wtf_confused

5 ms·

1.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
No, they are not reflections in the optical system. In fact, Raytheon is actually using this to advertise the system that was involved. I don't think they would be doing that if it was in fact a flaw in their system that was at fault.
2.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
We know this because the radar operators are on record in many mainstream media interviews telling us the radar can track these objects performing in these ways. Also, why do you doubt that the radar can tell the difference between an objec
3.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
I understand your distrust of the military, but what does this skeptical outlook gain us? Do you think we stand to benefit more from dismissing these claims as potentially tainted than seriously investigating them? I do not think humanity h
4.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
The radar operators report the craft could go from 80,000 feet to 20,000 or down to sea level in under a second. Out of sheer curiosity, what do you think they actually have at NG/LM that could move like that? I find that sort of perfo
5.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
Why? Did we change what we call these things because some people in power are afraid of the taint of woo and made up a new designation? I like UFO:)
6.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
I agree that such an effort is needed for serious study, or maybe the weeks of radar tracks the navy may get declassified if enough scientists are interested, but I think there is ample performance data available from the pilots themselves
7.
by wtf_confused 7y ago
To start the conversation, I think we should immediately ask ourselves the following: 1) Given the performance observed, what sort of power generation technology could or could not be inside of these craft? 2) Is it even possible to build a
8.
Ask HN: Why are we not making the most of the recent UFO reports?
9 points by wtf_confused 7y ago|19 comments