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.

 

This thread is my case for the existance of manmade (American) discs/saucers

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Ever seen a Stealth Bomber? For all effect and purposes, that plane is an American UFO. It uses a gravity accelerator to create a bubble around the plane and the covering of the plane I hear can only be made in space. I don't know anything about the fuel it uses, but again have heard it is exotic.

That being said, look at your history. The Nazis were in contact with ET, that much is clear now. I am certain that at least some of the photos of the Nazi disks are real. Phil Schneider and Bill Cooper both said that the triangle shaped ones are ours. Here are a few sites on this...

www.naziufos.com...

www.unmuseum.org...

www.eyepod.org...



Thats interesting ... but how does it relate to the images and case I'm trying to make within this thread ?




posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
S&F for your OP. I am not going to declare it a water hole, but it is quite possibly manmade ( My personal opinion only) My only thought that you might want to consider is this: IF this was a crashed American disk project ( for the record I do think there are), I am almost 99.5% sure that within minutes of the crash there would be swarming with S&R teams as well a recovery vehicles to retrieve and hide the wreckage. If the vehicle was unable to extracted within a reasonable amount of time they would have camoflaged the site. The crews at A51, Tonopah and surrounding areas know full well about Google sat flights and know that people are ALWAYS looking to try and catch them slipping. I just can't see them leaving something out in the open like that. And if by some weird chance that the sat flew over before they could reach the site, we are talking mear minutes here, they would have contacted google to have the image removed.

[edit on 14-9-2009 by djvexd]



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by djvexd
S&F for your OP. I am not going to declare it a water hole, but it is quite possibly manmade ( My personal opinion only) My only thought that you might want to consider is this: IF this was a crashed American disk project ( for the record I do think there are), I am almost 99.5% sure that within minutes of the crash there would be swarming with S&R teams as well a recovery vehicles to retrieve and hide the wreckage. If the vehicle was unable to extracted within a reasonable amount of time they would have camoflaged the site. The crews at A51, Tonopah and surrounding areas know full well about Google sat flights and know that people are ALWAYS looking to try and catch them slipping. I just can't see them leaving something out in the open like that. And if by some weird chance that the sat flew over before they could reach the site, we are talking mear minutes here, they would have contacted google to have the image removed.

[edit on 14-9-2009 by djvexd]


I'm in total agreement with you and it's something that gave me considerable pause for thought.
If I was in charge of recovery, I'd definitely either want to remove the craft to a more secure/convenient lcoation and/or erect some kind of camouflage if unable for whatever reason to move the craft.

So why it's still in place and why there's obvious activity around it, I simply don't know - perhaps there's something about the craft that PREVENTS it being moved elsewhere OR it's UNSAFE to move it elsewhere.

I tend to think that the image capture was a huge fluke as the craft may have only come down only recently before image acquisition.

As for worrying about Google Earth, I don't think they give a crap whether it's imaged or not because why would anyone think to or be deliberately searching that very location using GE ? Would YOU think of looking/searching that particular mountainous location ?
The odds are so far in the military's favour that they'd remain completely unobserved that it wouldn't be worthwhile raising attention by getting the GE people to do 'a fix up" on that location.
And even if a Google Earther did happen to stumble across it (like myself), then we all KNOW (and so would the military) that it will be immediately written off as nothing more than a "water hole"
by those very ATS'ers who should have the MOST incentive and interest in digging deeper and examining the site.
So the military have nothing to worry about ... just remain silent, do nothing to attract attention and leave it to the ATS members "debunking" as the best way to cover up the incident !

Sometimes I think that I'm not far of the mark by believing that some ATS members can be their very own worst enemy ... show them something of incredible interest and they go into "knee jerk mode" and blow it off with lame explanations !



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:11 AM
link   
...i agree with - if it was flying, it shouldve bounced/skidded after the initial impact... the terrain is rock - not the monahans sand hills... areas of activity - i saw paths, roads and rain runoff depressions - normal for any watering hole... the brighter green portion in the enhanced photo of the alleged entrance to an underground facility kinda looks a giant bullfrog but that kind of thang is common when jackin' around with photos... i think its far more likely that the lighter area is the larger rocks under the surface of the water...



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 

For what it's worth I agree with most of what you say, just that in this case, most of what you are looking at isn't even in the original image, and has been created by the zooming algorithm. Unless you can find higher quality images it's inconclusive.

Check your U2U



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...if it was flying, it shouldve bounced/skidded after the initial impact... the terrain is rock - not the monahans sand ...


