My Problem With Debunkers

[Filer of False Complaints]

What about the scenerio of... how big was the fish you caught... It was THIS BIG. What I mean is... A mile is just an easy measurment to throw out when saying you saw a large craft, but in fact it was much smaller.

Is this when the experienced observer comes into play.

 

[ArizonaWill]

OK, perhaps the assumption here is that WITHOUT "OUTSIDE" HELP, humanity cannot build mile long ships floating in the sky. You can quote me (as if anyone would quote me!?!?), as saying I agree with DB on this.

However, if there really are entities from other realities, planets, dimensions, zipcodes, etc., and they are helping some tiny portion of humanity in terms of technology, then all bets are off, aren't they? What we know about engineering and all that other techy stuff becomes moot (or "moo" if you live in Wisconsin). Perhaps this is not the time or place for people to divulge whether they believe or know (uh, oh....here we go again) if entities are indeed interacting with some humans to create such technological wonders.

Honestly, I just don't know, do you?

P.S. I am quite honored to have this comment appear right below the ads for the buxom babe movies. Ah, such class! I must go get my body lotion.

 

[David Biedny]

Given the stupidity and brutality of the human race, I would put the possibility of non-human beings giving higher tech to humans at... 0%.

dB

 

[mike]

i think once you discount the possibility its human technology, you put the squeeze on the possibility that its human technology from the future. and thats not something im comfortable with. time travel as an explaination for the ufo question still ranks up there as one of the better explainationsfor me.

of course if the idea that its human tech from the future is plausible, then the major factor becomes time................

and then its plausible that the tech might have been first developed by the nazi's all those years ago and simply appears to be ahead of its time due to its existance being kept out of the public eye for security reasons

 

[ArizonaWill]

Given the stupidity and brutality of the human race, I would put the possibility of non-human beings giving higher tech to humans at... 0%.

dB

Well, considering the stupidity and brutality of the "visitors" I have encountered via alien abductions as a boy and young man, I would not be so sure about that unless you really think the non-human beings are benevolent and kind. The technology they could give us might seem "higher" to us, but still be in the peanut gallery as far as they are concerned (nothing that could pose a threat to them, but might help us make war on each other more efficiently). When you truly get into all this, it brings up our assumptions about everything, e.g., what kind of "aliens" are we dealing with? Are they compassionate wise "spiritual" beings, are they self-centered jerk-offs that steal our sperm and eggs for their own profit margin? Are they parasites or paradims of virtue? Space Brothers or demons? Native to Earth (John Mack's tree-hugger environmentalist aliens) or more like the Borg? (The Clueless One's alien ONENESS?). Maybe I should shut up now before I get locked in the laundry room (which happened years ago in college when I posed to many irritating questions on a topic that everyone thought was quite simple - something to do with sex, as most conversation revolves around in college).

 

[ArizonaWill]

i think once you discount the possibility its human technology, you put the squeeze on the possibility that its human technology from the future. and thats not something im comfortable with. time travel as an explaination for the ufo question still ranks up there as one of the better explainationsfor me.

of course if the idea that its human tech from the future is plausible, then the major factor becomes time................

and then its plausible that the tech might have been first developed by the nazi's all those years ago and simply appears to be ahead of its time due to its existance being kept out of the public eye for security reasons

I suppose it could be from what we would call the future, but you'd think it would be more discreet than to fly mile long craft over populated areas. I guess one of my assumptions is that time travelers would want to be discreet, but that could be wrong also. Afterall, a Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court supposedly taught everyone to dance the jitterbug! I am joking, David.

Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. Do you ever get the feeling we actually know next to nothing about this phenomena beyond our own experiences and our assumptions? But to state anything with declarative power, I think it helps to state our assumptions.

 

[Graphimancer]

For most observers, a mile long craft means "bigger than I can guestimate." For some, such as pilots or other trained observers, it may be a more accurate figure.

For humans, with human technology and materials, a mile long craft is both not feasible and the fuel requirements would absolutely make the thing a dud, due to the rising fuel storage requirements vs. propulsion issue, and cost. And, again, how useless would be a poorly maneuverable aircraft that no insurgant could possibly miss, short of a backfire.

