Shooting down a UFO?

reply to post by Slan1


Good point, but lets face it , if it came down to a fight I would rather take on the alien when he is not riding a ship capable of FTL, which can also repel .30 cal ammunitions from a military aircraft, shut down nukes, and shut down military aircrafts weapons and on occasion drive systems without seeming to fire a shot.
If I have to fight the alien ( should it be required... to be honest I see no evidence that they need killing) I would rather do it fist to fist and gun to gun, down here where we are masters of our domain, rather than the air where clearly they are our superiors.

reply to post by SlovenlyGhost


Well, if you've been reading any of the UFO conspiracy topics, you'd understand that earth governments all have (governments that could potentially hurt the UFO's anyway) non-aggression treaties with the aliens so you won't see 'attacks' by humans. These non-aggression treaties apparently are not being adhered to by the aliens (reporting how many abductions, don't kill too many cows), but it seems the government can't do to much about what the aliens do. Maybe this is why there has been a push to reveil their presence. Maybe it's a way to reel them a little...

reply to post by CanadianDream420

pulse or some type of energy missile

Who's to say they haven't? Roswel for example?
I then think the aliens friends made a little visit & warned them not to do it again..

I meen who would be so stupid to start a war with the sky? They can do things that humans never will be able to..we'd basically be "blowing" our own graves.

There's a great video in this thread on page 1 I think - how can anyone say that's not a spacecraft? Seriously...these "scientists" are told what to say..
"here's a $million, here's your script"

reply to post by TrueBrit


Good point, but don't forget that they have these little gadgets that can make you stand like a deer in the headlights, and not remember anything afterwards.

So mano-a -mano with the aliens (or UFO pilots whatever they are) is a non-starter in my book.

I say disclosure by all the govts. of the world is the only way to let us know what we are really up against.

reply to post by 1SawSomeThings


I hear you , but I still think we would have a much better chance on the ground than in the air. I mean being able to make me go deer in the headlights is one thing, but in thier ships they are bullet proof, and I mean BIG bullet proof. Thats not a fight that ends well for us in my thinking.
Besides which, we have snipers here on Earth who can blow a mans head clean off from a mile and a half away... I think thats a good deterant to the DIHL ray (deer in head light). Hells if it comes to it we have bunkerbusters, napalm, thermobaric weapons, and the metal storm system. I dont see nukes being a whole bunch of use, because they keep getting switched off by the little tinkers, but everything else seems fair game to me !

the us governments stance on ET is, if ET wants to come and visit, he must come in pieces

reply to post by TrueBrit


Who knows? I hope you're right.

I hope they don't say "Take us to your bleeder."

reply to post by SlovenlyGhost


Actually, it would be a very baaaaaaaaaaaad idea to try and shoot down a UFO.

The United States Air Force back in the 1950s lost a bunch of aircraft due to pilots being ordered to try and shootdown ufos. I believe it was somewhere on the order of over one hundred aircraft lost during the time period. In the summer of 1952, instructions had been given to Air Force pilots to shootdown ufos. As a matter of fact, quite a few of the pilots who were lost had hundreds if not thousands of flight hours that were shot down by ufos. Just to give you an estimate as to how many craft we lost. We lost twenty aircraft over Europe due to ufos alone during 1952. One incident in particular stands out as a "Maybe we shouldn't be shooting down ufos" air crash. On August 5th, 1952, a jet crashed in South Glastonbury, CT. For instance, the jet was said to have ran out of fuel and crashed. However, when it crashed, it exploded and set the ammunition on fire. There is just one problem with the official explanation that the government gave. The .30 caliber bullets had caught fire and were going off even though the craft was reported to have ran out of fuel.

In fact, it wasn't until the late 1950s when the United States Air Force changed the orders as to what pilots were supposed to do when it came down to engaging and chasing after a ufo. The new order specified that instead of firing weapons at ufos, the new order instructed either pilots or co-pilots to take photos of these craft. This way, it would have cut down on the number of aircraft being shot down while engaging ufos. Was the United States Government concerned about ufos at the time? I believe that the government does indeed know how much of a threat that ufos actually are to national and global security.

reply to post by gimmefootball400


I havent heard anywhere else than this post about those numbers of craft going either missing or going down after engaging a UFO in conflict. However I have this to say about the crash you mentioned. An aircraft can run out of fuel and still burn when it makes ground fall. See, the fuel will run out , the levels in the tank being useless as drive fuel, but the moment you throw that plane at the ground, any remaining vapour will burn if ignited by a spark or a shorting circuit , either exploding and or setting fire to the surrounding area and in this case cooking off the ammunitions aboard the aircraft.

well I would use the electro-gravic induction gun to shoot them down

(you asked)

Usisng the e-gig should be able to disable most of their drives causing shutdown..

(pray does not cause containment failure of what their energy is stored with)


It would be wiser to send a new message of peace to them...

reply to post by SlovenlyGhost


It might really dangerous to try. Wilhelm Reich supposedly invented an orgone weapon that could take down a ufo; no one AFAIK has ever replicated it though.

reply to post by SlovenlyGhost


cant shoot down whats not there.

reply to post by SlovenlyGhost


maybe we wouldnt call it technology

the dichotomy of man

statistically it is more than 100% probable that there is other (probably more) intelligent (alien) life in the vast multiverse where planet earth is but a speck, if that.

just watched some guy on uk tv who, probably is accepted by peers as ''a regular guy'', this guy just said : ''I don't trust men with beards, or men who wear sandals...just don't trust them. and hate caravan owners, I just think they are selfish''. this guy wearing his blue collar attire and acting like he thinks it's normal to have such ideas, doubt if his peers even question this.

we probably have all met guys like this, rednecks and the like.

how much of the population of each nation is made up of people like this.....seriously, I wouldn't give these people a gun made of butter, let alone a real one.....as for aliens....these guys are hateful of men in sandals and beards!

Yes good idea! we shoot them down, we kidnap the survivors and we ask for............ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!!!

I'd shoot them down, seen them enough and had enough of the secrecy and non-disclosures.
I'd need a very powerful laser weapon.

reply to post by SlovenlyGhost


I starred that because it made me chuckle. Reminds me of my running commentary when playing Medal of Honour...

Of course, really I think we should all be about love and light etc.

Unless they want to eat/ enslave/ destroy us - in which case, Halo all the way!

reply to post by Gloster


Or the alien kitten gets it...