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

241–250 of 317 posts

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

#241

Post by jazzyjackson »

mcphage wrote: post #223
jazzyjackson wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, the video didn't show me that the objects traveled at any speed -- that's from the pilots testimony, but maybe it appeared to move against the backdrop as they were banking around it. I would expect fighter pilots to be a good judge, but maybe you lose some sense of velocity when you're surprised by something you haven't seen before. Separately, radar operators saw something they didn't understand. It c…

> I don't know, the video didn't show me that the objects traveled at any speed That’s because you’re watching a YouTube video that was filmed on a potato, instead of actually, y’know, being there .

Well my point is all the conjecture of this unexplained supersonic movement is all hearsay based off eye witnesses. I don't trust eye witnesses, maybe they saw something maybe they didn't, but I haven't seen anything that seems to hold any water.

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

#242

Post by TeMPOraL »

rblion wrote: post #66
ceejayoz wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Planes have blinking lights, right? Not necessarily - they can be turned off, non-functional, or drowned out by a brighter light like the landing lights from a distance. > One of them disappeared in a flash... Or someone flipped the landing lights switch. I saw a C-17 at night while staying near Fort Drum that I was completely baffled by until it got close enough to properly make out. Had it stayed away, I'd have h…

There were two of them next to each other. Is that common at all? Does 'formation flying' involve craft flying around in random non-linear fashion? There was a bunch of us and we discussed it for awhile, aircraft is the first thing we jumped to...

There were two of them next to each other. Is that common at all?

How close is "next to"? Aircraft tend to have multiple lights, many symmetrically positioned. And when it's closer than you think and maneuvering, it may look as if the lights are moving non-linearly. Disappearance of a light can be explained too - the plane maneuvered in a way that its wing or fuselage blocked your view of the light.

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

#243

Post by zorronimous »

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…

It's an UFO until it's a drone. (Joking)

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

#244

Post by lytol »

NateEag wrote: post #190
krapp wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What evidence do we have that these phenomena are strictly natural? Well... natural phenomena are the only phenomena for which evidence exists at all. That's why the Bible says faith is the evidence of things unseen, as opposed to data.

That sounds like circular reasoning to me - you seem to be saying that if we can observe something it must therefore be entirely natural. That doesn't follow, though. The obvious example would be that if Jesus actually rose from the dead by a miracle, then people who were present could see him and put their hands on his scars. Is the supernatural inherently not scientifically testable? Absolutely. It does not follow…

Well, then it's certainly camera shy.

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

#245

Post by cheez »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #199
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.

Sadly, this is probably the right answer.

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

#246

Post by whiddershins »

krapp wrote: post #162
NateEag wrote: post #157

Time for me to burn some karma. What evidence do we have that these phenomena are strictly natural? There are some ingenious explanations in this thread of how you could create something like this effect with known technology. If we don't a priori eliminate it on the grounds it is impossible (as a Christian, I do not, but many here do), I imagine that supernatural beings trolling humans (especially modern scientific…

>What evidence do we have that these phenomena are strictly natural? Well... natural phenomena are the only phenomena for which evidence exists at all. That's why the Bible says faith is the evidence of things unseen, as opposed to data.

Where exactly in the Bible does it say that?

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

#247

Post by jazzyjackson »

RandomTisk wrote: post #153
chubbyrabbit wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is laughably stupid. QM and nuclear science? I see nothing stupid with using quantum mechanics and nuclear science in this context. > Can we call out politicians for just throwing in words that they don't know what they mean? I'm sure they know what those words mean on a surface level. They don't really need to understand them beyond that point, it's not their job.

Me either, it's that R word making people sensitive again.

The man went to school for biblical studies. Now I don't have a grudge against anyone with a BA in biblical studies, but I'm not going to respect their opinion on whether something requires quantum or nuclear science.

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

#248

Post by luxuryballs »

perseusprime11 wrote: post #191
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.

Maybe they’re testing tech that tricks pilots and tracking systems into seeing things that aren’t there, or things that distract the sensors and pilots so the real craft can make a hasty escape.

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

#249

Post by luxuryballs »

erik_landerholm wrote: post #100

I feel like a lot of commenters on here must first be hearing of this or have not even looked into the tic-tac case even a small amount. You have a top gun pilot and his WSO on record saying they saw it visually along with a huge underwater craft. It moved in ways that nothing using conventional propulsion can. Hovering for example is extremely difficult, made all the harder with no wings, blades or visible exhaust.…

Could be some technology being tested to fake out both pilots and sensors, like a mirage/decoy? Allowing real planes to escape or stealthier craft to not get attention.
Post reply on HN