Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Bionic Bigfoot

Why do you believe in UFO's and aliens?

258 posts in this topic

Depending on the distance would it be expected to see the propellers in the first place? Especially if one is anticipating a propeller to be at the front of the aircraft instead of at the rear?

I'm afraid the door isn't completely closed on the idea that he could have seen some kind of flying wing. I'm not saying that's definitely what he saw, but these points you are raising don't suffice to rule it out.

I will give you credit for absolutely dogged persistence once you get an idea in your head.

I can find evidence that the flying wing only left its test area in California one time, and that's when it was flown to Washington DC in February 1949, at President Truman's request.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDIQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.insidesocal.com%2Fhistory%2F2011%2F04%2Fnorthrops-flying-wing.html&ei=z22FULncIJPw8AT92oDACw&usg=AFQjCNF5ckvP-BZCWKIk8esDRpVmdKs7bw&sig2=vwVlWGElk87oO8Kw1gc50g

Edited by TheMacGuffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack Northrop said that the flying wing program was actually cancelled arbitrarily in October 1949, because he refused to follow Stuart Symington's instructions to merge his company with another one.

"According to Northrop, when he refused Symington's demand that he merge his company with Convair, builder of the B-36, Symington shut down the Flying Wing program, despite the revolutionary design and often extraordinary performance of the XB-35s and, later, the YB-49s. Northrop died on Feb. 18, 1981 at 85, convinced until the end that his design had been stymied by short-sighted political machinations."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The B-2 Stealth bomber is of course a direct descendant of the Northrop Flying Wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

were there any other witnesses to the 'non-disk' / 'wing' object which arnold had observed?

this was part of some flap right?

Tulsa_Saucers_July12_1947.jpg

:o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were nine of them. There were only ever two of the Northrops flying at any one time, and with all the problems as mentioned, they never went that far from the test bases at either Northrops' factory or at Muroc, so why would they go on a sightseeing trip to the Cascade Mountains? And so far as I can ascertain*, the Hortens were never actually flown in the US; and certainly not nine of them flying around in formation. Therefore, I think the "secret Flying Wing aircraft" theory can be fairly safely put to bed.

* word of the day

For someone who normally seems quite ready to entertain some pretty wild speculations at times, you seem uncommonly closed off to considering them if the subject of speculation is prosaic in nature. Rather inconsistent isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For someone who normally seems quite ready to entertain some pretty wild speculations at times, you seem uncommonly closed off to considering them if the subject of speculation is prosaic in nature. Rather inconsistent isn't it?

I'm merely trying to apply the same standards of criticalness to Rational explanations as are rigidly applied to wild speculations. There are a lot of questions regarding this explanation that leave a lot of questions unanswered, and I'm afraid that the idea of secret aircraft flying about that no one has ever heard anything of since, or that pilots may have gone scooting about all over the United States on unauthorised excursions in extremely expnesive prototype aircraft, leaving no record of their doing so, is does not seem to supply a satisfactory explanation to me. And where did those other eight aircraft come from?

Can a question leave a question unanswered? Anyway, you know what I mean.

Anyway, what are these wild speculations to which you infer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, what are these wild speculations to which you infer?

ufo6.jpg

:unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Arnold never saw that. It was the Maury Island hoax,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm merely trying to apply the same standards of criticalness to Rational explanations as are rigidly applied to wild speculations. There are a lot of questions regarding this explanation that leave a lot of questions unanswered, and I'm afraid that the idea of secret aircraft flying about that no one has ever heard anything of since, or that pilots may have gone scooting about all over the United States on unauthorised excursions in extremely expnesive prototype aircraft, leaving no record of their doing so, is does not seem to supply a satisfactory explanation to me. And where did those other eight aircraft come from?

Can a question leave a question unanswered? Anyway, you know what I mean.

I don't see anything wrong with applying the same standards of scrutiny to all speculations regarding this phenomena at all. In fact, I encourage it completely. And you are just as entitled to an opinion about any given idea as anyone else.

I believe that I've clearly qualified my mention of similarities between flying wing designs of the day and the good Mr. Arnold's sighting as just an interesting observation. To extend this into a realm of hypothesis would require a bit more detail I think, but that doesn't dissuade me from considering the idea from a purely speculative standpoint. It seems to me that such ideas can be the very spark needed in order to lead to more substantial answers, even if the initial thought wasn't necessarily the correct one.

