• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Advanced Aviation Threat Identification Program UFO'S

It is just a matter of using the process of elimination. [...]

That's nothing but an Argument From Ignorance fallacy : "We don't know what it is, therefore extraterrestrial visitation."

Some times the best explanation science can offer is "We don't know." This doesn't mean space creatures are visiting us.
 
There is never enough information to eliminate all possible explanations except 'aliens'. On those occasions when additional information eventually emerges, the explanation often proves to be something no-one had even thought of. How can you eliminate possible explanations that haven't even occurred to you?
 
That's nothing but an Argument From Ignorance fallacy : "We don't know what it is, therefore extraterrestrial visitation."

Yes, the Giorgio effect is strong in this one.

Some times the best explanation science can offer is "We don't know." This doesn't mean space creatures are visiting us.

UFO nuts and CTs can't admit this though...they can't admit to not knowing

I think its time to leave this thread now that it has attracted the attention of the escapees from the asylum.
 
Last edited:
skyeagle409: You apparently haven't learned anything from the last time you entered one of these conversations. I am thinking in particular of your Minuteman story, and also the JAL story, both of which were comprehensively shredded on your last outing.
Do your other tales rely on the same flimsy speculation, or is there more substance to them?
 
It is just a matter of using the process of elimination. For an example, do we have flying vehicles capable of flying at hypersonic speeds within the atmosphere and not create a sonic boom? Some UFOs have been tracked at over thousands of miles per hour and in 1952, one UFO was tracked in the Washington D.C. area at 7200 mph and no sonic boom was heard. In another case, multiple UFOs flew near a B-29 in 1952 near Galveston, Texas at over 5000 mph.

Based on my own experience and what I know from declassified government intelligence and military documents --among other many other things--ET is here and has been for centuries. Here is one small example of thousands of references where flying saucers were tracked by Project Mogul and other balloon teams.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aqOswt1XY-o/U-bN5X8iU-I/AAAAAAAAGGA/xg2bjFD4C0Y/s1600/MCLAUGH1.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CHXR2lYnJZ8/U-bN9i0-LFI/AAAAAAAAGGI/V7u5Pw0Yb8k/s1600/MCLAUGH2.jpg


UFO encounters by military and civilian pilots are nothing knew and the advanced technology nature of UFOs encountered underlines the fact the objects are not ours. In the America West encounter, the object was hundreds of feet long, and I might add the UFO was confirmed by a F-117 stealth fighter pilot flying in the general area.

Audio tape recordings between civilian and military radar personnel made during the UFO encounter have been available to the public where the military confirms on tape the tracking of that huge UFO, but I find the Japan Airlines 1628 UFO encounter over Alaska even more interesting because of the huge size of the UFO that was described as larger than two aircraft carriers, which was also confirmed by FAA and Air Force ground-based radars. FAA documents on the Japan Airlines UFO encounter are now available to the public. The radar data was flown to the East Coast and examined by hardware and software specialist who later confirmed the huge size of the UFO that maneuvered around the B-747, which was accompanied by two smaller objects.

A bit more than two months later, an Air Force KC-135 encountered a similar object of size and shape in the general region and communication tapes of that UFO encounter with the KC-135 are now available to the public along with letters from the FAA controllers who were involved in the JAL 1628 incident. Not long after the KC-135 encounter, an Alaska Airlines jet encountered a UFO in that general region.

I have also been aware that a detachment from Wright-Patterson AFB was sent to Alaska and they also encountered a UFO. Photos taken of the UFO during that encounter were then classified and sent via courier back to Wright-Patterson AFB, and I might add the photos are still classified to this very day, but I can also add that gun video footage taken by a climbing Air Force jet of a UFO that was hovering above 30,000 feet over Wright-Patterson AFB has been released to the public.

I find the Navy pilot UFO encounters interesting but expect more such revelations to be revealed by the government in the future.

That particular reply was directed at the knee jerk eye roll some will display thinking aliens are naturally involved. Everyone one on this forum has not enough information to form a definitive opinion.
 
That's nothing but an Argument From Ignorance fallacy : "We don't know what it is, therefore extraterrestrial visitation."

Some times the best explanation science can offer is "We don't know." This doesn't mean space creatures are visiting us.


