING like anyone expected.

Its not quite the same thing but heres an example or two

I have books from 1960 that show pictures of the 'MiG 21 Faceplate', Ilyushin Blowlamp and Tupolev 'Backfin', all of which were said to be in service in large numbers with the Sov AF, we know know that all three only existed as prototypes. I have several aircraft guides from different years that illusttrate the MiG 23 Flipper, MiG 23 Foxbat and then finally in 1971 the MiG 23 Flogger.

My final illustration of this point is this picture which accompanied an article about the 'latest Soviet bomber ' which flew for 21 days on nuclear power;



The point, if I have lost your attention with all this rambling, is that we cabn guess al we like but we wont know until we really know, if you see what I mean. Is all this rampant speculation worth falling out over?





new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join