I'm just a bit surprised by how opposed you seem to be when speculations involving things closer to earth are even mentioned, like plasma and aircraft for example. It doesn't seem to me that you are applying this standard equally across the board, at least not from a visible sense. You may have similar reservations about ET conclusions, but just don't voice them as often?

Anyway, what are these wild speculations to which you infer?

Perhaps I shouldn't have said "wild speculations" so much as your affinity for the value of speculative thought. You've certainly made many statements over time which indicate that you value speculations quite strongly. As an example, here are a few which I tracked down by an advanced search where "speculate" is the word and you are the poster...

We're going to have to be willing to explore sci fi and fantasy ideas in order to make any sense of any of these subjects, don't you see? You're never going to find out anything about extraterrestrial life, or about any mysteries, if we just insist on restricting ourselves to "what we know to be possible". Really, we know very, very little, and we're never going to expand what we do know if we just stick to that attitude. In short, we're going to have to be willing to consider "fantasies" - we're going to have to be willing to speculate - if we're going to make any progress in investigating any phenomenomena. We're just restricting ourselves so much that we might not be able to see something that's literally under our nose if we just insist on only considering "what we know to be true".

people never seem to understand that when talking with advanced technology, you're going to have to (gasps in horror) speculate about things that the Hard Nosed might dismiss as the mere stuff of fantasy, do they? If we're talking about technology far in advance of ours, then obviously we're going to have to consider things that we might think are just the stuff of Fantasy. We would never make any progress at all if we just stuck in the mud of insisting that only what we know to be possible is possible.

Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Einstein.. all of whom were willing to look beyond what we knew already, and what the accepted paradigm was, and make a leap that everyone else dismissed as wild speculation, based on what their researches had led them to. I don't know why you seem to be hung up on this idea that i've ever tried to insist that anything is fact, beyond the fact that sticking to what we know and not being willing to speculate will never make any progress.

yes, it is psychye's whole point, and I'm completely mystified why he and others seem angered and/or annoyed by it, because, as I keep trying to say but people either don't, or deliberately choose not to, understand, we're never going to make any progress if we Stick to What we Know. That, surely, has been proved time and time again throughout history. Of course it's an "imaginary solution", (and i can hear your nose curling in a sneer as you type it (how can you hear a nose curling? it's a talent I have)), but heavens, that's what we need, rather than just repetitively saying over and over again "well, it can't be proved", or "there's no evidence", and folding one's arms huffily. heavens above, i'm not trying to insist that it's a theory that everyone should accept, I wouldn't even call it an Hypothesis, it's just an idea which I think is interesting. Some people seem to have a problem with that, but, as I said before, i can only feel sorry for them. Please try to understand this; I'm not trying to insist that everyone should accept these speculations as a new scientific paradigm, but on the other hand i do get Shirty (© psyche) when people insist dogmatically that we must not Speculate and we must Stick to What we Know. That seems, if I may say, a little arrogant.

Some of these seem to be pretty emphatic defenses of speculative thought in general. Wouldn't you agree?

In my opinion ET isn't the only possible unknown we should consider when examining these cases. We should also consider unknown knowns, meaning that if the observed phenomena closely resembles something that we can recognize (like aircraft for example) we shouldn't toss this possibility out the window just because we can't find the specific airplane(s) and pilot(s) who may have been responsible.

As a case in point, just because we have nothing on paper that says those 9 YB-35 aircraft in the photograph had been flown, it doesn't necessarily mean that they hadn't been. Don't forget that we are talking about the very same government, military, and intelligence agencies which UFOlogy is more than willing to point out as secretive when trying to sell us on the idea that they are hiding some kind of ET visitation reality. How much easier would it be to hide documentation related to 9 YB-35 (or some other kind of flying wing) taking a test flight? I'd say that it would be far easier to hide something like that than hiding a hypothetical alien visitation reality. There is also good reason to entertain the possibility that just such an exercise could have easily been performed as a sort of psychological experiment to determine just how the general public might react to something like that.

Does that truly seem extravagantly far fetched to you? Moreso than extraterrestrial visitors?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a case in point, just because we have nothing on paper that says those 9 YB-35 aircraft in the photograph had been flown, it doesn't necessarily mean that they hadn't been. Don't forget that we are talking about the very same government, military, and intelligence agencies which UFOlogy is more than willing to point out as secretive when trying to sell us on the idea that they are hiding some kind of ET visitation reality. How much easier would it be to hide documentation related to 9 YB-35 (or some other kind of flying wing) taking a test flight? I'd say that it would be far easier to hide something like that than hiding a hypothetical alien visitation reality. There is also good reason to entertain the possibility that just such an exercise could have easily been performed as a sort of psychological experiment to determine just how the general public might react to something like that.

