• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

perhaps reports of drones not so looney after all

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Wade

Wade

FeralNormal master
i don't know if anyone else has noticed, but speaking for myself, more and more, i'm hearing of how the military (AND c.i.a.) is so enarmored of the success of the use of pilotless drones in recon., intell and taking out selected targets there is talk of using them stateside by police agencies and some companies for commercial uses, only right now the f.a.a. is taking the role of stick in the mud for very good reason... i believe i saw in a recent businessweek article about how some companies are trying to come up w/an 'smart drone"application that can reduce the number of potential collisons or airspace intrusions by these pilotless drones, at any rate here's an google link for you. drones faa - Google Search

the reason why i did not post this in what would arguably be a more appropiate forum (say conspiracy threads) is that for a few years there have been reports of mysterious drones spotted in the skies, (usually hovering and/or semi-stationary) and these discussions have many times been mentioned on paranormal forum boards.obviously many if not most are probably hoaxes, but what i was thinking about was these two things...

seeing how whenever stories such as these...the faa's pending attempt at regulating airspace of the application of drones... get mentioned in the news as a possible future event, it's very likely that in actuality the said events are already in place and have been (at least in military applications) for some time, i.e. the lag time between public mentions and actual useage by military or law and order agencies, therefore perhaps some drone sightings are legit

furthurmore, i wonder if this could be an extention of another phenomena that has been discussed in this forum in the past, that is, the stories of certain technologies that were apparently witnessed in the past a little before they were widely seen or known of usually in connection with ufo sightings,i am of course speaking of such things as flaming chariots, airships, ghost rockets and ghost planes.

one last note, whenever people have brought up the mention of biblical descriptions of ufo's they are described as "flaming chariots", as opposed to the modern decription people use today. of course the pat answer here is that the people of the time would not have any other way to describe them except for what would be known of in context of their time, BUT what if the phenonmena DID appear as bonafide flaming chariots, instead of what we accept today, so as not to conflict with their beliefs of the time. If ufo's are a tricksterish manifestation, then they would most likely appear in the context of the time just as much as be described in the context of their time
 
Good post. When still in the Navy, I was in a class instructed by a real-life murky behind the scenes intelligence expert. Ex-military intel + MI6. We were being instructed in dissecting political and psychological motivations behind suicide bombings etc.
Anyway this Cold War era spy somehow got onto the topic of unmanned military aircraft and the benefit of how these can be used for striking targets and collecting intelligence with no risk to a pilot (pilot's are extremely costly to train and keep current, in addition to the costs of the jets they fly) etc. Now, at that time plans had been approved for a couple of new UK aircraft carriers that were supposedly destined to carry some VSTOL (Vertical, Short Take Off and Landing) fighter/bomber aircraft. This intelligence officer predicted that as the inevitable conflicts of the decade 2000-2010 unfolded with the US at their head, the use of drones was gonna increase markedly and that pretty soon, many aircraft carriers may instead become carriers of mainly drones.
You can fit many of them onboard, they have no 'pilot', cheaper to replace, can be used in far more 'risky' ops etc. He basically predicted the rise of the drone and decreasing use of old-style airpower.
Now, I'm not suggesting this man was anywhere near the first to predict such things, it probably happened decades ago but it was from him that I was first instructed to be aware of the increasing use of drones in coming years, the provability of which may greatly alter the construction or not as the case may be, of new aircraft carriers and fighter jets.
And wouldn't you know it, some years later those new carriers for the UK have been put on hold, with finances being blamed but I would not be surprised to see revised plans of these ships approved that are more designed for drone use rather than jet fighter.
The versatility of drones is a plus enough - the reduced cost almost an added bonus.

I have been expecting the start of civilian use of drones - far cheaper than a police helicopter etc and already living in the most CCTV dense country in the world, the thought of various types of civilian drones starting to fill our skies has an air of inevitability to it.
 
