Government report into UAP's released

[Dejarma]

8 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Yes I agree favor is cashing in on his experience, but realisticly you and everyone else here would also cash in on an event that happened in our lives.

yeah great= you're talking as if his <alleged> (an important word there)  experience really happened--- but no one debating it knows if his story is true, do they Sherlock!? you don't get it, do ya

[the13bats]

15 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

But, one thing for certain isn't an opinion, and that is that there are Unidentified Flying Objects that are violating the Airspace of count urges worldwide. Are they Alien Craft, I don't believe they are or that aliens have ever visited Earth. 

But, whatever these objects are, they are a danger to all aircraft in our airspace and they are also a danger to National Security because no Nation in this planet has been able to prevent them from doing what they. 

I think i understand where you are coming from but i simply do not fully agree, while i do believe things in or airspace need to be investagated one might say the mil pilots who claimed to have seen craft yet didnt investagate and perhaps engage should be investagated and perhaps removed from duty.

We do not have one documented case where a UFO did anything threatening besides the fact its in our airspace, no aircraft have been caused to crash none of these alleged UFOs have done anything hostile, yet another reason i firmly suspect the powers to be know just what they are that they are not ET and do not present a threat.

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

9 minutes ago, the13bats said:

When i was young i had a very misplaced respect of authority,  as a kid i thought a doctor, cop, and people with letters at their names were somehow above the average person and beyond reproach or flaw.

As i got older i saw just how ridiulously silly my childhood notions were, a stunning example is that a person like trump was president.

when i hear "UFO" stories and they have to use the buzz words like "hes a cop" "hes a pilot" "hes gov or military" to try to cook up some kind of pesudo crediblity im far from impressed.

Ever noticed these ex military who step up to bray claims about ET never do it until they are old ready to or have retired, no, i do not care much that some cat who polishes chairs with his butt doesnt know what every UFO in the sky is, it his ignorance is far from proof of anything.

Not unlike when highway patrol would pull me over in a custom job and ask what kind of car is this, at one point in my life i would have expected a highway cop to know but thats not the case,

And it seems too much blind faith is being placed in stories just because of who the teller is.

 

Yes I agree they certainly do wait until they retire. But, their is a good reason for that, while they are on  Actuve Duty they would not be allowed in most cases to go on National TV and talk about these issues, because if they did, they would be subject to possible prosecution or worst. 

But, what I think is funny is that so many people on this forum  talk bad about Favor and all the interviews he is doing. Now be honest Bats if you were able to make a millions dollar for telling your story, you can't tell me you would not also do it, I know I would, and why not get paid for something I experienced.

 Now some are saying that's he is making everything up, if that's true then I think he is totally wrong.  But, honestly Bats, i have seen no proof presented that proves his is lying, if you know of any articles that prove that he is lying, please post one for me, because if he is lying I want nothing to do with him!

Peace Bats. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

10 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

yeah great= you're talking as if his <alleged> (an important word there)  experience really happened--- but no one debating it knows if his story is true, do they Sherlock!? you don't get it, do ya

Your ad hominem attacks are not needed. Even though it would be very easy to get down and type on the floor which is your level. I refuse to that, I have nothing to prove to you because your egotistical opinions are just that your opinions. Which mean nothing to me. You donthis because you are not able to carry on a conversation without personal attacks.

Its also very apparent why you do this, and its the same reason you have not added a single paper or article to this thread. It's because your knowledge of this subject is non-existent, and your only purpose for posting is to be disingenuous, belittling, and condescending to people who see you for your are And do not bow to your OPINION. 

So please continue to yawn and whatever else you do at least that way if you fall asleep you can dream that your are this brilliant scholar you wish you could be!

[the13bats]

7 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Yes I agree they certainly do wait until they retire. But, their is a good reason for that, while they are on  Actuve Duty they would not be allowed in most cases to go on National TV and talk about these issues, because if they did, they would be subject to possible prosecution or worst. 

But, what I think is funny is that so many people on this forum  talk bad about Favor and all the interviews he is doing. Now be honest Bats if you were able to make a millions dollar for telling your story, you can't tell me you would not also do it, I know I would, and why not get paid for something I experienced.