Does that truly seem extravagantly far fetched to you? Moreso than extraterrestrial visitors?

The reason they were grounded, just to address this point for now (I may get back to the more philosophical questions when I've got time) was because the original propeller engines were unsatisfactory. Therefore Northrop would, I'd have thought, have been very unlikely to decide to get together enough engines (each of them needing four engines) just to make them airworthy so they could, for some reason, fly them secretly and never tell anyone. That would be the kind of budget wasting excercise that, oh, only Government departments could think about. And why would they want to do that, if the design as it was had already proven to be unsatisfactory? It makes no sense at all, and until nine other suitable candidates can be found, then I think that we can rule the YB-35, at any rate, out as a candidate. And remember the size of these things; 172 ft wingspan. Can you imagine what nine of those would look like in formation? I'm sure someone other than Kenneth Arnold would've noticed that. And i'm pretty sure that, as a pilot, even a private one, Arnold would follow developments in aviation technology, and it wasn't as if the YB-35 was exactly secret; this was long before Area 51, so I dare say that he'd recognise a YB-35 for what it was if he saw one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About a year ago, I woke up thinking my mom was opening my door to check on me as it was around 11 am. Instead I looked up to see a solid black figure, peering at me through my cracked door. I was shocked and in so much fear I could hardly move or speak. It vanished right as it was aware I knew of its presence. Some would argue that this is sleep paralysis, however, my door remained open. Seconds later my mom did come check on me, and persisted to ask me why my door was open. This changed my sleep patterns for life and my mind races to find the ultimate truth.

I have done a lot of reading about UFOs and ET contact and do think that this could be been an encounter with a being from another dimension! It mustve been a sign pushing me to start the research...

Now my spirituality and outlooks on life and reality have all changed for the good.

This is my first post, I hope to learn a lot here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boon, for whatever reason, you are one of the hardest of the hard core "skeptics", and nothing I have ever posted makes the slightest dent in that.

I don't know what would. You tell me.

funny, huh?

If your German scientist had instead said,, "There are no Extra Terrestials", he would have hugged you and praised you.

don't need no "tangible evidence" for that stsatement, right?

the neggs play a twisted game. "Don't listen to the man behind the white curtain!!"

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About a year ago, I woke up thinking my mom was opening my door to check on me as it was around 11 am. Instead I looked up to see a solid black figure, peering at me through my cracked door. I was shocked and in so much fear I could hardly move or speak. It vanished right as it was aware I knew of its presence. Some would argue that this is sleep paralysis, however, my door remained open. Seconds later my mom did come check on me, and persisted to ask me why my door was open. This changed my sleep patterns for life and my mind races to find the ultimate truth.

I have done a lot of reading about UFOs and ET contact and do think that this could be been an encounter with a being from another dimension! It mustve been a sign pushing me to start the research...

Now my spirituality and outlooks on life and reality have all changed for the good.

This is my first post, I hope to learn a lot here!

Wow! A response to the original question. Thanks, and welcome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just trying to hold you to your own standards here, Boon, since you basically don't believe what these people are saying about ETs and all that.

They are saying that they did know something about ETs, and you are replying that they haven't convinced you. You want physical evidence and things like that. All right.

Lord Mounbatten did indeed say that he was aware of such evidence and that the aliens were small humanoids. I don't KNOW exactly how he was aware of that, but it may very well have been through his high-level military contacts. That would be my best guess, but I don't know.

All these old records and statements from the 1940s and 1950s, which are actually a lot better than anything we have from more recent times, are the key to the whole UFO issue.

You really ought to write an e-book. :tu:

not joking.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

funny, huh?

If your German scientist had instead said,, "There are no Extra Terrestials", he would have hugged you and praised you.

don't need no "tangible evidence" for that stsatement, right?

the neggs play a twisted game. "Don't listen to the man behind the white curtain!!"

Typical of you to mis-characterize my point of view and/or how I would hypothetically respond to something. Once again you're quite mistaken, but I suspect you should be getting rather used to that by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

funny, huh?

If your German scientist had instead said,, "There are no Extra Terrestials", he would have hugged you and praised you.

There's no question about it. Boon and the rest of them would have thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread if he had something like that. They'd have said he studied the question for years and rightfully concluded that no ETs were here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really ought to write an e-book. :tu:

not joking.

Thanks, although most of what I say has already been said before. There are lots of people who know these same things I do, and more,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, although most of what I say has already been said before. There are lots of people who know these same things I do, and more,

it may have been said before but putting it all together in one collection would be priceless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It simply doesn't make any sence that we are the only planet among billions of galaxys of planets that have life on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no question about it. Boon and the rest of them would have thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread if he had something like that. They'd have said he studied the question for years and rightfully concluded that no ETs were here.

I would appreciate it if you didn't project your fantasies about how you think I would respond to something as though it is actually the way I would respond to something. Can you afford me at least that much respect McG?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would appreciate it if you didn't project your fantasies about how you think I would respond to something as though it is actually the way I would respond to something. Can you afford me at least that much respect McG?

Maybe you'll surprise me one of these days and actually say once in a while "By gum, there just might be something to that one". LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you'll surprise me one of these days and actually say once in a while "By gum, there just might be something to that one". LOL

The most perplexing part of this is that I've said that about quite a few cases actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Arnold never saw that.

so, since you didn't resppond to my other post, i'll ask you directly, were there any other witnesses to the 'non-disk' / 'wing' object which arnold had described?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That there may have been large formations of aircraft flying about that only one or two examples were known to have ever flown. That seems rather fanciful to me.

I think it is a big call to say you are across every R & D test associated with every flying wing and blended body design and able to say with certainty, "Yes, Nine Flying wings have never flown at once". With versions ranging from propellor driven to rocket driven it seems that more examples exist than have been discussed here.

If this design had been evaulated, either by the Americans or anybody else, in the late 1940s, it would have been public knowledge long before now. There'd be absolutely no reason to keep the very existence of it secret still, unless we really do want to start supposing "secret" air forces and so on, which really is just as fanciful as supposing the occasional visit from extraterrestrials.

I do not believe that is the case. We do not need secret air forces to keep an aircraft under wraps. One aspect of design is all that is required to put a blanket over a project.

See above; any experimental aircraft that may have been flying in the late 1940s would be public knowledge long before now, unless we really do want to start supposing "secret" air forces and so on, which really is just as fanciful as supposing the occasional visit from extraterrestrials.

The aircraft are public knowledge, I propose that all aspects of R & D are not. Why would they be? The candidate exists, you just say we have no record of nine flying at once. Other than that, the description fits very well, and even Kenneth Arnold felt they were ours. I echo Boon in that I do not know of such a flight, but I would like to know if it was not these how Arnold managed to draw one? Unless you are saying that aliens happened to come up with the same design the Horten Brothers did?

I'm afraid it is, almost as fancful as an unofficial display by the CAF Snowbirds as an explanation for the Phonix Lights .

I do not see how. Snowbirds exist. Flying wings exist. We have both of them right here, and evidence to tie them in to the physical locations of the events. That I cannot provide you with the actual flight plans I do not feel paints them out of the picture, and offers an opening for an ET craft?

I guess a healthy imagination could make such a connection, but I do not see any rationalisation of the proposal.

The point is not that a trial run may have happened without being recorded, it's that that number of that type of aircraft were never in the air at the same time, and what test flights there were were conducted either near to the factory in California, or from secure USAAF locations, for the exact reason that they wouldn't want any unauthorised observations of them.

Have you scoured the history if the N-1M? It made over 200 test flights. Were all of Arnolds "flying discs" exactly the same?

What about McChord AFB? The first test flight was from Dry Bed, were all flights from the same location, and what were the ranges?

As observed above, those are the uncompleted YB-35s lined up outside the Northrop factory, waiting scrapping.

And two went on to become jet propelled prototypes. As Boon said, Arnold drew a Ho. How did he manage that?

ET seems to be following us very closely for the ETH to be considered? They make spaceships out of stuff that looks just like Tin Foil and Balsa wood at Roswell, and two weeks earlier they were copying flying wings. Rather amazing that an advanced species would be so similar to us aesthetically.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The youtube link is to James Fox's movie "Out of the Blue". If you haven't seen it, I recommend you do. If you can't access youtube it would be worth your while to rent the movie.

Ohh, OK, thanks. I do have that one at home.

Can you not set parental control on your home computer so your kids can't view it but you can? IIRC correctly restricting their access was your concern.

I had the router set to block it. One rule for all seemed vary fair, as it was not a unanimous decision.

