• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Pentagon official:: There's compelling evidence that we might not be alone

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
829
661
315
[/QUOTE]
I watched the interview with the David Fravor. And sorry, he doesn't say anything about metallic looking saucers. It was tic tac shaped and when the video you mention was brought up, he talks about some ball covered in some kind of force field. Nothing about saucers. Corbell and Rogan immediately try to bring in Lazar and Fravors agreed about the object turning it's belly to possibly steer. He said nothing about "Lazar is right, it totally looks like his skeches and works like he describes". He says he likes Lazar as a person, mentions some of the Lazar's descriptions but he never says that Lazar is the real deal.

This Fravor actually is legit. He has legit background, his story has some visual proof, it's backed by navy and other witnesses. They saw some unindetified objects but they are not hasty to call them aliens. As Fravors tells his story he goes out of his way without the need to ask to explain a lot of details about the protocols they go through, equipment he works with that was used to track these objects and how it works. Also freely talks about altitudes, distances. That's a person who actually knows his shit. Lazar is exact opposite of this. Corbell had to save Lazar's sorry ass non stop to the point he talked more than Lazar. That whole Barry the lab partner thing sounds like someone who has watched "Breaking Bad" way too much.
There is loads of legit ufo footage! It's just that low iq people need to be told what to believe.
Try harder, funny how the pilot believes Lazar and says he is a genuine person. Also explain to us element 115.
I'd also like people explain why people have been documenting ufos for literally thousands of years.
 
Last edited:
Feb 18, 2019
583
347
360
There is loads of legit ufo footage! It's just that low iq people need to be told what to believe.
Try harder, funny how the pilot believes Lazar and says he is a genuine person. Also explain to us element 115.
I'd also like people explain why people have been documenting ufos for literally thousands of years.
[/QUOTE]
Many of those Ufos footages are almost for sure from manmade space vehicles, imho, either experiments and / or sightings done on purpose
Sightings of the real ufos are rare
And yes, they were much more present in the past, there are dozens of art pictures in which flying objects are depicted in the background, is almost frightening

And I Also always though pyramids are all but man's operas, even their positioning around the world is suspect, I mean, how is this possible? Identical pyramids from a latitude to another, in an era in which having contact even with a near land was almost impossible?
Also, menhir and such ( all of this imo, of course)

I live in an island with an active volcano, and here ufo sightings are very common
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

MadAnon

Member
Sep 11, 2018
292
201
250
Yup, this video. He doesn't mention saucers at any point during the interview. There's another video from some History channel show where an aerospace engineer who was involved in some of these sightings and knew the pilots described it as gyroscope looking. Again nothing about Lazar and his classic sci-fi saucers.
 
Last edited:

DoctorEkkoUK

Member
Dec 14, 2014
487
381
455
I watched the Rogan podcast with the Tic Tac pilot last night with an open mind. I am still leaning towards sceptisism. The evidence I have seen that explains the video recordings being the result of how the camera and gimble in the FLIR works and how objects can jump to the side when you switch camera modes seems way more likely than the explanation of it being some kind of physics defying craft. What about the eye witness acounts you say? well to me seeing a disturbance under the water with a white object hovering overhead sounds a lot like how you might see a flock of seabirds feasting on a school of fish. We know they were very far away when they saw it and they were looking for "something weird" in the area due to the radar reports. My guess is that these reports start with a weird radar anomaly then pilots go out looking for something weird then if you look for something weird looking you are more likely to see it.
 

MadAnon

Member
Sep 11, 2018
292
201
250
There is loads of legit ufo footage! It's just that low iq people need to be told what to believe.
Try harder, funny how the pilot believes Lazar and says he is a genuine person. Also explain to us element 115.
I'd also like people explain why people have been documenting ufos for literally thousands of years.
Yes, there's lots of interesting footage. I don't care whether the pilot believes Bob or not. He clearly isn't familiar with the whole Lazar story. Only the small bits.

What you want me to explain? How about Lazar explain us why all his element 115 predictions were wrong? Element 115, 114 etc. and island of stability was theorized in "American Scientist" before Lazar. It already had a spot and placeholder name (Ununpentium) on periodic table. Even Lazar himself in his old interviews say "we have theorized" when he talks about these heavier elements and "Island of stability". For some reason you simpletons think that it's all Lazar.

