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.

 

Are UFOs just Alternative Aviation Technology (AAT) ?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   
For fellow ATSers who require source/evidences:

"Here comes the evidence":

If I provide the evidence, my life and my family's life will be in danger.....
/
/
/
/
/
/

Wait...does this sound familiar...have you heard this somewhere before ? From UFO/ET witness testimonies ? From UFOlogist talks/seminars/conferences ?

There are many ways that you can take this: e.g. sick joke, cheat,....etc
But who knows, there is a possibility that this is true for the people who have the inside story.

I cannot reveal the source of information. This may endanger my+his/her life.....(you may add your own icon from above :-))

Till then, can we actually see if the theory can stand without real evidences coming out ? Like what theoretical physicists are doing ? :-)




posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by r00t999
Thanks for your reply and contribution.

Well, the publish-able/broadcastable technology was primitive, but AAT was initially "under the table".


I'm not denying that the military had their own black projects that were advanced for their time, but it's stretching the imagination to say they had craft that violated physical principles.


True, only to mainstream technology that we've been told about.


Right, but my point is that I very much doubt they have any aircraft that use exotic physics. Something like that is ridiculously hard to hide.


Have we captured such footages during 1940s ? Have you seen a UFO doing high-g 90 degree turns in 1940s ? Did I say AATs were capable of doing high-g 90 degree in 1940s ?


I haven't seen them myself, no. However, many credible witnesses including scientists, government officials and pilots have reported seeing objects that performed such maneuvers. I think the best evidence for these kind of maneuvers is radar, though. If you haven't already, I'd suggest taking a look at the 1952 white house UFO fly over case where one of the objects is shown to make a sharp 90 degree turn. Another case is the Belgium UFO wave, where radar showed an object go from 0 to 500 MPH in 1 second. These objects may or may not be extraterrestrial, but I sure as hell don't think they're old human technology from the 40's.



Mainstream physics worked / "are convinced/"incepted" to work" on conventional rotor-based / wing-based aerodynamic systems. It is quite normal for them to conclude that UFO-type technology will not work. But are rotor-based / wing-based the only alternative ?


Considering every military aircraft I've ever seen in my life, I'd say yes. Discs, spheres, and wingless triangles like those reported in certain UFO cases shouldn't be very aerodynamic according to the laws of physics.


Perhaps it is not as difficult as one may thought ? Even General Relativity needs refining. right ? :-)
Also, your reference: how trustworthy is it ? I hope it is not pseudoscience. :-)


I'm not claiming that we understand everything or that we'll never find a way to generate gravity-like fields, but according to current theory it is very hard. That may change tomorrow, in the next decade, the next century, or never. Only time will tell.

As for Robert Forward, he was a sci-fi author and a physicist. He was probably one of the first scientists to ever write a book about exotic propulsion, back in the 60's. He's definitely no quack, if that's what you're saying.




Take care, you may have fallen to the trap of Assumption of Ignorance : www.youtube.com... Credit: Neil Tyson and St. Petersburg College

Jumping to Anti-gravitiy technology to ETs is such assumption.


You misunderstand me. I'm not assuming they're ET. I'm only saying that a sufficiently advanced civilization could harness the kind of energy required for that kind of enormous engineering (the Forward anti-gravity device).

However, I'll say that the ET hypothesis is far more likely than human engineered craft with tech from the 40's. That doesn't mean it's ET, it's just more likely than the hypothesis being presented in this thread. And that's only for certain UFO cases. Most (95%) UFO sightings are explainable by conventional means.



As mentioned earlier, scientists worked / "are convinced/"incepted" to work" on conventional rotor-based / wing-based aerodynamic systems. This is in the mainstream education program. Mainstream scientists denial to AATs actually helps to keep AATs "under the cover".


Like I said, I don't buy it. This does not seem plausible to me. That's just my opinion.

I'm sure there are scientists who do work on black op projects, but they're nothing like what some people have seen in the sky or what has been seen by radar.



Thanks for sharing your opinion.