The only good use for such a large craft would be a mothership for use in space, an aircraft carrier from beyond. It would also be useful as a generation ship. Why they would come so close to the surface of a planet, especially an unpredictable, hostile planet like this one, is a mystery to me.

Many of these triangles and similar big ships are reported to not make noise. Again, not human tech.

Telepathic broadcasting to surface dwellers? Not human tech.

Ah, I guess I've made my point. I also reserve the right to wildly wrong.

 

[mike]

the fuel requirements would absolutely make the thing a dud, due to the rising fuel storage requirements vs. propulsion issue, and cost.

unless the propulsion system is unlike those you are used to comprehending.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam-powered_propulsion

ie microwaves beamed from another source perhaps higher in orbit.
some of these new power sats being proposed do just that able to beam down enough power to run entire cities

then there is the supposed zero point energy sources.

size ? well thats a human thing too

The Navy likes to call the big Nimitz class carriers "4.5 acres of sovereign and mobile American territory" --

but big as these ships are ,they only useful where there is water.........

imagine taking the same concept "one step up" into the air.
if they are able to react to threats with superior speed and altitude of known aircraft then they are safe from attack.

from a military pov the bigger the better has always been a maxim

A microwave beam could be used to send power to a rectenna, for microwave electric propulsion. Microwave broadcast power has been practically demonstrated several times (e.g. Goldstone, California in 1974), rectennas are potentially lightweight and can handle high power at high conversion efficiency.

However, rectennas tend to need to be very large for a significant amount of power to be captured.

this could explain the size

 

[Graphimancer]

Well, that's a pretty good answer. Conceded. I was thinking more in terms of traditional propellants.

I imagine there are labs where they have got anti-grav working, and they are working on refining it. I don't know about Bushman's claim that the Gulf Breeze sighting were man-made or not, although it's not outside the realm of reality.

Fuel/propulsion issues aside, I'm still holding to the idea that the big ships aren't ours. It's just logical that such big ships would be more liability than advantage.

If the planet were doomed, I could see them being built as space arcs, but I just don't see that kind of forethought in the government. Catrina/Gulf Coast seems to bear that out to me.

 

[ArizonaWill]

If the planet were doomed, I could see them being built as space arcs, but I just don't see that kind of forethought in the government. Catrina/Gulf Coast seems to bear that out to me.

Where would we go? There isn't another planet in this solar system that is readily hospitable to our species, and we don't have (to our knowledge) fast flight between this solar system and the nearest promising system. By the time we reached another habitable spot, would we even be human after perhaps 10 to 1000 generations were bred, lived and died on a space ship (assuming renewable food technology, for one thing).

 

[DanielBrenton]

I know someone here in Vegas who witnessed one of these huge triangles cruising silently over the UNLV campus at about 9:00 PM after she had gotten out of a class a few years ago. Pretty brazen aliens, huh?

A while back it was suggested to me that this is some form of new projection technology that can produce realistic images by holographic or other means. Given that scenario, testing this over populated areas would make some sense. With the amazing progress we've been seeing in audio phase cancellation technology, maybe some analogous light technology has been developed.

At the risk of making Will crazy, I doubt this could explain the psychic effects much discussed by (... wait for it ...) Dr. Lynne Kitei!

 

[ArizonaWill]

At the risk of making Will crazy, I doubt this could explain the psychic effects much discussed by (... wait for it ...) Dr. Lynne Kitei!

My therapist, parole officer, and barber have made me promise that I will never again listen to Lynne sing, since it seems to bring out the beast in me. But Jeremy started it all, so I maintain (and you can quote me) it is all his fault. That laugh of his is infectious, and there is no vacination that works against it.

But I cannot be bothered with Lynne. I am working on establishing a telepathic link with my dog. He comes into the room and just stares at me, and I know he is trying to tell me something about gnosticism and the Essenes. Then I know he also has a few questions about the vet's visit last week (when he was neutered).

