UFOs (UAPs): Explanations?

Yep. And demanding higher standards of proof for other people than he allows for his own ... stuff.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Definitely has to reach COMPELLING

ie seen on YouTube

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Whatever makes you feel better about yourself..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So why do you keep posting to this thread?

(And why am I responding to you??)

 

If the cause of UFOs is currently unknown, and if we don't know how many unknown explanations the category of the 'unknown' might contain, then we arguably can't say how many hypothetical explanations UFOs might have.

We don't know that the explanation for UFOs is "intelligent beings", let alone how old those purely hypothetical beings might be. (They may be younger, but got off to a quicker start.) UFOs might be some kind of unknown physical phenomenon and have nothing to do with intelligence. We don't really know that UFOs are technology, machines in our current conceptualization. They might be alive in their own right, organisms of some unknown sort.

Those are just science-fiction speculations and nothing more than that. But they are useful for expanding the possibility space in our own imaginations, the source from which our proposed explanations come.

I'd give that one an exceedingly low likelihood. The Germans had very early ballistic missiles and jet planes, but nothing like the technology that the 'tic-tacs' display, assuming that they are indeed technology.

Yes, that's my preferred option. I do have plentiful doubts about it though.

That might explain how an object can seemingly instantaneously dissappear from the field of view. But it would seem to suggest instantaneous acceleration. No known propulsion technology can achieve that. And the G-loads would be tremendous. That in turn would suggest that, assuming that the observed accelerations are real, that either a) what is observed is robotic, or at least isn't organic as we understand it (subject to being squished), or b) that somebody/something has an inertia dampening field. The latter is a science-fiction possibility that's way beyond anything contemplated by present-day physics. Very unlikely in my estimation.

Another viable possibility is that the performance of these things has been mischaracterized. Dave offered up that one earlier regarding the 'tic-tacs' and I can't dismiss it.

 

I spend a fair portion of each day with my feet one foot higher than my head. What's your excuse?

 

Anti-gravity technology would do it just fine . To negate any acceleration forces . No G-forces expertienced .

And it is a known technology from the late 1920's , T.T.Brown .

 

Skylark of Valeron

 

This will probably be a futile effort. Nevertheless.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Townsend_Brown#Anti-gravity_research
Last para under that heading reads:

"A physicist invited to observe Brown's disk device in the early 50s noted during the demonstration that its motivation force was the well known phenomenon of "electric wind", and not anti-gravity, saying “I’m afraid these gentlemen played hooky from their high school physics classes….”[10] Scientists who have since studied Brown's devices have not found any anti-gravity effect, and have attributed the noticed motive force to the more well understood phenomenon of ionic drift or "ion wind" from the air particles, some of which still remained even when Brown put his device inside a vacuum chamber"

Are you prepared to let go on 'electrogravitics?

 

Dude, River thinks the Moon's low gravity is due to its low rotation and that "cold energy" is conducted between galaxies. Good luck getting him to be logical about anything.

 

Yes the odds are small but just maybe he has only ever read pro Townsend articles (or YouTube vids) i.e. misrepresentations. This is a once off effort.

 

( You know that T.T.Browns' research was stolen by the military .... and improvements could have been made to his research ) .

Not yet , it was an early start . I understand what your saying .

I'm sure alot more research has been done by now and on going , on anti-gravity technology . And many more theories as to how it could be done .

These craft are doing extremely quick accelerations and hover . Right now the minimum technology that would explain this ability , would be anti-gravity .

 

Like 'Nazi Bells' for instance? Strange indeed that no airforce anywhere has replaced their conventional aircraft with 'game-changing antigravity tech' that would give them a huge strategic advantage. Ditto for commercial airlines.

 

And you can understand the secrecy in not divulging this technology . For the military .

The petro-camps , would not like this technology common place for their obvious self interest monantary reasons .

 

It's an oft repeated theme but won't wash. Any nation possessing such tech would have to rapidly develop it and deploy it. Because foreign intelligence agencies are very good at stealing info. THAT is a proven fact. Hence arms race in 'antigravity tech' would inevitably follow and it could not remain hidden. Clinging to conventional jet and rocket tech would be particularly stupid.

I will translate that as meaning fossil fuel industry. Nope. Same general competitive advantage pressures will apply.

 

Any Nation that has the funds and freedom to develope this technology .

And that race for superior anti-gravity technology would be held secret . Between each country that can .

 

Yes

There are billions if not trillions of dollars wraped up in reaserch and exploration in the petro industry .

To your last statement ;

Why and how ?

 

I see

Interesting , more when the full context is revealed . And the question .

No post # , just gossip .