Now tell me why he doesn't say how he discovered that it's 115 (number of protons)? Why he suddenly talks about special isotope now that his stability predictions has turned out to be wrong. He somehow knew it had 115 protons and nothing more about it's atomic structure like what kind of isotope? How convinient to not know any details but only the basic staff he could've read in "American Scientist" to sound convincing to simpletons.
 
Last edited:

Saruhashi

Member
Oct 2, 2018
1,408
3,296
505
Also watched the Joe Rogan podcast yesterday.

I found Commander David Fravor to be very credible. The only conclusion from his testimony is that something must be going on there.
However, the end result is still "we don't know exactly what".

Unfortunately the presence of Jeremy Corbell does cast a shadow over the credibility of the whole thing. The guy is full of shit.

I'm still skeptical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zombrex and MadAnon

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
I watched the Rogan podcast with the Tic Tac pilot last night with an open mind. I am still leaning towards sceptisism. The evidence I have seen that explains the video recordings being the result of how the camera and gimble in the FLIR works and how objects can jump to the side when you switch camera modes seems way more likely than the explanation of it being some kind of physics defying craft. What about the eye witness acounts you say? well to me seeing a disturbance under the water with a white object hovering overhead sounds a lot like how you might see a flock of seabirds feasting on a school of fish. We know they were very far away when they saw it and they were looking for "something weird" in the area due to the radar reports. My guess is that these reports start with a weird radar anomaly then pilots go out looking for something weird then if you look for something weird looking you are more likely to see it.
But four pilots(2 in each jet) all saw the same thing. How are the pilots all wrong, the fighter's equipment is wrong, the sonar tracks were wrong, and the radar equipment is wrong on the same objects?

And if you watch the Pentagon report on it, they were tasked with investigating these objects, dozens of military reports with evidence outside of this case. They determined the objects able to defy known physics.

Not only the Aegis radar tracked the objects that were of similar speed and behavior to objects tracked on radar since the 1950s, over 20,000mph and the ability to stop, hover, and take off incredibly suddenly. It's a classic behavior of these things.
It's in the OP. What sort of radar anomalies would span over decades of radar variations but maintain those hypersonic speeds and bizarre consistent behaviors?
 
Last edited:

Saruhashi

Member
Oct 2, 2018
1,408
3,296
505
But four pilots(2 in each jet) all saw the same thing. How are the pilots all wrong, the fighter's equipment is wrong, the sonar tracks were wrong, and the radar equipment is wrong on the same objects?

And if you watch the Pentagon report on it, they were tasked with investigating these objects, dozens of military reports with evidence outside of this case. They determined the objects able to defy known physics.

Not only the Aegis radar tracked the objects that were of similar speed and behavior to objects tracked on radar since the 1950s, over 20,000mph and the ability to stop, hover, and take off incredibly suddenly. It's a classic behavior of these things.
It's in the OP. What sort of radar anomalies would span over decades of radar variations but maintain those hypersonic speeds and bizarre consistent behaviors?
Let's be fair here.

The footage in the OP is grainy and unclear.
We are not talking about a close up video where it's obvious that we are looking at something extraordinary.
It's inconclusive.

At best you've got "an unknown something was seen by some people but we don't know what it is".

What sort of radar anomalies would span over decades of radar variations but maintain those hypersonic speeds and bizarre consistent behaviors?

I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows.

The thing is that until one of these things is captured or witnessed up close then we don't actually know anything.

Fair enough if you say "the objects can defy known physics" but if you don't know what the objects themselves are (if they are even objects at all) then it's just a big load of nothing.

For me, the problem seems to be that there is something unexplained (maybe unexplainable) going on but you have all these people trying to move towards a very specific explanation (some kind of vehicle from another planet) and that is where the conversation starts to break down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phunkydiabetic

Chittagong

Gold Member
Jun 8, 2004
18,415
2,281
2,050
Let's be fair here.

The footage in the OP is grainy and unclear.
We are not talking about a close up video where it's obvious that we are looking at something extraordinary.
It's inconclusive.

At best you've got "an unknown something was seen by some people but we don't know what it is".

What sort of radar anomalies would span over decades of radar variations but maintain those hypersonic speeds and bizarre consistent behaviors?

I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows.

The thing is that until one of these things is captured or witnessed up close then we don't actually know anything.

Fair enough if you say "the objects can defy known physics" but if you don't know what the objects themselves are (if they are even objects at all) then it's just a big load of nothing.

For me, the problem seems to be that there is something unexplained (maybe unexplainable) going on but you have all these people trying to move towards a very specific explanation (some kind of vehicle from another planet) and that is where the conversation starts to break down.
I think this is a pretty fair stance.

