Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

landing on i20?

page: 12
222
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 



Tifozy, I don't understand why you have to grab something I post and twist it around.


First of all, it's Tifozi and not Tifozy. Don't tell Emeral to learn how to read if you can't even replicate what you see.

Second, I didn't twist anything, I'm not very flexible. You're the one point things without contextualization.


1- To mock the thread


Respectometer = 0.


2- So that perhaps another 'smart' ATS member could trace the route the fuselage took. I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to be the same truck as it most likely traveled only by night and at relatively slow speeds.


How can it be the same? One is transporting a C-17 ( ) and the other was transporting a F-35 (don't need to repost image).

One was for practice (like the training they do with blackhawks underwater and all) and the other one has no info about the use of the fuselage.

The C-17 Galaxy is under study because of it's structural failures after 5000 hours, and the F-35 is already in mass production and all tests were perfect.


Oh, and yes, most likely the (local) government did release info about it, I don't live there, I don't know.


Exactly.


Instead we get a fool who could have called local authorities to try and find out what's going on, but instead starts a thread on ATS called 'landing on i20?'


The "fool" that created the thread was SEARCHING for witnesses, even contacted MUFON and was gathering help. Yes, he may have missed some basic steps, but who are you to judge anyone? I don't see your contribution bar very developed, wonder why...


What's even worse, there's no attempt on anyone to find out what's going on between pages 1-3, the closest they come to is a guy monitoring radio stations to see if they mention anything.


And the fact that in the first pages there are always "empty posts" is different from any other thread because........?

We didn't just monitored the radio station, we also checked the website for podcasts and virtual broadcasts... Guess you missed that.

And if we start by not trusting the authorities about this subjects, why the hell would we go talk to them first hand? And btw, the local authorities have been contacted, and in the first days they didn't offered any response or report.


Coincidentally, another ATSr posts the same thing, but on another thread, and another road in the same area. That's when the real smart ATSrs kicked in. They figured out that's the route between to known facilities, and even go as far as to guess what it might have been (a fighter jet fuselage).


What you don't realize is that we actually acknowledged that, marked it like an option but continued searching. But we never stop in the basic. If we have to squeeze everything about a case to see that it's really what they(whoever it is) claims it to be, then we'll do that. That's what this community is all about. If you are not interested about this case, stfu and respect who is debating it.


Sadly, to date, no one suggested contacting the transportation authority in Texas to try and find more info. Do it myself perhaps? I'm sorry, but no. Guys like you make me lose all hope in humankind since I know that if I call, and post results here, guys like you will start throwing comments like 'that's why it's called a coverup, they won't tell you the tuth!', or will find never ending loopholes in the story.


Actually, we did, and didn't needed to because someone on twitter already did that and got no report from them. They said they didn't knew anything about it.

If you're not going to do anything to contribute, again, stfu and respect who is searching for something in this case.




posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 



Guys like you make me lose all hope in humankind since I know that if I call, and post results here, guys like you will start throwing comments like 'that's why it's called a coverup, they won't tell you the tuth!', or will find never ending loopholes in the story.


ARE YOU SERIOUS? You loose hope in humankind because of some post you read on the internet? Excuse me, but it's because of guys that view humankind the way you do that I loose hope in humankind.

And don't even try to judge me, think that you know me or that you will understand my profile. You can't, you don't and you won't.

You fired against your own foot, because you are actually accusing the guy who suggested the Wind Turbine theory. So, I'm not much of a conspiracy maniac, I guess.

Just because I like to debate and refute/analyze all options to exaustion, doesn't mean I'm a conspiracy fanatic.

The story has loose ends. We are just figuring it out if they make sense or not. It's a debate.


So somehow you came to the conclusion that there was something in the sky - I thought u didn't jump to conclusions that easily. But anyways, suppose there was something, suppose it was a weather balloon, suppose the military did shoot it down. Would you ever expect to see the headline 'Military shoots thousands of rounds, downs weather balloon'?


Your failure to understand that I was justing pointing an example for my argument shows exactly your hability to understand the big picture or what people are actually pointing out.

And btw, in your first points you accuse me of being somekind of blind conspiracy theorist because of the stupidity of this thread, and now you say "Oh, I thought you didn't jump to conclusions that easily"? Make up your mind.


Maybe they did shoot down a weather balloon and are still covering it up.
Maybe they shot a weather balloon, and missed.
Maybe they did shoot an UFO with no success.
Maybe they downed an UFO and are covering it up.
Maybe they simply shot a cloud.

Abosutely no one ever said 'weather balloon, case closed' rather they open possibilities, same thing I'm doing here.


Again, it was an argumentitive example.

"same thing I'm doing here", are you for real?

Dude, have you even read my (or anyones for that matter) posts on this thread? We are SEARCHING for EXPLANATIONS. We are analyzing loose ends (right way or not) and trying to UNDERSTAND what the hell happened, and you say "same thing I'm doing here"? You must be joking...

