Wealthy Space X Partner Believes UFO's Among Us

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
What's a newtonian flight capability?


Non newtonian flight would be something like accelerating from a dead stop to thousands of miles an hour in a second, or making 90 degree right hand turns at thousands of miles an hour. Or coming to a complete halt in one second from 500 MPH.

The reaction would cause occupants to turn into a pile of mush.

We can't build anything that does that. Nor can they anywhere else on this planet.

Basically breaking newtons laws of motion.

UD


Non-Newtonian motion can't be explained.

What you saw, and what they saw, can be explained.

What you see at night lacks comparison, relative size, and is impossible to judge. You can't tell that it's going "thousands of miles an hour" with a naked eyeball. It's your perception of motion that's in error. Perspective, line of sight, relative motion, they all contribute. It's the same thing as the daytime YouTube posts, discussed on this very board, of "an airplane flying backward".

It ain't flying backward! The perspective of the camera operator is simply causing an optical illusion that makes it APPEAR to fly backwards. Just like your UFOs APPEAR to have turned, or accelerated, in non-Newtonian motion.

The simple explanation: perceptive confusion beats the impossible explanation: "non-Newtonian motion"

Even the description, "non-Newtonian" motion is, in fact, a mis-perception. Even if your perception of motion was accurate (it wasn't, but supposing for a minute) there is nothing you saw which invalidates Inertia, F=MA, or equal and opposite reaction (Newton's three laws). The motion that you perceive is incredible (that is, difficult to believe) because you perceive the "A" to be very large...but it's still Newtonian. It just requires very large "F", or much smaller "M" than you imagine.

I've seen lots of motion, and weird optical illusions, at night, when I was moving at hundreds of miles an hour, or more. Human perception wasn't designed for that set of conditions.

It's easy to believe you saw something completely different than what you actually saw.

With more details, what you saw can be explained, in normal terms, with normal objects.


So whats the explanation then? I had another witness with me at the time, The " Did you see that" moment was pretty funny.

Im not exactly sure how fast an object that moves from one of of the horizon to another in less than the blink of an eye is.

How is a 90 degree right hand turn at speed not violating the law of momentum?
Can anyone in the discussion show me anything on earth that can do that at speed- Id love to see it.

for reference - I know what fighters look like from a lifetime of airshows and air force bases- when they break the sound barrier this and hundred even thousand plus MPH - whatever I saw made anything ive ever seen look slow including small meteors entering the atmosphere.

I dont know what it was, but I know we can't do that.

Audio engineer As a video guy in the effects business for 30 years I believe almost none of what I see thats not live and even question live events - I can fake almost anything digitally & imperceptably.


UD

 

[d00df00d]

How about "we don't know?"

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
We can't make anything that moves like that.

And the evidence that anyone has seen something violate the known laws of motion is scant, to say the least. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and a couple interviews don't cut it. Astro covers much of it.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
How about "we don't know?"

We don't. That's exactly the point. But, to hear some of these TV personalities talk, they've got an entire worked out narrative to tell us.

 

[d00df00d]

Right, that's my point.

Someone says they see all this insane stuff happen, and we have no explanation for it. Therefore... we have no explanation for it. Pretty straightforward.

 

[Shannow]

That's the reason that I posted a few months ago regarding these things always being "just beyond" our current technical limits.

Airship sightings were prevalent at one stage, when those were just beyond our know technical limits...was there a European "area 51" with top secret weapons reasearch ?

Would the people in that era be expecting airships (just beyond), rockets, or gravitics ?

What would they therefore describe ?

what on Earth was Ezekiel talking about ?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Someone says they see all this insane stuff happen, and we have no explanation for it. Therefore... we have no explanation for it. Pretty straightforward.

I still liked the one interview that Crazy Hair had with Stanton Friedman. Crazy Hair went off on something, and Stanton Friedman just stared at him like he was insane. Now, if you can get Stanton Friedman to look at you that way, given some of the stuff he's stated over the years, you know you've accomplished something.

 

[buster]

 

[d00df00d]

Every single conversation/thread about this:


A: Hey guys, aliens amirite?

B: Possible, but there's no evidence.

A: Look, this guy said he saw lights that moved weirdly!

B: Yeah but moving lights aren't aliens.

A: Dude ALL THESE PEOPLE said they saw UFOs.

B: Okay but... that doesn't mean the UFOs were aliens.

A: Are you saying they're ALL lying??

B: No! They clearly saw/heard/felt something. I'm saying there's no reason to believe the thing they saw was --

A: LOOK, MOAR UFO SIGHTINGS

B: Dude. Listen to what I'm --

A:

 

[KrisZ]

Yup, UFO=aliens
Never fails.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
How about "we don't know?"


We don't and that truly is the bottom line. My personal "belief" based on the many credible testimonials that fall outside the realm of weather/space debris etc. is that something is probably interacting with our world but it simply can' be identified.

Millions of people believe in much more ridiculous things globally where there is little evidence at all.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
We can't make anything that moves like that.

And the evidence that anyone has seen something violate the known laws of motion is scant, to say the least. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and a couple interviews don't cut it. Astro covers much of it.


Do you consider sworn testimony and an " interview" to be the same thing?


UD

 

[MinamiKotaro]

I'm sure aliens exist, but they aren't coming here and we aren't going there ... unless they invent space-folding technology to cross the void.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do you consider sworn testimony and an " interview" to be the same thing?