 Now some are saying that's he is making everything up, if that's true then I think he is totally wrong.  But, honestly Bats, i have seen no proof presented that proves his is lying, if you know of any articles that prove that he is lying, please post one for me, because if he is lying I want nothing to do with him!

Peace Bats. 

Sorry you wont like my stance.

Where do i start, no ones proved favors lying so what? The burden isnt on the person to prove a negative the burden is on the guy getting what did you say, paid a million bucks to prove his story, favor has not done that at all his best evidence is weak.

And no, i would not cha ching on some extraordinary event i was witness to unless...

For example if i had a dead bigfoot a body to show, proof then i might just cash in on it, but no i would not pull a warrens and take money for telling stories, my carreer is close enough to that already.

Weak, active duty guys wait until old bored and over with to tell stories because fear of prosecution, i didnt know that after retirement military trusted with secrets are then allowed to spew all they know, so im supposed to respect and trust a cat who kept a secret for 40 years but when offered a mil paycheck he decides to bray...you do see how this sounds right?

[Dejarma]

10 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

It's because your knowledge of this subject is non-existent

yep

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 minute ago, the13bats said:

Sorry you wont like my stance.

Where do i start, no ones proved favors lying so what? The burden isnt on the person to prove a negative the burden is on the guy getting what did you say, paid a million bucks to prove his story, favor has not done that at all his best evidence is weak.

And no, i would not cha ching on some extraordinary event i was witness to unless...

For example if i had a dead bigfoot a body to show, proof then i might just cash in on it, but no i would not pull a warrens and take money for telling stories, my carreer is close enough to that already.

Weak, active duty guys wait until old bored and over with to tell stories because fear of prosecution, i didnt know that after retirement military trusted with secrets are then allowed to spew all they know, so im supposed to respect and trust a cat who kept a secret for 40 years but when offered a mil paycheck he decides to bray...you do see how this sounds right?

 

1 minute ago, the13bats said:

Sorry you wont like my stance.

Where do i start, no ones proved favors lying so what? The burden isnt on the person to prove a negative the burden is on the guy getting what did you say, paid a million bucks to prove his story, favor has not done that at all his best evidence is weak.

And no, i would not cha ching on some extraordinary event i was witness to unless...

For example if i had a dead bigfoot a body to show, proof then i might just cash in on it, but no i would not pull a warrens and take money for telling stories, my carreer is close enough to that already.

Weak, active duty guys wait until old bored and over with to tell stories because fear of prosecution, i didnt know that after retirement military trusted with secrets are then allowed to spew all they know, so im supposed to respect and trust a cat who kept a secret for 40 years but when offered a mil paycheck he decides to bray...you do see how this sounds right?

I am not offended by your comments at all. If you say you would not cash in on an experience you had, I believe you, because over the last few years you have proven that what you say is always truthful and trust worthy, to me anyway. When , I retired from the Military I was debriefd because of my TS-SBI Security Clearance. I was given my last lie detector test, where they asked me if I completely understood the personal requirements that I would held too, do to my Security Clearance. As far as my Clearance was concerned, I was forbidden to speak about any knowledge I had that was classified for a period 10 years after my retirement. 

So no they can't spew as you put it all the classified information they have. However, Favor has not done this to my knowledge, the only information he has discussed that I have seen was verification of information that had already been released by the US Navy, so after the Navy released the information it was no longer classified so Favor could openly speak about without fear of repercussions. No one, with a security clearance that has any brains would release classified information, unless they wanted to go to jail for treason. So the fact that Favor isn't behind bars proves what he talked about was not classified and that his comments were actually approved by the US Navy because the Navy never disagreed or challenged anything he has said.

Peace Bats

[the13bats]

35 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I am not offended by your comments at all. If you say you would not cash in on an experience you had, I believe you, because over the last few years you have proven that what you say is always truthful and trust worthy, to me

To clearly i would likely cash in as you call it if i had more than a story, you know proof to support my claims so no, i would not do as favor or lazer have done.

Remember very little about tgese lastest cases is proven fact, the navy saying "yeah, thats a leaked video" doesnt make it aliens,

The fact they used the term leaked and not something like declassified to me says that someone should be in federal prison, the fact they are not means someone dropped the ball the whole case is horse hockey or both.

Favor is either full of bull or basically a threat to national security which i doubt you support. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

37 minutes ago, the13bats said:

To clearly i would likely cash in as you call it if i had more than a story, you know proof to support my claims so no, i would not do as favor or lazer have done.

Remember very little about tgese lastest cases is proven fact, the navy saying "yeah, thats a leaked video" doesnt make it aliens,

The fact they used the term leaked and not something like declassified to me says that someone should be in federal prison, the fact they are not means someone dropped the ball the whole case is horse hockey or both.

Favor is either full of bull or basically a threat to national security which i doubt you support. 

Actually, I know very very little about Favor because to me he is just a fly spec in the enormity of the entire situation. I don't  disagree that whoever leaked the information should be in jail, and if Favor was involved he should be right there with the other criminals. To me the information he is responsible for is so insignificant that I don't even really understand why anyone truly cares what he says in the first place, the guy has offered nothing new or of any serious value in my opinion.

But, here is where our ideas about this situation take different turns:

1. I don't believe that any classified information was even leaked in the first place. I know the Navy uses the term leaked, but it is my belief that the Navy intentionally released the video footage and the other documents and information.

    a.  Why, they did this is the real question?

    b.  What is going to happen in the near future because they did this?

    c.  What effects will full disclosure have in the world if those actions have on the world?

You see I think these Craft are devises built by a foreign government, and if this turns out to be true what will the other world governments do about it. They can't just go on about their business as usual, because the technology is beyond what other world governments currently have. It's like 1945 after we drop the Atomic Bombs on Japan, effectively we ruled the world. Because no other country was even close to  building Atomic Bombs.

In fact the first country to successfully build and test a bomb was Russia and that did not happen until September if 1949. Well we could have taken over the world between 1947-1949, because who could stop us. So, the same thing is happening today with this UAPs, if a foreign government is responsible for them they are many years ahead if any other country in the World today, and this upsets the worldwide balance of power and that's dangerous!

Peace Bats. 

 

 

 

 

[Tom1200]

8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Thanks for your point of view, I appreciate it but why are you concerned what I post. If it isn't of interest to you that's cool, but why not just leave it alone, why must you attack things that you don't agree with.

Haven't we had this conversation before?  It's an open forum for free-thinking and debate.  If you don't want your posts to be read - don't post!  But if you post, and I don't agree with the content, I'm allowed to respond.  As for my 'attack' - my precise words were I'm not impressed.  If you consider that a scathing assault on your views, integrity and character - grow a pair.

In post #111 you gave the same reply and the same link to three different contributors.  I'll ask the question once again - why?  Does this make the report any more credible?

8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

one thing interesting about that paper, it was written with the assistance of many many professionals like Jack Sarfatti.

Really?  Here's a perfectly typical extract:

an email to Jack Sarfatti suggests: “****** seems to agree with you on that point. I asked him how dangerous he thought an Alcubierre style warp drive could be and he seemed to think that in some conditions, a spacecraft could crash without causing a lot of damage, but depending on what you were doing with the spacetime warping, he seemed to think that it could be extremely dangerous.”  (page 46)

This quote contains nothing but useless speculation.  A redacted name (so it could be anyone or their aunt) 'seems to agree'.  How dangerous might an Alcubierre-style warp drive be?  In some conditions it might be harmless, in others 'extremely dangerous'.  Manwon: this is not science, or any academic study - this is pointless, irrelevant, useless dribble.  But the author builds on dozens of such droppings to construct something resembling an argument that Tic-Tacs are made by extraterrestrials from spacetime-warping metamaterials.  

This is not an attack on you!  The paper presents itself as plausible, but - as Bats keeps reminding us - we should never be dazzled by false authority or pseudo-credibility.  We should doubt, check, challenge, tear into arguments, rip logic to pieces and shred the evidence in the hunt for truth.  I'm certain you're smart enough to not fall for the plethora of scams out there: because you don't immediately accept that the person phoning you really is a Nigerian billionaire who needs your help.  Please - try to see this paper in a more critical light rather than just accepting it as academic and/or authoritarian.  It is neither.