My take on it is that if there is the amount of radar, camera and military personnel detections of this stuff as the NYT article and the pilot would indicate, it's very likely that something that we do not understand is happening.

What this should spark is an open research program to try to detect and analyse the phenomena. The phenomena does not seem influenced by detection, but it occurs in places where detection is less likely. A proper set of experiments and hypothesis should be conducted. That's how we would get to understand it.

Personally, the most plausible explanation for me would seem to be drones or probes of some sort, I very much doubt anyone is driving the vehicles, it would seem unnecessarily wasteful.
 

Saruhashi

Member
Oct 2, 2018
1,408
3,296
505
I think this is a pretty fair stance.

My take on it is that if there is the amount of radar, camera and military personnel detections of this stuff as the NYT article and the pilot would indicate, it's very likely that something that we do not understand is happening.

What this should spark is an open research program to try to detect and analyse the phenomena. The phenomena does not seem influenced by detection, but it occurs in places where detection is less likely. A proper set of experiments and hypothesis should be conducted. That's how we would get to understand it.

Personally, the most plausible explanation for me would seem to be drones or probes of some sort, I very much doubt anyone is driving the vehicles, it would seem unnecessarily wasteful.
Yeah, if there is some kind of extraterrestrial something out there then it seems most likely that it would be drones or probes.

Unfortunately when these guys bring Bob Lazar etc into the equation then stuff gets a bit more complicated and a lot less credible.

I think that's the "balancing act" that needs to be maintained here. Yes, we can say that something we don't understand is going on. No, we cannot make any assumptions about what that is exactly.

People end up doing a "God of the Gaps" type thing. In this case "Aliens of the Gaps" I suppose.

What we really need is for one of these things to just crash land in a busy, populated, area (no casualties) and suddenly images and videos are all over social media and that's that.

Instead it's like we've got all this "something was detected on radar, far away from anyone, only seen by military people out doing exercises or whatever" and that's just not enough.

Something that gets to me about the pilot guy on Joe Rogan is that he outright says they were on a big exercise and then they are asked to go out and investigate some "weird" stuff but that just happens to be not part of the exercise? Then afterwards they are basically being trolled by their colleagues etc?

It always seems like there is juuuuuust enough ambiguity to make the story seem like it could go either way.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
Let's be fair here.

The footage in the OP is grainy and unclear.
We are not talking about a close up video where it's obvious that we are looking at something extraordinary.
It's inconclusive.

At best you've got "an unknown something was seen by some people but we don't know what it is".

What sort of radar anomalies would span over decades of radar variations but maintain those hypersonic speeds and bizarre consistent behaviors?

I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows.

The thing is that until one of these things is captured or witnessed up close then we don't actually know anything.

Fair enough if you say "the objects can defy known physics" but if you don't know what the objects themselves are (if they are even objects at all) then it's just a big load of nothing.

For me, the problem seems to be that there is something unexplained (maybe unexplainable) going on but you have all these people trying to move towards a very specific explanation (some kind of vehicle from another planet) and that is where the conversation starts to break down.

That's all I'm saying. I just dont see it as a string of mistakes about the same thing.
 

KorbinDallas

Member
Oct 8, 2019
188
131
215
Yup, this video. He doesn't mention saucers at any point during the interview. There's another video from some History channel show where an aerospace engineer who was involved in some of these sightings and knew the pilots described it as gyroscope looking. Again nothing about Lazar and his classic sci-fi saucers.
Lazar did say during his interview, the only time he saw more than one craft, they were all different shapes and sizes.
 

MadAnon

Member
Sep 11, 2018
292
201
250
Lazar did say during his interview, the only time he saw more than one craft, they were all different shapes and sizes.
And he also said that element 115 can't be synthesized on earth, said he had masters degrees fron Harvard and Caltech. Besides stories that can be easily made up, he has no backgroud that checks out, no witnesses, no tangible proof, nothing. Just a story inspired by interest in science, movies and great imagination. You guys are relly easy to fool if you don't need a single evidence to even confirm small part of the story. And Lazar doesn't even have proof for his most basic claims. Most People really are as gullible as they say. But I shouldn't feel surprised when there are flat earth and shapeshifting lizard overlord believers. Lazar's story is pretty tame in comparison.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
Another thing I was thinking about outside of the billions of Earth like planets, are moons. There are two moons in our solar system that nasa believes have a good chance to support simple life. So you have to imagine throughout the billions of galaxies, those are also candidates in addition to the planets.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
Yeah theres a ton of crazy patents, this one too

 

JimmyJones

Member
Mar 19, 2015
1,467
1,421
495
It's pure arrogance and folly to believe we're the only intelligent beings in the universe. The odds alone favor life elsewhere.
This is how I feel. There is definitely life out there somewhere in the universe.

