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

Post by Pyxl101 » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 11:52 PM UTC

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…

Post by rblion » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 11:53 PM UTC

russdill wrote: post #48

rblion wrote: post #2

I was a skeptic of a lot of things until I saw some flying orbs around Mount Shasta, California last October. I saw similar moving orbs again in upstate NY this year on two occasions. I don't know what I saw but they were not weather balloons, satellites, planes, planets, stars, or meteors. Anyone here ever see something similar?

We live in an age where nearly everyone has a smartphone capable of recording video, satellites record the earth, and ground cameras record the sky. You either have to believe there is some massive conspiracy to cover the truth, or you are seeing some mundane phenomenon for which you just don't have the explanation available to you.

Post by guardiangod » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 11:56 PM UTC

derefr wrote: post #53

Anyone in this thread familiar with Electronic Warfare? Specifically, the EW arms race between a guided missile's "eyes", and decoy signals created by things that don't want to get hit by said missiles? (Or, better yet, between large-scale MIRV missiles, that don't want their warheads to get hit by interceptor systems, and the sensors on those interceptor counter-missiles. In that case, you'd call these techniques ht…

Post by lamontcg » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 11:57 PM UTC

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?

Post by ceejayoz » Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 11:58 PM UTC

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...