I really appreciate that you take your time to think about the topic/subject/theory.
edit on 1-2-2011 by r00t999 because: Add last line


Happy to be of service

edit on 1-2-2011 by GeeGee because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by r00t999
 


AAT's would indeed need pilots of some kind, whether they're on-board or remote. Tesla may have been developing some kind of method of remote control, but that would mean there still would have to be a pilot on the ground somewhere nearby to be able to control the AAT because they would have to be able to see to control it. With the great distances the UFOs are have been seen to travel and the precision with which they do it, I don't see that as feasible. After all, they were at most using technology 20 years ahead, not 70 years ahead.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Firstly, many thanks for the time you spent on reading this, and the comments that you made.


Originally posted by GeeGee
I'm not denying that the military had their own black projects that were advanced for their time, but it's stretching the imagination to say they had craft that violated physical principles.

Right, but my point is that I very much doubt they have any aircraft that use exotic physics. Something like that is ridiculously hard to hide.

Just a thought, before helicopter was taken seriously, non wing-based levitation was also thought of as "stretching the imagination" by some. Although, I agree that the gap between A) wing-based vs helicopter and B) Most maneverable craft vs AATs is quite different.

A) small gap B) big gap.
However, IMHO, the feasibility for someone bridging this gap is higher than ET visits :-)



I haven't seen them myself, no. However, many credible witnesses including scientists, government officials and pilots have reported seeing objects that performed such maneuvers.

Were the 1940s UFOs able to do such maneuvers ? Look forward to see some re-constructed / animated footage for those.



I think the best evidence for these kind of maneuvers is radar, though.

That is better then naked eye, I think. :-)



If you haven't already, I'd suggest taking a look at the 1952 white house UFO fly over case where one of the objects is shown to make a sharp 90 degree turn.

For the 1952 case:
Is the following radar (non naked eye) record correct ? "white, tailless, fast-moving lights — over a 14-minute period". That's it ? I didn't see anything about making a sharp 90 degree turn and being recorded on radar. Am I missing anything ? If this only comes from pilots' testimonies, then I will tend to be a bit skeptical, as they were probably under pressure and could well become victims to hallucination.



Another case is the Belgium UFO wave, where radar showed an object go from 0 to 500 MPH in 1 second. These objects may or may not be extraterrestrial, but I sure as hell don't think they're old human technology from the 40's.

I assume that you are referring to the 1989 sighting. Has this been debunked already by skeptics: gmh.chez-alice.fr... ?
Assuming a real event similar to it exist, It is very likely that AATs has evolved throughout these 40 years and these are more advanced AATs.



Considering every military aircraft I've ever seen in my life, I'd say yes. Discs, spheres, and wingless triangles like those reported in certain UFO cases shouldn't be very aerodynamic according to the laws of physics.

Thanks for your support.



I'm not claiming that we understand everything or that we'll never find a way to generate gravity-like fields, but according to current theory it is very hard.
Very hard for published theories...but AAT assumed that there are the un-revealed ones....




That may change tomorrow, in the next decade, the next century, or never. Only time will tell.
It is good to keep an open mind :-)



As for Robert Forward, he was a sci-fi author and a physicist. He was probably one of the first scientists to ever write a book about exotic propulsion, back in the 60's. He's definitely no quack, if that's what you're saying.

I respect every scientist in their fields. What I worried is that Forward based his research on published technologies available to him, wheras AATs were hidden away from his scope...hence he could be misled into the conclusion that AATs are impossible.



You misunderstand me. I'm not assuming they're ET. I'm only saying that a sufficiently advanced civilization could harness the kind of energy required for that kind of enormous engineering (the Forward anti-gravity device).

In the published engineering realm it is true that it appears as a impossibility.



However, I'll say that the ET hypothesis is far more likely than human engineered craft with tech from the 40's. That doesn't mean it's ET, it's just more likely than the hypothesis being presented in this thread.
As you have seen, I am on the other side of the argument. :-) .

To me, ETs travelling light years away from another planet and CRASHed near a military establishment is less likely than alternative technology being developed undercover. If they are not Extraterrestrial, but Endoterrestrials (my own term), then it is any other story. (I am keeping an open mind). If they are Endoterrestrials who have been develop AATs, my theory still hold, I hope




That doesn't mean it's ET,

If these are not human, not Extraterrestrials, not Endoterrestrials, then what are they ??