Anyway, it's a good movie giving a rundown on the current concerns about UFO's and the secrecy surrounding their existence.

I have watched it, but only once. I thought 50 Years of Denial was much better personally.

I believe that the rest of the world (outside) US either has the same knowledge/contact with ET's/UFO's or they don't. If they do, they say nothing and if they have no contact, they still say nothing in either case it gives the appearance that they do. In other words they just apply same/similar secrecy rules as does the US. It's the old "keep them guessing" game in the interest of national security. I sort of answered that above. Countries other than USA, use the same "smoke and mirrors" policy with regard to UFO's/ET's perhaps to make the US think they have the same information, whether they do or not. I think most countries would have the same agenda relating to this subject.

Do not countries that are claiming to be open and honest about the UFO phenomena falsify this though? Brazil for instance claims it has opened it's files.

Examples:

France opens up its UFO files

France became the first country to open its files on UFOs on Thursday when the national space agency unveiled a website documenting more than 1600 sightings spanning five decades.

LINK

Brazilian Air Force Opens Its UFO Files

In accordance with the important of campaign UFO: Freedom of Information Now and publisher of Magazine UFO J. Gevaerd, the representatives of the Aeronautics had been serious, transparent and considerate how much to the claims of the ufologists. "This was a first contact with the officers, new chances will appear and who knows in a next future will be able to establish partnerships to organize research related to Phenomenon UFO.

LINK

And then we have the Disclosure project assuring us that disclosure is just around the corner.

UFO FILES - COUNTRIES RELEASING

LINK

I agree, the skies/outer space are watched closely, however I believe that extraterrestrial vehicles may likely have some sort of "cloaking" ability. Seems there are examples of UFO appearing and disappearing sometimes and cases when witnesses see an object, but it is confirmed nothing showed up on radar. Heck, we already have quite good stealth technology ourselves.

If they have a cloaking ability, then why would some people see them and never someone with telescope pointed out of the system? Does not the frequency of alleged sightings not make it likely that if such technology was deployed that it would not be constant? And then we have to ask, how many of these alleged aliens are supposedly here? Some claim up to 57 species visiting, and they all have the same tech? Except us?

And what about ones that do show up on RADAR? How come they are never ever tracked leaving or entering the planet? Why is every single incident on our soil, and not in the skies?

It strikes me that as every single UFO answer to date has come from beneath out feet, that the trend is likely to continue?

Maybe the US or other countries have the ET's in a negotiating position. If the ET's agenda is to peacefully assimilate with mankind, perhaps the US is saying to them "If you disclose yourselves to the general public, we will reveal to them that your agenda is hostile, so you maintain contact with us only" There's a few rumors of a false flag operation in which an attack by aliens could be staged.

How could an advanced species think the US is the one who calls the shots for the entire planet? To be fair, this does not sound like an advanced species, but rather the opposite? It seems rather strange that an advanced species would be controlled by a lesser species?

And what about Rebel aliens? None want to make contact and see for themselves? I would bet a human would?

I know I keep referring to the USA with most of this, but I think it likely that several countries share the same agenda which gives the appearance to many that these countries are working together.

That is the thing. Governments hate each other, I do not understand where any illusions of them "working together" exist. It's the US ETH and the rest of the world ETH. The Twain never meets. Like I said, the entire UN cannot even keep the Sea Shepard out of the water, I do not see any collusion existing currently even to benefit ourselves?

Also, it would be likely IMHO, that the perpetrators of the secrecy are quasi-government groups and private sector black-ops types in order to keep the information away from FOI requests.

But again, you have competition, and competition is where the entire deal falls apart IMHO.

What do not understand is that these countries have to be working together for America to keep this quiet. I understand that you mention stealth technology, which to be honest I find a bit of an easy answer, like saying space is too big too cross, but just the same, neither are entirely accurate. I do not feel that Stealth technology can possibly count for every case when the alleged sightings are numerous. How can one have stealth, and then be seen all the time, but just not in space? That seem to be placing quite some conditions to qualify the idea?

But perhaps I did not word myself well.

What I cannot figure out is why would say China for example not tell the World that the US is receiving interstellar visitors? What reason could they have to keep quiet? This is what happened every time a Government did not play by the rules, as per the examples set out in the previous post. It is not an illusion of conspiracy between the US and China, and I do not think anyone has suggested that, but for the ETH to be at all possible, this must be so, and not illusion, but real collusion. But how so? The world does not work like that, and never has?

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.