It is all very simple to understand. The object was not a weather balloon nor anything to do with temperature inversion. The object is obviously an artificial flying object that exhibited advanced technology unknown to mankind, a fact the Air Force mentioned in its 1952 intelligence report, which once again, reconfirmed its 1948 ETOS report that concluded the objects were "Interplanetary Spaceships."

Ever wondered why years ago, and thanks to the FOIA, the U.S. Army confirmed the existence of its 'Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit (IPU) which was supported by Project Moon Dust and Operation Blue Fly? Think about it.
 
There is never enough information to eliminate all possible explanations except 'aliens'. On those occasions when additional information eventually emerges, the explanation often proves to be something no-one had even thought of. How can you eliminate possible explanations that haven't even occurred to you?


It is well-known that these objects exhibit advanced technology not found in the closet of mankind. For an example, if I don't have a blue car that is parked in front of my home, then the blue car cannot be mine based on the fact that I don't have a blue car, which means the blue car cannot be mine.

I am very sure the saucer that flew along side Aerolíneas Argentinas over Bariloche, Argentina in 1995 as it was approaching the airport was not that of mankind. Not only did people on the ground see the saucer as it flew along side the airliner, but passengers and crew watched the saucer as well as it flew along side of their aircraft and I should also mention that parts of the city lost power as the object passed overhead. The object interfered with the aircraft in such a way that the pilot had to conduct a missed approach.

UFOs can be a hazard to air traffic and in some cases, military pilots were lost as they tried to intercept UFOs. Ronald Reagan became a believer after witnessing a UFO flying in formation with his aircraft over California while he was governor, but it is what the UFO did afterward that opened everyone's eyes on his aircraft, which exhibited technology not found in the our closet. In other words, if mankind doesn't have that advanced technology, then the advanced technology exhibited cannot be that of mankind.
 
Last edited:
Given that trained and experienced fighter pilots can do things like mistaking their own wingtip light for a SAM launch and misidentifying friendly APCs wearing dayglo orange ID flags. I think I'll hang on for harder evidence (I'd love it to be true though).
 
That particular reply was directed at the knee jerk eye roll some will display thinking aliens are naturally involved. Everyone one on this forum has not enough information to form a definitive opinion.


It is just a matter of using the process of elimination to determine whether these objects are ours or theirs. For an example, does mankind have saucers capable of hypersonic flight within the atmosphere and not generate a sonic boom? If the answer is no, then the saucers cannot be ours.

F-16's had similar encounters with UFOs over Belgium as the Navy pilots. I obtained the following radar data from one of the F-16's sent to intercept a large triangular-shaped UFO over Belgium. The UFO was tracked on multiple and dissimilar ground-based radars which guided the two F-16's to the location of the UFO until contact was made with their radars. Here is the radar data and note from the data that mankind does not have a flying vehicle capable of such extreme maneuvers, which were so violent that the UFO broke their radar locks on multiple occasions.

F-16 Radar Data on a UFO

Seconds after Heading Speed Altitude lock-on (degrees) (knots) (feet)

00 200 150 7000

01 200 150 7000

02 200 150 7000

03 200 150 7000 04 sharp 200 acceleration 150 6000 05 turn 270 = 22 g 560 6000
06 270 560 6000 07 270 570 6000

08 270 560 7000

09 270 550 7000

10 210 560 9000

11 210 570 10000

12 210 560 11000

13 210 570 10000
14 270 770 7000
15 270 770 6000

16 270 780 6000

17 270 790 5000

18 290 1010 4000

19 290 1000 3000

20 290 990 2000

21 290 990 1000

22 300 990 0000

22.5 300 980 0000 Break lock

NOTE: The UFO accelerates to hundreds of miles per hour and change altitudes in mere seconds, which is something that no aircraft can do, which is another means of how we can differentiate between flying vehicles that are ours and theirs.

It was also noted that at no time was a sonic boom heard despite the fact the UFO flew at supersonic speed just before radar lock was broken.
 
Last edited:
I think the government is slowly preparing the public for UFO disclosure,

Fascinating. So what is the international treaty that stops Iran, Russia, China and Syria from disclosing that UFOs are real before the USA does, since the 1950s and during the cold war? :D
 
The UFO accelerates to hundreds of miles per hour and change altitudes in mere seconds, which is something that no aircraft can do,

Lucky then that we know from Blue Book that this is caused by false readings on radar due to temperature inversions.

