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.

 

I am now convinced most UFOs are man made.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   


Wasn't aware we had contact. Probably because there's no evidence of it.


That depends. Radar and interceptor contact, yes. Spaceship landing and shaking tentacles with them on international television contact, no.




posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I can see the parallel . The acceleration and maneuvering are amazing! Any details on the "toy"? Where can I get the plans or kit?
edit on 30-11-2011 by type0civ because: typos and such



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
It could be plausable for a TINY fraction of supposed UFO observations. But I mean, plenty more varieties of UFO that can be debunked by thingslike the more commonly spotted Chinese lanterns and LED kites... Stick some lights on that RC toy and we just have something else to look out for. And of course CGI is now easier then ever to create, further muddling vids.

95% of what I see seems easily explained away, but it is the 5% that keep me intrigued.


edit on 30-11-2011 by wonderboy2402 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
That looks like a lot of fun to fly, fast too.

But this thing is noisy for its size. Imagine one the size of a supposed ufo, it would be real noisy.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Mmmmm...Great toy.

But lets use some logic of the great ATS debunkers, shall we..

How do we know this toy is real? These effects could all be done with CGI.

How come the "camera" pans exactly where the "Toy" is going, never miss interpreting a movement?

How come the shadow of the "Person" does not move, doesnt show him/her moving their arms, or holding the controls?
It appears the camera person and the controller are the one and the same? How come we dont see the shadow holding a camera? How can they hold a camera and control the toy?
Is the camera mounted on the persons head and moves with their head movement?

The shadow doesnt seem to show a camera, to be sitting on top of their head.

Why dont the 2 people walking along, and who are nearly decapitated by the rotors, Turn Or make a reaction (ducking), from the UFO...it makes enough noise?.

Is it me or does the Helicopter device seem to be moving too fast and quickly....Compared to the ordinary toy helicopters we know of. It is certainly moving very quickly...

Is it just swamp gas, and a reflection of Venus? Could be.

IT seems toooo good, to be real. Simple cgi...

Anyho.....that is thru the mind of our residents.....

Me...I want to buy one, where do I sign.




posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by type0civ
 


Not positive on this, but I believe it's a quadrocopter, and they've been around since the 20's. There are communities dedicated to making these things: www.rcgroups.com...

Not saying they account for all UFO sightings, but I definitely can see someone strapping a few LEDs to these things and filming them in crappy quality just to get their 15 minutes of Ufology fame.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Imtor
 


That's the point. People say you need advanced craft to do the things ufos do. Clearly you just need 4 propellers.

So if such things are so easy to achieve, why assume something alien and eons more advanced would even be visible?...would even be recognizable as a craft?



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by tpg65
 


No. I'm saying the technology is not that advanced and that the presence of planes like the XFV-1, the V-22 Osprey, and Heinkel Lerche for the last century gives significant probability that such technology has been available by us, made by us, and only by us.

There is no reason to assume aliens when we can do it all on our own.



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


I'm not saying we have had contact. I'm going with the assumption of what people claim.



Wasn't aware we had contact. Probably because there's no evidence of it.


Witness accounts. And if those aren't credible, then who cares?




When exactly did science reveal the existence of virtual particles? I must have missed it.


We've been manipulating them for a while. Get with the times:

www.forbes.com...

www.world-science.net...

We can suck the energy out of space time and for a moment put it to form.





Fact is, there aren't too many facts above this text.


lmgtfy.com...

lmgtfy.com...


Might want to look that up before you claim it.


edit on 30-11-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


See previous post.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   
This is a HOAX!


And of the worst kind!


A CGI, pure and simple.....

WHY?



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


These cover theoretical work on that:
www.scientificexploration.org...
www.calphysics.org...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


It uses... fans? So you're saying with current propulsion system you can fly when the shape of the airplanes, the helicopters using fans are so for a reason... if you say that giant boomerang aircraft are using tons of fans.. you are just wrong.

The argue isn't are these ETs or not but you are now arguing are they using the same technology or another kind, which I say it is another kind, not that some couldnt use the same but there is clearly a completely diff technlogy, cannot be denied with all the documents existing about either elements and their isotopes or some reverse engineering

Basically you are wrong because there are much more into this people like pilots, aircraft engineers - so it doesn't matter what you say. Also '91 means you are 20? IN other words:


edit on 1-12-2011 by Imtor because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
No. But it certainly convinces me that such ability is not that advanced. And thus, not likely from aliens, who should be more advanced.


Remember the Avro Car? It used the Coanda effect



So does this...





And so does this...