Most (95%) UFO sightings are explainable by conventional means.
You are more optimistic than me...
I estimated 99.9%
edit on 1-2-2011 by r00t999 because: Update grammar and font

edit on 1-2-2011 by r00t999 because: Update format

edit on 1-2-2011 by r00t999 because: Update grammar

edit on 1-2-2011 by r00t999 because: Correct more grammatic mistakes



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Thanks for your reply.


Originally posted by warbird03
reply to post by r00t999
 


AAT's would indeed need pilots of some kind, whether they're on-board or remote. Tesla may have been developing some kind of method of remote control, but that would mean there still would have to be a pilot on the ground somewhere nearby to be able to control the AAT because they would have to be able to see to control it.

Agree. However, how "nearby" is nearby ? One can't really tell.


Originally posted by warbird03
With the great distances the UFOs are have been seen to travel and the precision with which they do it, I don't see that as feasible.


A lot of footage only concentrates on the object. Is there a footage that actual testify the UFOs have travelled with such great distances ? It is very difficult to judge from 2-D imagery. It appeared to be travelling a great distance in the video, wheras it reality it may be not.


Originally posted by warbird03
After all, they were at most using technology 20 years ahead, not 70 years ahead.

Actually, this opinion supports that AATs is not ETs-related. A 20-years ahead technology still cannot bring us to our nearest planet and had a CRASHed landing.....like what was "demonstrated" in Roswell.

No matter what. Thanks for this.opinion.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
No matter you agree or disagree with AAT...If you like this thread, please kindly raise a flag



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by r00t999
 


What I meant by using technology at most 20 years ahead was concerning remote control. Technology that operates by remote control such as our Predator drones are relatively new, and didn't come about till 50 years after Roswell. They could conceivably used a line-of-sight method of radio control, but that would have incredibly limited usefulness and most likely wouldn't be reliable at the high altitudes some have been seen at, and would prove problematic at low altitudes where terrain could cause a loss of line-of-sight.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
rOOt999- Sorry, but I'm not falling for this hoakum. It just sounds like some spookdoom created B.S. created in the hall's of the CIA, using alot of smoke and mirrors + some fuzzy math thrown in.

If I'm wrong, I APOLOGIZE,
Erno



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeeGee

I haven't seen them myself, no. However, many credible witnesses including scientists, government officials and pilots have reported seeing objects that performed such maneuvers. I think the best evidence for these kind of maneuvers is radar, though. If you haven't already, I'd suggest taking a look at the 1952 white house UFO fly over case where one of the objects is shown to make a sharp 90 degree turn. Another case is the Belgium UFO wave, where radar showed an object go from 0 to 500 MPH in 1 second. These objects may or may not be extraterrestrial, but I sure as hell don't think they're old human technology from the 40's.


*cough*
The radar showed signals, which if interpreted as if it were a real object, going from 0 to 500 MPH in one second.

ECM is quite sophisticated, and is not limited to simple "jamming" (because modern military radars are resistant to simple jamming).

It is not always reasonable to assume that because a radar---especially a civilian radar---showed results which appeared to be X, that an actual object actually was doing X.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erno86
rOOt999- Sorry, but I'm not falling for this hoakum. It just sounds like some spookdoom created B.S. created in the hall's of the CIA, using alot of smoke and mirrors + some fuzzy math thrown in.

If I'm wrong, I APOLOGIZE,
Erno


Thanks for your reply..



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by GeeGee

I haven't seen them myself, no. However, many credible witnesses including scientists, government officials and pilots have reported seeing objects that performed such maneuvers. I think the best evidence for these kind of maneuvers is radar, though. If you haven't already, I'd suggest taking a look at the 1952 white house UFO fly over case where one of the objects is shown to make a sharp 90 degree turn. Another case is the Belgium UFO wave, where radar showed an object go from 0 to 500 MPH in 1 second. These objects may or may not be extraterrestrial, but I sure as hell don't think they're old human technology from the 40's.