8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

One thing I have noticed is that you will tear apart Scientific Papers presented by other, because they don't agree with your OPINION, but you don't  offer any Scientific papers tha refute that paper, I have to ask where are your Scientific Sourceses?

True - I'm not in the habit of searching for scientific papers that refute every piece of nonsense I read on the internet, especially when it's clear that the other side is not interested in meaningful scientific debate.  But in response to the invitation to challenge your paper - I've dug up this https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/andp.19053221004.  It's an oldie, but still doing the rounds.  It's in German, and to paraphrase the Simpsons no one who speaks German could be bad at physics.

A huge part of this paper relies on the assumption that FTL travel is possible through warping spacetime using an Alcubierre drive.  I need to point out that any such method of propulsion requires matter with totally different properties to anything we've found so far.  (That doesn't prove it can't exist, but we're a long, long way from demonstrating that it can exist.)  So theoretical physicists give it a name - exotic matter - and ascribe it the properties they desire, and then start to look for it.  But until it is discovered scientifically and studied scientifically any speculation of exactly how it might behave in specific situations can only be imagination, conjecture and guesswork.  That's not scientific, or academic.

9 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

But, one thing for certain isn't an opinion, and that is that there are Unidentified Flying Objects that are violating the Airspace of count urges worldwide. Are they Alien Craft, I don't believe they are or that aliens have ever visited Earth. 

But, whatever these objects are, they are a danger to all aircraft in our airspace and they are also a danger to National Security because no Nation in this planet has been able to prevent them from doing what they. 

JIMO

I can see here how you're trying to present a fair and balanced argument by contradicting yourself.  That's not quite how debate works...

 

[ChrLzs]

Here's Neil dG-T back again, speaking directly about the videos and the fact that decent evidence is missing ...

Nailed it, Neil.

Also... as a public service to readers, may I offer the following.

If anyone has a particular bit of the footage that they are completely bamboozled by, or think that some footage shows impossible maneuvers, please name or link to the video, and also give us the timing of the event you would like explained.  I'll do my best to go through what is shown on screen and include explanations of all those numbers and indicators along with the maths / geometry (it's a little bit involved, but I think you'll get it - and you are welcome to cross-check it with anyone with expertise).

And just before anyone asks, is there any of the footage that puzzles me?  Yup.  That one where the object appears to drop into the water is pretty odd.  Not unexplainable, just a bit unusual/weird.  Pity it's such crap quality.

The other stuff is beyond mundane.  It just looks funny coz it's in IR, and the camera, the object and the background are all moving relative to another - and one (or two) of them are GOing FAST.  (See what I did there?)

BTW, I promise to be polite.  But if you think someone who simply disputes or debates or points out errors or flaws in logic is attacking you, then I think maybe you should get a blog and censor anyone you dislike...

[Grim Reaper 6]

58 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Haven't we had this conversation before?  It's an open forum for free-thinking and debate.  If you don't want your posts to be read - don't post!  But if you post, and I don't agree with the content, I'm allowed to respond.  As for my 'attack' - my precise words were I'm not impressed.  If you consider that a scathing assault on your views, integrity and character - grow a pair.

In post #111 you gave the same reply and the same link to three different contributors.  I'll ask the question once again - why?  Does this make the report any more credible?

Really?  Here's a perfectly typical extract:

an email to Jack Sarfatti suggests: “****** seems to agree with you on that point. I asked him how dangerous he thought an Alcubierre style warp drive could be and he seemed to think that in some conditions, a spacecraft could crash without causing a lot of damage, but depending on what you were doing with the spacetime warping, he seemed to think that it could be extremely dangerous.”  (page 46)

This quote contains nothing but useless speculation.  A redacted name (so it could be anyone or their aunt) 'seems to agree'.  How dangerous might an Alcubierre-style warp drive be?  In some conditions it might be harmless, in others 'extremely dangerous'.  Manwon: this is not science, or any academic study - this is pointless, irrelevant, useless dribble.  But the author builds on dozens of such droppings to construct something resembling an argument that Tic-Tacs are made by extraterrestrials from spacetime-warping metamaterials.  

