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.

 

UFOs we know them as in Discs, don't you think they have evolved to jet or so like form?

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Let me reiterate something I said twice now.


"If vid analysis were to be done, you can -still- say it's "just as likely a fairy as ET craft" due to lack of a body or interior view."
...and it would still be a valid argument because proving it's not a fairy and is an ET UFO is impossible.

You didn't ask for a body, but to you everything else seems irrelevant (e.g. video/audio/interviews with astronauts/physical evidence/statistics/astronomy facts/it's physically impossible to be a bug or known man-mad craft etc.). So that leads one to believe a body is the only thing you'd accept as "evidence".

& yea, senior pilots are all aware of UFOs (just seeing them or picking them up on radar). At least the hundred or so I talked with on the subject throughout many years. But you're right, I can't speak for every senior pilot on the planet seeing as I've not met all of them...
edit on 16-1-2011 by MasonicFantom because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Granted it could be a fairy piloting the craft- but I know fully that were evidence presented in the case of that large punch hole cloud video, that the 'object' you saw from 4 secs - 6 secs moving right from seemingly nowhere, showing an actual craft not man made and travelling at speeds we are incapable of reaching then I will completely drop my theory of fairies and listen to someone who can identify it or make reasonable explanations about what it is.

As for all the other cases of astronauts, eye witnesses, video footage etc. Nothing comes close to having enough evidence for me to 'presume' it to be anything never mind ET visiting Earth, fairies or the Loch Ness monster.

I take it for what it is and try and find the easiest and most mundane explanation for it as it's usually the one which turns out to be right in the end.

So again please, do your thing with the software and the reference points and show this to be an ET craft. I'd kill for proof of visiting ET life (or automated vehicles) on, or just above, Earth.

-m0r



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
If by UFO, you mean alien spacecraft, why the crap would they try to make themselves look like jets, if they can just become invisible?



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
For a flying disk to become a jet would be devolution, in my opinion. Who would trade a smooth gliding ride for a dangerous slow firecracker?



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by MasonicFantom
Wingedbull is as full of himself as m0r if he denies all the evidence of UFOs/ET life


I challenge you to produce one quote from either one of us denying all evidence of ET life.

Otherwise, you must admit you are mistaken or attempting to slander us to distract from our arguments.


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
thinks that's a bug still despite my explaining how it's a physical impossibility


And you were quite wrong, as I pointed out. You did not explain one bit how it was "impossible", only made the claim then refused to back up the claim, demanding we take your word for it on your authority alone.


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
I said it "comes from underneath" in my last post on this thread, right above the video. "Bug shooting off to the side"?


The implication being that it comes from the Hole Punch Cloud. It doesn't. It appears below the cloud and has no connection to the cloud except in your fancy.


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
I think even a stooge can know that if that were the case, the bug would blow up and over the car then


It does blow up and over the car...but a two-dimensional video makes it appear as if it is just moving over to the side.


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
bugs don't grow in size with magic.


You are right, they don't. But an object moving closer to a camera will appear to grow larger as it does.


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
Course, being the kind of schmucks you are, you'd probably try & make an argument those are fairy depictions & thus this argument is endless.


Nope, I would make the argument they are works of art, depicting nature, spirits, and just people grossly misinterpreted by a modern observer.

It seems you are less interested in providing a cogent argument but instead relying on browbeating and insulting anyone who doesn't agree with you.
edit on 17-1-2011 by WingedBull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


Hey well, to hide them more efficiently, well I do think to their cloaking techniques there are downsides.
As I saw this thread of "Day Before Roswell", it shown there were sighted 9 ufos, then the washington dc one "Ufos Over Washington DC 1952 Youtube video "
If I go here, I find the connection between roswell which was 1947 and Washington DC which was 1952.
This gives us proof, that the cloaking technique wasn't in action since 1947 till 1952 in a sense.
Unless they were getting cocky and aliens thought why not freak out these earthlings! lol
Anyways , that gives us 5 years that the Ufos as in Orbs/disks weren't to get any kind of cloaking yet..
Now that would be the evolving from there to cloaking, I would say getting an upgrade to cloak!
I am sorry that I said evolve to jet or so, I really meant like couldn't they evolve their space craft to blend in with
the crowd and not appear on the
radar?

edit on 17-1-2011 by B1993 because: spelling



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by MasonicFantom
If it were a bug on the windshield, it would blow up and over the car. Not go out to the side in a straight path... and it would splatter on the windshield.