I have to disagree with you ... I stated in my analysis that the observed forward rim damage and resultant crater may have been due to the disk approaching the ground at very low velocity and at a very shallow angle of attack.
At such a low velocity and angle, it would be more inclined to slightly dig into the loose topsoil and slide (WITHOUT BOUNCING) along the ground, pushing the loose topsoil to the front and sides of the craft.

(Google examples of planes hitting the ground at low speed and angle to see the sliding effect.)


As for the terrain being only rock, here's an image showing the height of the crater wall (from desert level to bottom of crater) being approx. 9 - 10 metres ... that's a heck of a lot of soil ... not rock ... being displaced.

Notice also that the top of the disc is BELOW the crater edge.

Don't take my word for it ... go GE and check it out for yourself.






normal for any watering hole...

If this is nothing more than a simple, natural waterhole, then could you please explain why the remaining "water" has formed an almost perfect circular shaped rim that has edge thickness ... how the edge of your "water" can cast a shadow ... and what is that black mass in the centre of your "water" ?
Simple water hole ? Not on your life !








... the alleged entrance to an underground facility ...


"Alleged", huh ????
This looks to you like something thrown together by some desert animal ... jack rabbit, coyote, perhaps ??

I'm not "alleging" anything ... in fact, I'll come right out and state clearly and categorically it's artificial and constructed !




posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Sorry to bust your bubble. I know you "think" you are going to discover some great secret by looking at composite aerial photos on Google Earth but that just ain't going to happen.

TPTB just is not going to allow that to happen.

I have been to the Nevada Test Site and you have not.

There are watering holes ALL over the place some have trees growing around them some do not.

But they are there.

Get over it and move on.

A blind man can see it is a watering hole.

Hey some once else (probably you) found a big circular hole in the ground in Antarctica.

Go Google Earth that.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   


A blind man can see it is a watering hole.

Well, all I can say in this case is that your "blind man" had better get himself a seeing eye dog as that is NOT a water hole !

I'm getting sooooo tired of explaining to all you "water hole" freaks that if you all took a VERY GOOD look at it, you'd see so many anomalies that couldn't possibly exist in/on a pool of stagnant water.

Anyway, if it's a pool of water to you, then fair enough ... certainly don't waste anymore of your time on my thread.




Hey some once else (probably you) found a big circular hole in the ground in Antarctica.


Yes, that WAS my thread as well ... the point being that GE can, when used effectively, reveal a heck of a lot of weird, unusual and unnoticed items ... so NO apology from me whatsoever for using the power of GE !



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Both your "disk" and "camouflaged entrance" are very clearly and obviously watering holes. I have seen many such guzzlers during my desert expeditions in Nevada. I can't believe you could interpret these features in any other way.

Most watering holes in the desert have been modified to serve more efficiently as reservoirs, hence the obvious manmade shapes. Your analysis of these features in completely bogus.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by calcoastseeker
[SNIP]




Let's just get one thing straight right away ... and that is that I take extreme exception to your arrogant, insultive, deprecative and condescending attitude and tone !
Just who the hell do you think you are that you can hide behind the annonymity of ATS and throw around such insults as "nimrod", "stupid" and "delusional" ?
Here you are devaluing my opinion, time and research and replacing it with YOUR version of "reality", as if you're in any position whatsoever to make such a judgement call.
I don't give a rats posterior if you've been inside a "tunnel" at the NTS or whether you've seen a water hole ... neither of those makes you an instant expert and gives you the authority to wave your hand and pronounce verdict.

I notice that you failed to explain away (or even mention) every one of anomalies that I pointed out that appear to be associated with the disc object ... do you come up with any counters or explantions of those same anomalies ? nope, easier to totally ignore such inconsistencies and instead spout your subservient and purile ridicule.

If you haven't the balls the take a mature and constructive attitude to this thread, then do me a favour and take yourself and your attitude elsewhere.

Mod Edit: Removed quote. Please remain on topic!

[edit on 5-10-2009 by Gemwolf]



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Well spoken, tauristercus and I completely agree with you that such arrogance and condescending manner has no place here on ATS.
I like to believe that most members can conduct themselves in an appropriate and civilized attitude, whether they agree with a poster and their topic or not ... simply not acceptable !



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 08:10 AM
link   
I don't blame you for going off the deep end ... some of his comments were totally of base



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Just because calcoastseekers' remarks were rude doesn't make them any less true. It just means he lacks diplomacy. It's hard to blame him in a case like this where the OP is making such wild and obviously baseless claims.

The "disc" and "entrance" are clearly watering holes. The image resolution is clear enough for anyone to see this, especially when the artifacts in question are compared to other nearby watering holes on and around the Nevada Test and Training Range.

