Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

US Navy has more footage of USS Nimitz UFO

142 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hazzard

They would rather have us believe in ET visitation than be embarrased about whatever...

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExoPaul

Could be bait. Might not know who owns it (China, Russia, etc) so they are letting tapes of it leak out in the attempt that it lures a country like China to boast that it belongs to them, or causes an engineer from that country to open his mouth and reveal details.

And if the bait doesn't work, then just pass it off as unexplained and let UFO experts have a field day speculating on lizard men and hidden planets, etc, while they continue to investigate through usual classified surveillance and intelligence avenues.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
Quote

We have discovered certain briefing slides that are classified TOP SECRET," the response reads. "A review of these materials indicates that are currently and appropriate Marked and Classified TOP SECRET under Executive Order 13526, and the Original Classification Authority has determined that the release of these materials would cause exceptionally grave damage to the National Security of the United States."

Of course the objects, if there are any, are classified because of national security interests. Happened with U2/SR71/F-14/15/16, Rockwell B-1, Northrop B-2, F-117, Tomahawk and all the other stuff thats flying with an USAF logo on it. As for the Tic-Tac "UFO", it seems to be a high speed/supersonic drone and nothing else.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mister TiraMiSu

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2010-01-05/pdf/E9-31418.pdf#page=2

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DreadLordAvatar
5 hours ago, toast said:

Of course the objects, if there are any, are classified because of national security interests. Happened with U2/SR71/F-14/15/16, Rockwell B-1, Northrop B-2, F-117, Tomahawk and all the other stuff thats flying with an USAF logo on it. As for the Tic-Tac "UFO", it seems to be a high speed/supersonic drone and nothing else.

A “high speed/supersonic drone” (man made) that can move without any form of conventional propulsion and defy the laws of physics as we know it.  Are you inferring time travel of the drone from the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
Just now, DreadLordAvatar said:

A “high speed/supersonic drone” (man made) that can move without any form of conventional propulsion ...

Logic exercises for beginners (2 lessons):

Lesson 1: as you dont know the propulsion system of the Tic-Tac "UFO", you cannot judge the propulsion system as to be non-conventional.

Quote

... and defy the laws of physics as we know it.  

Lesson 2: as the Tic-Tac "UFO" operated in compliance to the known aeronautical patterns and options, the known laws of physics applied.

Quote

Are you inferring time travel of the drone from the future?

What?

PS: pls dont spam me with DeLonge&friends drivel. Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
36 minutes ago, toast said:

Lesson 2: as the Tic-Tac "UFO" operated in compliance to the known aeronautical patterns and options, the known laws of physics applied.

Really ? If that was the case, it wouldn't be a story.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DreadLordAvatar said:

A “high speed/supersonic drone” (man made) that can move without any form of conventional propulsion and defy the laws of physics as we know it.  Are you inferring time travel of the drone from the future?

Please state in detail your evidence that the items shown in these videos have no "conventional propulsion", and "defy the laws of physics".  Name the Law/s, and also show your calculations.

 

If you'd rather not do that, then may I suggest you've picked the wrong hobby, and your choice of avatar pic is rather ironically embarrassing.

 

Hab, feel free to help him out, or if not, withdraw your claim.

Edited by ChrLzs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Really ? If that was the case, it wouldn't be a story.

These TTSA morons would make a story about a bag of noodles if it would help to make money.

Edited by toast
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
7 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Please state in detail your evidence that the items shown in these videos have no "conventional propulsion", and "defy the laws of physics".  Name the Law/s, and also show your calculations.

 

If you'd rather not do that, then may I suggest you've picked the wrong hobby, and your choice of avatar pic is rather ironically embarrassing.

 

Hab, feel free to help him out, or if not, withdraw your claim.

Seems pretty simple to me, if it was some mundane thing, it would have been identified, let's not try and characterize this is some wacky story from a sensationalist website, it was on the main TV news bulletins. So if it was "conventional". what was it, or why wasn't it identified ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
4 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Seems pretty simple to me, if it was some mundane thing, it would have been identified, let's not try and characterize this is some wacky story from a sensationalist website, it was on the main TV news bulletins. So if it was "conventional". what was it, or why wasn't it identified ?

Check post #4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Just now, toast said:

Check post #4

Never mind about check post 4, you tell me what it was, and why it wasn't identified. a supersonic drone ? whose supersonic drone ? You really think an arm of the US military gets to publish pictures of another arm's secret project ? Or is it some kind of sophisticated disinformation ploy ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
1 minute ago, Habitat said:

Never mind about check post 4, you tell me what it was, and why it wasn't identified. a supersonic drone ? whose supersonic drone ? You really think an arm of the US military gets to publish pictures of another arm's secret project ?

I dont know what it was but its obvious that a lot of people do. And no, its not the TTSA cranks but the people who designed, build and operate the craft.

Quote

Or is it some kind of sophisticated disinformation ploy ? 

Most likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Just now, toast said:

I dont know what it was but its obvious that a lot of people do. And no, its not the TTSA cranks but the people who designed, build and operate the craft.

Most likely.

Clutching at straws now, anything except "I don't know" eh ? I think you have just invented a conspiracy theory ! Congratulations !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
16 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Clutching at straws now, anything except "I don't know" eh ? I think you have just invented a conspiracy theory ! Congratulations !

The only CT here is the Tic-Tac blob to be of extraterrestrial origin. I cannot say other than "I dont know" because I`m a guy living and working in Hamburg and not at Groom Lake, so whats your problem with my statements given?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, toast said:

The only CT here is the Tic-Tac blob to be of extraterrestrial origin. I cannot say other than "I dont know" because I`m a guy living and working in Hamburg and not at Groom Lake, so whats your problem with my statements given?

