UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

Status
Not open for further replies.
ufology said:
I realize that visualizing technology we don't yet have is a real challenge for some people. Other people are pretty good at it. Others see it and are just too afraid to say anything for fear of ridicule.

j.r.
Click to expand...
Sledge, can I offer you an aspirin?
 
ufology said:
I didn't say that. You are assuming things and misrepresenting my statement. Although if you don't see how it could work, then maybe it's not as easy for people as I had thought.
Click to expand...


Did you miss that lesson in critical thinking I gave you several posts ago? Was it too hard to read? Did it have words that were hard to understand? Should I link to it? Are you not interested in applying critical thinking to your alleged alien sighting?
 
I'm already on ibuprofen and prescription co-codamol. I'm not sure anything short of morphine is going to help now.
 
Sledge said:
I'm already on ibuprofen and prescription co-codamol. I'm not sure anything short of morphine is going to help now.
Click to expand...
That's where you're going wrong, if you want to get rid of pain you need Anti-ibuprofen. :)

If you can't imagine how it would work, apparently it's your own fault for having a knowledge of how anti-inflammatory drugs really work.
 
ufology said:
I realize that visualizing technology we don't yet have is a real challenge for some people. Other people are pretty good at it. Others see it and are just too afraid to say anything for fear of ridicule.

j.r.
Click to expand...


I think you'll find none of us have any trouble visualising starships and light sabres and Pan-Galactic Gargle Blasters but weaving them into stories about the real world is a whole 'nother thing.
 
OK that's it. I'm not wasting HDD space hosting pictures for explanations that just get ridicule. I'm done dicussing my sighting here.

j.r.
 
Last edited:
Anti-gravity. It's the new magic.
"How does that picture have anything to do with the topic?"
Anti-gravity!
"Why didn't something travelling faster than the speed of sound create a sonic boom?"
Anti-gravity!
"Why do birds suddenly appear every time you are near?"
Anti-gravity!
"Why is a mouse when it spins?"
Anti-gravity!
 
ufology said:
Sure ...

The distance from very bottom of the valley to the top of the mountain is different than the height than from where it landed to the top of the mountain.

Click to expand...

Same scene at time of 1st and 2nd reported sightings:
Visual-01b.jpg


So how did you figure the size, speed and dimensions of the earlier objects you saw. Or did you simply conflate the different sightings?
 
Gravity really doesn't have anything to do with the physical properties of a body displacing air and creating the shockwave that causes a sonic boom. We can suppose that it does, but in fact such conditions are merely suppository in nature.
 
ufology said:
OK that's it. I'm not wasting HDD space hosting pictures for explanations that just get ridicule. I'm done dicussing my sighting here.

j.r.
Click to expand...

You could spend some HDD space explaining why you have so many errors in your perfectly infallible memory of your alleged sighting of a light 37 years ago.
 
ufology said:
I've already answered some of the distance discrepancy and acknowledged my mixup of the album name. I still remembered the song names and that is how I pinned the album name down on my website.
Click to expand...
And twice here contradicted yourself on the both the album names and the song names, despite insisting that
"The three of us were sitting together on the couch in the dark looking out the picture window and listening to Led Zeppelin Two."


"I could even tell you the record that was playing while we were sitting there ... Led Zeppelin, Houses Of The Holy.".

"Heartbreaker and The Lemon Song are two songs that got etched into my brain that night, and they are indeed on Led Zeppelin Two"
​
To answer in more detail on the distances, particularly the vertical rise, I took into account that the object had landed on the bench overlooking the lake and that the mountain elevations were from the valley floor, therefore the distances in fractions are not from the lake, but from a spot above the lake, plus the mountain was in the background, which would make it appear smaller than it was. Taking these factors into account, I came up with the estimate on my website, which I still think is reasonably accurate.
Click to expand...
Actually, this last embellishment makes your "calculation" of 200m even more off from the actual height that might be calculated from an apparent height 2/3 up the mountains in the background. I addressed this in post 211.

In fact I even recognised that I had not done it correctly and added in that post,
ETA: Ack. Let's apply some trigonometry here.
Assume Four Points Mountain is 7.8km distant, then an object at 3km distant that appears to be 2/3 of the way up it would be at about a height of 480m. Still a significant variation in the height estimates from ufology...

