41 replies to this topic

[BrandOfAmber]

Well put Hazzard.  That's Science!

-Brand

[bmk1245]

Why we can't see something like


Where those "huge motherships", with all sorts of portholes and appendages, so popular a while ago, suddenly disappeared?

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

bmk1245, on 19 March 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

Why we can't see something like


Where those "huge motherships", with all sorts of portholes and appendages, so popular a while ago, suddenly disappeared?

Perhaps the ETs have more sense than to try to fly great big motherships in the atmosphere and gravitational pull of even a relatively small planet such as ours. Perhaps their technology has developed. Perhaps Adamski and Meier and friends made it all up.
Who can say.

[dlonewolf85]

I think an UFO doesn't actually have to be extraterrestrial and carrying aliens inside them. The 'UFO' that was captured on film could also be like some advanced jet or some other man-made flying object, about which a government, which could be both domestic or foreign, hasn't disclosed any information to the public as yet. I would say it is a possibility. And also, it doesn't really prove that ET has ever visited our planet.

[DBunker]

dlonewolf85, on 19 March 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

I think an UFO doesn't actually have to be extraterrestrial and carrying aliens inside them. The 'UFO' that was captured on film could also be like some advanced jet or some other man-made flying object, about which a government, which could be both domestic or foreign, hasn't disclosed any information to the public as yet. I would say it is a possibility. And also, it doesn't really prove that ET has ever visited our planet.

So you are willing to consider all that, but not the simplest explanation, insects flying infront of the camera?

[CRIPTIC CHAMELEON]

Where's the other footage.?

[DBunker]

CRIPTIC CHAMELEON, on 19 March 2012 - 09:50 PM, said:

Where's the other footage.?

Dont you mean alleged footage?

Edited by DBunker, 19 March 2012 - 09:54 PM.

[dlonewolf85]

DBunker, on 19 March 2012 - 09:43 PM, said:

So you are willing to consider all that, but not the simplest explanation, insects flying infront of the camera?

If you didn't get, that is the exactly the point I was trying to make. I am saying that this 'object' seen in this video could easily be anything but a spaceship from outer space.

[Oppono Astos]

This is down there with Richard Lennie's claims videos of repeated UFO attacks on NASA shuttles during launches - any rational person would recognize them as bugs, but...

[DONTEATUS]

Did you not see the guy in the grey shirt flying the R/C plane around the field ?

[highdesert50]

Impressive ... since this was an airshow, the airspace would be rather tightly controlled. I would assume, then, that this is a near-field object perhaps a small UAV akin to the old Sikorsky Cypher or similar model aircraft or, as mentioned, maybe insects. Any large aircraft moving at the perceived distance and speed would have likely caused a sonic boom unless it was capable of bending natural physical laws. Pursuing this further, it seems implausible that a military entity would want to give its hand away demonstrating such an aircraft. Similarly, why would a truly alien entity, with demonstrably advanced technology, want to display its might at an airshow -- an act that could be interpreted as potentially aggressive.

[AlienDan]

HAHA I can't believe anyone thinks this might be a spaceship. It's insects flying in front of the camera.

[Mentalcase]

This one keeps surfacing huh? I wonder.  

[booNyzarC]

Mentalcase, on 20 March 2012 - 03:10 AM, said:

This one keeps surfacing huh? I wonder.  

Billy Meier keeps surfacing too...  don't wonder too much.

[Mentalcase]

booNyzarC, on 20 March 2012 - 03:23 AM, said:

Billy Meier keeps surfacing too...  don't wonder too much.

I tell you everything that is really nothing, and nothing of what is everything, do not be fooled by what I am saying.  Please listen carefully and try to hear what I am not saying.