I couldn’t care less about all of this speculation though. Give me something concrete or I’m not interested.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,522
6,289
1,560
The Paradox argument has always been a bit weak, IMO. You could easily brainstorm and come up with a dozen more reasons why we haven't seen anything.
I think the biggest flaws with the Fermi Paradox are:

1. There has not been enough time pass for someone to notice the Earth, given that we have only been producing signals for roughly 100 years and thus only a small neighborhood relative to the galaxy could even detect us.

2. We have not examined a significant portion of the universe, by any standard, especially at the time Fermi posited the paradox before we had SETI and similar operations. I think this is the fault of human hubris and overestimation of capability, particularly at the start of the nuclear era.

There is no paradox, just people somehow forgetting that all information transfer is bound by relativity.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,522
6,289
1,560
Fair enough if you say "the objects can defy known physics" but if you don't know what the objects themselves are (if they are even objects at all) then it's just a big load of nothing.
Wrong. Counterexamples are one of the most powerful form of proof in logic, because a single instance indicates a flawed assumption.

What we know says that objects cannot accelerate/decelerate like these objects do. What we know says that objects cannot enter water at high speeds and survive. Radar, sonar, and corroborating witnesses say that both of these phenomenon are happening, so an assumption is wrong. That is powerful.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
I'm puzzled

2004 Mexican military




There's lots of videos with these same "flying in formation" lights. They look like drones, but there are videos from the 1950s that shows very similar behavior

1952


The one from the 1950s is well documented with lots of military witnessing it. It gets stranger later in the vid when they start moving in formations.

Compare the above behavior to this as well:

 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: KorbinDallas

Gashtronomy

Member
Apr 19, 2019
2,439
3,033
390
I'm puzzled

2004 Mexican military




There's lots of videos with these same "flying in formation" lights. They look like drones, but there are videos from the 1950s that shows very similar behavior

1952


The one from the 1950s is well documented with lots of military witnessing it. It gets stranger later in the vid when they start moving in formations.

Compare the above behavior to this as well:

We've had drone technology since the sixties, providing sputnik was the first satellite in space
 

Gashtronomy

Member
Apr 19, 2019
2,439
3,033
390
The 2nd video was from 1952, and was a military investigation. And I'd love to see evidence of 1950s drone tech flying 700mph.
Flying at high speeds has never been hindered by the material or ability to fly at those speeds. The stumbling block has always been to keep the human pilot alive.

The TSR-2 developed by the british in the late 50's early 60's was so advanced for an aircraft that it wasn't financially viable to build, yet a lot of its' technologies ended up in later aircraft, all the way up to and including the 80's. It even had it's own version of a 'sat' nav and could fly missions automatically, including take-off and landing (something all planes have been able to do for decades).

The materials we use in modern day craft, and even ones of yesteryear, can easily pull 30G and travel above Mach 3. We don't see aircraft whizzing about at that speed though because it would liquify the insides of the pilot.

Having drones in the 50's may sound far fetched, but 10 years later, we put a rocket, a dog, a monkey and a man in space, carried out a space walk, launched a satellite and put a man on the moon.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
Flying at high speeds has never been hindered by the material or ability to fly at those speeds. The stumbling block has always been to keep the human pilot alive.

The TSR-2 developed by the british in the late 50's early 60's was so advanced for an aircraft that it wasn't financially viable to build, yet a lot of its' technologies ended up in later aircraft, all the way up to and including the 80's. It even had it's own version of a 'sat' nav and could fly missions automatically, including take-off and landing (something all planes have been able to do for decades).

The materials we use in modern day craft, and even ones of yesteryear, can easily pull 30G and travel above Mach 3. We don't see aircraft whizzing about at that speed though because it would liquify the insides of the pilot.

Having drones in the 50's may sound far fetched, but 10 years later, we put a rocket, a dog, a monkey and a man in space, carried out a space walk, launched a satellite and put a man on the moon.
I'd buy putting things into orbit over those objects any day of the week, some of them are literally flying underwater and tracked on radar over Mach 15 going back to the 1950s.