Hey, Daniel, long time no see. Refreshing to read a comment by you that doesn't mention a radio and/or podcast interview you've done nor an article you wrote, available now on your website.

 

[DanielBrenton]

Hey, Daniel, long time no see. Refreshing to read a comment by you that doesn't mention a radio and/or podcast interview you've done nor an article you wrote, available now on your website.

You villain ... you ... actually, I think most of what Benjamin read is still available on my website, though I archived about 75% of my content recently.

I was just noticing that you were staying away from the UFO subject.

If you were here, I'd welcome you back.

 

[ArizonaWill]

I was just noticing that you were staying away from the UFO subject.

If you were here, I'd welcome you back.

I'm just waiting for David B. to get tired of my humor and throw me out. He seems to be a rather stern serious dude with really strong views. He reminds me of my 6th grade teacher who eventually was kicked out of teaching for hitting the kids over the head (hard! I got a bump) with school books when they didn't agree with him in class.

I'm here because I had something I wanted to say (earlier in this thread) and I've just hung around out of sheer laziness. I had to do 2 Memorial Services today so this is just the kind of cotton candy mind masturbation I need right now. Then I must gird my loins for the huge Jesus energy tomorrow. Damn, I should have had my teeth whitened for all the smiling I will be doing. Oh, well....I see Al is waiting eagerly for your UFO Magazine article. (See, I gave you a plug!) "Oh, by the way, when is that issue coming out?"

 

[DanielBrenton]

I'm just waiting for David B. to get tired of my humor and throw me out. He seems to be a rather stern serious dude with really strong views. He reminds me of my 6th grade teacher who eventually was kicked out of teaching for hitting the kids over the head (hard! I got a bump) with school books when they didn't agree with him in class.

Well, I see we're straying from the topic pretty seriously here, so out of sheer embarrassment I'm going to take a little break.

Good to see you back / not back.

 

[Ron Collins]

There is NO human tech currently capable of putting something equivalent to the length of 5 cruise ships in the sky in one piece. Seriously - we don't have any vessel that large in the water, either, so the notion that we have something that big in the sky is ludicrous. Classified or otherwise. I'm glad I make you laugh, but the idea that anyone thinks that we've built a solid, structured craft a mile long that can move in the air, without sound, is just silly. You can quote me on that... DB

quoted... lol.

I also agree.

Amen Brothers. I can just imagine the Pentagon funding discussion. "So, Dr., you want to build a mile long half mile wide black stealth blimp.....What the fuck for?"

 

[mike]

Amen Brothers. I can just imagine the Pentagon funding discussion. "So, Dr., you want to build a mile long half mile wide black stealth blimp.....What the flock for?"

The Navy likes to call the big Nimitz class carriers "4.5 acres of sovereign and mobile American territory" -- all two dozen American carriers of all classes add up to about 75 acres of deck space. Deckspace is probably a good measure of combat power. The rest of the world's carriers have about 15 acres of deck space, one fifth that of America's.



The Navy likes to call the big pythagoras class carriers "1.5 miles of sovereign and airborne mobile American territory"

the description "aircraft carrier" applies equally to the nimitz calss vehicles and that seen by our respected Host Mr Biedney

 

[derekcbart]

Hello.

At the risk of creating a flurry of replies I have to ask, what is the evidence that there have been aircraft 1 mile long? Humans are very bad at judging size past a few hundred feet for objects that are on the ground with lots of visual reference cues and humans are even worse at judging the size of objects that are in the air when there are little to no visual reference cues.

-Derek

P.S. David, if you're fine with me coming on the air before the IIG website update I would be happy to do so.

