TIC TAC Pilot Adrresses ATS Skeptics....

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: KKLOCO

irrelevant - he makes a statement - :

" no birds at < insert altitude > "

this is utter drivel

and as thats his " argument " - i am leary of taking anything else he says seriously

ETA - i do not claim it was " birds "

i am merely pointing out that his arguments are flawed

This is what a non pilot says. Every person that isn't a pilot will not trust a pilot if they speak of "crazy" stuff in the sky. But they will trust them full heartedly in times of war.

But nope. They see some physics defying stuff in the sky after hundreds of hours air time and they're completely crazy.

Pretty sure a pilot would know what they're talking about, even civilian.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Very succinct reply in an effort to end that part of the thread. Kudos! Very well put. I hope we can move past that now.

I myself have seen a UFO, and it definitely convinced me it was something that we can't explain with our current understanding of nature. And considering the objective evidence presented with the tic-tac video, I have to reflect on what such evidence means for those that observe it, and those that do not.

On the one hand; we have someone that has been there and seen it unfold in real time. On the other hand; we have people, like us, that sees the digital remnants of parts of the experience. As well as witness testimony after the fact, which proves it's not only a digital piece of evidence, but also something that was observed and experienced.

It comes down to trust, doesn't it? If you haven't been fortunate, or unfortunate in some cases, to experience something like this, the validity of the account comes down to the cumulative facts surrounding the case. In this case, I truly believe the value is more than the sum of its parts.

I believe the sighting is real, but as for the rest... for example the motive behind releasing it? That might be another matter.

originally posted by: Droogie
for example the motive behind releasing it? That might be another matter.

Good, clear post. I was telling Celly a few weeks back that Lt. Col. Cheeks might have leaked the video, because, like Lt. Col. Blanchard, he wanted the info public.

Someone edited the video down to the short bit we see today. I see no reason for a say, a Marine Private or Seaman First Class to do that. I could see an officer like Cheeks doing this because there was some info on the vid that he did not want the Russians to see.

a reply to: Flesh699

Pretty sure a pilot would know what they're talking about, even civilian.

But what data do you have to back up your opinion.

Studies have shown that military eye witnesses have worse observational skills than an average human concerning something they don't understand.


Source : The Hynek Report.

Maybe you have some more accurate data.

For the record, I never said anyone was being paid to be here.
Yes seeing a flying saucer means that aliens are here.
Because aliens make flying saucers, not men.
Men did not make them in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's and they still do not make them today.

If you think flying saucers man made, prove it.
If you think Tic Tac's are man made, prove it.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
For the record, I never said anyone was being paid to be here.
Yes seeing a flying saucer means that aliens are here.
Because aliens make flying saucers, not men.
Men did not make them in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's and they still do not make them today.

If you think flying saucers man made, prove it.
If you think Tic Tac's are man made, prove it.

Actually , the burden of proof is on you.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
For the record, I never said anyone was being paid to be here.
Yes seeing a flying saucer means that aliens are here.
Because aliens make flying saucers, not men.
Men did not make them in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's and they still do not make them today.

If you think flying saucers man made, prove it.
If you think Tic Tac's are man made, prove it.

Men have been building Neutral-Dimension Craft for thousands of years...ever hear of the Vedic Texts?.....they are a simple imitation of nature or the path of least resistance ...the combustion engine is an intentionally overcomplicated marketing scheme and scam or the path of most resstance.

Reality based upon evidence tells a different storyline....it says we have evidence of men who build things but no evidence of anything else that builds things....so if Tic-Tacs aren't manmade prove it......see how that spins in the opposite direction?

This means to me that Tic-Tacs are manmade Neutral-Dimension Craft.

Add this to the fact that they are extremely simple and easy to build and frankly ANYONE could be out there zipping around....seriously there are multiple methods one may use to generate a Neutral Dimension field... from extremely basic materials....www.youtube.com...

If anyone is interested in how UFOs can be manmade and from our past not our future...the data is available.

I think the Pilot is being honest and forthright....clearly the existance of the technology has been outed by the creation of the internet and inquiring minds....it is what it is....its time to restore validity to human beings who EXPERIENCE things and parse their WORDS higher on the evidenciary scale than material physical evidence.

I mean to a man who is Joyriding in a modern Era Fighter Plane it cannot possibly be much of a stretch to consider that another Government or Group could very easily posses technology that surpasses what we consider to be top of the line.

I believe the Pilots word on what he experienced....and I also believe the Tic-Tacs are simply manmade Neutral-Dimension Craft.....no weeby-jeeby...no Voodoo...no Aliens....no spooks....simply manmade technology and to even consider different is quite odd to be frank.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Zcustosmorum

Well, yeah. Sometimes it's something man made or other natural phenomena.

