HIGHLY recommended to watch the second video/podcast, especially the first 50 minutes.
"Repulsive-gravity" patent awarded to US Navy
- Thread starter ack
- Start date
What do you think are the Nimitz "TicTacs"?
I see only three possibilities:
The TicTacs are:
1) extra-terrestrial,
2) secret black budget U.S. military technology, or
3) fraud/fake -- the pilots are actors and/or the FLIR "TicTac" videos are fake/photo-shopped.
I have no idea if it's 1) or 2) but I do believe it is not 3). That means whether it is 1) or 2) doesn't matter -- either one represents a paradigm shift in our world, with huge implications for many industries.
If I am correct then, investment-wise, I recommend BA, LMT, NOC, GLD. Legacy energy, legacy transportation, among other industries, likely would be toast.
Last edited:
From what I know how easily the first life could arise chemically, I do believe that the universe is teeming with microbial life. I expect life in our own solar system, e.g., on one of the moons of Jupiter. Higher life forms not so much, you need very special, sheltered conditions for that. So I would think intelligent life forms exist at best only in a few places in our galaxy -- but our galaxy is 100,000 light years across. So the chances that some extraterrestrial intelligence could visit Earth are next to nil. And no, I don't believe in distance travel through magical shortcuts.
UFOs are just that, unidentified flying objects, phenomena that we cannot yet explain. But to think that they might be extraterrestrial, nah. Indeed, the vast majority of UFOs have had a trivial explanation, and I'm sure that all of them will have a terrestrial one, or one related to celestial phenomena that have nothing to do with an intelligent origin. From a rational perspective, given the above about the vast distances in the universe, the idea of extraterrestrial UFOs makes me yawn.
I did find the movie Independence Day entertaining though.
"No official government investigation has ever publicly concluded that UFOs are indisputably real, physical objects, extraterrestrial in origin, or of concern to national defense."
? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object
? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object
What do I think of it? Nothing. There are many reasonable alternative explanations, see for example subheading "Skeptical views" under:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nimitz_UFO_incident
Let's look at it from a practical perspective: how would extraterrestrials come to Earth with an object, but there would be none but a few spurious encounters? Would that be worth a trip over a distance of many light years? Why not identify themselves to Earthlings?
And if they came with a hostile intention to take over the world, wouldn't they come with a whole armada? We haven't seen that, and a large fleet could not go undetected by the scientific community, no matter how much of a government military conspiracy there was.
No matter how you slice and dice it, there's just no plausible reason to suspect extraterrestrial involvement in those encounters. Add to that what I mentioned above, the expected scarcity of intelligent (not microbial) life in the universe and the vast distances even just within our own galaxy, and the probability of the incident being an extraterrestrial encounter drops down to zero.
Have you studied the extremely sheltered conditions necessary for the evolution of intelligent life over billions of years? Earth is an extraordinarily special place. I am certain there are other places like that in the universe, but they will be rare.
Pseudoscientific hogwash.
Sorry to be so harsh, but being a scientist I have little patience with science fiction.
There were some scientists in the 19th century who thought that about man’s ability to fly. Right before the Wright Brothers proved that to be BS. Don’t forget the ridicule that was heaped on the guy who postulated the theory of techtonics. It took decades for the rest of his field to accept it. The math about this is all there. Just because science has yet to figure it out doesn’t make it hogwash. As for planets, many up until the recent past thought that planets around other stars were rare. Now that it has been shown that most stars likely have at least one planet, we hear that Earth is a special place. Why think that? Seems like a really earth centric point of view. Gee, science used to think the Earth was the center of the universe. We really have no clue how many earthlike planets there are in our own galaxy let alone the vast universe. Furthermore, who is to say that you need earth like conditions for life to start and then develop. The conditions where the first life developed on Earth were very different than what they are now. Look at some of the recent theories about microbial life being possible in the upper atmosphere of Venus. I like to keep an open mind about things, not so open that my brains fall out, but really science has a long way to go before it is even close to really figuring out the universe. Oh, and by the by, what used to be considered science fiction is now accepted science.
You make one fundamental mistake in your argumentation. Yes, science has shown to progress in ways that are totally unexpected, but in the entire history of science no physical laws have ever been transcended. This has to be a crucial consideration in a realistic and rational assessment of what science can and cannot do.
Shortcuts of distance in space travel would break known laws of nature. Comparisons with man's ability to fly go nowhere. With the latter, obviously no laws of nature are broken.
***
As to exoplanets, of course there are countless ones. But they are typically not conducive to intelligent life. You should watch the PBS documentary "The Planets: Jupiter" to get an idea just how special our solar system is. And even that touches on just one aspect of what makes Earth so special. As I said, I do think there must be conditions for intelligent life elsewhere -- the universe is vast! -- but they will not be common.
Making any definitive statements about this foolish imo.
Just like Joe describes, humans are very limited in intellect and perspective. To think we know and understand ALL the laws of nature when we don't even understand gravity is arrogant. We still have a lot to learn!
I do think quantum mechanics points to possibilities we've never dreamt of yet, and certainly confirms the nature of our perceived reality as being mostly empty... and the energy making up mass is likely a phenomenon controlled by consciousness. This is also exactly how Buddhism describes the nature of reality. IMO we've only just begun to realize our potential and only have the slightest understanding of exactly how the world we live in works.
Just like Joe describes, humans are very limited in intellect and perspective. To think we know and understand ALL the laws of nature when we don't even understand gravity is arrogant. We still have a lot to learn!
I do think quantum mechanics points to possibilities we've never dreamt of yet, and certainly confirms the nature of our perceived reality as being mostly empty... and the energy making up mass is likely a phenomenon controlled by consciousness. This is also exactly how Buddhism describes the nature of reality. IMO we've only just begun to realize our potential and only have the slightest understanding of exactly how the world we live in works.
None of the objections raised in that section are very strong. Arguing against what someone else wrote doesn't impeach Cmdr. Fravor's testimony. Nor does putting words into his mouth - he did not say that he "could see what a forty-foot object was doing from forty miles away." The skeptic's position is not strengthened by resorting to such tactics.
I suggest you actually listen to Cmdr. Fravor before dismissing his account based in a weak Wikipedia entry. Ignore those (including myself) who draw conclusions from his account - just listen to him (especially now that you know what criticisms the skeptics raise) and draw your own conclusions.
Physical laws do not change but science (our understanding of them) sure does.
Science has an open canon, updated as our understanding of physical laws advances. For example quantum entanglement does not violate physical laws, but it does violate yesteryear's science.
Yup!!
If we look at the last hundred and fifty years or so, and then extrapolate forward another hundred fifty thousand or hundred fifty million years, who knows what we might become, assuming we avoid indulging in mutually assured destruction or something similar.
Last edited:
I was going to write the same thing. I did not find strong the skeptics' points in that section.
Al, while I don’t like dragging on, the exoplanets we have found have never really been imaged, their spectra studied, etc. yes, we have found gas giants, hot Jupiters and the like, but there are likely more planets in those systems that we cannot yet detect. What is there at this juncture is all guess work, other than we have been able to detect there are planets there. Perhaps the James Webb will help improve our understanding. We can’t even find planet 9 out in the Kuiper Belt that observations indicate must be there and that is in our own solar system. A recent paper even models that Proxima b in the closest Star system to Earth, even though tidally lock may indeed be able to support life. That is galatically speaking, in our own backyard. Time will tell.
BTW, guess where Gene Roddenberry got some of the ideas for Star Trek, like warp drive? Guys at Nasa. Those guys were really into that show when it first ran on network TV.
BTW, guess where Gene Roddenberry got some of the ideas for Star Trek, like warp drive? Guys at Nasa. Those guys were really into that show when it first ran on network TV.
Hi Al,
I truly am curious to try to pin down your thought here. I want to understand you.
Are you saying that whatever the explanation is, you believe the TicTacs are not extra-terrestrial and that they are not secret U.S. military technology?
Interesting article came out yesterday.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi.../government-secret-ufo-program-investigation/
https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi.../government-secret-ufo-program-investigation/
One of the criticisms raised seems plausible or even likely at first glance:
"Nickell and astronomer and former Air Force pilot James E. McGaha speculated... that "one video image showing an object suddenly zooming off screen was likely caused by the plane's banking while the camera was stopped at the end of its sweep". "
This certainly seemed like a potentially overwhelming criticism until it occurred to me that angle of bank information might be included in the video display itself, which in fact turns out to be the case.
Just above the bracketed target, in the center of the screen, is an icon of a little airplane as seen end-on, with what looks like an allen wrench to either side. These allen wrenches are the artificial horizon indicator. The ends point towards the ground.
If the aircraft were banking, the artificial horizon indicator would make it obvious. In the podcast (second video clip) in post #14, the aircraft is clearly not banking as the target accelerates rapidly to the left.
Here is a FLIR [Forward-Looking Infared] targeting pod display which is paused with the aircraft banking, so you can see what that looks like:
Below is the clip of the Tic-Tac zipping off to the left, happens about thirty seconds in (giving you time to zoom in so you can see it) and then is repeated maybe twenty seconds later. Notice how flat and level the artificial horizon indicator is:
Last edited:
Similar threads
