US Naval pilots "We see UFO everyday for at least a couple of years"

Jump to Latest
#162
hi,

this is for those who search for a prove that Einstein erred.
Actually I know of two reasons 😉

1st: Trash Talk .... travelling much faster than light. In fact it seems that light speed is the lowest possible velocity of TT.
2nd: e=mc² ... the true meaning is as simple as mundane ... Energy = Milk x Coffee²

... case settled 😀

jauu
Calvin
 
#164
Calvin said:
hi,

this is for those who search for a prove that Einstein erred.
Actually I know of two reasons 😉

1st: Trash Talk .... travelling much faster than light. In fact it seems that light speed is the lowest possible velocity of TT.
2nd: e=mc² ... the true meaning is as simple as mundane ... Energy = Milk x Coffee²

... case settled 😀

jauu
Calvin
Click to expand...

Small addendum:
3rd: E=MC2S3

Energy=Milk × Coffee2 × Sugar3 ;-)
 
#167
Indiglo, there is an analysis of the Navy videos by someone who actually knows how to read the display on the instrument panel pretty much the same reasoning as your last link.

If anyone wants a conspiracy, consider that there might be a LOT more space debris falling from private and govt. programs such as used boosters, etc. than anyone knows. If this were known it would be a public outcry and funding chaos. To add a point the "cool" aura around a hot object is a common artifact of IR cameras due to image apodizing or sharpening, this appears in several videos. Tracking a superheated piece of junk until it hits water and "dissapears", cools suddenly, would have to be ruled out.
 
#170
Indiglo said:
For the rational people amongst us - here is a link explaining and analysing the US Navy Videos

Here is another explaining and debunking the pyramid UFO video

Explaining UFO Parallax Illusion
Click to expand...

If the analysis in the link is accurate, then:

Our radar detection capability is massively incompetent, that they could not detect an ordinary craft from an UAP. The fact that these have been detected at a regular basis, and therefore if the debunk is accurate, then our detection capability and trained pilots have been duped at a regular basis.
 
#171
The only dupes are the general public gullible enough to keep the rhetoric flowing. Then there's the self aggrandizing percentile craving the attention it brings. The members of the Air Force are sworn to keep their mouths shut except when perpetuating the "phenomenons".
 
#174
Indiglo said:
Well obviously no-one said the "Standard Model" is a theory about everything and whether its reality is not up for debate, the laws of physics is reality and certainly not a approximation, physicists would find your views somewhat unorthodox.



The "Standard Model" is complete, the Higgs Boson particle was confirmed in 2012 long predicted by physicists. However what is missing is the linking between dark matter/energy and gravity and how it ties into the standard model.

There are no growing doubts,

the "Standard Model" has been subject to every attempt to overturn it to demonstrate in the laboratory that it must be substantially reworked – and there have been many over the past 50 years – has failed.

We can be thankful the scientists and physicists at Cern understand - The Standard Model
Click to expand...
From the CERN website "Today the LHCb experiment at CERN announced new results which, if confirmed, would suggest hints of a violation of the Standard Model of particle physics." Couple that with the recent Muon G2 results and I can't see where the Standard Model is "complete".
 
#177
andy2 said:
If the analysis in the link is accurate, then:

Our radar detection capability is massively incompetent, that they could not detect an ordinary craft from an UAP. The fact that these have been detected at a regular basis, and therefore if the debunk is accurate, then our detection capability and trained pilots have been duped at a regular basis.
Click to expand...

In fact its contrary, these optical systems are very advanced and complex, what they are detecting in some cases is in fact an actual aircraft and no doubt designed to detect smaller objects like missiles.

There's no deception either by the sensors or the pilots that cannot be explained by rational analysis. Sensors have limitations and pilots are not infallible as analysed in this discussion - 2004 USS Nimitz Tic Tac UFO FLIR footage (FLIR1)

The debunking the pyramid UFO video demonstrates how a night vision optical device when not fully conversed in its operation can lead to a conclusion the sky was filled with ufo's when in fact it was a boeing 737 and stars.
 
#178
Radar these days is very sensitive and can pick up small items.
They even pick up vehicles on roads and this has to be filtered out.

There are many things in the air besides craft. Large birds. Kites. Drones. Chinese lanterns. Model airplanes and rockets etc etc

I watched a "UFO" program late one night. It showed lights in the sky which were unexplained.
When it was investigated it turned out to be cars on a high road.
 
#180
oreo382 said:
From the CERN website "Today the LHCb experiment at CERN announced new results which, if confirmed, would suggest hints of a violation of the Standard Model of particle physics." Couple that with the recent Muon G2 results and I can't see where the Standard Model is "complete".
Click to expand...

This is the expectation from scientific inquiry, a group of scientists and physicists theorise the physical properties of something and another group propose and devise by the way of experiments to verify and produce evidence.

This is standard scientific modus operandi........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom