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 -
I'mConvinced

Now that we have hard evidence of UFO's

359 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

stereologist
2 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Sources please.

In fact don't bother, others can decide for themselves.  Clearly you haven't researched this and are just googling along as we go. Enjoy your delusions and have fun with the last word.  I don't engage with trolls and your information is so out of date it's hilarious.

I am addressing your multiple glaring failures.

Clealry you are completely as clueless about these issues as all of the other things you have absolutely clueless about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, stereologist said:

I am addressing your multiple glaring failures.

Clealry you are completely as clueless about these issues as all of the other things you have absolutely clueless about.

No, you are being cryptic and linking to a website that merely lists the agreement.  Your opinion of what may or may not happen at this point is irrelevant.  

What else have you got? That's all you've said, a bunch of half baked, opinion based conspiracies which don't fit the facts.  

Edited by I'mConvinced

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
Just now, I'mConvinced said:

Then explain what they are? You are saying the,military knows, which is actually a conspiracy theory backed with nothing but your own opinion, because? 

So your theory must be that these are a secret government project, correct? You have supporting evidence for this or did you pull it out of your backside like your comments on the videos etc? 

I can read. That is all it takes. I, unlike you, can read above the 3rd grade level.

Nowhere does it state the videos shows things that cannot be identified.

But here you reveal your bizarre nutter thinking.

Look at this nonsensical ramble: " You are saying the,military knows, which is actually a conspiracy theory backed with nothing but your own opinion, because? "

I am not suggesting a conspiracy. How did your wacko thinking come up with that?

And look at this idiotic nonsense: "So your theory must be that these are a secret government project, correct?" You seem very troubled in your thinking.

You really need to get grounded.

The statement does not say they can't identify what is in the video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 minute ago, I'mConvinced said:

No, you are being cryptic and linking to a website that merely lists the agreement.  Your opinion of what may or may not happen at this point is irrelevant.  

What else have you got? That's all you've said, a bunch of half baked, opinion based conspiracies which don't fit the facts.  

The agreement tells us what is in the agreement. Is that too hard for you to accept?

Would you rather I did not present evidence so that you can continue with hallucinogenic comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
3 minutes ago, stereologist said:

I am addressing your multiple glaring failures.

Ok, list the failures below please and provide the source material that verifies your position and invalidates mine.

Something like: 

1. Stereologist claims videos aren't linked to incident, gets proven wrong - link:http:pwned.whatajoke.com

2. Stereologist claims Navy never said they were unidentified, claims classified as unidentified definitively means they know what they are, can't back statement with evidence - link: http:onceagain.massivefailure.com

3. Etc 

Once you have your list and sources I will address each point in turn.  If you can't or won't do this then we have nothing left to discuss.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Love this quote:

Quote

Both the Army and TTSA recognize many of these technologies are “purely theoretical,” but some are already far along in the development process, according to TTSA Chief Operating Officer Kari DeLonge. In an email to Nextgov, she said the group’s active camouflage technologies are “a very mature capability,” for example, while secure quantum communication systems are still largely in the design stage. 

So most of the TTSA talk is baloney. That's management speak for don't expect anything. They decided to list Puthoff's stories. I guess that makes it possible for Puthoff to bill the government for whatever he wants to play with in the next 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
2 minutes ago, stereologist said:

The agreement tells us what is in the agreement. Is that too hard for you to accept?

Would you rather I did not present evidence so that you can continue with hallucinogenic comments?

So what is your position? What is your explanation? Stop spouting crap without backing your words up.  You've presented NOTHING.

Share this post


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

If you have done all of the above then please point it out

OK, seeing you asked so nicely:rolleyes::

YOU said, here:

Quote

The problem as described is that you cannot see any heat spikes in the gimbal video.

I asked you to define a 'heat spike' - you ignored that request.  I asked you to cite the footage, and/or to show examples of these heat spikes - you ignored that request.  So, on your very first item - and presumably you listed it first as it was your best evidence - you simply ignored any request to back up the claim.

