Then link me to those refutations! —if you have any. Oh, well then, I’ll run right out there to find all those witnesses and interview them! I didn’t make a claim other than that I believe, I say BELIEVE, we are “constantly visited by space travelers”. Remember that if you want to refute or challenge my beliefs you need to first quote them correctly, and then address the claim and not your preferred perception of what it may have been.
I've studied the refutations of the Navy tapes. You don't have to if you don't want to. However, I could not accept the claims made without seeing expert analysis that is separate from the interests of the Navy, those pilots, the press, or the UFO community that are all eager to ignore analysis and accept anything as evidence. What I notice is stuff like the 60 Minutes segment that invited all sorts of pro-alien folks to talk and totally ignored the refutations of the tapes they talked about. THEN, I get to see those same tapes touted over and over as evidence!! Every UFO group I've seen touts refuted claims as if it is evidence.
I think the error in your position is that you either overlook or deny the very strong interest of military brass and military scientists to find a more familiar explanation for the anomalies reported and recorded by qualified military personnel. They have already studied the reports and records very closely with first-hand interviews with the witnesses and examination of the documentation. How many of your “refutations” can say that? OTOH, how many of them consist of distant review of the published statements and images of documents followed by “best guess” ideas that they substituted for military analysis? Military scientists and top brass do not want to look foolish. Preference for the explanations of others who are not, or may not be neutral is like preferring the criticisms of socialist economy by capitalist economists over those of well-informed advocates of socialism.
We don't get to see all the evidence the military has, and we DO know that they have touted easily debunked claims. This isn't a contest to see who holds the most interviews. Let's remember that these Navy flights have gathered significant information available to the public that is enough to debunk the claims the purport to support. Key debunkers absolutely HAVE interviewed Navy pilots and those who are experts in the detection equipment that is in those jets - the equipment used to gather the evidence. Notice that YOU point to all those who want to prove the sightings are UFOs. THAT is NOT science.
There are lots of cases, so one would have to identify which one. In some, the source of the object in question has been identified through careful analysis of the data.
Yes. The Navy tapes are examples of these various types of sensing. I'm sure you are aware that one of those Navy tape objects turned out to be a weather balloon and another is a specific commercial airlines flight. The methods you mention for gathering info are certainly used, but the heart of the issue comes when these data get analyzed. The pilots told the truth. But, that's not the issue. >>> We have problems identifying ORDINARY objects. We manage to think that ordinary objects are doing supernatural maneuvering at super high speed. Let's remember that other countries ARE sending sensing devices over the USA. They ARE testing our ability to find and identify their objects. Other countries and ours are working hard on making objects very fast, very difficult to detect and with serious evasive capability - NOT like a weather balloon!!! One would fully expect that there are cases that have not been identified, because engineers made them hard to identify and no nation is going to explain. In fact, their purposes are improved by saying we saw an alien! But, UFOlogists have totally lost ALL credibility by hyping those cases that have been debunked.
Yeah, we have new weather balloons now that can accelerate from zero to 4,000 MPH in 0.1 second and manned aircraft that can do the same plus they can hover, have no wings, propellers, or any detectable means of propulsion and make no sound at any point. They’re shaped like a propane tank you see on a propane delivery truck or the 1,000 gallon propane tanks you might see in yards sometimes.
The Navy pilots honestly reported what they saw. However, it's been shown how various kinds of human and mechanical imperfections conspired to give those illusions. I don't know what presidents and police have said.
All they have said is that they saw something they could not identify. That is a LONG way from being evidence for (let alone proof of) any kind of extra terrestrial visitation.
Of course. You’re not telling me anything new. But you’re omitting their statements including those of test pilots who said nobody on earth has any craft that can make an abrupt right angle turn while traveling at over 1000 MPH or can stop on a dime at that speed, both of which they observed in disbelief. Then they saw the craft paralleling them with no “maneuvering surfaces” (wings) and no apparent means of propulsion, and then, observed them stop cold and hover without apparent power. Officials in touch with foreign capabilities said no country has craft that can do these things. So they could not identify them. But they also said they were not from any country on this earth.
Again, they could not identify them. That is it. We have no idea if what they saw was even really there. A hallucination? An illusion? An optical artifact from sunlight hitting a cloud in a particular way? We have no idea.
Yes, I'm fully aware that they thought they saw impossible acts of physics. The problem comes in when analysis shows that there are real world explanations.
When such an event is witnessed by 75 or 100 or 500 people who tell the same story and one or more of them are fighter pilots who not only had the object on radar which was recorded, but it flied along side of them for a few miles, and you weren’t there, who would you suggest be believed? And true, they could not “identify” them. That is why they are called “UFOs”.
Wow, you really don’t know about this stuff! And you’re so afraid of the truth that rather than ask questions, you make wild, speculative, unfounded assertions! LOL!!! YES they have evidence. LOTS of it.
Yeah not true. I pointed to respected, decorated, responsible military and police and congressmen. And now, for your benefit and info, I’m here to tell you that Congress just had a bipartisan, bicameral hearing with testimony from top military brass, UNDER OATH, in which they testified that UFO’s are a daily occurrence and that they are not of this world because they have characteristics nobody on earth has like instant acceleration, absent maneuvering surfaces (wings), and abrupt turns that would kill any pilot in any known aircraft, for starters. So check for this being reported on media. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...stleblowers-testimony-to-congress/ar-AA1eoyLu
I don't dispute that there are numerous UFO detections - detections which do not identify the object. As an example, we've seen the "Navy tapes" - UFO detections which were initially claimed to be outside human construction, only to have it shown that the object was highly likely to be of human origin. In fact, one was shown to be a specific flight number of a passenger plane. We KNOW that our military WILL take a hard stance against divulging information that identifies the extent of our detection capability as well as inferences on what it is that we can create. So, serious detection information will be limited to the public. We KNOW of objects that have come from someplace deep in our galaxy. What we do not have is evidence of aliens.
I don’t know of anything fitting that description. Today, military top officers testified under oath that they have personal knowledge of alien craft that was obtained and which was subjected to reverse engineering to learn the technology and how they do what they do . . . . . . . -because our craft can’t do what they do. Another military brass testified that the military retrieved alien bodies from a crash site and subjected them to forensic study.