Look at all those bugs moving in straight lines.





Originally posted by MasonicFantom
but using logic, I am ruling out fairies personally.


You really missed the point of the fairy comment, didn't you?


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
You can make any decision you want. When it gets to this point, you have to put your big boy pants on & your thinking cap then make an educated decision (or, as what it seems you decided to do, wait for a physical body!)


Are you capable of making a point without resorting to insults?


Originally posted by MasonicFantom
Even if this vid were analyzed and proven to be "out of this world"...


Funny you should mention that, because you seem to have ignored the fact it's a Hole Punch Cloud. Seems only one person here is arguing for a conclusion despite the evidence. If you don't think it's a Hole Punch Cloud, could you please tell us why it isn't?
edit on 17-1-2011 by WingedBull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by m0r1arty
 





UFO = Unidentified Flying Object. UFO ≠ Alien Space Craft. -m0r


I think they originally termed them UFO because it was shorter than WTFWT.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Wingedbull, no offense, but your video analysis and physics background you display here is very questionable. I especially love the part where you show a vid of bugs splatting on a windshield and try to equate that to the other vid which 1) isn't just a "blip" like all those bugs are in the vid 2) doesn't splat on the windshield 3) moves in an exact linear fashion 4) it's in MOSCOW Russia during winter on a freeway (in case you're wondering, that's not the time or place flying insects are to be found) 5) an insect doesn't just appear from nowhere, if it did, that would mean it would strike the vehicle directly and thus splatter on the windshield....There's probably 5 other things I can mention without even having to analyze the vid, but fear the logic would be wasted.

@B19 there's ancient Indian scriptures (Vedas) of Vimanas (essentially, space craft) having the ability to cloak or even turn into clouds (so if you take it as literal, they had cloak ability for a long time. Which makes sense). They gave a very detailed description on these flying machines that the 'gods' used & they even waged war against one another in aerial battles (so detailed in fact that the Nazis, especially Herman Oberth and Verner Von Braun, took them to be not mythology, but history & translated them into technical descriptions which heavily contributed to their quantum technological leap during WWII). In some cases there's even what sounds like atomic weapons being used (on people or other gods) in the Mahabharata. There's physical evidence of this "ancient atomic war" too (via ancient earth vitrification and corpse radiation). If you're interested in more or references, let me know.
edit on 17-1-2011 by MasonicFantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by B1993
reply to post by The_Zomar
 


Hey well, to hide them more efficiently, well I do think to their cloaking techniques there are downsides.
As I saw this thread of "Day Before Roswell", it shown there were sighted 9 ufos, then the washington dc one "Ufos Over Washington DC 1952 Youtube video "
If I go here, I find the connection between roswell which was 1947 and Washington DC which was 1952.
This gives us proof, that the cloaking technique wasn't in action since 1947 till 1952 in a sense.
Unless they were getting cocky and aliens thought why not freak out these earthlings! lol
Anyways , that gives us 5 years that the Ufos as in Orbs/disks weren't to get any kind of cloaking yet..
Now that would be the evolving from there to cloaking, I would say getting an upgrade to cloak!
I am sorry that I said evolve to jet or so, I really meant like couldn't they evolve their space craft to blend in with
the crowd and not appear on the
radar?

edit on 17-1-2011 by B1993 because: spelling


How do we know that they weren't cloaked any of the time? Just because we saw a few doesn't mean that none were visible. We still see them today correct?



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
I cant see them evolving backwards into winged aircraft...after they've prob mastered flight without delta-wings, cockpits, rudders n flaps. They may have been there once like we are now, but its understandable they'd have gone onto to different shapes. Not backwards into wings n feathers.
More like us? We are the cavemen. "Monkeys on a tiny-small blue planet" as one said already (thanks, great analogy!)