I then offered a video where Mick West himself shows footage from the Gimbal video, and lo and behold - some spikes:
Stupidclaims1.thumb.jpg.7bdbd776fdf955e4c4171051fa3309ea.jpg
That's a still image only, but note how I have included the timing, so anyone can check the image came from that interview video.  That's the sort of thing I'mConvinced NEVER does, as he knows he can't defend his position.)

These spikey effects may or may not appear on the IR footage, depending on a whole pile of factors that I explained earlier, including angle of aircraft, engine settings, compression artefacts (see below).  It's a stupid, ignorant and simply false claim.  The video DOES show spikes.

And to hammer that home, in that same video and elsewhere, Mick also made a direct comparison of the other footage, showing how a commercial jet aircraft looks almost exactly the same as the supposedly mysterious and unexplainable footage.....
Stupidclaims2.jpg.fc5b8f5b837ae98881bfeb221d04e955.jpg
Again, that's a still image only, from the same video linked above so you can check it.

 

So, those are SPECIFIC rebuttals for I'mConvinced's main claim.  Is anyone other than him still saying there is something unexplainable? - if so, POINT IT OUT precisely.

 

For heaven's sake, just look at the bloody pictures!  You don't need to be an Raytheon IR expert to see that there is NOTHING unusual here - two of the videos show aircraft, the other is something else, perhaps a large seabird, or a drifting balloon or similar.

 

 

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
Just now, I'mConvinced said:

Ok, list the failures below please and provide the source material that verifies your position and invalidates mine.

Something like: 

1. Stereologist claims videos aren't linked to incident, gets proven wrong - link:http:pwned.whatajoke.com

2. Stereologist claims Navy never said they were unidentified, claims classified as unidentified definitively means they know what they are, can't back statement with evidence - link: http:onceagain.massivefailure.com

3. Etc 

Once you have your list and sources I will address each point in turn.  If you can't or won't do this then we have nothing left to discuss.

Here is what I stated.

Quote

TTSA has claimed a lot of things including faking the background of Elizondo. They can tell you lots of anecdotes and I know you will fall for each and everyone of them.

TTSA was not responsible for leaking the videos. One video was out 2-3 years before there was a TTSA. Are you suggesting they time travel. LOL. You are clueless are you?

TTSA and the military have n agreement as I showed.

I guess you like to make things up. You've been doing that this whole thread.

1. You lied about what I posted. You are a liar. Why lie about what I posted?

2. Here you lie again as you try to cover up your stupid mistakes. It's sad but this is what you do every time you are shown to be wrong.

Buck up sonny.

And t least one of the videos was out long before the TTSA was even formed. Why didn't you lie about that as well? I bet you realized you were wrong and don't have the moxie to admit your glaring mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

OK, seeing you asked so nicely:rolleyes::

YOU said, here:

I asked you to define a 'heat spike' - you ignored that request.  I asked you to cite the footage, and/or to show examples of these heat spikes - you ignored that request.  So, on your very first item - and presumably you listed it first as it was your best evidence - you simply ignored any request to back up the claim.

I then offered a video where Mick West himself shows footage from the Gimbal video, and lo and behold - some spikes:
Stupidclaims1.thumb.jpg.7bdbd776fdf955e4c4171051fa3309ea.jpg
That's a still image only, but note how I have included the timing, so anyone can check the image came from that interview video.  That's the sort of thing I'mConvinced NEVER does, as he knows he can't defend his position.)

These spikey effects may or may not appear on the IR footage, depending on a whole pile of factors that I explained earlier, inclduing angle of aircraft, engine settings, compression artefacts (see below).  It's a stupid, ignorant and simply false claim.  The video DOES show spikes.

And to hammer that home, in that same video and elsewhere, Mick also made a direct comparison of the other footage, showing how a commercial jet aircraft looks almost exactly the same as the supposedly mysterious and unexplainable footage.....
Stupidclaims2.jpg.fc5b8f5b837ae98881bfeb221d04e955.jpg
Again, that's a still image only, from the same video linked above so you can check it.