This is not an attack on you!  The paper presents itself as plausible, but - as Bats keeps reminding us - we should never be dazzled by false authority or pseudo-credibility.  We should doubt, check, challenge, tear into arguments, rip logic to pieces and shred the evidence in the hunt for truth.  I'm certain you're smart enough to not fall for the plethora of scams out there: because you don't immediately accept that the person phoning you really is a Nigerian billionaire who needs your help.  Please - try to see this paper in a more critical light rather than just accepting it as academic and/or authoritarian.  It is neither.

True - I'm not in the habit of searching for scientific papers that refute every piece of nonsense I read on the internet, especially when it's clear that the other side is not interested in meaningful scientific debate.  But in response to the invitation to challenge your paper - I've dug up this https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/andp.19053221004.  It's an oldie, but still doing the rounds.  It's in German, and to paraphrase the Simpsons no one who speaks German could be bad at physics.

A huge part of this paper relies on the assumption that FTL travel is possible through warping spacetime using an Alcubierre drive.  I need to point out that any such method of propulsion requires matter with totally different properties to anything we've found so far.  (That doesn't prove it can't exist, but we're a long, long way from demonstrating that it can exist.)  So theoretical physicists give it a name - exotic matter - and ascribe it the properties they desire, and then start to look for it.  But until it is discovered scientifically and studied scientifically any speculation of exactly how it might behave in specific situations can only be imagination, conjecture and guesswork.  That's not scientific, or academic.

I can see here how you're trying to present a fair and balanced argument by contradicting yourself.  That's not quite how debate works...

 

Thanks Tom, I will read your paper when I have time. I am very aware of what exotic matter is and I also understand that its existence is hypothetical at this point in time and nothing more. What I am not clear on is why your so interested in drastically changing the course of this discussion from the threads title on the Governments Report on UAPS.  To a very speculative warp drive idea based on a solution of Einstein's field equations in general relativity as proposed by theoretical physicist Miguel Alcubierre. 

I dont really see a reason to abruptly change directions in the middle of thread that is already started. I think it would be more appropriate to start a different thread on that subject, rather than to derail this thread. I think it would be very wise to ask Tiggs if he will allow you to make this change in discussion in his thread, so let me know what he says about this.

JIMO

Edited July 2, 2021 by Manwon Lender

[Grim Reaper 6]

32 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Here's Neil dG-T back again, speaking directly about the videos and the fact that decent evidence is missing ...

Nailed it, Neil.

Also... as a public service to readers, may I offer the following.

If anyone has a particular bit of the footage that they are completely bamboozled by, or think that some footage shows impossible maneuvers, please name or link to the video, and also give us the timing of the event you would like explained.  I'll do my best to go through what is shown on screen and include explanations of all those numbers and indicators along with the maths / geometry (it's a little bit involved, but I think you'll get it - and you are welcome to cross-check it with anyone with expertise).

And just before anyone asks, is there any of the footage that puzzles me?  Yup.  That one where the object appears to drop into the water is pretty odd.  Not unexplainable, just a bit unusual/weird.  Pity it's such crap quality.

The other stuff is beyond mundane.  It just looks funny coz it's in IR, and the camera, the object and the background are all moving relative to another - and one (or two) of them are GOing FAST.  (See what I did there?)

BTW, I promise to be polite.  But if you think someone who simply disputes or debates or points out errors or flaws in logic is attacking you, then I think maybe you should get a blog and censor anyone you dislike...

There is no need to be sarcastic you are very aware of your own actions, so please dont play little games it is beneath you. In the next day or so, I will have a few more papers on this subject, they will not consist of media articles or news paper related information of any kind. Once I receive them I will post them for your opinion, then it would be very helpful if you are able share your knowledge and break them down for the forum.

Thanks

 

[Tom1200]

13 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

What I am not clear on is why your so interested in drastically changing the course of this discussion from the threads title on the Governments Report on UAPS. 