Then we can toss in some rotating magnetic fields and get true anti gravity




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Imtor
 


Wisdom is irrelevant to age, fyi. The oldest man on Earth is rarely the smartest. The youngest mind on Earth, collected in knowledge, is often the most brilliant. So get out of the house some more and think about that.

Furthermore, I am saying that if we can do the same things they can with what is essentially 20th century technology, then there is no reason to assume that such crafts are alien in origin. Because we can do it.

Alien and from another star implies you would be quite advanced. Yet all these so-called collected data are all outdated.

We have never acquired so-called data that we haven't already known about. If alien contact really did occur, you'd expect something new; something we don't already know about.


I repeat. No alien ever informed us of virtual particles, warp drive, or anything else. We always knew first. Then so-called witness accounts came after we knew the data already. It's really not that surprising that ufos started being sighted more when these sciences became common knowledge.


Thus,

Either aliens are not more advanced, and nothing special, or simply not what we culturally construct them to be, and something entirely not understandable.


Fact is. We CAN do the things these craft are reported of being capable of doing. So why assume aliens?


And a fan is not a propeller. Learn your words. Props are a type of fan that works differently. Fans blow air. Propellers efficiently go through them. One is stationary, moving air. The other is mobile, moving a craft. You can't make a fan pick itself up. You can make a prop do this. Similar, but not the same. And yes, I think a boomerang craft could be using it, or a jet engine equivalent. Fact is, we did it. So you can't say we can't.
edit on 1-12-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


But I already told you. If you tossed that EM system out a plane, the whole rig would fall down.

You cannot have anti gravity unless you make the whole planet an electro magnet of enormous proportions...which would fry every electrical system we have. And you wouldn't be able to leave the planet.


The answer would be in being able to produce a material that leaches onto the EM waves, and attaches to them, bending the EM field into its molecular structure, and creating the same situation that superconductors create, only with the embedded energy, not outside energy to make it colder.

Another very interesting development was that they recently managed to suck a photon out of the fabric of space. Basically turning the energy of space into light. They can also manipulate virtual Particles to some small degree. Combining these ideas, if you blocked the graviton, then a piece of matter would become weightless, and if you manipulated space time, you could move the craft with micro gravity.

How many aliens have told you that, eh?



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
I'm not saying we have had contact. I'm going with the assumption of what people claim.

Yeah, you shouldn't make assumptions. Especially when the evidence is not in favor of the assumption. Great way to show off some cognitive dissonance, though.


And there is no evidence that those "virtual particles" have been discovered by any means that are not terrestrial.

Alien-tech? Maybe time to put down the Icke.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Ickle? I don't care for him.

I don't even think we have alien tech.

Perhaps, rather than assuming, you should...actually read my posts. Gee, what a helpful action that would be.

Right now you're assuming I'm some alien believer. Hell, personally I don't even think they've found us yet, and if they have, the only logical thing to do would be to leave a monolith like in 2001. Something that says "sup dewds".

Reread what you think I am. I wouldn't be making this entire thread if I was who you thought I was.

Yes, we have detected virtual particles. We just don't understand them is all. again, quit with the holier than thou assumptions. It just makes you look like an arse.
edit on 1-12-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91

Most certainly aliens exist, and most certainly a probe or two has heard the music of the planet, but I wonder how much is actually from out there.

Direct quote from your OP. Can you explain the discrepancy between your last post and the OP in terms of what you believe?
edit on 12/1/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Certainly. The universe is 15 billion years old. The time it takes for a human to evolve is 5 million years. The species in question that something human could evolve from have been around since the early Permian, 300 million years ago.

Logic dictates that if it only takes a theoretical 3 billion years to generate something mildly human in nature, and the universe is near 5x this age, with infinite possibilities of combinations of planets, it's almost guaranteed that aliens do or have existed to the complexity that can produce technology and culture. As such, in all likelihood they have noticed us in some degree. But what all powerful species would give a crap about a bunch of humans?

Fact is, that if we're dealing with something human-like in nature, then they're only going to be so many possibilities. Either they ever leave their home system ad just send out probes to learn, like we do; they are aggressive religious types, bent on forcing all under their way of life; or they are traders, simply interested in knowing and learning and indeed, feeling a place. Because we have no evidence of any sort of direct contact, the aggressive type are not present. Because we don't see any abnormal technological jumps, they trader types are not present. The only possible ones left are the xenophobic-but-interested-in-science types, whom have probably already come, documented us from space a-la Darwin probe style from "Alien Planet", and left us alone, maybe leaving some graffiti in the form of a monolith on Phobos, or Mars, or something. And to this end, there is much theoretical evidence, but no actual proof. Still evidence is better than nothing.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join