And has there ever been evidence of humans remotely guiding aircraft with that level of dexterity and speed in the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s?
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
Maybe that video is evidence of that.
Its insane if so, that many drones flying like in synchronous, going that fast in 1952. It would literally be the most impressive black ops program I've ever heard of by far.

It shows they're deep in development, at least ten years or more. If they showed me drones today like that in sync moving 700mph I'd be blown away. In 2019.

I also find it strange that credible sources have been describing these bright orbs going back to the early 1900s, even before the Wright brothers.

The other thing is the bizarre formations they have, it's the weird inverted rotation of a triangle that I constantly see that spans decades.
 
Last edited:

Gashtronomy

Member
Apr 19, 2019
2,439
3,033
390
I'd buy putting things into orbit over those objects any day of the week, some of them are literally flying underwater and tracked on radar over Mach 15 going back to the 1950s.
I believe in Aliens, or at least, a race or genus of advanced technology and intelligence to match or rival our own, be they terrestrial or extra-terrestrial in origin and location.

However, I've seen advanced technology, specifically aircraft, with my own two eyes, flying in the air, years before they were even mentioned in journals or theorised upon.

Look at the arms race of WW2. We entered the war with single prop-planes and left with jet engines, radar and nuclear weapons. The rates of progression of technology never slowed down, the milestones were just stopped from becoming public.

Another example; AI and computational power. In 2005, only the most advanced PC at the time could play Crysis in full balls-to-the-wall bells and whistles. Now, 14 years later, there are still consoles and PC's that struggle to run crisis. Why? Because the advancement of processing power and computers was artificially slowed down to the public, so that the major tech companies could load marketing and spy data on to all of our CPU's and GPU's. Yet, to the public, we are told that this is just the rate of progress.

TL;DR imagine a graph where X is time and Y is the rate of increase in technology. Imagine starting the line in the 50's and ending it today. Can you visualise the curvature and gradient of the line? Draw another graph, start in the 50's with technology we have today and guess where that line would be in 2019. That's the tech that is available, today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ikutachi

Ornlu

Member
Oct 31, 2018
1,303
1,533
430
TL;DR imagine a graph where X is time and Y is the rate of increase in technology. Imagine starting the line in the 50's and ending it today. Can you visualise the curvature and gradient of the line? Draw another graph, start in the 50's with technology we have today and guess where that line would be in 2019. That's the tech that is available, today.
That's never been how technology works, though. Things always go in huge jumps. One breakthrough leads to 1000's of others, as projects that were stalled or tabled make use of the original breakthrough. So to say that you can plot out advances in tech isn't quite right. There are no guarantees.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
I believe in Aliens, or at least, a race or genus of advanced technology and intelligence to match or rival our own, be they terrestrial or extra-terrestrial in origin and location.

However, I've seen advanced technology, specifically aircraft, with my own two eyes, flying in the air, years before they were even mentioned in journals or theorised upon.

Look at the arms race of WW2. We entered the war with single prop-planes and left with jet engines, radar and nuclear weapons. The rates of progression of technology never slowed down, the milestones were just stopped from becoming public.

Another example; AI and computational power. In 2005, only the most advanced PC at the time could play Crysis in full balls-to-the-wall bells and whistles. Now, 14 years later, there are still consoles and PC's that struggle to run crisis. Why? Because the advancement of processing power and computers was artificially slowed down to the public, so that the major tech companies could load marketing and spy data on to all of our CPU's and GPU's. Yet, to the public, we are told that this is just the rate of progress.

TL;DR imagine a graph where X is time and Y is the rate of increase in technology. Imagine starting the line in the 50's and ending it today. Can you visualise the curvature and gradient of the line? Draw another graph, start in the 50's with technology we have today and guess where that line would be in 2019. That's the tech that is available, today.
I get what you're saying, I just feel like people put to much stock in black projects, giving them near magical abilities. The SR71 had the greatest minds on the planet working on it, and it was ahead of it's for a secret black project, yet somehow I'm supposed to believe we had drones 10-15 years before it that were flying at over 10x its speed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gashtronomy

Airola

Member
Jun 25, 2015
3,484
1,863
475
Finland
I get what you're saying, I just feel like people put to much stock in black projects, giving them near magical abilities. The SR71 had the greatest minds on the planet working on it, and it was ahead of it's for a secret black project, yet somehow I'm supposed to believe we hat drones 10-15 years before it that wete flying at over 10x its speed.
So when you see weird technology flying around this planet, it's not a proof of people being able to build them here, but that it's much more likely that they have come from another galaxy?

