Hazzard Posted July 11 #101 Share Posted July 11 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Zebra3 said: Aspects of physics we can't understand yet. I think this explanation has to be at the very bottom of the list... but its interesting that you put it on the top. Edited July 11 by Hazzard 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted July 11 #102 Share Posted July 11 For those who haven't seen it, I understand. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 11 #103 Share Posted July 11 Just now, Zebra3 said: For those who haven't seen it, I understand. Im sorry if I missed it, we have lots of people telling their experience... can you link to it, or tell it again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the13bats Posted July 11 #104 Share Posted July 11 2 hours ago, Zebra3 said: From my sighting, OUR laws of physics absolutely do not apply to whatever the hell it was. You saw something but don't know what the devil it was but jump to our laws of physics don't apply. That makes as much sense as people who insist they can gauge the size and distance speed etc of some unknown object in the air, going on what ? They are just guessing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted July 11 #105 Share Posted July 11 I'll do it tomorrow. Gotta run. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the13bats Posted July 11 #106 Share Posted July 11 55 minutes ago, Zebra3 said: I'll do it tomorrow. Gotta run. At this point I don't blame you for running off. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAnderson Posted July 11 Author #107 Share Posted July 11 3 hours ago, Piney said: In another thread he said he was in the Army and is a scientist who does "research" for the A.F. Not anymore. And yes I have a double major in physics and mathematics and several years of post graduate studies. The poster who you have a discussion with was unable to explain to the physics he thinks he knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAnderson Posted July 11 Author #108 Share Posted July 11 (edited) 4 hours ago, astrobeing said: Oh my gosh I just told you which laws! What a waste of time you are! I am waiting for your explanation and still nothing. Perhaps you left for today. I am still perplexed because you said you have seen many objects that have these extraordinary capabilities I described. You said they are not extraterrestrial. I didn't say anything about extraterrestrial objects (although the possibility is there). Since you have seen these objects that have no wings, no exhaust, no cockpit, no windows, travel at incredible speeds and making no sounds, then tell me which objects are you referring to. Do the Air-Force or Navy have developed this kind of technology? You said you have seen them but I don't know where and when or what they are. Don't tell me they are meteors, stars, weather balloons. Edited July 11 by MrAnderson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAnderson Posted July 11 Author #109 Share Posted July 11 On 7/9/2024 at 7:42 AM, OpenMindedSceptic said: Mr Andersen, the MO for the naysayers on here is to twist small words and phrases and then expand that into ssyingbthe whole ufo phenomenon must be fake. Their problem is, a flying object that can have '40 B52's parked on one wing', witnessed by thousands, and they suggest it can't be from anywhere other than our planet. Unless there's a really really big mylar balloon. lol I can't remember if I answered your post because I have usually many notifications and I may miss a few replies. You know that I don't have to say I agree with you on how the subject is approached by the skeptical community. It's simply denying and dismissing everything and then start all over again. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted July 12 #110 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 14 hours ago, the13bats said: At this point I don't blame you for running off. Well, I was gonna post it this morning but you couldn't even wait for it to start your bull****. We all know you have no real interest in this subject, like the rest of the debunking-hobbyists in here. I posted it years ago after it happened and have already dealt with you guys when I did, Hazz included. And, if you can imagine, had no real help in finding answers, just BS comments like this. Hazz's snarky little 'laugh' emoji reaction to your post there also shows his real intentions, as if that was unexpected. He asked nicely so I was gonna post it but he couldn't wait either. If MrAnderson or any other experiencers wish to see the report, they can PM me to compare incidents. I already knew you'd crap the bed right off the bat but I at least thought you'd wait to read about it. So, continue your little hobby here as you do. Flip through your little legal pad and pick your response, 'cause we're all looking forward to your oh-so-unexpected and original response. Edited July 12 by Zebra3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 12 #111 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Zebra3 said: Well, I was gonna post it this morning but you couldn't even wait for it to start your bull****. We all know you have no real interest in this subject, like the rest of the debunking-hobbyists in here. I posted it years ago after it happened and have already dealt with you guys when I did, Hazz included. And, if you can imagine, had no real help in finding answers, just BS comments like this. Hazz's snarky little 'laugh' emoji reaction to your post there also shows his real intentions, as if that was unexpected. He asked nicely so I was gonna post it but he couldn't wait either. If MrAnderson or any other experiencers wish to see the report, they can PM me to compare incidents. I already knew you'd crap the bed right off the bat but I at least thought you'd wait to read about it. So, continue your little hobby here as you do. Flip through your little legal pad and pick your response, 'cause we're all looking forward to your oh-so-unexpected and original response. Touchy...? Anyway...what ever that was... "The file you were looking for could not be found" Edited July 12 by Hazzard 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 12 #112 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 15 hours ago, MrAnderson said: Since you have seen these objects that have no wings, no exhaust, no cockpit, no windows, travel at incredible speeds and making no sounds, then tell me which objects are you referring to. If you would have clicked on those links I posted for you about these anomolous atmospheric lights, like in Hessdalen, you would have known that you description matches with some of these lights. Yes, even the "object" you keep talking about can be explained... some of these lights/orbs can (and do) have a metallic looking surface. Edited July 12 by Hazzard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted July 12 #113 Share Posted July 12 It was just the helpful list. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrobeing Posted July 12 #114 Share Posted July 12 16 hours ago, MrAnderson said: I am waiting for your explanation and still nothing. Perhaps you left for today. I gave you the list of physical laws that prevent your make-believe spacecraft from existing. Surely a former Air Force whatever like yourself know what these are. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrobeing Posted July 12 #115 Share Posted July 12 19 hours ago, Zebra3 said: I saw it, not 'thought I saw', more wordplay. The physics isn't dismissed, it may be something we may not understand quite as well as we think we do. So you don't believe optical illusions exist and the bulk of what we have learned about the physical world must be rewritten to accommodate what your eyes told you. This says more about you than what you saw. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAnderson Posted July 12 Author #116 Share Posted July 12 1 hour ago, Hazzard said: If you would have clicked on those links I posted for you about these anomolous atmospheric lights, like in Hessdalen, you would have known that you description matches with some of these lights. Yes, even the "object" you keep talking about can be explained... some of these lights/orbs can (and do) have a metallic looking surface. It wasn't what I was describing and the poster couldn't tell me which of the objects he was referring to. He threw an explanation out of nowhere. We are not talking about anomalous atmospheric lights. Otherwise we will replace the term UFOs. O = object Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAnderson Posted July 12 Author #117 Share Posted July 12 26 minutes ago, astrobeing said: I gave you the list of physical laws that prevent your make-believe spacecraft from existing. Surely a former Air Force whatever like yourself know what these are. I don't think you did. You thread some sentences there without even explaining what you meant. What are the objects you were referring to when you said you have seen them so many times? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted July 12 #118 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 29 minutes ago, astrobeing said: So you don't believe optical illusions exist and the bulk of what we have learned about the physical world must be rewritten to accommodate what your eyes told you. This says more about you than what you saw. Thanks for crystallizing my sentiments. Yes, I don't believe optical illusions exist and science about the physical world is set in stone and never evolves. Edited July 12 by Zebra3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrobeing Posted July 12 #119 Share Posted July 12 7 minutes ago, MrAnderson said: I don't think you did. You thread some sentences there without even explaining what you meant. OK Mr. Anderson. There are physical laws imposed on objects because of their momentum and how they must travel through the atmosphere. Surely a former Air Force Whatever is familiar with the physical laws regarding flight. 9 minutes ago, MrAnderson said: What are the objects you were referring to when you said you have seen them so many times? Well obviously, Mr. Anderson, they had to have been mechanical objects because they didn't have windows or exhaust. By your logic there can be no other explanation. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrobeing Posted July 12 #120 Share Posted July 12 11 minutes ago, Zebra3 said: Yes, I don't believe optical illusions exist and science about the physical world is set in stone and never evolves. So you believe physical laws "evolve" over time? Who taught you this? 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebra3 Posted July 12 #121 Share Posted July 12 Science evolves. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzard Posted July 12 #122 Share Posted July 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, MrAnderson said: We are not talking about anomalous atmospheric lights. Otherwise we will replace the term UFOs. O = object You dont think that one of the lights/orbs with a metallic looking surface from Hessdalen can be mistaken for a craft/object? Edited July 12 by Hazzard 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resume Posted July 12 #123 Share Posted July 12 1 hour ago, Zebra3 said: Science evolves. Scientific theories are provisional and may change given futher data; however, are current understanding of the physical laws of the universe is that they are constant throughout, though that too may be subject to change given further data. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrobeing Posted July 13 #124 Share Posted July 13 22 hours ago, Zebra3 said: Science evolves. From what to what? Give an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrobeing Posted July 13 #125 Share Posted July 13 On 7/11/2024 at 4:35 PM, MrAnderson said: Not anymore. And yes I have a double major in physics and mathematics and several years of post graduate studies. The poster who you have a discussion with was unable to explain to the physics he thinks he knows. If you have such an impressive background in physics then why are you begging me to explain basic physical laws to you and why are you unable to comprehend anything about them? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now