RADAR alone cannot determine Intelligence

[Repoman]

I believe it has been shown that RADAR, although incredibly sophisticated, can do nothing but display information about the reflected EMF waves it produces. All of the other information about semi-autonomous drones and weapons systems have nothing to do with RADAR. Radar is nothing more than a device that displays data about (presumed) objects which reflected the radio waves emitted by the RADAR unit back to the RADAR unit.

The software that accepts data from the RADAR unit is not RADAR. It is a heuristic look-up table that attempts to match RADAR reflections with its stock library of RADAR signatures.

[Hazzard]

Radar is nothing more than a device that displays data about (presumed) objects which reflected the radio waves emitted by the RADAR unit back to the RADAR unit......

Thats my opinion aswell.

If radar were 100% foolproof, and could indeed tell intelligent crafts from, lets say, plasma or ball lightning,etc, it would be interesting. As this debate has clearly shown, radar, the machine, can not. Its all up to the human behind the screen to make the best "intelligent guess" he can.

One more thing.. This is the place to continue the radar debate...not the Best Evidence thread. It has been done to death there..and as here, it ended the same way, everytime.

Edited January 21, 2009 by hazzard

[skyeagle409]

Thats my opinion aswell.

If radar were 100% foolproof, and could indeed tell intelligent crafts from, lets say, plasma or ball lightning,etc, it would be interesting. As this debate has clearly shown, radar, the machine, can not. Its all up to the human behind the screen to make the best "intelligent guess" he can.

One more thing.. This is the place to continue the radar debate...not the Best Evidence thread. It has been done to death there..and as here, it ended the same way, everytime.

Objects have their own unique signatures and that is how experienced radar controllers were able to throw our natural phenomena in many UFO case files.

[psyche101]

Objects have their own unique signatures and that is how experienced radar controllers were able to throw our natural phenomena in many UFO case files.

Radar controllers? Are you saying Radar alone cannot determine intelligence?

[karl 12]

Great thread -its refreshing to see such an intelligent and civilised debate about this subject (kudos to both debaters for some great posts).

Not wanting to detract from the thread but theres some intriguing comments here about sonar confirmation made by trained professionals:

Interview at 0:18

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoFjvUqh4d0

Interesting examples of objects being plotted on multiple sonar.

http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi...;num=1217341083

http://www.waterufo.net/item.php?id=1088

http://www.waterufo.net/item.php?id=174

Cheers

Edited April 21, 2009 by karl 12

[Evangium]

Great thread -its refreshing to see such an intelligent and civilised debate about this subject (kudos to both debaters for some great posts).

Not wanting to detract from the thread but theres some intriguing comments here about sonar confirmation made by trained professionals:

Interview at 0:18

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoFjvUqh4d0

Interesting examples of objects being plotted on multiple sonar.

http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi...;num=1217341083

http://www.waterufo.net/item.php?id=1088

http://www.waterufo.net/item.php?id=174

Cheers

Thanks Karl. After seeing a few debates turn ugly, it is nice to think that at the least a civillised debate was achieved here. I still think that the amount of views this debate has recieved, given the dryness of the topic, is a testiment to what can be achieved if both parties approach the subject calmly.

Those USO reports are intriguing, it's a shame that this potential area of the enigma is often overlooked in favour of UFOs...

[mcrom901]

The following radar data that proves an object under intelligent control

Belgian Air Force Report

8. At 00.05 2 F16 were scrambled from BEAUVECHAIN airbase and guided towards the radar contacts. A total of 9 interception attempts have been made. At 6 occasions the pilots could establish a lock-on with their air interception radar. Lock-on distances varied between 5 and 8 NM. On all occasions targets varied speed and altitude very quickly and break-locks occurred after 10 to 60 seconds. Speeds varied between 150 and 1010 kts.

***************************************************************

Seconds after Heading Speed Altitude

lock-on (degrees) (knots) (feet)

00 200 150 7000

01 200 150 7000

02 200 150 7000

03 200 150 7000

04 sharp 200 acceleration 150 6000

05 turn 270 = 22 g 560 6000

06 270 560 6000

07 270 570 6000

08 270 560 7000

09 270 550 7000

10 210 560 9000

11 210 570 10000

12 210 560 11000

13 210 570 10000

14 270 770 7000

15 270 770 6000

16 270 780 6000

17 270 790 5000

18 290 1010 4000

19 290 1000 3000

20 290 990 2000

21 290 990 1000

22 300 990 0000

22.5 300 980 0000 Break lock

***************************************************************

Now, let's tie that data with the radar imagery below that was presented at the international press conference, which was conducted by the Belgian Air Force and note 990 knots on the radar imagery.

http://www.geocities.com/area51/vault/9054/belradar.jpg

Based on the radar data information, the Belgian Air Force was convinced that the object was an intelligently controlled craft. In a video interview, General DeBrouwer stated that based on that data above, the performance of that craft cannot be related even to an experimental aircraft.

In addition, ground-based radars, which were dissimilar systems amongst themselves, had confirmed the object as the same object that was tracked by

the two F-16's.

Since the object reacted to the each of the radar lock-ons by the F-16's, that clearly indicates intelligence. In other words, the radar indicated that the object was reacting to each of its lock-ons and since both aircraft locked on to the same craft, the indications of its reactions, were not the result of any radar glitch nor misintepretation by any of the two pilots, especially since the F-16's were receiving data information on the same object from ground-based radars as well.

This video backs my statement that radar confirmed the performance of an intelligently controlled craft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcv_-OX9-WQ...feature=related

thanks wonderful debate.......

in most scientific experiments..... the resulting data is verified/yielded with the use of certain measuring instruments......

similarly radars have been utilized to legitimize the 'already' unaided observances....... i.e. with actual readings to boost our understanding with the actual 'hard data'.......

which clearly demonstrates; non earthly intelligence/equipment showing 'unseen' maneuverability and 'unachievable' speeds......

to ignore such details....... is like discarding the microscope or ruling out telescopes........ of course given the nature of radars, this has nothing to do with the 'alone' factor of this debate.....

but the more important point here is.......... that, this is proof....... that some of the observed 'ufos' are indeed 'intelligently controlled' and are of extraterrestrial origin.......

whether probes or piloted is a different issue altogether.......

cheers