Generally, I wouldn't. We see a lot of rubbish on these TV programs. However, to whom was the "sworn testimony" given and why? Generally speaking, I wouldn't see a lot of need to tell a shaky, vague story under oath.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: MinamiKotaro
I'm sure aliens exist, but they aren't coming here and we aren't going there ... unless they invent space-folding technology to cross the void.


Well we probably won't be going anywhere for at least 50-100 years or more.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do you consider sworn testimony and an " interview" to be the same thing?

Generally, I wouldn't. We see a lot of rubbish on these TV programs. However, to whom was the "sworn testimony" given and why? Generally speaking, I wouldn't see a lot of need to tell a shaky, vague story under oath.



Sworn testimony is typically transcribed in writing and requires a witnessed signature and opens the person up to perjury charges.

It typically given to a commander, or superior in the military, or in court of law.

An interview has no consequences.

When an enlisted officer writes down his version of of an event and signs it this document follows him for his career. An enlisted officer wont do this lightly.

If you go watch the rendelshem clip that was posted you can watch how the see how the base commander worked the system so that he made his underlings write and sign the reports.

I would concur almost all TV is rubbish.

UD

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave

So whats the explanation then? I had another witness with me at the time, The " Did you see that" moment was pretty funny.

Im not exactly sure how fast an object that moves from one of of the horizon to another in less than the blink of an eye is.

How is a 90 degree right hand turn at speed not violating the law of momentum?
Can anyone in the discussion show me anything on earth that can do that at speed- Id love to see it.

for reference - I know what fighters look like from a lifetime of airshows and air force bases- when they break the sound barrier this and hundred even thousand plus MPH - whatever I saw made anything ive ever seen look slow including small meteors entering the atmosphere.

I dont know what it was, but I know we can't do that.

Audio engineer As a video guy in the effects business for 30 years I believe almost none of what I see thats not live and even question live events - I can fake almost anything digitally & imperceptably.


UD


The fact that you can fake anything proves the fallibility of human perception.

You've not provided enough details, enough actual facts, of your observations for me to being to be able to explain it.

You've made claims...but the claims don't include details other than your own perception of what happened...

And it's your perception that's flawed. Not physics.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave

Sworn testimony is typically transcribed in writing and requires a witnessed signature and opens the person up to perjury charges.

It typically given to a commander, or superior in the military, or in court of law.

An interview has no consequences.

When an enlisted officer writes down his version of of an event and signs it this document follows him for his career. An enlisted officer wont do this lightly.

If you go watch the rendelshem clip that was posted you can watch how the see how the base commander worked the system so that he made his underlings write and sign the reports.

I would concur almost all TV is rubbish.

UD




While I agree that almost all TV is rubbish, I would put some sworn statements in that same pile.

If you've got copies of those statements that we could see (it may only be prima facie evidence, but at least something on which to begin unraveling what was seen). Linking, or posting, claims of what was in those statements is hearsay, and proves nothing.

Further, if you're going to use statements from military members as evidence of UFOs, then we have to go back to the definition of UFO - It's an object, that's flying, and UNIDENTIFIED.

Unidentified is NOT the same as Alien.

I'm trying to help you identify what you saw.

You want me to believe that you saw alien spaceships, spaceships that exhibit fantastic characteristics, and that's a whole different thing than Unidentified Flying Object.

Finally, you're going to have to help me understand your terminology.

"Non-Newtonian" motion?? I have no idea what you mean by that. I have some understanding of physics and don't understand what you're saying.

"Enlisted Officer"? What's that?? Military members are either enlisted (ranks E-1 through E-9) or officer (ranks O-1 through O-10), or perhaps a Warrant Officer (W-1 through W-5) but there is no such thing as "enlisted officer"

Your terminology doesn't make sense, so I'm struggling to even understand your point.

 

[UncleDave]

Did I say alien ? I said what I saw we can't duplicate. (or as you say perceived I saw )

Take a look at threndelshem event it itself you've got signed statements by the deputy base commander as to the events and the guy is singing like a bird.

What I saw violated the 1st law of an object at rest or in motion wants to stay at rest or in motion by instantly starting stopping and turning with no perceived ramp in speed either way.

Non-newtonian as in not subject to laws of momentum or any determinable action reaction event like jet thrust pushing a fighter in an opposite direction.

I dont disagree it was my perception.

Thats all you or I anyone describing any unrecorded event can relate.

Interestingly (and much to my relief and concurrent dismay) my perception was identical to that of the VP of credit and collections at Universal Studios who was with me at the time.

Halt was the deputy base commander. Thats the guy that singed the rendleshem report.

Im only a civvvy and although I was in an air force family I never served so perhaps I dont use the correct military terms .



UD

 

[Nickdfresh]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do you consider sworn testimony and an " interview" to be the same thing?

Generally, I wouldn't. We see a lot of rubbish on these TV programs. However, to whom was the "sworn testimony" given and why? Generally speaking, I wouldn't see a lot of need to tell a shaky, vague story under oath.



Sworn testimony is typically transcribed in writing and requires a witnessed signature and opens the person up to perjury charges.

It typically given to a commander, or superior in the military, or in court of law.

An interview has no consequences.

When an enlisted officer writes down his version of of an event and signs it this document follows him for his career. An enlisted officer wont do this lightly.

If you go watch the rendelshem clip that was posted you can watch how the see how the base commander worked the system so that he made his underlings write and sign the reports.

I would concur almost all TV is rubbish.

UD




There's no such thing as an "enlisted Officer" and much of Rendelshem has been debunked. They were watching a distant lighthouse and caught up in the histrionics of being in the woods at night...