Pentagon Has ‘Off-World Vehicles Not Made on This Earth’

You are assuming these powers. Where in our knowledge of evolution do godly powers arise? They don't. If they did some life on earth would have them .

In order to explain ETs and no evidence we turn them into magical beings. Kind of like God of the gaps.

But remember, I think these craft are real and super high tech. But I have seen no verifiable evidence they are ETs. Or no evidence for anything in regards to origin.. I am open to such evidence. But gotta see it. Stories don't provide it.

 

Yes - in ALL these videos the pilot tracked the object by eye.

The catch is, that is HIGHLY unreliable. In fact, the videos demonstrate that by the claims of super fast objects that were actuall free floating balloons.

And, the catch with the "throw against the wall" comment is that blaming aliens is a SUPREME example of throwing something against the wall.

So, yes. I do not accept that as indication that there are aliens flying around earth harrassing our military aircraft - which ARE supreme targets of EVERY country and their commitments to defending against US military incursion, or by those countries to whom we distribute these incredible weapons. Even the USA works to figure out how to defeat our military aircraft. We can't sit by while other countries work on that.

 

The go fast looked like a balloon. The other two didn't. The tic tac interacted with the fighter pilots and when Favor tried to cut it off it got the hell out of Dodge. We have more info on the tic tac. And more interaction. It was aware of the F 18s.

There was a fleet of tic tacs revealed by the gods eye radar at higher altitude.

Drop the alien comments. I have made myself clear on that issue yet being disingenuous you choose to ignore it. Like some troll.

 

Del.

 

No, go fast was not perceived to be a balloon. It was perceived as a fast moving object - thus its name. It wasn't named "really slow balloon".

That one was an especially clear example concerning the perception of pilots when faced with something they were not expecting. Their descriptions will NOT necessarily be accurate representations of what an object is actually doing. The fact that it was so easily debunked is all the more damning. The information available on the cockpit radar could be seen as contrary to the perception without the pilot having to do any trigonometry.

Yes - I do not see any justification for believing any of these to be alien encounters.

Focusing on the piolt descriptions to the point of ignoring physical evidence is a mistake.

There is no reason to believe that the pilots were fully briefed of all phenomena created by humans that they might encounter. And, there is EVERY reason to believe that the military would not divulge the full and complete nature of the operations of this or any other country.

So, some pilot thinks his radar got jammed - so you jump to ALIENS??

 

No you jumped to aliens.

And you are more skilled than a wing commander! Lol

 

Also stop acting like only eyesight was used! You are trying to ignore that combat tools were being used. That's how it works. You need to read more to get caught up. And stop ignoring important data.

If that tic tac was ours we need to scrap all other jets. If its Russia or China, we lost.

 

Well who debunked the go fast? Mick? Anyways the only event that had merit was the tic tac. Because of how it played out. The balloon looked like a balloon. The tic tac interacted with combat pilots and combat tools on both fighters and ships detected it. The balloon just acted like a balloon. Trying to equate the tic tac to the balloon is unreasonable. Completely different context.

Fraber on Rogan debunked Mick in regards to the tic tac and the Gimbel. He didn't bother with the go fast. For it wasn't credible to begin with.

That you would believe or give more merit to a debunker who isn't the commander of a fighter wing and who did not personally interact with the craft is just absurd. In any reasonable person's mind.

And these kind of anti gravity craft have been in our air space since the 40s. Evidenced by several foia releases early on. Debunk that why don't cha. Or better stop up your ears, cover your eyes, and yell, na na na na.

Nowhere did I claim ETs. Indeed my posts on this topic involve the lack of evidence of ETs . Yet the evidence over decades for the existence of these nontypical craft is overwhelming. They exist. And they don't appear to be faster than light craft needed to get to earth by your ETs. Yet clearly not propelled by fossil fuels. So when Mick said the tic tac reminded him of the Chilean craft that had a clear exhaust trail he should have lost credibility. No trace of an exhaust trail in infrared on the tic tac. How you missed that means your mind was in shut down mode.

IMO there could never be enough evidence for you to admit these craft exist. Its the mindset of a debunker instead if a critical thinker. Some minds will accept anything, including stories of abductions without one hair of evidence. Other minds will never accept evidence that counters their beliefs no matter how valid that evidence is. But then some people will base beliefs on evidence, no matter what. You IMO are in the second group while I reside in the third. Patricia is in the first group.