Well - it's either:

a) I'm a CIA spook who's tracking these fora for threads that are dangerously close to uncovering the truth.  It's my job to distract people like you who are so are about to accidentally reveal state secrets about interstellar contact and technology exchange.  (Can you believe that a race who've perfected the Albuquerque Drive hadn't discovered the Corby trouser press, or fish fingers?)  This is actually in your best interests 'cos if I don't stop you we might have to shoot you.

or b) I'm responding to an article you brought up.

YOU introduced this paper, to add credence to your point of view whilst rejecting its premise that these UAPs are of extra-terrestrial origin.  Unfortunately it is so riddled with baseless speculation, useless opinions and unscientific bull$hit that it's of no credible value.

To repeat myself yet again, and as ChrLzs has just pointed out, there is no useful, unambiguous evidence to support the notion that UAPs are artificial flying machines, whatever their provenance.  That's why it's so tedious discussing all the ancillary issues such as - what kind of metamaterial is needed to withstand jerks of 10¹⁵ ms^-3? or why do extra-terrestrials, capable of FTL travel over millions of lightyears, keep crashing once they reach Earth?  It's just not important.  It's a bit like arguing over which pigments Andontonio used on his masterpiece Gorgo and Pleistarchus (which hangs in the Louvre), without first checking - does it even exist?¹

44 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I think it would be more appropriate to start a different thread on that subject, rather than to derail this thread.

Well - perhaps if you ever addressed the valid points that others raise we'd all be able to reach a consensus and move on?  It's not good enough to just ignore other opinions and points of view, then accuse your detractors of attempting sabotage.  I'm not being rude, disrespectful or sarcastic - just looking for intelligent debate.  You say you're going to post more papers and invite others to 'break them down for the forum'.  I hope so, and I hope you make the time to read and think about the replies you get.

¹ It doesn't.

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

36 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

Well - it's either:

a) I'm a CIA spook who's tracking these fora for threads that are dangerously close to uncovering the truth.  It's my job to distract people like you who are so are about to accidentally reveal state secrets about interstellar contact and technology exchange.  (Can you believe that a race who've perfected the Albuquerque Drive hadn't discovered the Corby trouser press, or fish fingers?)  This is actually in your best interests 'cos if I don't stop you we might have to shoot you.

or b) I'm responding to an article you brought up.

YOU introduced this paper, to add credence to your point of view whilst rejecting its premise that these UAPs are of extra-terrestrial origin.  Unfortunately it is so riddled with baseless speculation, useless opinions and unscientific bull$hit that it's of no credible value.

To repeat myself yet again, and as ChrLzs has just pointed out, there is no useful, unambiguous evidence to support the notion that UAPs are artificial flying machines, whatever their provenance.  That's why it's so tedious discussing all the ancillary issues such as - what kind of metamaterial is needed to withstand jerks of 10¹⁵ ms^-3? or why do extra-terrestrials, capable of FTL travel over millions of lightyears, keep crashing once they reach Earth?  It's just not important.  It's a bit like arguing over which pigments Andontonio used on his masterpiece Gorgo and Pleistarchus (which hangs in the Louvre), without first checking - does it even exist?¹

Well - perhaps if you ever addressed the valid points that others raise we'd all be able to reach a consensus and move on?  It's not good enough to just ignore other opinions and points of view, then accuse your detractors of attempting sabotage.  I'm not being rude, disrespectful or sarcastic - just looking for intelligent debate.  You say you're going to post more papers and invite others to 'break them down for the forum'.  I hope so, and I hope you make the time to read and think about the replies you get.

¹ It doesn't.

 

So then it is your intention to derail Tiggs thread by changing the content from UAPs to your mythical Warp drive!  / German Egg beater. Your comical Tom, I ask you to supply some supporting sources of information and you pull an article that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and that is so old that it has Jesus Christs finger prints on it.  It very obvious you have nothing to offer, and you have no intention of even appearing to act like a responsible person. You have made your point and it is clear your information sources are nothing except your opinions endorsed by the Tiki God!

All I say Tom is your wonderful, your Brilliant and you and CHrLz are made for each other so Spoon it up Dude!