The use and role of unmanned aerial vehicles is widely expanding, and we'll be seeing more of them in our skies flown by the military, law enforcement and also by civilian operators. What many people don't realize is that these vehicles have a long history. Back in the 70s there was a lot of development of mini-RPVs (Remotely Powered Vehicles) often powered by 2-cycle engines. These were essentially suped-up model airplanes carrying sophisticated equipment (including GPS) ranging from radar-jamming to reconnaisance TV cameras, as needed for the mission at hand.

These have been flown in the past by the US across other countries' borders, and some of them generated UFO sightings. When these were reported, no one was eager to come forward to claim ownership of the device. Such reports probably represent a small fraction of UFO sightings, but of these represent a significant portion of ones documented by military bases.
 
I feel obliged to point out that when the word "Drone" is used in the UFo context it typically refers to a series of viral faked or marketed images. Some UFO personalities (LMH, Strieber, etc.) have endorsed the concept and in some cases the faked or "shopped" photos themselves. To that angle, I have never seen a reliable "drone" UFo image.

About the military angle, absolutely. The uses of UAV and their lethal brothers UCAV's are undeniable. I would even go as far as saying that they have been and are mistaken as UFO's today. As the tech becomes more prolific, I predict that they will instantly become the new "swamp gas" rubber stamp for debunkery purposes.

But, I have yet to see a military or civilian UAV that looks even remotely like the majority of the drone image nonsense.
 
The use of UAVs on the civilian population was an ongoing component of James Cameron's Dark Angel television series way back in 2000.

Not only do you have the problem of these things being used by the government but we also have the problem of private parties. There are versions of UAVs that are incredibly small and cheap and easily within the means of most any security outfit, private investigator, or criminal. There is a youTube video where a photographer uses a UAV to fly over a demonstration to get birds eye video of the police line. If I'm not mistaken Ron, someone filmed it flying over the crowd and it was floated as a UFO video!
 
The reason I don't even get concerned about drones in relation to future possible UFO videos etc is that if I see a video of any object I don't get excited unless I see it performing in a way our tech cannot do. All the drones in the world could be made to look like classic UFOs for all I care because unless they exhibit some serious physics-bending acceleration and inertia-defying, I care not!
 
Ron Collins said:
I feel obliged to point out that when the word "Drone" is used in the UFo context it typically refers to a series of viral faked or marketed images. Some UFO personalities (LMH, Strieber, etc.) have endorsed the concept and in some cases the faked or "shopped" photos themselves. To that angle, I have never seen a reliable "drone" UFo image.

About the military angle, absolutely. The uses of UAV and their lethal brothers UCAV's are undeniable. I would even go as far as saying that they have been and are mistaken as UFO's today. As the tech becomes more prolific, I predict that they will instantly become the new "swamp gas" rubber stamp for debunkery purposes.

But, I have yet to see a military or civilian UAV that looks even remotely like the majority of the drone image nonsense.
Click to expand...

All too true ron and I and am skeptical of many photos that RML and others have tried to pass off as real. Im speaking of the ones that look like a 8 year old did with an erector set. To be honest those images remind me of that torture-bot that was brought into princess leias cell in the original star wars movie.

To take another tact, those examples are so haphazard and amatuerish if I wanted to debunk the phenomena these would be the examples I would use so maybe lmh is a false flag :)


BUT there are more exotic unmanned vehicles waiting in the wings that have been lab tested that could pass for a common hummingbird say, this is brought up in mainstream magazines and press and as I mentioned ,if it has since been acknowledged in the general press, who's to say it hadn't already been realized albeit covertly. In all likelihood probably not, but maybe the more exotic ones have been tested outside but in a situation that was thought to be secure but wasn't.
 
spookymulder said:
furthurmore, i wonder if this could be an extention of another phenomena that has been discussed in this forum in the past, that is, the stories of certain technologies that were apparently witnessed in the past a little before they were widely seen or known of usually in connection with ufo sightings,i am of course speaking of such things as flaming chariots, airships, ghost rockets and ghost planes.

one last note, whenever people have brought up the mention of biblical descriptions of ufo's they are described as "flaming chariots", as opposed to the modern decription people use today. of course the pat answer here is that the people of the time would not have any other way to describe them except for what would be known of in context of their time, BUT what if the phenonmena DID appear as bonafide flaming chariots, instead of what we accept today, so as not to conflict with their beliefs of the time. If ufo's are a tricksterish manifestation, then they would most likely appear in the context of the time just as much as be described in the context of their time
Click to expand...