*cough*
The radar showed signals, which if interpreted as if it were a real object, going from 0 to 500 MPH in one second.

ECM is quite sophisticated, and is not limited to simple "jamming" (because modern military radars are resistant to simple jamming).

It is not always reasonable to assume that because a radar---especially a civilian radar---showed results which appeared to be X, that an actual object actually was doing X.




Thanks for your reply.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Does anyone else find r00t999 kind of odd? Something about the way he responds seems odd to me. And he responds just to say "thanks for posting" and looks to be a nearly brand new account. I dunno, not trying to point fingers or anything.

Edit: Also, every single one of his posts is trying to tell people all UFOs are AATs, even his posts in the only thread he participated in that wasn't his (where he also linked his threads multiple times). Honestly, there's something fishy about this whole thing.
edit on 1-2-2011 by warbird03 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by r00t999
 


UFO Phenomena has been documented since the Stone age.

Here are some historical sightings, and as you can see, it goes back almost 50.000 years.

Historical Sightings
45,000 BC China Rock carvings of round UFO-like objects have been found in China's Hunan province. The depictions date back to age of the Neanderthals.

12,000 BC China The Dropa, the name given to visitors from Sirius, came down from the clouds with their air gliders.

8000 BC Australia The Aborigine believed in "dawn beings" from the stars. Australian aboriginal cave drawings depict celestial beings, with antenna and x-ray style drawings. They were very advanced in "aerodynamics". The boomerang is identical to a modern day aircraft wing. Aborigine means "from the beginning".

4000 BC The Sumerians from today’s Iraq had contact with extraterrestrial civilizations according to their text. The extraterrestrials also interbred with humans and traveled with them to the stars. The kings were taken to the stars by the extraterrestrials. Sumerian text coincides with "the book of genesis". Their astronomy was highly developed. They had numbers with 15 digits! The Sumerians say extraterrestrials are from Mars, the star system Pleiades, and the star Sirius. Sumerian text shows drawings of solar system.

3000 BC China From the book " Memories of the Sovereigns and the Kings " published in the 3rd century AD, in China, in the third millennium B.C., before the birth of Huang Ti or of Chi You , "sons from the sky", would descend to Earth on a star which was the shape of a saucer.

2345 BC China The, Hsui-nan-tzu, a Chinese classic there is a description of ten suns appearing in the sky.

2000 BC Peru’s pre-Incan civilization records the gods were from the star system Pleiades. Inca ruins have been found at 13,000 feet, with one stone weighing 20,000 tons. Legend tells of spaceships that came from the stars. Inca ornaments of "platinum" were found. Text reveals the Inca’s knew the earth was round.

1766 BC China The Emperor Cheng Tang commissions Ki-Kung-shi to construct a flying chariot. After construction the aircraft was tested, reaching the province of Honan. The vessel was destroyed by imperial edict, as he Emperor feared the mechanism might fall into the wrong hands.

1500 BC Egypt The Palace of Pharaoh Thutmosis III. Circles of fire are said to have hovered over the palace while fishes, winged creatures, and other objects rained down from the sky.

593 BC Ezekiel witnesses an event which some writers have claimed sounds suspiciously like a UFO encounter. Josef Blumrich, former chief of the systems layout branch of NASA, set out to disprove such suggestions, however, from a careful analysis of the data available, he concluded that the vehicle described in the Bible actually was a UFO.

400 BC India From the Mahabbarata. Blazing discs burned and destroyed an entire city and its inhabitants, before returning to the hand of Vishnu.

332 BC Phoenicia, Tyre During the siege of the trade capital of Phoenicia by the Greeks a fleet of flying shields is described as plunged from the sky and crashed upon the city walls.

329 BC Alexander the Great records two great silver shields, spitting fire around the rims in the sky that dived repeatedly at his army as they were attempting a river crossing. The action so panicked his elephants, horses, and men they had to abandon the river crossing until the following day.

