pilot who spotted mile wide UFOs goes on TV

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
The only problem I have with this (well, not the only problem, common sense, reason and logic dictate about 10 things off hand that need to be considered) if why on earth would you need a mile wide UFO in atmosphere?

Look at it this way, we have crappy optics that can read the license plate or see the pattern on a golf ball from orbit. You would figure that any advanced race (and yes, they would have to be very advanced to keep a mile wide UFO aloft in our atmosphere) would be able to make much better observations from orbit (or even from farther distances within our solar system) without the need to have the risk of atmospheric flight. Even if they need to collect physical samples, why risk the mothership? Surley they are advanced enough to send out smaller drones or piloted "away teams" that can handle the scientific observations and collections at a substantially reduced risk.

There are many, many other reasons why I think anything related to a "mile wide ufo" is complete poppycock. Sure, some will come back telling me that how can I possibly assume the motivations and thought processes of an alien race, bla, bla. But I choose to believe that logic, reason and common sense are universal in nature, and a biological imperative to advance to the level of an intergalactic spare faring species.

yes presume to much,who said aliens reasoning and logic would even be like ours,the craft could even be a cruise liner filled with sightseers on holiday checking out some crappy planet.

so this pilot is lying...the other pilot is lying...the radar blip from the ground is lying, and the passengers in the plane are lying...but YOU know it's poppycock because logic and reason tells you it is. tell me, what is the motivation for all of these pilots here and in the past that have put these sightings into official reports....fame? money??...that's where my logic and reason kick in. why would they take on the ridicule of so many people like you. crackpots are not allowed to fly passenger aircraft.

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

why on earth would you need a mile wide UFO in atmosphere?

Aliens have big families?

All kidding aside, maybe they do. Maybe it's one of those things like when one woman goes to the loo they all go?

Really. I mean how do we know?

Thay’s just it we don't.

If someone on my block was headed out for another planet and asked, ‘Hey Mate, how big of a Ship would you take? I'd tell him the biggest one possible and start inviting my friends.

Maybe it was like a whole class of aliens going for a live hands on science project like our kids go to the zoo.

See, it all sounds silly, my suppositions, but, honestly, it could be something even more far out. We are dealing with aliens here right. Something we have absolutely NO real idea about when it comes down to it.

So the last thing I'd do is start to put limits on something I've not a real clue about.

peace

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
The only problem I have with this (well, not the only problem, common sense, reason and logic dictate about 10 things off hand that need to be considered) if why on earth would you need a mile wide UFO in atmosphere?

Look at it this way, we have crappy optics that can read the license plate or see the pattern on a golf ball from orbit. You would figure that any advanced race (and yes, they would have to be very advanced to keep a mile wide UFO aloft in our atmosphere) would be able to make much better observations from orbit (or even from farther distances within our solar system) without the need to have the risk of atmospheric flight. Even if they need to collect physical samples, why risk the mothership? Surley they are advanced enough to send out smaller drones or piloted "away teams" that can handle the scientific observations and collections at a substantially reduced risk.

There are many, many other reasons why I think anything related to a "mile wide ufo" is complete poppycock. Sure, some will come back telling me that how can I possibly assume the motivations and thought processes of an alien race, bla, bla. But I choose to believe that logic, reason and common sense are universal in nature, and a biological imperative to advance to the level of an intergalactic spare faring species.

Interesting, but suppose for the sake of the argument that these object are "manned" with intelligent pilots then still there is (I think) a mayor but natural flaw in your reasoning and that is that is is from a human perspective.
The reasons for such a large object to appear can be limitless naturally driven or intentionally and above all, above our comprehension.
And if intentionally, is there a reason to think they can be threatened by us? We do not even have time to react or to snap a good picture. And if you would design a spaceship, would you shape to suit the eyes of the earthlings or just keep it practical? (could be both of course)
Maybe it is a peekaboo game.

What annoyes me the most, is the not knowing in this subject. So I have to agree with Silo above.