 

[mike]

again im not stating these are man made craft, im just exploring the potentials of the theorys.
i honestly think ppl are looking at big craft from a gravity locked position ie on the ground.
from out in space with a birds eye view a beam craft could be moved accross the surface of the planet with the ease of a draughts peice.
like sliding a coin accross the table.
the physics of transforming the kitty hawk craft to a hercules transport are far more complex than making the hindenberg larger by the same factor. as for the speed at which they travel, well
Liquid immersion provides a way to reduce the physical stress of G forces. Forces applied to fluids are distributed as omnidirectional pressures. Because liquids are (virtually) incompressible, they do not change density under high acceleration such as performed in aerial maneuvers or space travel. A person immersed in liquid of the same density as tissue has acceleration forces distributed around the body, rather than applied at a single point such as a seat or harness straps. This principle is used in a new type of G-suit called the Libelle G-suit, which allows aircraft pilots to remain conscious and functioning at more than 10 G acceleration by surrounding them with water in a rigid suit.

and the ability to move these craft so fast means that conventional aircraft are rendered harmless, esp when tracked from the high orbit power source.
imagine that from that height you could see a conventional jet take off, you know its fuel capacity and outer range radius, so long before its anywhere near your craft, you simply move the beam like a laser pointer to a spot on the planet well out of the range radius of the jet fighter.
imagine flying over russia and having dozens of jets scrambled for intercept, so you casually zip the craft to new zealand, like moving a counter on a snakes and ladders board. gone....................

add that ability to an equal advantage in altitude and you have the next generation of air superiority

perhaps the pilots are litterally drowned in oxy water like that rat in a jar that did the news desks way back when.
"Liquid breathing is a form of respiration in which a normally air-breathing organism breathes an oxygen-rich liquid (usually a perfluorocarbon), rather than breathing air. It is used for medical treatment and could some day find use in deep diving and space travel. Liquid breathing is sometimes called fluid breathing, but this can be confusing because both liquids and gases can be called fluids."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing

edit: did some digging on G forces


Acceleration protection by liquid immersion is limited by the differential density of body tissues and immersion fluid, limiting the utility of this method to about 15 to 20 G[15] Extending acceleration protection beyond 20 G requires filling the lungs with fluid of density similar to water. An astronaut totally immersed in liquid, with liquid inside all body cavities, will feel little effect from extreme G forces because the forces on a liquid are distributed equally, and in all directions simultaneously. However effects will be felt because of density differences between different body tissues, so an upper acceleration limit still exists.

Around 1970, liquid breathing found its way into television, in alien spacesuits in the Gerry Anderson UFO series, which enabled a spaceman to withstand extreme acceleration forces.

so filling the lungs with fluid allows for 20 Gs and more......... and the "idea" has been around since the 70's

 

[Graphimancer]

I just read the Wiki entry on liquid breathing--I had no idea. That's bizarre, but pretty interesting.

One thing occured to me, and it's probably already been covered some in this thread. If a ship had full on antigravity, then the stresses of that make holding a mile long ship together in standard gravity, such as by lighter than air or being a flying wing, would simply not apply. In a gravity free setting, where it's not subject to shear and gravity and other aerodynamic forces, it could be relatively fragile and still be fine.

With antigravity, a ship could change direction radically, start and stop with great rapidity, and fly and speeds that would kill a human, all because inside the vessel it would be as if they were always standing still--no G-Force.

I suspect that's what we are seeing with the triangle ufos--a central antigrav enging, made of charged rotating coil. And, the three nodes on the triangle tips being either smaller anti-grav devices for stabilization and maneuvering, or perhaps ion thrusters. If the ship is in anti-grav, then an ion thruster would be more than suffucient to move the craft. zero point energy would provide the power, and the slag burnoff that is sometimes recovered after a ship has lifted off would be a reasonable discharge.

No wonder, if this scenario were true, that reverse engineering would be at a loss to explain the power source for many years, because tapping into zero point might be as simple as some circuit board in some console that the scientists don't understand anyway.

Carrying this thought experiment to its end, I don't believe a "simple" antigrav conveyance would itself be useful for the interstellar gulfs. This leads back, then, to the idea of A) interdiminsional visitors, B) crypto-terrestrials, C) the wormhole near earth as a stargate, D) the "Shuttle" hypothesis, where most are shuttles from a nearby mother ship, E) shuttle hypothesis from a planet in our solar system, F) a separate star drive system in each ship for folding space-time, G) a combination of the above, and H) something weirder than I can comprehend.

Thought Experiment: Inconclusive.