3 ms·

You speak about videos, sensors and tracking. But there are many cases over the past decades where radar records match what multiple eyewitnesses observed simul

by romseb 5y ago

You speak about videos, sensors and tracking. But there are many cases over the past decades where radar records match what multiple eyewitnesses observed simultaneously: Physical objects performing maneuvers not possible with human technology.

user-the-name 5y ago
Name one that actually has verifiable records.
- romseb 5y ago
  European cases are for example detailed (in German) in: Unidentifizierte Flugobjekte über Europa. Wissenschaftliche Beweise durch Radargeräte, optische Sensoren und militärische Luftraumüberwachung. Mit 4 Tabellen und einem Katalog der über Deutschland gesichteten UFO-Formen. ISBN 10: 3776621109
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    Well, that tells me absolutely nothing at all, what with not having that book and not reading much German. You can do better than that, surely.
    - romseb 5y ago
      There is no need for a condescending tone. I referenced von Ludwiger's work because he is in possession of raw radar data, for example from Switzerland. If you just want to scroll through a short selection of radar-visual cases, start here: http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseView.asp?section=Radar&numbercases=24 http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseView.asp?section=Radar&...
moron4hire 5y ago
I haven't seen those particular ones. But it's still a stretch to take their word that it's "not possible, period". Eye-witnesses are not at all reliable. Radar is spoofable and confusable, even just by meteorological events. And just because the radar saw something and the eye witnesses saw something doesn't mean they are the same thing. There's a lot of room for error.
orwin 5y ago
Is it likely that when we advance physics beyond all we can possibly imagine, our cloaking tech won't be material-based but powered, and some glitches will be so big that sometime, the energy distribution and the cloaking will fail? Also, i would totally make contact with an industrial civilization that threaten to destroy most of its ecosystems before they do so, and if ET are visiting us, they are at the very least jerks. The "studying us" explanation doesn't fly, because if we are ever capable of navigating through the stars, we will be able to simulate false worlds with human who think they are biological and not simulations on them.
moron4hire 5y ago
Ok, I found what I think are the videos you're talking about. Is it this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKsLK_Na7iw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKsLK_Na7iw All I can say is, take a look at what the Navy is willing to publicly say about what they're working on: https://www.nrl.navy.mil/Our-Work/Areas-of-Research/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/Our-Work/Areas-of-Research/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/vrs/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/vrs/ Just because the Navy's camera man or the radar techs he talked to didn't know what they were, doesn't mean the captain of the ship didn't know what they were.

by romseb 5y ago

user-the-name 5y ago

Name one that actually has verifiable records.

romseb 5y ago
European cases are for example detailed (in German) in: Unidentifizierte Flugobjekte über Europa. Wissenschaftliche Beweise durch Radargeräte, optische Sensoren und militärische Luftraumüberwachung. Mit 4 Tabellen und einem Katalog der über Deutschland gesichteten UFO-Formen. ISBN 10: 3776621109
- user-the-name 5y ago
  Well, that tells me absolutely nothing at all, what with not having that book and not reading much German. You can do better than that, surely.
  - romseb 5y ago
    There is no need for a condescending tone. I referenced von Ludwiger's work because he is in possession of raw radar data, for example from Switzerland. If you just want to scroll through a short selection of radar-visual cases, start here: http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseView.asp?section=Radar&numbercases=24 http://www.ufoevidence.org/Cases/CaseView.asp?section=Radar&...

moron4hire 5y ago

I haven't seen those particular ones. But it's still a stretch to take their word that it's "not possible, period". Eye-witnesses are not at all reliable. Radar is spoofable and confusable, even just by meteorological events. And just because the radar saw something and the eye witnesses saw something doesn't mean they are the same thing. There's a lot of room for error.

orwin 5y ago

Is it likely that when we advance physics beyond all we can possibly imagine, our cloaking tech won't be material-based but powered, and some glitches will be so big that sometime, the energy distribution and the cloaking will fail? Also, i would totally make contact with an industrial civilization that threaten to destroy most of its ecosystems before they do so, and if ET are visiting us, they are at the very least jerks. The "studying us" explanation doesn't fly, because if we are ever capable of navigating through the stars, we will be able to simulate false worlds with human who think they are biological and not simulations on them.

moron4hire 5y ago

Ok, I found what I think are the videos you're talking about. Is it this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKsLK_Na7iw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKsLK_Na7iw All I can say is, take a look at what the Navy is willing to publicly say about what they're working on: https://www.nrl.navy.mil/Our-Work/Areas-of-Research/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/Our-Work/Areas-of-Research/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/vrs/ https://www.nrl.navy.mil/tewd/vrs/ Just because the Navy's camera man or the radar techs he talked to didn't know what they were, doesn't mean the captain of the ship didn't know what they were.