UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-09-2015, 07:05 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:27 AM)JonMJ33 Wrote:  
(09-09-2015 12:10 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  If I may paraphrase Neil deGrassse Tyson; 'aliens that build flying saucers are stupid aliens.'

Prove it.

Hey, if you've got a beef with the words, take it to Dr. Tyson. I'm just relaying them.

Besides, what is there for me to prove? That stupid aliens exist? That'd require aliens in general to first have been proven. That flying saucers are a stupid mode of transport? Do I really need to set about proving that? Our own experiments with saucer-shaped vehicles have demonstrated that they tend to be unstable platforms that are tough to deploy and can rarely get much, if any lift. Not to mention that there are asteroids that could probably have a better time on atmospheric entry than those things.

On a non-saucer stupid aliens track; what kind of species is capable of both crossing the vast distances between star systems, and crash landing? One would think that such a species of such technology would not have to worry about crashing.

Maybe it has something to do with constantly choosing terrible designs for entry...

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Free Thought's post
09-09-2015, 12:01 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 05:33 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(09-09-2015 01:00 AM)Banjo Wrote:  As for the maneuverability, don't forget Sopwith and his harrier in reverse. That was over 40 years ago. Nor the Sukhoi 27 and 35 Cobra maneuver.

I developed and built a R/C airplane over 20 years ago. It was a straight delta configuration with a conventional (tractor) fuselage.

I used a high performance engine with tuned pipe - and kept the weight to an absolute minimum. (30 inch wingspan - 29 inch length - under 3 lbs fueled up)

The wing was a special construction of carbon fiber tubing laced with 200 lbs test kevlar kite string. The wing was flat plate lift (one thickness) at only .189 inch.

Due to the extreme thinness of the wing, the plane was capable of vectored thrust maneuvers that would kill a pilot from the G load --- including a REAL "cobra" --- that is - a 180 degree direction reversal, then a countering direction reversal. The Sukoi only does a "half cobra" - as it's only just a bit over 90 degrees.

It took quite a bit of practice - but I could do full cobras one after the other.

It was also capable of a unique maneuver dubbed "the cyclone" -- a nose up maneuver that allowed the plane to do a full stalling turn - where the inside wing moved in less than a one foot circle. It looked like it was caught in a cyclone....

Top speed was quite impressive too --- you had to put the elevons into low rate or it'd be hyper sensitive. We once got it on hi-speed tape doing consecutive rolls -- playback showed the rate at 18 rolls a second -- it was just a blur.....

The pilot is always the limiting factor.

awesome! I'd loved to have seen that. Smile

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:22 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 04:45 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Remember what the U in UFO stands for. Sure, there are plenty of unidentified phenomena out there, but that doesn't mean you can logically make the leap from 'unidentified' to 'that's totally a fucking alien spaceship' without losing all credibility; Apollo 14 astronaut or not. Drinking Beverage

Why not? How does anyone lose credibility by making a conclusion based upon all available knowledge?

For example, when you have people intimately familiar with virtually every type of known aircraft, and are experts in the field of aeronautics, and they claim along with many other equally credible individuals that they seen a type of aircraft that greatly defied all known human craft in regards to manoeuvrability and performance and that these types of craft are not possible with human technology, how then does that not make their statements credible?

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:33 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  For example, when you have people intimately familiar with virtually every type of known aircraft, and are experts in the field of aeronautics, and they claim along with many other equally credible individuals that they seen a type of aircraft that greatly defied all known human craft in regards to manoeuvrability and performance and that these types of craft are not possible with human technology, how then does that not make their statements credible?

It doesn't.

What makes them not credible is the absolute lack of evidence that they actually saw a craft.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:39 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:33 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  It doesn't.

What makes them not credible is the absolute lack of evidence that they actually saw a craft.

Their testimony is not evidence? I'm not sure what planet you live but we rely on eye witness testimony to make judgments about the world quite a bit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:43 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  Why not? How does anyone lose credibility by making a conclusion based upon all available knowledge?

For example, when you have people intimately familiar with virtually every type of known aircraft, and are experts in the field of aeronautics, and they claim along with many other equally credible individuals that they seen a type of aircraft that greatly defied all known human craft in regards to manoeuvrability and performance and that these types of craft are not possible with human technology, how then does that not make their statements credible?

I agree

If Buzz Aldren said he observed a Soviet flag on the moon would you believe him? I'd give his claim some credence.....so why shouldn't I give Buzz credence if he were to claim he saw aliens on the moon?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:44 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:39 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Their testimony is not evidence?

No, anecdotes are not evidence.

(09-09-2015 12:39 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I'm not sure what planet you live but we rely on eye witness testimony to make judgments about the world quite a bit.

And yet, if someone claimed that they saw a leprechaun in the back yard, you would dismiss the claim.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:45 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:33 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(09-09-2015 12:22 PM)Free Wrote:  For example, when you have people intimately familiar with virtually every type of known aircraft, and are experts in the field of aeronautics, and they claim along with many other equally credible individuals that they seen a type of aircraft that greatly defied all known human craft in regards to manoeuvrability and performance and that these types of craft are not possible with human technology, how then does that not make their statements credible?

It doesn't.

What makes them not credible is the absolute lack of evidence that they actually saw a craft.

Problem is when you have a group of these experts all together and all claim to have seen the exact same thing at the same time, how then does these numerous eyewitness accounts not have credibility?

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 12:47 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:45 PM)Free Wrote:  Problem is when you have a group of these experts all together and all claim to have seen the exact same thing at the same time, how then does these numerous eyewitness accounts not have credibility?

No matter how many times you multiply zero, it is still zero.

Oh, I'd certainly believe that they saw something. It is not, however, rational to make the leap from "they saw something they couldn't explain" to "they actually saw an alien spacecraft".

Thousands of people claim to have seen Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, or ghosts every year. Some of them are trained professionals.

There still isn't any evidence in favor of any of those things existing.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Unbeliever's post
09-09-2015, 12:55 PM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(09-09-2015 12:01 PM)Banjo Wrote:  awesome! I'd loved to have seen that. Smile

I've got some very shaky video -- VHS -- but it's just about impossible to get good video of it as it's size/speed ratio makes it very tough to track in a viewfinder.... I'm considering building one --- although the last crash destroyed the engine, pipe and radio system...... When you dork one of these, you really dork them.........

But - it's incredibly tough --- and I've never been able to break one in the air -- including full power dives straight down - followed by full elevon pullouts - in high rate.. If you make the pullout going away from yourself - you can see the wings bending. I've even gotten them into flat spins -- and was unable to recover -- so I shut the engine off - and let it go in. All it required was replacing the prop - and it flew again 15 minutes later.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like onlinebiker's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: