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 zatara
Why should it always be the americans who back-enigeneer UFO-tec? Why not the russians or chinese or dutch for that matter?
[edit on 29-3-2010 by zatara]
Originally posted by zatara
Another why...what are these huge silent running black triangles in the air at night. Owned by the US-army or little green men?....supposing that the witness accounts are true and real.
They are big, black, and triangular. In UFO folklore they are proof-positive that planet Earth is a rest stop for joyriding, but road-weary, extraterrestrials.
A just released study by the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS), based in Las Vegas, Nevada, sheds new light on the dark and mysterious craft. They offer a more down-to-earth hypothesis.
NIDS researchers contend that these type vehicles are lighter-than-air, blimp-style craft of the U.S. military's making.
Each sighting requires a great deal of analysis. A witness's perceptions of speed, acceleration, and size are likely of very little value... I have taken an approach of first identifying needs -- or mission requirements -- and technology availability. Then I compare those with the cold raw, simple facts of a sighting, not the conjecture or guess work of a witness
Personally I do not belief any of Hutchisons claims and doubt that any person on this planet has the anti-gravity tec.
Another why...what are these huge silent running black triangles in the air at night. Owned by the US-army or little green men?....supposing that the witness accounts are true and real.
Is it that UFO's only crash in the USA? Or is there an US crash-retrieval team who can and will retrieve all UFO's all over the world. Are these teams so swift and stealthy that no foreign intelligence agency and no army is able to beat them to be the first at the crash-site? Do not think so.
There either are no UFO's and all the anti-grav tec is US made. Which means that the science is understood and this whole LHC (huge expensive particle collider from CERN) experiment is not about understanding gravity.
Originally posted by Bobbox1980
reply to post by Arbitrageur
That NIDS prepared study mentioned on space.com is hugely flawed.
The author of the study, L. Scott Miller, says:
Each sighting requires a great deal of analysis. A witness's perceptions of speed, acceleration, and size are likely of very little value... I have taken an approach of first identifying needs -- or mission requirements -- and technology availability. Then I compare those with the cold raw, simple facts of a sighting, not the conjecture or guess work of a witness
The quintessential black flying triangle sighting is the Belgium Incident of 1989-1990. Internos made a post on this in Karl 12's thread UFO Flight Characteristics ~ Right Angle Turns.
America West Airlines Flight 564 sighting
Arizona Lights Sighting
The Lebanon, Illinois Sighting
The Tinley Park Lights
The Stephenville Texas Sighting
The NIDS study doesn't mention the Belgium sighting, does it? So how does showing the Belgium sighting may have been something else show the study is flawed? It doesn't.
The NIDS study wasn't a government outfit. They were a group of researchers financed by Bigelow.
Debate clubs are centered around the idea of 2 groups debating an issue from different sides. That does not mean one of the sides has to be valid whatsoever. Yes you will run into people critiquing just about everything but if you have a well developed BS filter, it becomes fairly easy to tell if their critique has any validity behind it or not.
The purpose of this thread is to gain clarity about what is going on with, and the relation between anti-gravity and back-enigeering technology from crashed UFO's.