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Manwon Lender

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Well - it's either:

a) I'm a CIA spook who's tracking these fora for threads that are dangerously close to uncovering the truth.  It's my job to distract people like you who are so are about to accidentally reveal state secrets about interstellar contact and technology exchange.  (Can you believe that a race who've perfected the Albuquerque Drive hadn't discovered the Corby trouser press, or fish fingers?)  This is actually in your best interests 'cos if I don't stop you we might have to shoot you.

or b) I'm responding to an article you brought up.

YOU introduced this paper, to add credence to your point of view whilst rejecting its premise that these UAPs are of extra-terrestrial origin.  Unfortunately it is so riddled with baseless speculation, useless opinions and unscientific bull$hit that it's of no credible value.

To repeat myself yet again, and as ChrLzs has just pointed out, there is no useful, unambiguous evidence to support the notion that UAPs are artificial flying machines, whatever their provenance.  That's why it's so tedious discussing all the ancillary issues such as - what kind of metamaterial is needed to withstand jerks of 10¹⁵ ms^-3? or why do extra-terrestrials, capable of FTL travel over millions of lightyears, keep crashing once they reach Earth?  It's just not important.  It's a bit like arguing over which pigments Andontonio used on his masterpiece Gorgo and Pleistarchus (which hangs in the Louvre), without first checking - does it even exist?¹

Well - perhaps if you ever addressed the valid points that others raise we'd all be able to reach a consensus and move on?  It's not good enough to just ignore other opinions and points of view, then accuse your detractors of attempting sabotage.  I'm not being rude, disrespectful or sarcastic - just looking for intelligent debate.  You say you're going to post more papers and invite others to 'break them down for the forum'.  I hope so, and I hope you make the time to read and think about the replies you get.

¹ It doesn't.

 

I had no idea you were a member of the CIA, but that certainly clears a lot of unaswered questions up Todm. But I think you have gone to far by trying to be humorous about using Wet Work to shut people up. In the future you should be more careful when you say things like that. Because someone could misunderstand your intent, and then something humorous could become very serious. 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Manwon Lender

[Tom1200]

7 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

So then it is your intention to derail Tiggs thread by changing the content from UAPs to your mythical Warp drive!  / German Egg beater.

But.  YOU.  Started.  That.

(Sigh.)  Is it worth trying, one final time, to explain HOW THINGS HAPPEN?

Tiggs' thread (notice the possessive apostrophe?) is a link to a document that says, in essence, that some UAPs (that's unidentified aerial phenomena) defy explanation.  I would be astonished if it reached any other conclusion.  Tiggs did not ask that we keep the thread to the contents of that document and nothing else.  So when YOU introduced a paper in post #111 to support your case that did not break any rules.  But don't you find it just a teeny bit hypocritical to attack others for straying from the contents of post #1?

You called the paper interesting, academic and in-depth.  For reasons not yet explained you posted three identical links to it.  I took the time to read it and found it neither academic nor in-depth, but at least it was mildly interesting.

This paper that YOU introduced talks about UAPs as extra-terrestrial vessels that arrived here at FTL speeds and now spend their time spying on (mainly) America's military planes and nuclear weapons, whilst remaining desperately shy and always staying just out of range of cameras. 

This paper that YOU introduced starts with the assumption that UAPs are alien spacecraft.  There is no doubt in the author's mind concerning this.  Therefore the entire paper is devoted to looking for evidence that explains how they got here and what they're up to.  The author uncritically accepts that these aliens reached Earth using an Alcubierre drive - a hypothetical machine that uses exotic matter to warp spacetime.  But exotic matter does not exist, so neither can an Alcubierre drive.  So UAPs cannot be alien technology, which is the whole point of the paper YOU introduced.

When I pointed out the flaws in the paper that YOU introduced, you somehow twisted things around to suggest I'm promoting or advocating the author's position.  On the contrary, at no point have I argued that this paper is anything other than ill-informed waffle with no scientific or academic qualities to redeem it.

8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

you pull an article that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and that is so old that it has Jesus Christs finger prints on it

I'm disappointed, but not really surprised, that you did not see the relevance of that paper to the overall theme that UAPs might be alien technology.  It was Einstein's 1905 paper on Special Relativity which proved that FTL travel is impossible.  