​
Hint: Look up the trig method of "similar triangles".
Perhaps I'll redo the calculations with the Google Earth tools to get an even more precise number.
Click to expand...
I'd already done it, but you repeatedly ignored that post and you continued to insist that your recollections and estimates were accurate as they were base on, "on landmarks of discernable distance based on map measurements with a minimal margin of error for all practical purposes."
As for the number in feet I used here on the forum that don't match up, it was just a bad on the fly metric conversion or possibly I had meant to say yards, but it was just due to the haste of a forum response.
Click to expand...
You say 200m (656ft) on your website but stated 300ft here.

Confusing 656ft with 300ft is some metric conversion error.
Then you are off by more than five times that (see post 210) when you insist that it rose to 2/3 the height of the mountains in the background.

That's some bad on-the-fly metric converting you're doing there.
Lastly, the way it came down the mountain toward us was in three big arcs as described on my website. The graphic I included was for illustrative purposes and was not presented as the sighting itself, but as "very similar".
Click to expand...
It wasn't even remotely similar...
I'd love to be able to work with a CGFX person sometime to get the whole thing into an animation.
Click to expand...
He'd be hard pressed since he'd have to try to work out whether the thing rose to a height of either 200ft, 656ft or 1574ft. What point a graphic that is going to be even more inaccurate that the one you've already screwed up?
For now this is all I've got.
Click to expand...
Which is miles away from your first post that opened so boldly with,
I believe Earth has been visited by objects of alien origin. ...I believe this because I saw a UFO that had performance charateristics beyond any Earth technology then or now. So I have firsthand experience.
​
The only reason I've been getting in your face about the discrepancies in your recollections is because of this opening post.

You seem to think that your "firsthand experience" is compelling, whereas all I've been doing is pointing out that you are unable to consistently recall this firsthand experience without mixing up very pertinent details, but still, in spite of these inconsistencies being pointed out to you, persist on insisting that your every recall is exactly how it happened.

ETA: the other reason I've been getting in your face about the discrepancies in your recollections is also because of the declaration on your website that,
Our aim is to illuminate the truth by presenting accurate, objective, and verifiable information that can be enjoyed by all our visitors.
​
Whereas your very own recollection is shot full of holes on accuracy and objectiveness, let alone verifiable information.
 
Last edited:
Spektator said:
Gravity really doesn't have anything to do with the physical properties of a body displacing air and creating the shockwave that causes a sonic boom. We can suppose that it does, but in fact such conditions are merely suppository in nature.
Click to expand...


Careful with your pseudoscience there. A sonic boom is dependent on the production of a shock wave. A system capable of maipulating gravity wouldn't have to create a shock wave. The air molecules could simply be held in place up to a point near the object and then compressed together in place to compenstae for object's volume and then decompressed behind it without any change in the surrounding air pressure ... hence no sonic boom. And maybe the plasma glow or whatever it was has something to do with it as well ... some sort of ionization effect. But again this is simply speculation and I make not claim to it being actual science, just something to consider.

j.r.
 
ufology said:
Careful with your pseudoscience there. A sonic boom is dependent on the production of a shock wave. A system capable of maipulating gravity wouldn't have to create a shock wave. The air molecules could simply be held in place up to a point near the object and then compressed together in place to compenstae for object's volume and then decompressed behind it without any change in the surrounding air pressure ... hence no sonic boom. And maybe the plasma glow or whatever it was has something to do with it as well ... some sort of ionization effect. But again this is simply speculation and I make not claim to it being actual science, just something to consider.

j.r.
Click to expand...
..
ufology said:
Careful with your pseudoscience there.
Click to expand...
 
ufology said:
I'm done dicussing my sighting here.
Click to expand...


Excellent. A very productive approach. Sounds like you've accepted that there never was, is not now, and never will be any objective evidence to support your claim that you've seen aliens.

On the other hand, it's too bad the JREF doesn't have a dollar for every time a dishonest woo peddler said he/she was done pushing their woo here then jumped right back in with more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom