I Found This Rather Neat...Grimsley's Work

[PararealitySaint]

Although this might have been discussed in the past, I couldn't help but post it again, in the hopes that I can get some of your opinions on what it is:

Around 4:42 in the video, notice what they call, the "Delta Wing"

I find this piece very fascinating and would like to discuss it further with anyone out there more inclined to have any type of background on it.

 

[trainedobserver]

The bat-wing/arrowhead shape says to me that it is some sort of military aircraft.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Despite having served in the military, I have no special knowledge of advanced aircraft. Though I will say this. According to current understanding of physics, we should not have anything that can hover that is not a helicopter or vertical thrust aircraft (or neutral bouyancy like a hot air balloon etc).
Anytime I hear someone say that one of these triangle craft -like seen in Belgium during their famous wave - is just advanced military i have to question whether that person really understands how we traditionally achieve flight. If we are not using jets like in a harrier jump-jet then you need to have a lifting surface with sufficient airflow to create a difference in pressure, greater on the underside than on the top side, providing a net force upward. To achieve that an aircraft must attain sufficient velocity and keep above that minimum, otherwise the aircraft will stall.
A helicopter is basically several rotary-wings spinning, creating lift with a tail rotor system to counteract the 'wish' of the fuselage to rotate in the opposite direction to the rotors.
So without a jet downforce, a helicopter is the only other aircraft we have that can hover and it most certainly cannot do it quietly.
So many reports of these flying triangles state that they seem able to hover. That to me spells anti-gravity of some sort and I doubt if you will find any book or accpeted scientific paper detailing how we can currently achieve true anti-gravity. It may be the case that places like skunkworks and other hush-hush aerospace manufacturers are researching and building very advanced but still traditional craft, i.e still relying on a lifting surface and some forward thrust (and that is where i think these advanced places differ, novel scramjet engines etc but not anti-gravity).
My point is that I doubt that the amount of engineers and scientists working at these places could alone rewrite physics as we understand it alone. Usually large leaps in technology happen with input from many sources, or at least if a breakthrough is made I imagine it would be extremely difficult to put into practice without a good deal of the larger scientific community finding out that we have new ways to manipulate gravity etc
I would almost find it easier to believe that if there are truly human-built and operated anti-gravity flying delta craft, that the tech was indeed back-engineered from ET tech.
If the craft that Ed Grimsley is pointing out are really operating at the speeds and altitudes that he claims, then apart from traditional rocket technology, we should have nothing that can operate in a vacuum like space. These very high speeds are hard to explain except when traditional rockets etc are in orbit. What is being used to provide the impulse to push a craft to high speeds while not being in orbit remains a mystery to wider science.
If humans have anything like a delta craft that can hover with no moving parts I will be happy to assume it is copied tech?
gordon

 

[trainedobserver]

If the craft that Ed Grimsley is pointing out are really operating at the speeds and altitudes that he claims, then apart from traditional rocket technology, we should have nothing that can operate in a vacuum like space. These very high speeds are hard to explain except when traditional rockets etc are in orbit. What is being used to provide the impulse to push a craft to high speeds while not being in orbit remains a mystery to wider science.
If humans have anything like a delta craft that can hover with no moving parts I will be happy to assume it is copied tech?
gordon

Well that is the thing, we don't know what the actual speed or altitude of the objects on the film are. The physical configuration is not unlike other known UAV and manned USAF and Navy aircraft. Who knows what those things are, I for one just find it poor evidence for ET technology.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

@T.O yeah, agreed re: ed grimsley footage and various other sightings of forward-moving delta shaped craft. they could easily be advanced fighters or spy planes.
However, it is the reports of such vehicles that are seen going to slow for traditional lift to be keeping them in the air and obviously a flat triangle craft should not be able to hover in any circumstance.
I have seen stuff from Ed going back quite a way but i dont remember seeing anything that looks like it is hovering. Also, it is mostly footage of lights very high up with no reference so speed and acceleration is hard to make out.
I maintain however that if reports such as the enormous boomerang shaped craft sighted in the Phoenix lights case of '97 and others involving triangles that hover are true, then that may well indicate ET technology as even leading physicists such as Michiu Kaku seem to be completely unaware of anti-gravity science being a reality.
I would think it would be hard to keep such a discovery a complete secret, due to the number of high-lever scientists/engineers that would be required to bring such a new technology to fruition. I can believe though that if the technology was just copied or back-engineered from ET tech, that would be easier to keep secret because it would not take the same amount of R&D as science from scratch!
I would be most interested in seeing decent footage of delta-shaped craft hovering, or moving to slow for the wings to be generating lift in the traditional sense.
gordon.

 

[PararealitySaint]

First off, most of you know that although I am open to the suggestion that ET could exist, I doubt very sincerely he (it whatever) could care less about us humans, no less fight over or near our space in any support/interested role. Considering that point, I would much rather conclude it being something of our own making, and who is to say that NASA wasn't a front for a covert group which is 60 or so years ahead of anything we citizens know of.

I posted this video and referred to time frame 4:42 because there you once again seem to have the lights in a triangular fashion similar to all the triangle craft so many people have witnessed outside and close to the earth, hovering and then shooting off into the night.

In 1957 the United States supposedly had a blueprint of a craft I have always thought pretty cool, and something perhaps they utilized as the origination of a more advanced Delta winged craft:

Dyna_Soar

I am not saying this is definitely the case, but considering the space shuttle as our supposedly only advanced space craft......come on.....The craft I refer to above was cancelled? Or was it that this is what we were told and instead they kept up the development and now have many generations since 1957, some even with propulsion now?

 

[trainedobserver]

We know that the USAF and Navy have their own space programs. The capabilities of those programs are naturally secret. I think there is reason to believe that while we may not possess backward engineered anti-gravity drives, we do have some extremely exotic aircraft and spacecraft in operation. I think it is reasonable to assume a 50 year (which I believe to be conservative) lead time on technologies in use in these military programs versus those in common knowledge and use. Privatized and compartmentalized research and development programs may be flying some very exotic weapons and observation platforms indeed. Also, a lot of things make it to prototype stages but fail to go into what we would think of as mass production. The design and test cycle has been compressed greatly through the use of computer simulation and advanced modeling technologies. The potential for incredible breakthroughs and innovation has never been greater and is increasing exponentially. That is why we should be reluctant to say things like "That can't be ours."

 

[PararealitySaint]

We know that the USAF and Navy have their own space programs. The capabilities of those programs are naturally secret.

So then it wouldn’t be such a stretch to believe that in 50 years, anti gravity propulsion could very well be a mode of flight. Combine this with the idea (notice I didn’t say fact, as we do not have any actual facts) that the U.S. Navy and Air Force is advanced 5o or so years in the production of “space access” type vehicles, then the triangle lit Delta Winged aircraft we see in position 4:24 of the video, could very well be in fact a U.S. spacecraft.

 

[trainedobserver]

So then it wouldn’t be such a stretch to believe that in 50 years, anti gravity propulsion could very well be a mode of flight. Combine this with the idea (notice I didn’t say fact, as we do not have any actual facts) that the U.S. Navy and Air Force is advanced 5o or so years in the production of “space access” type vehicles, then the triangle lit Delta Winged aircraft we see in position 4:24 of the video, could very well be in fact a U.S. spacecraft.

I think that is a very real possibility and much more probable than it being an alien spacecraft. I also think field propulsion may have existed in one form or another for a while now, however it probably isn't anything like the sci-fi version. It also may not be all that practical which could explain why it hasn't been commercialized or weaponized. That's just all wild speculation though.

 

[boomerang]

The delta pattern at around 4:42 is a real eye-catcher. When pondering strange craft in the sky that seemingly violate established limitations of aerodynamics and propulsion, I sometimes wonder how much might be real and how much might be technological stagecraft. For instance, how about hovering lighter than air craft constructed with breakthrough materials technology that have the ability to simultaneously cloak while appearing to zoom away at fantastic speeds?

Just a thought.

 

[PararealitySaint]

I think that is a very real possibility and much more probable than it being an alien spacecraft. I also think field propulsion may have existed in one form or another for a while now, however it probably isn't anything like the sci-fi version. It also may not be all that practical which could explain why it hasn't been commercialized or weaponized. That's just all wild speculation though.

I agree with your notion about the possibility of it being terrestrial instead of E.T., but how much more practical can it get if it moves like it does in the video and in orbit no less?

As far as the commercialization of the weaponry or propulsion method, the SR71 and the U2 are examples of the U.S. subverting the technology far and away from the market for many years.

Boomerang brings up a good point. Perhaps this was staged, but Grimsley has shown this type of sighting for years now...During some of his videos, up to 50 people and more have eye witnessed his findings. Either they are being staged by someone who can do so by reflecting at great distances, or perhaps other remote function, or what was shown in the video is really something intelligent flying above our planet.

 

[trainedobserver]

I agree with your notion about the possibility of it being terrestrial instead of E.T., but how much more practical can it get if it moves like it does in the video and in orbit no less?

I don't know how sure we can be about how high and how fast the objects in his videos actually are, but I don't think they are staged.

I'm sure there is a great deal of technology in the SR71, U2, and other exotic aircraft that while whiz-bang isn't practical for c commercial manufacturing and use. If anti-gravity or some sort of field propulsion exists within a military project or program it may be so damn expensive to manufacture, maintain, and operate that we only have a couple in operation at any given time. Also, I imagine it might be a bit dangerous to be around.

 

[PararealitySaint]

If anti-gravity or some sort of field propulsion exists within a military project or program it may be so damn expensive to manufacture, maintain, and operate that we only have a couple in operation at any given time. Also, I imagine it might be a bit dangerous to be around.

Yet we are talking about the U.S. Government being at least 50 to 60 years ahead of itself and perhaps already mastering anti gravity propulsion. Again, I agree with you, I would much rather believe this to be the case than it being E.T.

Who was the guy from the band Iron Butterfly (In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida) who was supposedly into anti gravity testing as an armchair physicist and found it's true properties, just to disappear into the desert, never to be heard again? Perhaps this was a cover up by the govt. to ensure the technology wasn't advanced farther than it has been.

It would also solve the question of all these triangular craft eye-witnessed by so many floating nearby and then shooting off into the night.

 

[trainedobserver]

Yet we are talking about the U.S. Government being at least 50 to 60 years ahead of itself and perhaps already mastering anti gravity propulsion. Again, I agree with you, I would much rather believe this to be the case than it being E.T.

I think there could very well be a mix of both. I am convinced there is no one explanation for UFOs or any other paranormal phenomenon. There may very well be ET and terrestrial sources for them. It isn't necessarily all one thing or another for any of this business.

 

[PararealitySaint]

I think there could very well be a mix of both. I am convinced there is no one explanation for UFOs or any other paranormal phenomenon. There may very well be ET and terrestrial sources for them. It isn't necessarily all one thing or another for any of this business.

But then why haven't we been contacted yet on a mass scale, or something leaked out to show that in fact E.T. really exists? This very reason is why I believe in the terrestrial theory instead. I think most of us on this board would summarize that what was recorded in frame 4:42 was a vehicle, triangular in shape and moving at a pretty fast speed in orbit. Many eyewitnesses have reported triangular craft within our atmosphere, hovering and moving at great speeds, and nearly all have reported the craft to have lights. I still cannot fathom why E.T. would use comparable light positions on their craft almost exactly like our aircraft.

 

[trainedobserver]

But then why haven't we been contacted yet on a mass scale, or something leaked out to show that in fact E.T. really exists?

Possible answers:
1. They don't care to contact us at all.It does not factor into their mission.
2. They have long since infiltrated human society and classical contact scenarios are neither needed or desirable.

I still cannot fathom why E.T. would use comparable light positions on their craft almost exactly like our aircraft.

I think the arrow-head configuration of lights in the video belongs to a terrestrial aircraft as well.

 

[PararealitySaint]

Possible answers:
1. They don't care to contact us at all.It does not factor into their mission.
2. They have long since infiltrated human society and classical contact scenarios are neither needed or desirable.

I think the arrow-head configuration of lights in the video belongs to a terrestrial aircraft as well.

1. Answer: Ok, this is what I felt as well, but in a different context. I felt that they wouldn't be interested in us at all because we are so inferior to their advancement. It would be like an ant farm, you find interest for a little while and then let it go.

2. Answer: For what reason then? By infiltrating us they would have a need to do so, something they have been covertly taking away or using from us? The show V comes to mind, LOL!

Agreed on the aircraft. It's a really cool video.