8 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

All I say Tom is your wonderful, your Brilliant

Something everyone here on Unexplained Mysteries can finally agree on?

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

But.  YOU.  Started.  That.

(Sigh.)  Is it worth trying, one final time, to explain HOW THINGS HAPPEN?

Tiggs' thread (notice the possessive apostrophe?) is a link to a document that says, in essence, that some UAPs (that's unidentified aerial phenomena) defy explanation.  I would be astonished if it reached any other conclusion.  Tiggs did not ask that we keep the thread to the contents of that document and nothing else.  So when YOU introduced a paper in post #111 to support your case that did not break any rules.  But don't you find it just a teeny bit hypocritical to attack others for straying from the contents of post #1?

You called the paper interesting, academic and in-depth.  For reasons not yet explained you posted three identical links to it.  I took the time to read it and found it neither academic nor in-depth, but at least it was mildly interesting.

This paper that YOU introduced talks about UAPs as extra-terrestrial vessels that arrived here at FTL speeds and now spend their time spying on (mainly) America's military planes and nuclear weapons, whilst remaining desperately shy and always staying just out of range of cameras. 

This paper that YOU introduced starts with the assumption that UAPs are alien spacecraft.  There is no doubt in the author's mind concerning this.  Therefore the entire paper is devoted to looking for evidence that explains how they got here and what they're up to.  The author uncritically accepts that these aliens reached Earth using an Alcubierre drive - a hypothetical machine that uses exotic matter to warp spacetime.  But exotic matter does not exist, so neither can an Alcubierre drive.  So UAPs cannot be alien technology, which is the whole point of the paper YOU introduced.

When I pointed out the flaws in the paper that YOU introduced, you somehow twisted things around to suggest I'm promoting or advocating the author's position.  On the contrary, at no point have I argued that this paper is anything other than ill-informed waffle with no scientific or academic qualities to redeem it.

I'm disappointed, but not really surprised, that you did not see the relevance of that paper to the overall theme that UAPs might be alien technology.  It was Einstein's 1905 paper on Special Relativity which proved that FTL travel is impossible.  

Something everyone here on Unexplained Mysteries can finally agree on?

You wonderful Tom, I really like your writing style its very impressive you such a flare for words! Still waiting to hear more about your exploits with the CIA Tom! So that paper was on Special Relativity, which talked about FTL travel, wow I would never have figured that out, where do you even find a paper like that, I just dont know what I would do without you assistance!

Thanks Man , your the best! 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Manwon Lender

[Dejarma]

4 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Something everyone here on Unexplained Mysteries can finally agree on?

yep, i agree.... just out of interest:

forget the CIA, i get the feeling you were part of my team many years ago working for the highly secret branch of the NSA...

does the code name 'under wolf' ring any bells?

[jmccr8]

44 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

yep, i agree.... just out of interest:

forget the CIA, i get the feeling you were part of my team many years ago working for the highly secret branch of the NSA...

does the code name 'under wolf' ring any bells?

Do you remember me? I went by the code name Won Hung Lo?

[Dejarma]

25 minutes ago, closed for business said:

Do you remember me? I went by the code name Won Hung Lo?

yes i do- i thought you were dead

[jmccr8]

42 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

yes i do- i thought you were dead

Hi Dejarma

 no I am still up and around you know how we play

[Dejarma]

31 minutes ago, closed for business said:

you know how we play

oh I do= you were the one who tap danced on a recovered saucer for a laugh; not realizing the vibration rebooted it's system & it shot off with you on it-- we learned a lot because of you. Back engineering became easy from that day on....wow respect, you're a legend

when did you get back?

[Guyver]

On 6/26/2021 at 5:37 AM, LightAngel said:

 

You shouldn't worry about what others think of you.

The simplest answer is often the right one.

There's a lot we don't know.

 

So true.  Well said.

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, Dejarma said:

wow respect, you're a legend

Hi Dejarma

Sorry for the late likes for some reason either UM or me can't do the math on daily likes or may be it's a time warp thing.

Actually it's "the man, the myth, the legend"