And that's how I see it. And its an accurate appraisal.

Personally I don't think ETs are involved. Little gray beings or shape shifting evil reptilians. If these craft are not some unknown natural phenomenon yet to be understood for me that leaves the possibility of a advanced human civilization that is separate from ours and much more advanced. That survived a past cataclysmic event and went underground or under the sea. At least that is in the realm of the possible. Unlike ETs with God like powers.

That's my hypothesis and while it is in the area of sci fi it gets rid of beliefs in god like ETs , either space brothers or evil beings messing with our genes to create hybrids.

The myth of Atlantis may be based on reality ..An advanced civ. that survived as most of humanity had to start over. And separated itself from the remnants of barbarians.

 

No, I've been crystal clear about insisting that people NOT jumping to aliens.

 

I've been TOTALLY open to the instrument recordings and reports of these pilots and others involved.

As with go fast, that doesn't mean that their interpretation is an accurate represetation of what actually happened.

I would say it slightly differently.

I'd say that the military needs to fully understand these events as they have a bearing on national defense.

And, it's quite possible that they do have a full understanding of these events.

There are several very good reasons for the military not to spell it out to the world. So, assuming that they have give us all that is known is a highly unreasonable assumption.

 

Yet you act as if I was promoting aliens when my posts was against it!

All that I promoted was these craft that are interacting with our fighter pilots exist. And there is evidence to support that. And its more than observation by eyesight.

 

If they've got them then send 'em to Detroit, I want one!

 

That is a GROSS misrepresentation of what I posted.

And, the go fast tape clearly documents that the balloon did not look like a balloon to the witnesses.

You treat the witness testimony just like I do in this case - the witnesses told the truth as they saw it, but they were simply wrong about the interpretation of what they saw.

Now, you want to give ultimate credibility to the interpretations made by these pilots, and I don't see any justification for that.

Not only that, but you introduce your preconceived conclusion as part of your interpretation!!! That is not acceptable.

Now, you are using the above to attack ME!!

Sorry, dude. I'm totally open to evidence. But, unlike you I'm not looking for justifications for your preconceived notions.

Aren't you totally dodging any kind of evidence related to the Navy events here?

It's ALWAYS possible to claim that superpowerful aliens are responsible for those things for which we have no total and proven solution. But, that has nothing to do with pursuing knowledge through examination of evidence - and including the HUGE lack of evidence we have in this case (such as what the Navy hasn't divulged).

I'm glad to see you reject the ET conclusion, though. We don't have NEARLY enough evidence to go there, at least at present.

 

Right with the go fast there were no reports in depth like with commander Faber.. For that kind of interaction with multiple fighter jets did not happen. The pilots spotted what turned out to be a balloon . It didn't interact with the pilots. It didn't do what the tic tac did. It didn't evade the F18. And it didn't act like anything but a wind swept balloon. A huge difference. And it wasnt dropping down from 60,000 feet to right above sea level and looked to be hovering over something in the water shaped like a commercial airliner, zig zagging over the other object.

So when the commander dove to check it out, get closer, the tic tac ascended and copied the fighter keeping distance. So Faber went to cut it off but it accelerated away so fast it was out of sight in a second. To appear in short order on radar at the other location Faber was supposed to go next . That is when the other aircraft went to that location to check it out and the gun camera footage was taken. Along with the targeting system being jammed when they tried to lock on. At this time the gods eye radar saw a fleet of these craft up high. Both fighters and ship radar picked these craft up. And several pilots saw it and it didn't behave like a balloon.

Faber and others briefed congress on it recently. In public and in secret.

 

Great! I'm glad you aren't promoting the idea of objects or pilots from some source beyond our Earth.

I didn't really get that from what you've been saying.

The reports aren't good enough for that. The go fast report was so bad that they misidentified a balloon as a fast moving craft. They have nothing to say about potential defense testing of the capabilities of our fighter jets - hardiness against radar jamming, the visual effects of devices that create plasmas in the atmosphere, incursions by foreign, but Earthly craft, instrument failure (which is NOT rare by any measure), pilot error in setting equipment, purposeful equipment or signal compromises for testing pilots (which even GA pilots face in training), etc.

