Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 317 posts

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#191

Post by perseusprime11 »

godelski wrote: post #126

Reading the linked Vice article >"Based on pilot accounts, encounters with these UAPs (unidentified aerial phenomena) often involved complex flight patterns and advanced maneuvering, which demand extreme advances in quantum mechanics, nuclear science, electromagnetics, and thermodynamics.” - Walker > Republican representative Mark Walker of North Carolina This is laughably stupid. QM and nuclear science? Can we call…

I've seen those videos. The objects were at 80,000 ft traveling at Sonic speeds as recorded by jets flying in the vicinity. The object also took a sudden left so fast that our radars could not lock in the position. All to say that it is ok to entertain that these are not identified by human technology and they may not be our drones.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#192

Post by kfrzcode »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #152

What I do consistently see uniting all of these articles is Tom Delonge and TTSA, which has a big “Invest” button up at the top of their website. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to marketing in 2019. Looks like Tom Delonge is operating some kind of quirky investment scam. Next up, a Blink 182 reunion tour.

Nah, it's an Angels & Airwaves tour. His band, known as AvA has been around for more than a decade. He's been working this whole media conglomerate for many many years, and this is just another part of it, IMO.

If you're interested in actually funding research in extraterrestrial life, donate to SETI - https://www.seti.org/donate

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#193

Post by lonelappde »

erik_landerholm wrote: post #169
bobdole12345 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, more like the laser pointer dot can move faster than any cat could catch. That doesn't mean the laser pointer wielder is moving that fast.

Huh? You think it’s some kind of projection? How do you explain the great, huge underwater vessel the 4 pilots saw? It was seen visually. The FLIR and radar reports were from different people on two separate training exercises and from the Princeton. The pilots claiming to have seen the large underwater craft and the tic-tac saw it visually only. The radar on their planes could not pick it up. They watched it for 5 m…

Sounds a lot more like sensor jitters or optical illusion than a 23rd century aircraft flying in nonsense patterns over a giant teleporting submarine.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#194

Post by typeformer »

lamontcg wrote: post #35
simonblack wrote: post #4

I reckon it's misdirection. "We'll say it's a UFO, but really it's a hypersonic plane in development." Just like the SR71 had a cover story during its development phase. "The wreckage was recovered in two days, and persons at the scene were identified and requested to sign secrecy agreements. A cover story for the press described the accident as occurring to a F-105, and it is still listed in this way on official rec…

Its probably a system for "jamming" FLIR sensors an allowing the attacker to project targets onto the system. The pilots were guinea pigs. Which is made more plausible by the fact that the USS Princeton asked the Nimitz pilots first if they were armed, and only after they informed the Princeton that they were not that they were given the orders to investigate. There probably was a real object -- since one was sighted…

The US Navy does not do guinea pig exercise with live weapons because if pilots don't know it's a exercise, people die. One of these craft almost crashed into a fighter jet which is part of the reason so many personnel have come forward

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#195

Post by typeformer »

therein wrote: post #74
Pyxl101 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the case, why not read the pilots into the test, even at a summary level? If the Navy had told the pilots, "You just experienced an advanced technology test. Nothing to worry about" then they would have undoubtedly kept their mouths shut and not talked to the media.

I agree that would have prevented a lot of misunderstandings but Navy operates this way all the time. They prefer a somewhat "blinded" subject.

I think you know nothing about the Navy

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#196

Post by typeformer »

api wrote: post #44
lamontcg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its probably a system for "jamming" FLIR sensors an allowing the attacker to project targets onto the system. The pilots were guinea pigs. Which is made more plausible by the fact that the USS Princeton asked the Nimitz pilots first if they were armed, and only after they informed the Princeton that they were not that they were given the orders to investigate. There probably was a real object -- since one was sighted…

That's interesting, but wasn't there also at least one visual sighting accompanying this FLIR stuff?

Many more than one, from both the fighter jets and ship personnel onboard vessels in the regions.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#197

Post by friendlybus »

tempsy wrote: post #127

Anyone feel like this is a bit of a troll move, especially given the viral Facebook event to storm Area 51 is supposedly happening in a few days? What prompted them to say this now?

Shhh it's an art project. Let people analyze it as science as if it were ever meant to be done so that way.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#198

Post by nullc »

ComplexSystems wrote: post #182

As a mundane note, what is the reason that the audio quality in this video is so poor? It sounds like they're using walkie talkies from the 1970s. How can the US military, which spends more money than anyone else, have Navy pilots using heavily distorted audio communication systems that aren't even as good as a standard cell phone?

How well do you think a cell phone works out in the middle of the ocean?

I don't know anything about the particular system in use there, but the military has communications that can send voice from anywhere in the world without ground infrastructure in the presence of jamming, it also has systems that avoid emissions that could be used to target weapons .... coverage area, jamming resistance, covertness are all important qualities which can be traded off against audio quality.

Good training can make audio which is barely recognizable perfectly intelligible. I thought that audio sounded pretty decent, in fact.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#199

Post by akhilcacharya »

geomark wrote: post #189

I watched Joe Rogan interview Bob Lazar [1] which seemed mind blowing if everything he said was true. But then I went and researched it and seems more likely he came up with some fantastic stories to keep himself out of prison after he got caught taking a bunch of friends up to the mountains to watch some classified experiements of a particle beam device. It's not my field of study, but some opinions I read were that…

The idea that it’s a guinea pig test of a submarine directed anti-FLIR system is the only plausible explanation to me.

But again Lazar has been a crank for decades (I think the first reference to an alien at Area 51 named Elvis is from him, later popularized in Perfect Dark), so even that theory is a bit out there.

Re: Tom Delonge’s UFO Research Center Is Making Politicians Demand Answers

#200

Post by typeformer »

colechristensen wrote: post #21
simonblack wrote: post #4

I reckon it's misdirection. "We'll say it's a UFO, but really it's a hypersonic plane in development." Just like the SR71 had a cover story during its development phase. "The wreckage was recovered in two days, and persons at the scene were identified and requested to sign secrecy agreements. A cover story for the press described the accident as occurring to a F-105, and it is still listed in this way on official rec…

There is also misdirection via (apparent) incompetence. Give as little information as possible, or wrong vague suggestions to the people writing the press releases. That makes it look like you're trying to mislead/lie/coverup. It's a good strategy to advertise new capabilities to adversaries and/or let them know you know about theirs or just to make them think rare atmospheric/sensor phenomena are scary new tech.

Or it is a cover up that has been going on pretty successfully for decades because the truth seems to sensational for some people to believe.
Post reply on HN