Have you actually read any of the reports in Blue Book?
 
I think the government is slowly preparing the public for UFO disclosure

Wow nearly 70 years - now that is SLOW. Question what part of the government is doing this? Because other parts of said government are conducting research like the type that is the subject of the thread.

I wonder why no other government has done this?
 
It is all very simple to understand. The object was not a weather balloon nor anything to do with temperature inversion.
As a general rule whales aren't weather balloons or temperature inversions. Here is the story when it first appeared in Aviation Week in 2007. :cool:


(Pilot)FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.
 
It is well-known that these objects exhibit advanced technology not found in the closet of mankind.
Actually, it is not well-known that these objects exhibit any kind of technology, advanced or not. These objects are unidentified, and the fact that they are able to move at velocities greater than mach 1 without causing any kind of sonic boom, and that they kind change direction in defiance of the laws of physics, indicate that they are probably not real in the sense that they consist of matter.
 
It is just a matter of using the process of elimination to determine whether these objects are ours or theirs. For an example, does mankind have saucers capable of hypersonic flight within the atmosphere and not generate a sonic boom? If the answer is no, then the saucers cannot be ours.

F-16's had similar encounters with UFOs over Belgium as the Navy pilots. I obtained the following radar data from one of the F-16's sent to intercept a large triangular-shaped UFO over Belgium. The UFO was tracked on multiple and dissimilar ground-based radars which guided the two F-16's to the location of the UFO until contact was made with their radars. Here is the radar data and note from the data that mankind does not have a flying vehicle capable of such extreme maneuvers, which were so violent that the UFO broke their radar locks on multiple occasions.

F-16 Radar Data on a UFO

Seconds after Heading Speed Altitude lock-on (degrees) (knots) (feet)

00 200 150 7000

01 200 150 7000

02 200 150 7000

03 200 150 7000 04 sharp 200 acceleration 150 6000 05 turn 270 = 22 g 560 6000
06 270 560 6000 07 270 570 6000

08 270 560 7000

09 270 550 7000

10 210 560 9000

11 210 570 10000

12 210 560 11000

13 210 570 10000
14 270 770 7000
15 270 770 6000

16 270 780 6000

17 270 790 5000

18 290 1010 4000

19 290 1000 3000

20 290 990 2000

21 290 990 1000

22 300 990 0000

22.5 300 980 0000 Break lock

NOTE: The UFO accelerates to hundreds of miles per hour and change altitudes in mere seconds, which is something that no aircraft can do, which is another means of how we can differentiate between flying vehicles that are ours and theirs.

It was also noted that at no time was a sonic boom heard despite the fact the UFO flew at supersonic speed just before radar lock was broken.

Here you go again. This data was also debunked in the last thread, when I believe (if memory serves me right) that someone with radar experience showed how, if this was actually representing a flight path of a UFO, that the craft would have been flying underground at certain times.
I also pointed out, in some detail, how your conclusions about this incident are based on your own interpretations, not on anything the Belgian military said.
How is it that you have not taken any of this on board? A skeptic is separated from a dogmatist by their willingness to adjust their beliefs in light of the evidence, something you have singularly failed to do.
 
Compelling aka UFO Evidence

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/pentagon-program-ufo-harry-reid.html


Surprised there's not a thread on this, sort of. Leave it to Trump to make it so evidence of something otherworldly is not the #1 piece of news.


Anyway, it seems the Pentagon has spent a bit of taxpayer dollars trying to determine what to make of various UFO reports. The program was shut down in 2012, but it has recently been declassified and as a skeptic, I really think the reporting and video is pretty compelling.

Alongside the video, we have interviews with the principle players, the pilots, the folks involved in the investigation and such. Our most sophisticated radar systems confirmed what the pilots were seeing.


It's probably safe to say that whatever it is, it needs more study. These encounters are apparently numerous. This paragraph from the linked article is pretty much where I stand:

While not addressing the merits of the program, Sara Seager, an astrophysicist at M.I.T., cautioned that not knowing the origin of an object does not mean that it is from another planet or galaxy. “When people claim to observe truly unusual phenomena, sometimes it’s worth investigating seriously,” she said. But, she added, “what people sometimes don’t get about science is that we often have phenomena that remain unexplained.”
 
The evidence is compelling that they are unknown.

What is the evidence that they are X (whatever X is)?
 

Back
Top Bottom