In the end, my view is that we simply do not have enough information to treat these Navy releases as serious evidence of something beyond normal behavior for a military of the caliber of our own.

 

When I first saw the go fast it looked like a balloon to me. I never gave it much thought given it didn't have the story of interaction with pilots involved..Except the pilots talking as they tried to lock onto it with camera. There was so little said about it as with what occurred with Faber and company.

Don't understand what you mean about dodging any navy events?

If these craft are ours why do we still use jet propulsion craft? Plus these kind of craft have been seen for 70 years..This would be like waging war still using muskets when we had m 16s.

Thing is I believe our military have known about these craft for decades. And their position has been to deny and ridicule. Because they can't do anything to stop them. Powerless. So best not to inform us.

I doubt they know the origin. Yet I do not believe we have this tech in power source or propulsion. Yet if Russia or China gets it first....bad news.

The time to argue if these things exist or not is long gone IMO. The only question is, who made them? And are they a threat to humanity? At some point?

Bigger question , how well do we really understand what reality is? Do we even have a clue?

 

Kudos! A lot of pretty smart people thought it was a craft going really, really fast.

I gave several ways the Navy could have takenn part. I'm just saying we do not have complete information.

We don't have any other kind of propulsion that works even slightly as well within the atmosphere and gravity profile of Earth.

We ARE at a point where having human occupants is unnecessary. That changes the game in a big way, as equipment and flight profile constraints have to allow for pilot survival - slow turns, a cockpit, oxygen equipment, heating and cooling systems, ejection capability, all sorts of controls and instrumentation, etc., etc. Drones are at a HUGE advantage in increasing numbers of ways. A drone carrying limited observation equipment and no weapons could turn unbelievably sharply.

Also, one must assume that our military is building and testing all sorts of technology oriented to disrupting fighter aircraft and misleading both hardware and humans. And again, there can be no doubt that normal training would also include present to pilots situations where it is hard to know what the heck is happening. Thes technology and training programs are their JOB - not some assumption. And, private corporations are working hard on it too, because governments will pay HUGE dollars for war tech.

You're still making assumptions about what was seen. I see that as unwarranted given what we know today.

This is just an explanation of your belief system. I don't share that with you, but that shouldn't really be a problem, shoud it?

It is certainly a time for our military to examine this and all evidence in the light of all that they know. But, it is not time for us to guess what the Navy knows or to assume our branches of military aren't doing their jobs.

We have a long way to go before before we decide to reject the laws of physics that we know and that we test on a daily basis. Science can NEVER claim to know it all. That's just not possible. But, our physics, including Einstein and QM is tested every day both throughout the US and around the world.

Claiming these Navy tapes are good enough to trash modern physics is just plain nonsense - I'm sure you would agree.

 

Ah. You would have had to have read my posts to Patricia. We debated this issue quite a bit here over the past few days. He believes the abduction stories and gives his reasons. My only belief is that there is more than enough evidence over 70 years to prove they exist. The craft, not the ETs. Give me hard evidence and I believe as he does.

So you don't think we have enough info for these craft while I believe the opposite.

You are right about instrument failure . It happens. In fact one of the ships in that battle group after detecting the craft at 60,000 feet dropping to sea level in a second caused the ship to check out and adjust the radar. Which they did. It only helped the radar and they found nothing wrong. This was prior to Faber intercepting the tic tac. See, these craft had been detected for weeks at high altitude. And were dropping down low in the a.m.. Flights didn't start for the navy till around noon. But on this day one was detected as Faber got ready to fly. So they sent him to check it out.

It is possible the craft was ours under a secret space program. But we have seen such craft and performance since the late 40s. Not just recently. So the ET boys say we reversed engineered crashed ET craft. I doubt that.

 

Well not trusting eyes and state of the art instruments especially the latter has killed pilots. Generally instruments are trustworthy. Submariners really place their lives in its hands. Of course if what they are telling you trashes physics...that would give pause! Lol

I do assume some things. Like pilot reports and radar back decades ago are accurate. As is today. And that the astronaut who saw the military film taken on his base of the saucer that landed and filmed is true. Along with Halt's tape recorded account of the bentwaters incident that he recorded as he investigated that incident. Its an extraordinary event. Magical sounding. Common with some UFO sightings.

So yes I assume some people are not kooks including pilots. I assume foia released govt documents are legit and not jokes. I assume all is not known about physics.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2020/06/11/how-drones-beat-top-guns/#a0b5c5a7dbd2

Here is a description of our drone capability as of 50 years ago.

They were tested at Top Gun, where nobody cold come close to shooting one down, even though they worked on that with live missiles.

They were used in Korea and Vietnam for surveilance, where enemy jet fighters and ground based weapons could not take them out.

Elon Musk has made statements about F-35 fighters being no match for drones.

The idea that our military progress in the air has not progressed in a HUGE way over 50 years just carries no credibility with me. And, surely that includes more than just flight - sensors and disruptors of sensors.

I'd suggest that slower craft could turn far more sharply that could the jet drones.

And, who knows what they've done to reduce the accuracy of sensors - something that our military has spent billions to accomplish.

These are things our military doesn't spend a lot of time and money keeping the world informed about.

 

I agree. But what advances beyond jet propulsion? Drones are just craft without humans on board. I had a radio flyer in 67. The advances have been with known technological principles , right?

What kind of tech can drop from 60,000 feet to sea level in one second ? Or do right angle turns at speed? Its just impossible. Yet this has been observed with eyes and instruments. Fraber observed the tic tac do this above the ocean over what looked to be a plane under the water. Like a ping pong ball in a glass being shaken. Sounds unbelievable. Wouldn't a scientist say this and other things about the tic tac is impossible? And would they even waste time on what they say is impossible! Isn't that generally the attitude of academia towards UFOs?

 

No, a scientist would certainly not say that is impossible.

A scientist would say that it is unexplained.

Why are you certain that the object isn't a plasma created in the atmosphere using a device that is claimed that our military posesses? How can you comment on what it is without having any idea what the entirity of military involvement is?

Science gets excited when something becomes testable and will result in impoving our understanding of how this universe works. It demands full availability of information to all.

Debunking UFO claims offers none of that.

I'd point out that it isn't just uninteresting enough for physicists, it isn't even interesting to those whose accademic pursuits inolve searching for evidence of intelligent life from locations other than Earth.

What would be the product of debunking tic tac? A statement of our military technology achievements, or of holes in our flying object detection capabilities? Why would science get excited about that?

And, who would believe it, anyway. UFOlogists are still promoting stuff that was debunked half a century ago - as seen by comments on this thread.

 

I thought you said if it goes against the current physics science has a problem ? Or something like that. Many scientist have dismissed ETs coming to earth due to distance in light years. And the details of traveling at light speed. I have heard scientists poo poo the woo woo involved with the performance of these craft called UFOs. Lol

BTW there is an analysis of the state of art data from the battle group that interacted with the tic tac. If I can figure out how to copy and paste the link to the news story I will do it. There is a classified version we won't see but a non classified version as well. Apparently they didn't buy into mick;'s sketchy attempt at debunking the tic tac event. Also some choice words for the navy who won't share with other branches of the military. In regards to UFOs.

So the plasma deal was online in the late 40s? I'd like to read about your claim of generated plasma creating these craft that can interact with our military jet fighters and state of the art sensors.

I do not believe we have the technology experienced with these craft. I don't think academia does either. Yes we probably have some secret tech for war, but IMO its within the realm of known and applied physics. How big is the leap from fossil fuel propulsion and energy production to anti gravity?

If you want to get scientists in academia interested in UFO tech, just find a source for healthy grants to finance the research.. And then open up military files that are classified UFO data. So known data over decades is accessible by the researchers. And insure the results of the studyare not classified.

Research and science runs on sufficient financing by grants. So when was the last granted, independent research done on UFO tech? The answer is never, right? Unless its secret. And not revealed to the public.

 

I think both, the combined evidence of the presence of sightings that are unexplainable, and abduction phenomena establish that there are ETs.

However, I believe tic tacs are ours, given Turber's reportage on it. He seems to be 'in the know'. But who knows.

 

Can plasma make right angle turns at super sonic speeds?

A small percentage of sightings have not been debunked, and those are the ones every Ufologist I know promotes.

If the powers that be are not interested in anti-gravity ( or non reactionary propulsion ) they had better, because we wouldn't want to be losing out to Russia and China if they get there first. Whoever masters antigravity will have combat superiority, hands down.