I think this is an important highlight of Ufological meandering - the flaming chariot syndrome. While it should strike us as commonplace, and not examples of ET, this witnessing of tomorrow's technology today, we often get hung up on what seems to be an historical paradox. Really, tomorrow's technology is happening today - it's just not that widely known.

The chariots of the gods in the bible, along with all those neat early Christian paintings with guys in single manned capsules, are nothing more than the cultural symbols and representations of the times. I don't think they are connected to ET or any advance tech at all - just a symbol and nothing more.
 
Here's one for the skeptics that are continuously stating how "if there were all these UFOs flying around, why don't we have any quality photos of them"

Where are all the private sector sky watcher quality photos of the active drones that are being touted by all these monitoring agencies? I mean, they're every where right? Why don't we have hundreds of pristine photos of them? Could be that in the moment that it takes to glimpse a UFO, or to actually have a paranormal experience of some sort, it's in NO WAY helpful or natural to just grab your camera and click. Could be.
 
well as far as commercial drones they are still technically grounded as the FAA ruling is yet to come out. I believe its due this summer and the white house, law enforcement agencies and mapping and survey companies especially are chomping at the bitt to get airborne.

which is not to say some organizations aren't jumping the gun but they are doing so illegally technically. I'm sure once the final rulings are put out drones will be all over the place.
 
spookymulder said:
initially when this happens I'm sure that both pictures of "UFOs " and calls to local police agencies will skyrocket for a time.
Click to expand...

But shouldn't we be seeing a HUGE spike due to all the military drones that are up there, and have been up there for the last 10 years? We really should if the typical speculative crys for quality photos in the absense thereof are rationally accurate in their suggestion.

My point is, there is simply nothing short of carrying a camera with you everywhere you go, and even then keeping a most unnatural eye peeled toward the sky, for the rest of your life that would prepare you to take quality (?) photos of UFOs. I have always thought the notion in question by the speculative, ultimately ludicrous. If it weren't I think we honestly would see literally thousands of clear and concise photos from the public of odd military drones. (not the kind that look like a typical spy plane)

Maybe the black triangles are such a beast, but for something that's been around for a LONG time, it sure seems like we should know more. There is also the fact that many of these are reported as being monstrous in size. Then there are the flying platforms...UFOs, a never ending fascination.
 
"if there were all these UFOs flying around, why don't we have any quality photos of them"

I've tried to photograph terrestrial flying things several times with the following results:
A low flying, slow-moving, C-130 Hercules passed above in daylight, but I ended with a picture of clouds.
Another time, I tried photographing nocturnal airplane lights and came up with blurry streaks.
Recently, a Chinook helicopter flew over my house (twice) and by the time I had the phone camera aimed, it was gone.

Capturing pictures of a suddenly appearing moving object is not so easy, especially when you factor in excitement (and in my case, camera clumsiness).
 
I was going to type precisely what Ron Collins said. I'd also like to reinforce the sentiment that Linda Molten Howe is a fool. I would love to see her face some Paracast questions.
 
Unconventional aerial vehicles have been in use for a long time I would say. I know for a fact that they have been tested in my country for at least 35 years. And let me tell you: these UAVs you probably don’t see in the field today, but rather being kept under lock and key. Very hush hush, then and now. Reportedly had both americans and soviets snooping around our testing facilities at the time.


And mind you this is in relatively small country by most parameters, although with a pretty advanced weapons industry. This gives an indication of the level of sophistication of the military hardware of countries backed by bigger budgets. I think a lot of the UFOs being reported are advanced unconventional aerial vehicle whizzing around in the sky.
 
Back
Top