Yep. I totally I agree on that.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
That cloud is a well known phenomenon..you can find examples of it around the world. The moving 'ufo' is just a bug close to the windscreen.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by MasonicFantom
Wingedbull, no offense, but your video analysis and physics background you display here is very questionable...


This is getting very tedious indeed. YAWN!!

So rather than back up your statement with any attempts of evidence, validity or even supportive reasonable conjecture you attack a perfectly find alternative.

You are incapable of proving your statement because you know that you do not have the ability to do so. It is the only conclusion that can be reached after this many attempts at having you use your alleged pilot observation / software use skills.

As for the nonsense about statues and magic cloaking - PALEEASE!

Those statues were built by Tinkky Winky and Noo-Noo during an unaired episode of Tellytubbies. I know because I'm a TV producer so just accept it.

-m0r



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by m0r1arty
So rather than back up your statement with any attempts of evidence, validity or even supportive reasonable conjecture you attack a perfectly find alternative.

You are incapable of proving your statement because you know that you do not have the ability to do so. It is the only conclusion that can be reached after this many attempts at having you use your alleged pilot observation / software use skills.

Everything I stated in my above post is basic physics & easily verifiable visual phenomena comparing the 2 vids. If you didn't even understand that then any complex jargon with vid analysis equipment would be wasted on you anyway.

& you're right, sure is tedious, but you love to keep bringing it up. I could bother replying more but I would just be saying what I did earlier & you'd reply with what you did earlier.

Statues?
edit on 18-1-2011 by MasonicFantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by MasonicFantom
 


If it is so esily verifiable then why don't you go ahead and verify it then??

There are plenty of threads abound here which show you the level of analysis required to come across as a competent researcher instead of just some guy with fantastical ideas.

Statues yeah, I thought we could just throw any old trollop in here - that's what you are doing.

-m0r



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   
You guys are way off topic. Fantom your observations make ample sense (comparing the vids & explaining how it's not an insect but an aerial craft) and I don't see how anyone would not understand it....If someone is asking for more "proof" than that, then they're hopeless.

I'm interested in knowing more about the ancient atomic war stuff fo sho. Did you know about the Vril society during WWII?? They supposedly were in contact with ETs (Vril Damen) and writing down information in ancient Sumerian which the Nazis were using for V1 and V2 rockets & jet engines man. Oberth (head of rocketry program) even said, quote, "We have been helped by the people of other worlds". It may even be worth startin a new topic about it.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheLegend
You guys are way off topic. Fantom your observations make ample sense (comparing the vids & explaining how it's not an insect but an aerial craft) and I don't see how anyone would not understand it....If someone is asking for more "proof" than that, then they're hopeless.


Of the evidence is hopeless. If you see an ET craft than you see what you want to see not what is there.


Originally posted by TheLegend
I'm interested in knowing more about the ancient atomic war stuff fo sho. Did you know about the Vril society during WWII?? They supposedly were in contact with ETs (Vril Damen) and writing down information in ancient Sumerian which the Nazis were using for V1 and V2 rockets & jet engines man. Oberth (head of rocketry program) even said, quote, "We have been helped by the people of other worlds". It may even be worth startin a new topic about it.


Yeah, this 'supposed contact' - fancy giving it it's own thread?

-m0r



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I did not say it was ET. Even if we're looking at it objectively the very least it would be is a "UFO" (something unidentified that is flying) due to the no splatter & it appearing from nowhere. The most you can do is make an educated guess about what it is (whether man-made classified craft or ET) and in which case, there's no right or wrong. Due to basic things mason pointed out already tho, it's almost impossible to be an insect. Especially in Moscow during winter.

I'm too pooped to make a topic atm but here's a cool show (45 min) of the Vril society during WWII. It mentions what I said & much, much more. It's in 3 parts.

www.youtube.com...

edit on 18-1-2011 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheLegend
The most you can do is make an educated guess about what it is (whether man-made classified craft or ET) and in which case, there's no right or wrong


So you'd admit fairy is just as possible as either man made or ET then?

-m0r



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
M0r you're on the wrong site still! fairy.com...

PS I saw that ancient aliens episode & yea, I'll make a new topic later about ancient India & the things I mentioned.




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join