You said it was the work of people who made and operated it, an assumption well outside "I don't know". I have no idea what it was, but I am not buying it is some cooked-up BS from a sensationalist website, otherwise it would never have been been ventilated in the media world-wide. You think the US Navy would not have issued a denial of a fabricated story, that somehow got past the usual scrutiny, into a major news story ?

Edited by Habitat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
58 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Seems pretty simple to me, if it was some mundane thing, it would have been identified, let's not try and characterize this is some wacky story from a sensationalist website, it was on the main TV news bulletins. So if it was "conventional". what was it, or why wasn't it identified ?

Why on earth would you think everything is/has to be/can be identified?  That's just daft.  Do you think an aircraft for another country on a spy mission would just radio them and tell them who they are?  Or a secret experimental aircraft or drone?  Do you think these radar systems are designed to identify aircraft, or to detect potential threats?  Hint - it's the latter - unless the 'bogey' is quite close they do not have the resolution to identify aircraft.  Given they use light enhancement and IR sensors, the heat source creates a blooming/blurring effect.

Apparently the only folks that don't know that are armchair/tinfoil warriors who want it to be alienz, and of course the "To The Stars" moneymakers who want to make a buck from them.

 

The claim was that the craft was recorded doing maneuvers/speeds beyond conventional capabilities.  But there is NO EVIDENCE of such maneuvers/speeds, just handwaved anecdotes that differ (dramatically) from witness to witness.  Please READ what you are responding to, and save us a bit of time.

But thanks anyway, as your answer shows that No, you don't have any evidence for non-conventional behavior.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
4 minutes ago, Habitat said:

... otherwise it would never have been been ventilated in the media world-wide.

I was also spread in the media world-wide in the early 2000s Iraq to have mobile bio-weapons trucks and clandestine factories. In the 70s it was reported in the media world-wide Uri Geller to be capable to repair broken watches from remote. So what? Want more?

Quote

You think the US Navy would not have issued a denial of a fabricated story ?

You think the US Navy is obligated to comment and respond to every "UFO"-BS thats been connected to them by 3rt parties for the reason of sensation?  Why should the US Navy issue a denial about something/a project that will become public in the years to follow, and to bring themselves into a position of vindication?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
3 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Why on earth would you think everything is/has to be/can be identified?  That's just daft.  Do you think an aircraft for another country on a spy mission would just radio them and tell them who they are?  Or a secret experimental aircraft or drone?  Do you think these radar systems are designed to identify aircraft, or to detect potential threats?  Hint - it's the latter - unless the 'bogey' is quite close they do not have the resolution to identify aircraft.  Given they use light enhancement and IR sensors, the heat source creates a blooming/blurring effect.

Apparently the only folks that don't know that are armchair/tinfoil warriors who want it to be alienz, and of course the "To The Stars" moneymakers who want to make a buck from them.

 

The claim was that the craft was recorded doing maneuvers/speeds beyond conventional capabilities.  But there is NO EVIDENCE of such maneuvers/speeds, just handwaved anecdotes that differ (dramatically) from witness to witness.  Please READ what you are responding to, and save us a bit of time.

But thanks anyway, as your answer shows that No, you don't have any evidence for non-conventional behavior.

I don't want it to be anything, Charlie, and I am certain you are very much not wanting it to be "alienz" ! You can't fool me on that score. Simple fact, it evaded interception and identification, or this would not be a story. How did that happen ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Just now, toast said:

I was also spread in the media world-wide in the early 2000s Iraq to have mobile bio-weapons trucks and clandestine factories. In the 70s it was reported in the media world-wide Uri Geller to be capable to repair broken watches from remote. So what? Want more?

You think the US Navy is obligated to comment and respond to every "UFO"-BS thats been connected to them by 3rt parties for the reason of sensation?  Why should the US Navy issue a denial about something/a project that will become public in the years to follow, and to bring themselves into a position of vindication?

I would say it would be very much obligated, even anxious, to deny such a story, if BS.  I'm afraid your anxieties  that everything must conform with mundanity, or your little head will go into a spin, are on display. You said you adhered to "I don't know" with this, be as good as your word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Simple fact, it evaded interception and identification, or this would not be a story. How did that happen ?

Simple fact, dog fight/interception tests to be a part of high-speed drones/generation X unmanned fighter jets flown by AI.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 minute ago, toast said:

Simple fact, dog fight/interception tests to be a part of high-speed drones/generation X unmanned fighter jets flown by AI.

And what method of propulsion was seen ? The Acme Anti-Gravity Accelerator ? You have, as I say, entered the CT zone, and especially with this "secret" seemingly being offered up to the public. Oh, but wait, it is sophisticated misinformation, to get the Chinese wasting money on "impossible" aircraft, to catch up ? Which theory did you like best ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I would say it would be very much obligated, even anxious, to deny such a story, if BS.  I'm afraid your anxieties  that everything must conform with mundanity, or your little head will go into a spin, are on display. You said you adhered to "I don't know" with this, be as good as your word.

You like to tease, dont you? But let me tell you one thing. If we will experience the arrival of extraterrestrial beings on Earth within our lifetime, you will be confronted with something that will have nothing, really nothing, to do with the "UFO" vids, "testimonials" and claims of today. It will be such different from this BS that you by yourself will declare yourself as a moron for the rest of your life. Remember my words then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

And what method of propulsion was seen ? The Acme Anti-Gravity Accelerator ? You have, as I say, entered the CT zone, and especially with this "secret" seemingly being offered up to the public. Oh, but wait, it is sophisticated misinformation, to get the Chinese wasting money on "impossible" aircraft, to catch up ? Which theory did you like best ?

I say its human made, you think its of extraterrestrial origin, so you think its me who follow a CT? Hell, thats insane.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.