 

[tyder001]

Trainedobserver wrote: I am convinced there is no one explanation for UFOs or any other paranormal phenomenon. There may very well be ET and terrestrial sources for them. It isn't necessarily all one thing or another for any of this business.

Well put. I think people often have a "one size fits all" mindset. Life is rarely that cut and dried.

 

[trainedobserver]

1. Answer: Ok, this is what I felt as well, but in a different context. I felt that they wouldn't be interested in us at all because we are so inferior to their advancement. It would be like an ant farm, you find interest for a little while and then let it go.

Think about that analogy for a minute. The major difference between human beings and ants is not the use of technology, it is a a profound difference in all aspects of their being itself. These visitors may be of such a different order or kind of life that any perceived disparity between our technological advancement and theirs is a moot point.

2. Answer: For what reason then? By infiltrating us they would have a need to do so, something they have been covertly taking away or using from us? The show V comes to mind, LOL!

It could be any number of things. It could be something that we are unaware of for whatever reason. If the activity is some sort of resource management (we being the source of the resource) any number of controls might be necessary to ensure the preservation and cultivation of the resource. Our ideas about alien/human interaction could just very well be distractions, cultivated to maintain a certain level of unawareness of whatever the reality might be. I don't think any of the interpretations borrowed from religion such as demons, spirits, or djinns are correct, however for all practical purposes, we could be dealing with something analogous to predators from some other part of reality we don't have visibility into by virtue of either the design of our senses or our physical position in relation to it.

This is all just wild speculation mind you. I think it is safe to say that all paranormal phenomena isn't what it appears to be and we should not let our imaginations and cultural fears get the best of us.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I agree that there are probably several distinct things behind the whole UFO phenomenon. I do happen to think that at least part of it may be due to non-earth intelligences, but whether they come from another solar system, another time, or are camped out somewhere in our system I do not venture to guess.
One only has to look at the sheer diversity of unexplained objects in the sky to see that many sources may be behind it all. If you are to look at what has been recorded in Hessdalen in Norway, even just there in one location there is what appears to be vastly different phenomena going on. There are various intriguing light displays happening that look nothing like structured craft, moving at incredible speeds etc but there are also reports and at least one video of what seems to be an actual craft flying over the area. I sometimes wonder if ET might be investigating certain strange lights in the sky phenomena themselves?
If we look at the 'flotilla' phenomena that seems to be made up of bright small spheres and compare that with say, the Belgian triangle craft or indeed the huge boomerang craft from the Phoenix lights episode, to me these are so distinct and different that it almost makes more sense for there to be different intelligences behind these different UFO types.
I've often wondered at the sheer number of different craft and lights seen, could we be talking of just different 'models' of UFO piloted or controlled by one species? On earth we have quite an array of different cars and airplanes, so why could an ET race not have different types of craft?
I tend to think that if we are indeed being visited by an ET race then it is just as likely we are being visited by several. For a number of reasons I have never been too taken by the whole abduction thing but at the same time, the sheer number of reports leads me to think 'no smoke without fire' -it's just that along with UFO sightings I am sure there are many people who are making stuff up for whatever reason and it is hard to seperate the genuine from the outright fraud.
One thing I do take issue with is the thinking that because an ET race might be so far in advance of us that they would view us as mere ants - at most something that might get squashed under your shoe and nothing more. I do not subscribe to this at all. My reason is that if we look at humans and ants, what do we have in common? We eat, live on the earth, breath, reproduce etc but further than that, nothing really. We have no reason to think ants have a culture or technology or rational (or any) thought.
Even if some ET race was way ahead of us in technology and socially too, it could not escape their attention that we also have science and technology, even if it is primitive by their standards. To get where they may be now, they would still have had to research their surroundings, have theories, experiments, failures and successes. They absolutely would have to have mastered the EM spectrum quite early on. Because of this, they could not fail to notice that we also use electro-magnetic waves and that we have some understanding of the principles the universe is made of.
So I would have a hard time thinking that they would ignore this part of us and only view us as we view ants - no way, despite our differences we would still have an awful lot in common at least in science, even if it is something in common with their past. If we survive another few millenia and go out into wider space and we come across an intelligent species who has got as far as using electricity and radio waves, we would not consider them insignificant, just nowhere near as advanced. That is very different than how we consider insects etc surely?