223 BC Rome "At Ariminium a bright light like the day blazed out at night; in many portions of Italy three moons became visible in the night time." - Dio Cassius, Roman History, Book I

222 BC Rome "Also three moons have appeared at once, for instance, in the consulship of Gnaeus Domitius and Gaius Fannius." - Pliny, Natural History, Book II, Ch. 32

218 BC Rome Glowing lamps were seen in the sky at Praeneste, a shield was observed at Arpi and in the Amiterno district, the sky was all on fire, and men in white garments appear.

217 BC "At Faleri the sky had seemed to be rent as it were with a great fissure and through the opening a bright light had shone." - Livy, History, Book XXII, Ch. 1

214 BC "At Hadria an altar was seen in the sky and about it the forms of men in white clothes." - Julius Obsequens, Prodigiorum Libellus, Ch. 66

163 BC Formice "In the consulship of Tiberius Gracchus and Manius Juventus at Capua the sun was seen by night. At Formice two suns were seen by day. The sky was afire. In Cephallenia a trumpet seemed to sound from the sky. There was a rain of earth. A windstorm demolished houses and laid crops flat in the field. By night an apparent sun shone at Pisaurum." - Obsequens, Prodigiorum, Ch 114

122 BC Gaul "In Gaul three suns and three moons were seen." - Obsequens, Prodigiorum, Ch. 114

99 BC Rome In Tarquinia, there fell things like a flaming torch in different places from the sky. Towards sunset, a round object like a globe, or round or circular shield took its path in the sky, from west to east.

90 BC Rome In the territory of Spoletium, in Umbria, a globe of fire, of golden color appeared burning in the north with a terrific noise in the sky, then fell, gyrating, to the earth. It then seemed to increase in size, rose from the earth, and ascended into the sky, where it obscured the disc of the sun, with its brilliance. It revolved towards the eastern quadrant of the sky.

85 BC "In the consulship of Lucius Valerius and Caius Marius a burning shield scattering sparks ran across the sky. " - Pliny, Natural History, Book II, Ch. 34

81 BC Spoletium: "Near Spoletium a gold-colored fireball rolled down to the ground, increased in size; seemed to move off the ground toward the east and was big enough to blot out the sun." - Obsequens, Prodigiorum, Ch. 114

73 BC Asia Minor, Pontus: While Roman legions were engaged in battle near the Black Sea against King Mithridates a huge flaming object fell between the two armies. It was said to have a shape like a wine jar and was the color of molten lead.

66 BC "In the consulship of Gnaeus Octavius and Gaius Suetonius a spark was seen to fall from a star and increase in size as it approached the earth. After becoming as large as the moon it diffused a sort of cloudy daylight and then returning to the sky changed into a torch. This is the only record of its occurrence. It was seen by the proconsul Silenus and his suite. " - Pliny, Natural History, Book II, Ch. 35

48 BC "Thunderbolts had fallen upon Pompey's camp. A fire had appeared in the air over Caesar's camp and had fallen upon Pompey's ... In Syria two young men announced the result of the battle (in Thessaly) and vanished." - Dio Cassius, Roman History, Book IV

42 BC Rome From Prodigia of Julius Obsequens, “Something like a sort of weapon, or missile, rose with a great noise from the earth and soared into the sky.”

12 BC Rome A comet-like object hovered days over Rome for several then melted into flashes resembling torches.

9 BC Japan, Kyushu Nine moons were seen in the night sky over the community.

veritasshow.blogspot.com...

Good luck with your story.. because thats all it is, a story...


edit on 2-2-2011 by Moonguy because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2011 by Moonguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Moonguy
 


One thing you may want to add to that list is the ancient ruins of cities in India that seem to have been destroyed by some kind of nuclear weapons, including radiation that remains to this day. As far as we can tell, it seems to have happened about 4000 BC. Somehow, I don't think humans at the time were making nukes.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by warbird03
Does anyone else find r00t999 kind of odd? Something about the way he responds seems odd to me. And he responds just to say "thanks for posting" and looks to be a nearly brand new account. I dunno, not trying to point fingers or anything.

Edit: Also, every single one of his posts is trying to tell people all UFOs are AATs, even his posts in the only thread he participated in that wasn't his (where he also linked his threads multiple times). Honestly, there's something fishy about this whole thing.
edit on 1-2-2011 by warbird03 because: (no reason given)


Thanks for your reply.

May I ask what you meaning by "odd" ?
What is "normal" in this forum ?


Anyway, thanks for your interest in this post.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moonguy
reply to post by r00t999
 


UFO Phenomena has been documented since the Stone age.

Here are some historical sightings, and as you can see, it goes back almost 50.000 years.

Good luck with your story.. because thats all it is, a story...


edit on 2-2-2011 by Moonguy because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2011 by Moonguy because: (no reason given)


Thanks for your reply and references.

Not to discredit these, but I can also say that these are also stories. Human mind is very easy to associate things that they see with their own imaginations. "Ancient astronaut" is an old concept since Sitchin, Daniken, Icke and others.

But there are issues with this:
a) No one really heard about "Ancient astronauts" stories before later half of the 20th century, these has never been passed down through mainstream world history as frequent events. If UFOs and "ETs" were as frequent as today as those time, then we should see many of these events recorded in mainstream history. Instead of saying "why so many", ask "why so few".

b) Needless to say, there aren't really any good evidences to back them up that they are actually ETs. One can interpret some stone carvings found in caves as ETs, but one can also interpret it as some headdress with native tribes.

P.S. If you buy the concept of "Endoterrestrials", then I can say that these are "evidences" of Endoterrestrials, not Extraterrestrials.
edit on 2-2-2011 by r00t999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
A) One of the reasons that people have only recently begun looking at history and seeing these UFO events is that before that, most people's efforts were more towards survival than anything else. Only recently has education and study become more important.

B) Humans have some great imaginations, but there are limits. Go ahead, try and imagine something that isn't inspired by something from reality. Pretty tough, isn't it? The ancient accounts of UFOs may not be 100% accurate from years and years of being told and retold, but they had to have been inspired by something. Since we didn't have our own flight technology, there are few possibilities except that they are inspired by extraterrestrial UFOs.

There's a reason they dont talk about all the OOPArts and other ancient oddities in schools.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Thanks for your reply.


Originally posted by warbird03
A) One of the reasons that people have only recently begun looking at history and seeing these UFO events is that before that, most people's efforts were more towards survival than anything else. Only recently has education and study become more important.


Agree. But surely, there were more educated people in the past. Real ET visits should not be treated as trival event by these more intellectual individuals during their time. But have these been recorded in mainstream history around the world, instead of just folklores and stories ?


Originally posted by warbird03
B) Humans have some great imaginations, but there are limits. Go ahead, try and imagine something that isn't inspired by something from reality. Pretty tough, isn't it?

H. G. Wells had demonstrated that this is not as tough as it seems.
BTW. who knows, during NI-11's effort of covering-up AAT, perhaps it is inspired by H.G. Wells.
Who knows, perhaps the Roswell case is inspired by H.G. Wells during NI-11's cover-up.


Originally posted by warbird03
The ancient accounts of UFOs may not be 100% accurate from years and years of being told and retold, but they had to have been inspired by something.

I have confirmed from a foreign (to USA) source that one of Moonguy's example of a "historic sighting" is actually only a local (to this foreign country) folklore and NOT A REAL SIGHTING.

However, in order not to discredit Moonguy, I won't disclose which one it is. But it appears to me that Moonguy & you may have become a victim of disinformation in the "Ancient Astronaut" concept.
edit on 2-2-2011 by r00t999 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2011 by r00t999 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2011 by r00t999 because: Corrections



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Well I believe this to be true to some extent. They may make up some stories to hide a secret plan like the Stealth Bomber was many years ago. But not all of this is being made up as WAY back in the day there were sightings and these sightings were drawn on cave walls. How do you explain that?



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Thanks for your reply.

Are you referring to something like this is "Ancient Astronauts" ??

2.bp.blogspot.com...

Well, I can say that it might be ancient arts for
www.fotosearch.com.../IDX019/363081.jpg
Cute little girl.OR
midlandsfancydress.co.uk...

IMHO, something like this aren't even "evidences".



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join