I mean, I would think it would make more sense to first go through the options of all kinds of conspiracies and theories that revolve around this planet than to make the conclusion that it must be aliens. Like, I would find it much more likely that there is some super hyper secret group of people who build really advanced stuff and maybe have been able to do that for centuries, or even thousands of years. I would go through some Atlantis stuff with people being technologically super advanced and then mankind losing all of that in some freak accident or whatever, and a group of people would keep this secret knowledge alive, before I would make the conclusion that there is absolutely no way for humans to create anything like that alone without a contact to aliens from other galaxies.

EDIT:
I mean seriously, advanced technology seen in this planet requires evidence of it being possible to be built in the past. But at the same time we don't have any evidence that in any planet anywhere other than this planet even this technology that we currently have has been done, but we are ready to believe that this "super advanced" technology is from those planets instead of this.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
So when you see weird technology flying around this planet, it's not a proof of people being able to build them here, but that it's much more likely that they have come from another galaxy?

I mean, I would think it would make more sense to first go through the options of all kinds of conspiracies and theories that revolve around this planet than to make the conclusion that it must be aliens. Like, I would find it much more likely that there is some super hyper secret group of people who build really advanced stuff and maybe have been able to do that for centuries, or even thousands of years. I would go through some Atlantis stuff with people being technologically super advanced and then mankind losing all of that in some freak accident or whatever, and a group of people would keep this secret knowledge alive, before I would make the conclusion that there is absolutely no way for humans to create anything like that alone without a contact to aliens from other galaxies.

EDIT:
I mean seriously, advanced technology seen in this planet requires evidence of it being possible to be built in the past. But at the same time we don't have any evidence that in any planet anywhere other than this planet even this technology that we currently have has been done, but we are ready to believe that this "super advanced" technology is from those planets instead of this.

Another galaxy? Doesn't have to be. Scientists estimate there are 10 billion earth like planets in our galaxy alone, and there are billions of galaxies. It's not far fetch at all to imagine that drones from other planets are being sent here. We do the same and we're basically monkeys with cell phones.


Additionally, and more importantly, the Pentagon's own investigation deemed the technology seen by our military as "beyond our understanding of physics."

That's one hell of a statement.

For my brain, nothing adds up that its ours. With my understanding of technology I have to imagine the next possibility, human technology does not work for me at this point. Not even close. If there was something human to draw a parallel, I would. Again, the SR-71 is a great example of incredibly secret tech that the worlds best developed, yet somehow there was technology ten years before that was 10-15x faster? Fleets of them? How when we could barely get a single sr-71 off the runway at first? And why are militaries are all over the world reporting these objects? Why isn't it used in wars? We're sending our pilots to die in ultra outdated tech, why, when we could be using this incredible tech we've had since the 1940s? Are we're saving it for WW3? None of it adds up. To be clear, I never said any of this was proof of anything. It's just interesting.
 
Last edited:

Airola

Member
Jun 25, 2015
3,484
1,863
475
Finland
Another galaxy? Doesn't have to be. Scientists estimate there are 10 billion earth like planets in our galaxy alone, and there are billions of galaxies. It's not far fetch at all to imagine that drones from other planets are being sent here. We do the same and we're basically monkeys with cell phones.
I don't care if someone thinks they are from another galaxy or from this galaxy or from Mars or the other side of the Moon. The point is that for things that are going in this planet, evidence is required for the origins of those things coming from this planet, but not a single evidence is required for the idea that they are from somewhere else than this planet.

Additionally, and more importantly, the Pentagon's own investigation deemed the technology seen by our military as "beyond our understanding of physics."
That's one hell of a statement.
So it's easy to believe the people at Pentagon would deliberately lie and hide facts about real things coming from outer space, but they wouldn't deliberately lie about either the objects being that advanced or about them not understanding those physics?

There are lots of more plausible possibilities for both those objects and Pentagon's statements. Maybe it's technology they just haven't dared to use in war yet because of the possibility of them getting caught by the enemy and them learning about that technology. Or maybe the technology would reveal something very secret to the general public that they don't want us to know. Maybe that technology would help us get rid of certain problems but it would at the same time hurt some rich people and those rich people are in control. Or maybe it would be dangerous to reveal this possibility to general public because it would cause some general citizens with enough scientific knowledge to use and abuse either the technology or the new knowledge of physics.