 

So, those are SPECIFIC rebuttals for I'mConvinced's main claim.  Is anyone other than him still saying there is something unexplainable? - if so, POINT IT OUT precisely.

 

For heaven's sake, just look at the bloody pictures!  You don't need to be an Raytheon IR expert to see that there is NOTHING unusual here - two of the videos show aircraft, the other is something else, perhaps a large seabird, or a drifting balloon or similar.

 

 

No, they are not engine spikes as was shown by Dave Falch.  Let me show you engine spikes in a video, explained by the expert  Mick West consulted and misrepresented, so that you understand why this can't be so:

17:30 ish, video should start playing at that time.  Explain why Mick West uses only a tiny portion of the afterburner footage provided by Dave Falch to support his conclusions when the whole clip clearly shows they are nothing alike.

Explain why the military couldn't identify a passenger plane nor get a reliable lock on it?  Of course all of this, the audio, the range problem, the tracking issues, the multiple objects and more is ignored by Mick West and his 'pro' analysis

Edited by I'mConvinced
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
Just now, I'mConvinced said:

That's the sort of thing I'mConvinced NEVER does, as he knows he can't defend his position.)

I've presented evidence supporting every one of my statements and have done so again above.  You like to create your own narrative but it doesn't wash with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

So, your entire rebuttal is posting one video link?

Wow, you're really puttin' some effort in, IC.  As you have been a lazy b****** who won't offer freeze frames and comparisons LIKE I DID ABOVE, I shall get back to this later when I have time and motivation.  If anyone else wants to chime in genuinely, please do so.

 

In the meantime, dear reader, look up above and ask yourself who is offering direct examples and evidence, rather than handwaved bull****?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
7 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Here is what I stated.

1. You lied about what I posted. You are a liar. Why lie about what I posted?

2. Here you lie again as you try to cover up your stupid mistakes. It's sad but this is what you do every time you are shown to be wrong.

Buck up sonny.

And t least one of the videos was out long before the TTSA was even formed. Why didn't you lie about that as well? I bet you realized you were wrong and don't have the moxie to admit your glaring mistakes.

Hey its not my fault you don't get it. Go and be inanely obtuse in whatever quest to prove yourself right somewhere else please.  Maybe one day you'll provide a source to back up your claims, till then, adios.  At least Chris has bothered to come back with something that can be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
5 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

I've presented evidence supporting every one of my statements and have done so again above.  You like to create your own narrative but it doesn't wash with me.

That's rubbish and you know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
Just now, ChrLzs said:

So, your entire rebuttal is posting one video link?

Wow, you're really puttin' some effort in, IC.  As you have been a lazy b****** who won't offer freeze frames and comparisons LIKE I DID ABOVE, I shall get back to this later when I have time and motivation.  If anyone else wants to chime in genuinely, please do so.

 

In the meantime, dear reader, look up above and ask yourself who is offering direct examples and evidence, rather than handwaved bull****?

What? You provided a screenshot ..ahaha

There are direct examples from a far more qualified person to speak on these issues than Mick West, linked with the specific time in the video, including the footage and the explanation.  If you are have trouble comprehending then be specific as you always ask.  I have been, the engine spikes look completely different to what is seen in the gimbal video.  Ignore it all you want but facts is facts. 

Typical you cant address what he says and accuse me of doing something you yourself did just moments prior.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
2 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Hey its not my fault you don't get it. Go and be inanely obtuse in whatever quest to prove yourself right somewhere else please.  Maybe one day you'll provide a source to back up your claims, till then, adios.  At least Chris has bothered to come back with something that can be addressed.

You are a liar as I proved. You lied about my posts. Why do you stoop to such depths?

I take it that you now admit that you have been lying all of the time and have been caught doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
1 minute ago, stereologist said:

That's rubbish and you know it.

I have provided all the links, videos, articles etc.  If you want to address any particular point then provide a source and your explanation for me to address.  Otherwise talking to you is pointless imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
1 minute ago, stereologist said:

You are a liar as I proved. You lied about my posts. Why do you stoop to such depths?

