Best ufo photos ever taken

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Mar 6, 2016.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    I was a little suspicious about that one. But the reports from several different locations made it sound authentic. It would've taken a massive coordination of numerous people. Or else one person claiming to be many people.

    Here's a skeptic's account:

     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2016
    ajanta likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,586
    Yeah yeah.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
  8. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,808
    These are the best ufo photos ever taken are they?

    The best ones here have already been exposed as fakes. One or two of the others show clear signs of photoshop fakery (e.g. post #2). And the rest are the usual blurry lights without context.

    Ho hum.
     
    ajanta and Russ_Watters like this.
  10. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    no he is saying, why are they always human designs--think about it-- why are all these UFO's anthropocentric in design and function?
     
  11. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    What do you mean anthropocentric? Why wouldn't a nonhuman being have use for the aerodynamic saucer-shaped craft. Ever throw a Frisbee? Bingo.
     
  12. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    The only one shown to be fake was that weird one over California. The others show no evidence of photoshopping and are quite clear. But we all know no evidence will ever satisfy you. Ho hum.
     
  13. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    exactly.. i suggest looking into " anthropocentric. "
    MR, i do not have a problem with you exploring such thoughts-- in my opinion, you are on a " right path " but you need to, simply, be able to decipher between the shiit from reality. from what i have seen from you is simply this, that you need to work on.
     
  14. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    What do you think ufos are?
     
  15. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    wrong path..
    MR, again, " anthropocentric "
     
  16. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Why would a craft designed to travel through the vacuum of space need to be aerodynamic...? Makes no sense, given there is no air in space, and an aerodynamic shape would result in numerous disadvantages in exo-atmospheric control. Something more akin to a sphere or cylinder would be far better - optimum internal volume compared to surface area, ability to rotate to induce artificial gravity, etc.

    For that matter - why does it seem as though these "UFO's" tend to bank or otherwise follow aerodynamic and inertial characteristics when moving...? To cross interstellar distances, technology would need a way to reasonably overcome these limitations simply to allow for sufficient acceleration/deceleration without splattering the occupants.
     
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    Obviously because it is also designed to navigate in planetary atmospheres. Duh!
     
  18. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Which makes no sense - navigating a planetary atmosphere would ALSO mean escaping said planets gravitational field... simple math says that a dedicated craft for interstellar travel and atmospheric travel would make FAR more sense... the specific impulse required to break atmosphere vs the long duration burn required to achieve interstellar velocities, for example.

    Again, an aerodynamic interstellar craft doesn't make sense.

    There's also the question of, how do these tiny little UFO's contain and/or produce the necessary supplies for such a voyage?
     
  19. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    MR, again, " anthropocentric "
     
  20. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    You have no idea what kind of propulsion system these craft have. Going by their sudden acceleration and speeds that seem to defy mass and inertia in some way, the shape probably doesn't matter anyway. We have examples of cylinder shaped ufos, spheres, and even cubes. And why would a saucer escaping an atmosphere at an angle be less effective than a rocket going straight up? It wouldn't be. The saucer shape makes perfect sense for atmospheric navigation.
     
  21. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    MR, again, " anthropocentric "
     
  22. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Why would they NEED to have a shape designed for atmospheric navigation?
     
  23. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,129
    LOL! Figure it out...
     

Share This Page