I mean, the objects are here somewhere. Or at least they have been seen here somewhere. So why demand more evidence of them having originated from this planet than of them having originated from the outer space? At the very least we have evidence of them being here, but we don't have evidence of them being in the outer space.

I understand the will to speculate on things and I know it's really exciting and I love to hear about all kinds of wild hypotheses about them, but I don't understand how people would think there's more evidence of them being from outer space than from this planet because we certainly have even less evidence and knowledge of what technology can be built in some other planets than what we have of what can be built in this planet.

For my brain, nothing adds up that its ours. With my understanding of technology I have to imagine the next possibility, human technology does not work for me at this point. Not even close. If there was something human to draw a parallel, I would. Again, the SR-71 is a great example of incredibly secret tech that the worlds best developed, yet somehow there was technology ten years before that was 10-15x faster? Fleets of them? How when we could barely get a single sr-71 off the runway at first? And why are militaries are all over the world reporting these objects? Why isn't it used in wars? We're sending our pilots to die in ultra outdated tech, why, when we could be using this incredible tech we've had since the 1940s? Are we're saving it for WW3? None of it adds up. To be clear, I never said any of this was proof of anything. It's just interesting.
How do you know SR-71 was the "world's best"?
Maybe that was the best they have been able and or willing to reveal. Doesn't mean there aren't any other even more secret projects out there.
Maybe those better machines weren't or even aren't yet capable of bringing an actual human being along.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Yakuzakazuya

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
I don't care if someone thinks they are from another galaxy or from this galaxy or from Mars or the other side of the Moon. The point is that for things that are going in this planet, evidence is required for the origins of those things coming from this planet, but not a single evidence is required for the idea that they are from somewhere else than this planet.



So it's easy to believe the people at Pentagon would deliberately lie and hide facts about real things coming from outer space, but they wouldn't deliberately lie about either the objects being that advanced or about them not understanding those physics?

There are lots of more plausible possibilities for both those objects and Pentagon's statements. Maybe it's technology they just haven't dared to use in war yet because of the possibility of them getting caught by the enemy and them learning about that technology. Or maybe the technology would reveal something very secret to the general public that they don't want us to know. Maybe that technology would help us get rid of certain problems but it would at the same time hurt some rich people and those rich people are in control. Or maybe it would be dangerous to reveal this possibility to general public because it would cause some general citizens with enough scientific knowledge to use and abuse either the technology or the new knowledge of physics.

I mean, the objects are here somewhere. Or at least they have been seen here somewhere. So why demand more evidence of them having originated from this planet than of them having originated from the outer space? At the very least we have evidence of them being here, but we don't have evidence of them being in the outer space.

I understand the will to speculate on things and I know it's really exciting and I love to hear about all kinds of wild hypotheses about them, but I don't understand how people would think there's more evidence of them being from outer space than from this planet because we certainly have even less evidence and knowledge of what technology can be built in some other planets than what we have of what can be built in this planet.



How do you know SR-71 was the "world's best"?
Maybe that was the best they have been able and or willing to reveal. Doesn't mean there aren't any other even more secret projects out there.
Maybe those better machines weren't or even aren't yet capable of bringing an actual human being along.


I've already responded to these points in this thread. Even the one in the previous post I basically restated things again.

The evidence of it being from another world is if there isn't technology from this planet that is remotely comparable. That doesnt mean there isn't other options like ancient civilizations, spiritual, interdimensional, or whatever. I just find those less likely. Even the secret tech is an option but it just goes against all logic too.

The point with the Pentagon is they've been stating for years that they knew nothing etc, very silent. And to suddenly come out for the first time absolutely threw everyone for a loop. But they were forced to because of the leaks. Thats why its huge. Other governments have already been saying these things, so why is everyone lying about the same thing?

The SR71 in itself was incredibly advanced. Look at it up, it was shrouded in secrecy and far ahead of it's time. The other thing, it was stupid expensive to design and test. Why would we spend budget breaking funds on ultra secret tech when theres supposedly other secret tech decades already more advanced? Makes no sense. Even today those same 1950s ufos could run circles around our best fighter jets in 2019 and theres not a jet on the horizon that comes close. But for some reason we can't use any if that ufo tech for fear of it being captured, yet they still fly it around constantly all over the world. Apparently they're not worried at all about it falling into the wrong hands.
 