[edit on 29-7-2009 by Pjotr]

reply to post by reject


I don't have any reason to disbelieve the pilot. Perhaps it is alien thinking that large ships should begin their debut on earth, by now. And perhaps they want just a few people to see them at first, so we can get used to them, just like we have gotten used to smaller crafts. And if they show themselves for a while in a non-aggressive manner, as it seem to be the case, then when they finally land at "Our big cities," then we will already know that they are advanced, but mean no harm, or else they would have done the harm a long time ago. In fact, by doing this, they are already showing that they have no interest in alarming or harming anyone. Anything that big could wipe us out in a second, if they haven't done it yet, it is because they have no intention to.

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts

Look at it this way, we have crappy optics that can read the license plate or see the pattern on a golf ball from orbit. You would figure that any advanced race (and yes, they would have to be very advanced to keep a mile wide UFO aloft in our atmosphere) would be able to make much better observations from orbit (or even from farther distances within our solar system) without the need to have the risk of atmospheric flight. Even if they need to collect physical samples, why risk the mothership? Surley they are advanced enough to send out smaller drones or piloted "away teams" that can handle the scientific observations and collections at a substantially reduced risk.

Under that logic, one could ask why humans put men on the moon rather than just sending a rover. I don't think you're in any position to speculate on the motives, capabilities, and weaknesses of an alien race for building a large ship and sending it somewhere.

Who said this was a mothership? How do you know that taking this ship into the atmosphere was in any way risky to its pilots or even if it had any pilots on board in the first place? You are making up facts and then commenting on those facts.

The fact that you are using Star Trek as a frame of reference is laughable - you even use Star Trek terminology. Do you think Patrick Stewart was the captain of the UFO? I'm surprised you didn't ask why they didn't simply activate their Romulan cloaking device.




[edit on 30-7-2009 by andrewh7]

Looks CGI to me but at times it looks quite real. Claims to be from 1968. Relevance? This could be a mile wide ufo.

""""""On 29 September 2003 Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics & Surveillance Systems, Akron, Ohio, was awarded agreement HQ0006-04-9-0001 for design and risk reduction phase 2 of the High Altitude Airship advanced concept technology demonstration. The objective of this Phase 2 effort is to continue design (through critical design review) and technical risk reduction efforts for a high-altitude airship system prototype that will demonstrate military utility by operating in the stratosphere as a long-endurance, quasi-geostationary platform with a contractor-supplied, government-approved payload or a government-supplied payload. The estimated total value for Phase 2 is $40,000,000 with a period of performance from October 2003 to June 2004. There is an option for a prototype, development, build and demonstration Phase 3 for an estimated total value of $50,000,000 with a period of performance from June 2004 to July 2006 and a follow-on option for an Extended User Evaluation Period Phase 4 for an estimated total value of $9,000,000 with a period of performance from August 2006 to July 2008. The Missile Defense Agency is the contracting activity (HQ0006-04-9-0001).""""""

www.globalsecurity.org...


So the guy saw a blimp. It appears the Missile Defense Agency ain't got enough money to fly it anymore. It's probably what the 'UFO' landing pad outside the new hangar at Area 51 was built for.

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

But I choose to believe that logic, reason and common sense are universal in nature,

How is it not common sense to make the connection between all those stars in the sky and a giant spaceship in the atmosphere? The universe is 14 billion years old. Plenty of time for advanced civilizations to develop. How is it "logical" to think that we are the pinnacle of creation? I just don't get it... *sigh*

As for the giant spaceship in our atmosphere defying logic. It doesn't. These beings aren't here to take rock samples. They are here for us. They are trying to get our attention. Is this not becoming increasingly obvious? It's the only explanation that makes sense.

Your "logical" asseration that high tech aliens could simply take soil samples using smaller craft makes as little sense as huge spaceships hovering in the atmosphere. If they are that high tech, they would have long gathered the little knowledge that we have gathered in just a few hundred years. There is no reason for "soil samples."

These ships are here for a reason. And that reason is most likely us.

reply to post by Pervius

So the guy saw a blimp. It appears the Missile Defense Agency ain't got enough money to fly it anymore. It's probably what the 'UFO' landing pad outside the new hangar at Area 51 was built for.

The guys saw a HAA? Ok so your calling the guy a liar or saying that his flying experience doesn't mean anything and that he's probably never seen a blimp?