I take it that you now admit that you have been lying all of the time and have been caught doing so.

In your deluded opinion, either pony up with facts as requested or just go away, you are adding nothing as per usual and Chris has your bases covered for the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced

Apologies, I linked to the later part of the video, the discussion on spiking and Dave Falch's opinion starts around the 10 min mark and is linked at the correct time below:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
15 minutes ago, I'mConvinced said:

Apologies, I linked to the later part of the video, the discussion on spiking and Dave Falch's opinion starts around the 10 min mark and is linked at the correct time below:

And that, folks, is why I don't respond immediately (and in this case, waste my time trying to find it due to I'mConvinced's incompetence).  I'mConvinced's research skills are truly ... unexplainable.  Note that he also uses the word "opinion", not "analysis".  It's almost certainly just more handwaving and non-specifics, as compared to where I SHOWED the imagery and comparisons and pointed out EXACTLY what was wrongly being claimed.

Again, note that IC has offered NO specific example of where Mick and I were wrong.  Anyone else want to have a go?

 

But I will get back to this later - and sadly for IC and Falch, I'll be posting screenshots and actual debate and analysis..

BBL8R - look forward to it, IC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

And that, folks, is why I don't respond immediately (and in this case, waste my time trying to find it due to I'mConvinced's incompetence).  I'mConvinced's research skills are truly ... unexplainable.  Note that he also uses the word "opinion", not "analysis".  It's almost certainly just more handwaving and non-specifics, as compared to where I SHOWED the imagery and comparisons and pointed out EXACTLY what was wrongly being claimed.

Again, note that IC has offered NO specific example of where Mick and I were wrong.  Anyone else want to have a go?

 

But I will get back to this later - and sadly for IC and Falch, I'll be posting screenshots and actual debate and analysis..

BBL8R - look forward to it, IC.

I have provided a very specific example and you'd do well to watch the video and read the metabunk thread before commenting.  You asked for specifics and both sections of the video are relevant to the engine spiking but as I knew you wouldn't watch I made it as simple as possible.

Look forward to your analysis and rebuttal of Dave Falch.

*Edit* Just to be in no doubt, Dave Falch provided the footage Mick West used in his debunk video.  Dave Falch disagrees with Mick West and I am looking for the original footage, in it's entirety, that shows how Mick West manipulated the situation to suit his own needs.

Edited by I'mConvinced

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced

Dave Falch speaking directly on the Gimbal video and the rotation.  Once again, Mick West deemed this guy the expert to go to and then ignored everything he said.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
Posted (edited)

Lets look at a passenger jet as filmed with the FLIR1 in motion, not the one blurry screen shot used by Mick West.  See if you can spot the differences:

Now lets look at an F-!8.  Notice the inconsistent nature of the heat signature, the clear rings around the exhaust plume, the wings on the plane and the clarity of the jet when he switches to optical mode.  None of these are present in the gimbal video, which Mick West claims are the afterburners of a jet, and the rotation seen is not caused by derotation internal to the FLIR1 camera.  I still need to find the original clip used by Mick West but this is a good starting point although the technology is older than that used in the gimbal video.

 

Edited by I'mConvinced

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

Stop changing the effing subject.  HEAT SPIKES is what you claimed - that was your first choice.  Stop GISH GALLOPING - the only people who do that are true tinfoilers..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
2 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Stop changing the effing subject.  HEAT SPIKES is what you claimed - that was your first choice.  Stop GISH GALLOPING - the only people who do that are true tinfoilers..

These are all errors in Mick West's analysis and completely relevant, no gish gallop here.  I'm sorry if you can't deal with more than one fact at a time but that's hardly my problem now is it?  You wanted specifics, you have specifics, including a breakdown of the FLIR1 camera and Mick West's failure to understand what he was being shown.  So stop whining again and pony up with the hard science you seem to talk so much about but never actually show.

  • Like 1

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.