Seriously, I won't even respond to any of your posts. I just wasted too many time with this one...

(and btw, it's guys like you that ruin a healthy discussion about a subject (pointless or not)).

[edit on 24/8/09 by Tifozi]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Well no matter what it might be I must say since I have seen ufo's and been on them this one looks pretty ufo'ish to me.

I don't see why they wouldn't do this right out in the open they know the peoples they are dealing with and all they have to do is either keep there mouth's shut and just let it run with accusations or they throw out things to keep you researching and finding matches or you know they may even sit back and just laugh at the peoples cause they can do anything really and just about get away with it while the people argue then drop it.

This is the way it has always been and will probably will always continue to be.



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
thanks for telling him off like that i couldn't have done it better myself but thats prolly because he would have mistaken it as a compliment coming from me he seemed to twist everything else i said around



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tifozi
We didn't just monitored the radio station


...absolutely, but even so, monitoring the radio station was very important, since we did not know what the eye witness thought he saw. Turned out to be even more important when the radio station later denied all knowledge of it. At the very least, I heard them mention the existance of the call. That alone says something.

Tifozi



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Clickfoot
 


Exactly. When you guys started talking about the radio, I thought about the radio that I listen while I'm working. I listen to it on their site and they actually record and save their programs.

I thought that if the program for that night was missing or edited, that would say something. But I didn't found anything relevant, so, didn't even posted it.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Tifozi
 


Is the radio station still denying the call that they recieved even after the official report came out?



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Ok, the case has been solved and this was no UFO.
I just attended a seminar and the speaker of this session was discussing structural data and test analysis and his presentation included an actual photo of this object on the flatbed rolling down I20.

There was laughter when he said how this event generated multiple reported sightings of a possible UFO.

Turns out this was a JSF F-35 plane on its way from the Lockheed Martin plant in West Fort Worth to a dock in Houston. The plane was then shipped to the UK for the purpose of conducting structural analysis tests.

If anyone lives near the Humber Bridge in England you may have seen isimilar reports as it arrived in the UK.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alxandro
Ok, the case has been solved and this was no UFO.
I just attended a seminar and the speaker of this session was discussing structural data and test analysis and his presentation included an actual photo of this object on the flatbed rolling down I20.

There was laughter when he said how this event generated multiple reported sightings of a possible UFO.

Turns out this was a JSF F-35 plane on its way from the Lockheed Martin plant in West Fort Worth to a dock in Houston. The plane was then shipped to the UK for the purpose of conducting structural analysis tests.

If anyone lives near the Humber Bridge in England you may have seen isimilar reports as it arrived in the UK.


Hello and thanks for the update! I was just thinking of this case yesterday and wondering if any follow through had come about. I now sit satisfied with a sense of closure and ready to mull over and analyze something else.

Cheers,

Erik



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


Thank you


I will go for an F-35. Still, i admit, this i20 had me "boggled"...maybe it still does.




*To add...what a beautiful craft! It is a "striker" indeed, imo.

[edit on 9/23/2009 by qonone]



posted on Sep, 24 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by qonone
reply to post by Alxandro
 




...what a beautiful craft! It is a "striker" indeed, imo.



I agree with you, it really is a thing of beauty.
Major "AWE" factor at work here, kinda like when you see a mean, cool looking car, almost hypnotic too.

I had a chance to tour the facility just a few days ago and saw how these planes are being assembled. The plant itself is huge and is over a mile long.

I sure would hate to see that plane coming my direction.

 


MUFON Press Release



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by dowhatyoufear3
haha i think the poster that mention the empty lots was just being humorus...lol, just my opinion

the only thing i have to say about the whole flat bed truck thing, to me it seems the driver is parked on the side of the highway on the shoulder look at the solid white line....i dont think he's moving because none of the street lights are blurred? you would think with a simple cell phone camera it woulndt be good enough to capture moving lights without being blurred, but i know nothing of carmeras....so what im saying is if they did put it on a flat trailer then maby they havnt had time to cover it up and thats why he was only able to get 2 pics??? thoughts?


The pictures would blur with relative motion. If the truck is moving and the car with the person taking the picture is also moving, at similar speeds, you would then expect only stationary lights to become blurred.

-rrr



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by M0bstar
 


Another reason not to cover an object with a tarp is if the object's temperature is high enough to ignite it.

-rrr



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Just a prop is my guess.
During a crash you just have to be there to see if the saucer
is real.
Then you see how they transport a broken saucer.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
As I just posted in the other thread thats covering this subject:

---

So they dont make heat resistant tarps? Its not something i've looked into but I find it hard to believe they dont. Maybe they couldnt get 1 in time? But I find that hard to believe aswell... A chopper could fly a heat resistant tarp across in no time.

However I still have to agree that there is something weird about all of this and that thing on the back was moved in a hurry and for good reason. The tarp thing just doesnt sit right with me. Even if this was part of a plane or whatever it should still be covered over with something. So why wasnt it?





new topics




 
222
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join