While the HAA was an interesting read, a couple of points:

1) He saw the object at 6000 ft. The HAA would be used at 60-70k ft.

2) He said he saw a mile long object. He didn't say he saw a 500 ft blimp.

3) Not sure what the range on that blimp is, but it's a long haul from Akron Ohio to the English Channel.

Originally posted by Scramjet76
reply to post by Pervius

 

So the guy saw a blimp. It appears the Missile Defense Agency ain't got enough money to fly it anymore. It's probably what the 'UFO' landing pad outside the new hangar at Area 51 was built for.

The guys saw a HAA? Ok so your calling the guy a liar or saying that his flying experience doesn't mean anything and that he's probably never seen a blimp?

While the HAA was an interesting read, a couple of points:

1) He saw the object at 6000 ft. The HAA would be used at 60-70k ft.

2) He said he saw a mile long object. He didn't say he saw a 500 ft blimp.

3) Not sure what the range on that blimp is, but it's a long haul from Akron Ohio to the English Channel.

edit on 2-11-2010 by Scramjet76 because: (no reason given)

Moreover the military would quickly say 'you know that article you read about our funding regarding our haa well that was your tax dollars at work'. If you had the announcement for the project nor reason to hide it.

Also this guy is a piot he cant tell between a mile long ship and a blimp.

Why is it we spend so much time responding to skeptics instead of fleshing out facts to come to a conclusion. Skeptics seem to skip the disucssion of what it may be and go directly to "its not". I dont know thats why we meet here to talk.

All call to order the first meeting of Roswell. Well start the discussion with Rich. Rich - its not a ufo. Oh um ok well I guess lets go home. Thanks for coming.

Discuss why or why not. Conclusions are suspect.

Most importantly an airline pilot who sees upper atmosphere all the time is going to take more to disprove than just a "nahh ahhhh ".

what do yall think of the video I posted yesterday!?!

As far as their purpose!?

Why do we go to the moon/mars/sun? Why do we send a telescope into space? When we visit Hawaii is it just because there is a wild kingdom in the jungle?

They may have no care about us at all. its ethnocentric to assume its b/c of us. Maybe they pause to marvel at our backwards way and then move along examining the core of the earth or mining radioactive material from the core.

Maybe its a sight seeing tour and they come to see the ancient civilizations and their 'rock' flying crafts. We really are like a tribe of monkeys trying to guess why men are in their jungle. Varied reasons from killing them for sport to study.

reply to post by reject

hes a lier his eye brows are jumping through the roof.

originally posted by: said _zebidee
As a retired weather forecaster for the UK Meteorological Office - the theory of this "UFO" being lenticular cloud troubles me. Lenticular cloud requires specific conditions in order to form and the positioning of the Channel Islands makes these rather difficult to achieve. These clouds form downwind of a significant orographic barrier ( hills/mountains ). In my experience a wind in excess of 20knots and a barrier of at least 1000 ft is required. Winds at all levels at the time of this phenomenon appear to be from the western half of the compass meaning there can be no barrier until the Channel Islands and the Islands themselves are much too low to achieve significant uplift in the airfow to cause a trapped wave to form.

Here is an in-depth report on the incident from a meteorological standpoint.

rr0.org...

Said _zebidee, great post mate - thanks very much for that.

originally posted by: Springer

When asked about this phenomenon he has consistently said nothing and only raised his eye brows in a very emotive fashion. When pressed on the issue, he flatly states that "after reporting your first 'UFO', you'll never report another one".

Springer I've heard that from a British pilot as well.

All of my sightings were of human airplane sized craft. My first sighting was in 1994.

Sorry for not getting all pumped up about this.

I believe in the existence of ET UFOs and ET aliens, but I no longer get excited about them. Why? They are a non-factor. They are, AFAI see, for all intents and purposes: negligible. Easy to overlook. If they are still abducting people, it's the very rare thing these days. You hardly ever hear about it any more.

This thread is further proof of this theory. There was a one-mile wide UFO in the sky, and hardly no one saw it? pfffttt.... whatever.

If they start to get more involved... then I promise to pay better attention.

Like I said, sorry if I can't find myself getting all pumped up about the issue. It's just how it's evolved for me these days.