Then sometimes it's just Aliens.

gotta say i wish this meme would die. it has certainly outlived it's usefulness and as for funny, maybe the first 10 thousand times but we are well past that point. I think sometimes it's something man made or other natural phenomena, sometimes it's just we don't know or understand, and hell MAYBE even could be aliens.

a reply to: celltypespecific

Awesome!
I am speechless.
S&F

a reply to: mirageman

still...it needs to be said that you're using data from a project that was hell bent on denial and reducing the number of "unidentifieds"...by any means necessary.

edit: if you think about it...where is the logic in the conclusion that an ordinary person is a better eye-witness than a trained pilot that observes the skies regularly and is more in touch with what's technically available and has surely witnessed many weather phenomenon during his flight experiences.

I just dont see the logic in that statistic.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

It's fairly easy to see the logic.

If you are piloting a plane your concentration is on maintaining control of the plane and staying on course. Making sense of something you can't identify has to be juggled with keeping control of the aircraft.

The statistic was repeated in Hynek's book years after Blue Book has been wrapped up and by then he was a firm believer in the UFO phenomenon. You can try to disregard it any way you like. But unless someone else has better data from a wider sample then it remains an inconvenient statistic.

a reply to: mirageman

I guess it's down to an individual looking at those stats.

I find your explanation for the pilots rather simplistic. It is not about concentration but experience when once seeing the "object" in question, determining whether it's something unusual or mundane. Because the question is not whether they saw "it"...but did they misidentify it ? Your article says.."% of misidentification".

How does that stuff work even ?...they look at some reports and then conclude..."oh...this description rather sounds like...xxx, so it probably was that...chalk it up to "misidentified". Presto. Those stats could never be truly verified. It's just pulled out of someone's ass and claim it as truth.

Was there a longer version of the Tic-Tac video ?




twitter.com...

MORE ON THE LONGER VERSION OF TIC-TAC




twitter.com...

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: grey580

Thing with skeptics, and I'm not totally against them, it's good to be skeptical, unless of course the information presented, whether through witness testimony or photographic/video evidence (as in this case) is totally ignored.

The most infuriating I've found over the years are these astronomer idiots:

Witness says:

"It hovered in front of me, silently, for 2 minutes before shooting off at high speed".

Astronomer says:

"Of course, that could be the planet Venus, very frequent in the night sky at this time of year".

Almost every odd or bizarre circumstance which may have caused what that observer thought he saw, radar traces included is vastly more likely than the answer being extra-terrestrial being coming here and playing around flying in our atmosphere with bean-shaped craft, full-sized, with no purpose other than to play around with jets who were sent out to observe them without being armed.

twitter.com...

a reply to: Maverick7

Almost every odd or bizarre circumstance which may have caused what that observer thought he saw, radar traces included is vastly more likely than the answer being extra-terrestrial being coming here and playing around flying in our atmosphere with bean-shaped craft, full-sized, with no purpose other than to play around with jets who were sent out to observe them without being armed.

No-one said ET spacecraft, what IS relevant is that unidentified craft capable of seemingly incredible performances (beyond acceptable and known flight characteristics) are being observed

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
I just dont see the logic in that statistic.

I flew a plane when I was 10 years old. Granted I only did it for about 15 minutes and I did not land or take off, but I flew that Cessna in a straight line and in wide circles. If you can ride a bike with no hands you can fly a plane and keep it on course through empty skies.

It is like driving a car on the freeway with lots of cars around you. You can easily take your eyes off the road and look at strange things without crashing, people do it everyday.

People who fly plans for a living can do the same thing, and there is NOTHING for them to run into. They can eat lunch while flying the plane and still look at a flying saucer. So that whole argument of keeping control is false.

And let's not forget the fact that Dr. "Swamp Gas" Hynek was a cover-up artist for the military/government involved with the phony Blue Book UFO cover-up operation. Since he was a paid disinfo officer everything Hynek said should be taken with a grain of salt.

originally posted by: Gothmog
Actually , the burden of proof is on you.

The Skeptics Easy Out answer.

I am telling you that a craft that can go from 28,000 feet to sea level in 0.7 seconds is not man made or natural. That leaves only one choice left and it is certainly not an African vulture
That means it is alien.

You can say that one radar blip went off and another came 0.7 seconds later in a different place or that the radar operators on a billion dollar warship do not understand the job they are doing and how the radar works. Good luck with that. Because these flying craft were seen by several people who fly around the sky for a living. It was not just radar blips but a physical craft up there.

For those of us who know or believe that aliens are here the question is not are they alien, but the question is at least twofold:
Does a different style craft mean a different alien species?
And what the heck were they doing?

If the water disturbance was simply the USS Louisville submarine, would that really account for why they were in the skies for days around that location? How about the UAP's off the V-Cap or those over the Gulf? Does anyone really think those were toy balloons?