Additionally, the sites in question are located in an unfenced portion of the Range between the Groom Mountains and Highway 375. Anyone who has visited the area (or done significant Internet research on it) knows that cattle from nearby Medlin Ranch roam free in this area, drinking from the many water sources that have been prepared for them by the ranchers.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
It is very hard to have diplomacy when you are dealing with ignorant people.

I believe this forum signature phrase is DENY IGNORANCE for a reason.


GE is nothing more than a composite of aerial photos.
Most are from the U.S.military.

If this person would turn on streets and road he would see that his "Crash saucer" has a name.

Quail springs. The road that begins by it is Quail Springs road because it begins there.

If the government does not want you to see something they will camouflage it.
Or put and old aerial photo on the Terraserver that Google Earth draws their photos from.

There is only so much a person can take from reading nonsense and discovering some secret site the government forgot to hide on GE is one of them.

Without the OP doing extensive research, thinking about it in a logical manner (would the government actually place something out in the open for all the world to see?No.)

Eliminating all the Logical things first.Spring,water hole.

Not posting it on ATS with some bold statement and not expecting some one to call them out on the obvious.

And then not excepting it as REALITY.

I understand your interest in secret saucers,UFO's and all that in general.

But the truth is Area 51 the whole NTS site has been so publicized and talked about in the MSM and these sites that in all consideration it is not happening there.

They have other places to do that and they are not being scrutinized.

Please do more research and ELIMINATE all plausible logical explanations for what you are seeing before posting ludicrous information with sensational headlines.

And stop spending time looking on GE for that stuff the government cleansed all the photos before their released.

The saucers don't even fly out of there!!!!!!!!!!!!

MY case for man made flying saucers.

LOOK at my signature.




[edit on 17-9-2009 by calcoastseeker]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
This is in response to both tauristercus and calcoastseeker.

You both are correct, the Air Force hired contractors to build flying disks for their aerodynamics, all of which are classified projects, thus they'll never publicly admit it. But you two are a little bit outdated. I first heard about it when I was a kid. One of my friend's dad was contracted in the 1970s to try and make a flying disk fly at Williams AFB. He wasn't allowed to tell his wife. All his work was done at night. She thought he was cheating on her, so she broke into his office and his files, trying to find out who the other woman was. Only to discover he really was working all night. She got a hold of the blueprints and diagrams and whatnot.

She said after that, he was allowed to talk a little bit. They later divorced anyway. So she's still a blabber. She said the designs that he and the others did (1970s) did get into the air, but they were major gas hogs. So those designs were scrapped, new contractors hired for fuel efficiency.

My question to both tauristercus and calcoastseeker is if you did get a picture of one of the classified aircraft, why would you post it on the net? That's like giving away all classified military crafts to every other foreign country by posting them on the net. Even diagrams of them would be like giving away classified data to foreign countries if posted on the net.

So why are you trying to photograph or do diagrams of classified aircraft to post them on the net? Do you want every foreign country to have that classified information? Why do you do it?



posted on Oct, 5 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by MapMistress
 


Probably the same reason you just posted this story of what your dad did and your mother found out. Just more confirmation that they do exist.Why did you even mention it?

Do you seriously think that no other country is not technologically advanced enough to construct such a craft.

France and Britain and Russia all built Super Sonic Transports(SST) and flew them.How many did the U.S. build?

Anyway the OP is talking about a mud hole.



posted on Oct, 5 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 




If this is nothing more than a simple, natural waterhole, then could you please explain why the remaining "water" has formed an almost perfect circular shaped rim that has edge thickness ... how the edge of your "water" can cast a shadow ... and what is that black mass in the centre of your "water" ?
Simple water hole ? Not on your life !


I've just spent some time re-examining the "circular image' that you've displayed and the more I look at it, the less similarities it has to a "common water hole" as many have claimed it can only be.

You are perfectly correct that there IS a shadow effect to the right side of the disk and the left side has an obvious thickness component to it ... both of which are NOT commensurate with a circular patch of water.

Also, once your perception has 'adjusted" to what it is that you're viewing, it becomes obviously clear that there IS a hatch as you mention that apparently is in the raised, open position.

My conclusion:

Shadowing and edge thickness in association other "artificialities" associated with it implies that this is NOT a body of water and IS to a high degree of probability, an object of artificial construction.



posted on Oct, 5 2009 @ 01:11 AM
link   
here are some good proof thier man made check these videos out

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 6 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
There is no trace of activity at those locations.
Now thats a hiding place.

Mountain sides have been suspected since the first books on
saucers.

An artificial lake might also do like in James Bond.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join