Last edited:

Airola

Member
Jun 25, 2015
3,484
1,863
475
Finland
The evidence of it being from another world is if there isn't technology from this planet that is remotely comparable. That doesnt mean there isn't other options like ancient civilizations, spiritual, interdimensional, or whatever. I just find those less likely. Even the secret tech is an option but it just goes against all logic too.
Well, you have the right on whatever you think is the most logical way to think.

The point with the Pentagon is they've been stating for years that they knew nothing etc, very silent. And to suddenly come out for the first time absolutely threw everyone for a loop. But they were forced to because of the leaks. Thats why its huge. Other governments have already been saying these things, so why is everyone lying about the same thing?
On the other hand, you were ready to believe they were bullshitting before but you aren't ready to believe they are bullshitting now?
If it's their own tech that they absolutely wouldn't want people to find about, of course they would tell whatever story would make people think it's not their tech.

The SR71 in itself was incredibly advanced. Look at it up, it was shrouded in secrecy and far ahead of it's time. The other thing, it was stupid expensive to design and test. Why would we spend budget breaking funds on ultra secret tech when theres supposedly other secret tech decades already more advanced? Makes no sense. Even today those same 1950s ufos could run circles around our best fighter jets in 2019 and theres not a jet on the horizon that comes close. But for some reason we can't use any if that ufo tech for fear of it being captured, yet they still fly it around constantly all over the world. Apparently they're not worried at all about it falling into the wrong hands.
Flying constantly all over the world?
There aren't that many sightings of them.

And again, they could have other long term projects they just can't use yet in the form they are intended to be used in future. They might have to test the mobility of them in various circumstances and then they'll get them back to gather the data from those flights and they'll make them more fit to whatever they are wanting them to be.

And who knows, maybe they are using them already the way they are intending to use them. Who knows if they are some super hyper secret data collectors or spies or if they spread some whatever poison around or whatever else.
 

Hado

Member
Aug 13, 2015
2,925
1,329
565
I don't get it, is OP working for the Pentagon or why does the title say Pentagon official
 

Super Mario

Mario Mario
Nov 12, 2016
1,435
1,670
545
If you have any idea how big space is (or even to the extent we think it is), being alone is impossible. We estimate that there are over 100 billion galaxies out there, with that number likely being far greater. That's galaxies too, not just planets. There's 200 billion stars in OUR galaxy alone. There's probably even life in our galaxy.

It's fascinating to even think about. There's likely life forms out there that are less advanced than us, some more advanced than us, some that may defy everything we know.

We love to confuse that every time we hear "UFO" that it is about extra-terrestrial.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
1,370
1,318
385
Well, you have the right on whatever you think is the most logical way to think.



On the other hand, you were ready to believe they were bullshitting before but you aren't ready to believe they are bullshitting now?
If it's their own tech that they absolutely wouldn't want people to find about, of course they would tell whatever story would make people think it's not their tech.



Flying constantly all over the world?
There aren't that many sightings of them.

And again, they could have other long term projects they just can't use yet in the form they are intended to be used in future. They might have to test the mobility of them in various circumstances and then they'll get them back to gather the data from those flights and they'll make them more fit to whatever they are wanting them to be.

And who knows, maybe they are using them already the way they are intending to use them. Who knows if they are some super hyper secret data collectors or spies or if they spread some whatever poison around or whatever else.

The Pentagon report now aligns with other many government stances, but they were forced into that position. Thats why its important
Not saying they were liars but they were silent. They even had a 22 million dollar program that studied the phenomenon. Not only that NASA recently completed a 2 million dollar study(before their budget increase) that's goal was to determine the effect on the population if they were to announce the existence of an intelligent race outside of earth.

There are actually lots of those orb sightings that date back to the late 1800s all over the world. Its nothing new, but since the inception of radar, cameras, and airplanes they've gotten way more frequent and suddenly their all black projects for many people.

The other thing about black projects is none of them have seen the tech trickle down to them. We'd just rather break our military budget for the last 70years than to use this tech at all. The SR71 had a specific problem were the wings would heat so much they would warp. Can't even use the metals on these hypersonic secret UFOs either.
They're not even to build hybrid propulsion based off these things.

But yeah if the argument is we're afraid of losing them, they're spotted on Russia often. They're our enemies and possess some of fastest antiaircraft missiles on the planet.

They've been testing these things for some 70 years? They were outperforming our best 70 years ago. Seems they have it down completely considering our most advanced fighters still don't hold a candle after dozens of iterations, even today.
 
Last edited: