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.

 

Bob White’s Great UFO Artifact Mystery—Solved!

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   
I searched for this, and found no threads clarifying the source of this object-





Did this mysterious artifact actually fall from a UFO as Bob White claimed? In this week’s eSkeptic, Pat Linse (Skeptic magazine’s Art Director, and co-author of The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience) solves the mystery of Bob White’s UFO artifact—supposedly hard evidence for the existence of UFOs—by consulting a retired steel foundry expert. This article appeared in Skeptic magazine volume 16, number 3 (2011).


Sometimes All It Takes is Finding the Right Expert- full article




posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Very cool.... Thanks for the Post


That is almost cool enough that it makes me want to get one for myself



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Strange.

To me it looks like a dead double-trunked tree.

What part of a UFO could this be of anyway? Looks pretty heavy.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Not so fast.

If the metal object were as the article states metal shavings from a machine shop, simple tests would have determined that rather quickly.

What you have in the skeptic article is a theory...

Fail on solved.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
It is a A foundry standgrinder . That was shown clearly on an ATS thread where someone was trying to sell it(or one like it) on ebay for one million dollars. I will try to find the thread.
Ok here we go: www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 12-10-2011 by bluemooone2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemooone2
 


Thanks



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemooone2
 


I remember that.

Relevant information starts HERE

What a douche.


edit on 12/10/11 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by expat2368
Not so fast.

If the metal object were as the article states metal shavings from a machine shop, simple tests would have determined that rather quickly.

What you have in the skeptic article is a theory...

Fail on solved.


Perhaps You are correct, but the article explains the reasons behind simple testing's failure to make a solid determination.



depending on the castings being ground, the composition of the stalagmite could be an exotic mix of stainless steel, manganese, mild steel, aluminum—in other words, a very puzzling metallurgical mix all combined in a seemingly impossible compound.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:33 AM
link   
S & F This is why we need to check our sources and our sources sources people.
We must follow the rabbit hole however far it goes to the truth.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by exdog5
 


still on the fence on this debunk...I will wait for a reputable source to verify this



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by reject
reply to post by exdog5
 


still on the fence on this debunk...I will wait for a reputable source to verify this


last time I put my fence on a debunk the cops showed up


I kid,
I love the fact that we can have whatever opinion we want here and get away unharmed...well the sensitive types get beat up from time to time. We must remember, Because A Person Posts Something Here, Does Not Necessarily Mean They Believe It. Many of Us choose to share what we find interesting with Others because We Are Nice People.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by expat2368
 


what did the tests actually show ???

the " tessts " only showed that the object was not a alloy that is manufactured / sold anywhere

the " tests " did not show any non terestrial isotope ratios

to put it in more easy to understand terms :

say you go into your kitchen and pour into a bowl - the following

100 g white flour
80g castor sugar
57 g bicarbonate of soda
etc etc

then melt it and solidify the mass

what does a test that states " you cannot buy this in a supermarket " prove ?

thats all whites " test " showed - that the sample was not compericaly sold

i have made several castings for none critical applications - where i have not had enough of one alloy stock - so have mixed 2 alloys of compatible composition to create a casting of a unique alloy - that retained the desired properties of both feed stocks =/- 5 %



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Sure it looks like a tree branch/trunk. I determined that with ym common sense and ability to filter obvious from not obvious.

I would use my personal instincts than some website called 'skeptic' which primay purpose is to deny everything, not just the obvious, something I call dumb or shallow skepticism. Yes this is the other pole opposite the believer pole.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Unfortunately, your 'debunk' explanation does not fit the facts.

For one thing the article you site says that the process results from grinding steel. Bob White's object was chemically analyzed a number of times, was composed of 70% aircraft aluminum and was symmetrical, which none of the examples were that were sited in the site you posted.

Additional details are given in this ATS thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

While you haven't explained the artifact, you have demonstrated a lot about your personal bias, as well as your analytical and researching skills. Thanks for those insights to be borne in mind when reading anything else you post.

edit on 12-10-2011 by TheFlash because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by TheFlash
 


Have you taken the time to read this whole thread, or only the OP?



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Seems like a plausible explanation. The first two examples presented only bare a slight similarity to the object. The "custom made" stalactite looks a lot closer, but it was "custom made".

Although the article says:


No one seemed to wonder why a supposedly sophisticated piece of alien technology looked like it had been unceremoniously hacked off at one end.


I'm pretty sure Bob said on one of the shows that one end had been cut off for analysis. Of course he could have been lying, but that's the explanation for the object appearing to be "hacked off" on one end.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheFlash
While you haven't explained the artifact, you have demonstrated a lot about your personal bias, as well as your analytical and researching skills. Thanks for those insights to be borne in mind when reading anything else you post.

edit on 12-10-2011 by TheFlash because: (no reason given)


the guy posted a reasonable article...I'm pretty sure he didn't write it.....why the personal attacks?

Only The Flash could get defensive so quickly.....



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
And then there's the idea that the bright white light that Bob and his friend saw on the ground was a metallic craft, and as it hovered over the ground it was experiencing problems. This resulted in heat not being mitigated on the outer surface and causing some of the metal to actually melt. Once Bob's friend turned on the lights and showed themselves to the vehicle/pilots they shot up into the air to join a support craft hovering much higher above. This caused much of the super heated metal to accumulate at the base of the craft and when a sufficient amount had accumulated there it simple broke off and fell to the ground.

Consider...

Cash-Landrum incident. en.wikipedia.org...


"The object, intensely bright and a dull metallic silver, was shaped like a huge upright diamond, about the size of the Dayton water tower, with its top and bottom cut off so that they were flat rather than pointed. Small blue lights ringed the center, and periodically over the next few minutes flames shot out of the bottom, flaring outward, creating the effect of a large cone. Every time the fire dissipated, the UFO floated a few feet downwards toward the road. But when the flames blasted out again, the object rose about the same distance." (Clark, 175)

The witnesses said the heat was strong enough to make the car's metal body painful to the touch—Cash said she had to use her coat to protect her hand from being burnt when she finally re-entered the car. When she touched the car's dashboard, Vickie Landrum's hand pressed into the softened vinyl, leaving an imprint that was evident weeks later.


There's another incident where two men were taking a highway to work and witnessed a craft floating over the road emitting quite a bit of heat and it took off soon after, I beleive. The next day while going to work they were detoured back because of road construction. When the construction was done they noticed that only the area over which the craft had been floating was "repaired"/replaced. I can't find the original story and I'm pressed for time.

Anyway, considering many UFO stories I think there's enough to reason that the same effects which occur with a grinder could happen on a UFO/ship, and more.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
They didn't debunk anything. No idea of what metal it is.


Likely from a nuclear reactored spacecraft using a liquid metal cooling system for the reactor. As pressure builds up in the reactor.....like you need propulsion to shoot up...pressure in the reactor necessitates the need to release liquid metal coolant...

A pooping nuclear reactored spacecraft. She poops when you need a sudden burst in energy. As pressure in the cooling system drops, solid coolant is fed in where it melts to keep the system stable.

Supposedly Congress wouldn't let the Navy build some "Legacy Class" starships and they had to settle with a few smaller "tugs". Smaller spacecraft to move things around in orbit and do a little exploration.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
This debunk theory is old and it was presented many times in the very same programs featuring the object.
I don't mean this exact article tho.
Still, Bob is adamant about his recollection of the events and the tests are inconclusive.
He did pass lie detector.



new topics




 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join