I'm not saying it was aliens but...

I'll just say that I spent an entire afternoon recently dealing with 2 issues......

1) my wife's little sister who, while using my buddy pass, got to the airport terminal 30 mins prior to departure and didn't know how to turn her confirmation code into a boarding pass to get through security (missed her flight that had lots of open seats, had to get her on the later redeye)

2) my wife's little cousin who texts me several times a week about this UAP/UFO stuff, who basically long form texted me all of the above in this thread

My wife said "I'm sorry"

I think I was a pretty good husband that day, it all got taken care of :)
 
Lol. If they're aliens, they're the stupidest aliens imaginable. They can toy with the fundamentals of mass, velocity, electricity, magnetism, and energy like a cat with a mouse, but they can't manage to stay off the TV. Is humanity really so lonely that it needs to go inventing imaginary friends?

Yes, that’s right, swamp gas is the much more rational explanation. Or maybe yet another weather balloon. :rolleyes:

You’re the one making the assertion that they’re trying to stay off of TV. I don’t see anyone else making that claim.
 
Something that has always puzzled me is how rapid our technology grew in such a short amount time compared to a civilization that ruled for a thousand years never really did.
 
As usual, we define words very differently. :)

“Bonkers” to me would be near light travel, permanent installations on multiple planets and moons, etc. We’ve basically sent a few probes out that have some cool gizmos. The movie 2001: A Space Odyssey wasn’t supposed to be outlandish. It was what they thought we would be doing by then. And here we are a quarter century after that having barely scratched the surface of near space travel. Yet people want me to believe that we’ve got machines capable of defying physics? Sorry, I ain’t buying it.

Let's dissect the "tech" from 2001:

Reusable space planes so reliable they're suitable for airline use? Nope. Not even close.

Heavy lift capacity such that you can build and operate a space station with centripetal gravity with commercial services? Nope. Not even close.

Heavy lift capacity & regular scheduled flights from earth orbit to the moon? Nope. Not even close.

Large, robust lunar bases? Nope. Not even a twinkle in someone's eye.

Ubiquitous flat screen technology? Ok. Not in 2001, though.

Computer expert systems with conversational AI (with or without murderous intent) with accurate, real time voice recognition as well as visual input & comprehension? Maybe. Might be getting part way there. 22 years after the prediction.

Human hibernation for extended voyages? No one has even a clue how to do this.

Nuclear plasma drive for large space vehicles suitable for interplanetary flight? Who, the what?

Our space programs, either government based or commercial are laughably far away from any of this. Our "space transport" is locked into the same mantra as it was in the late 40's, with some marginal improvements in thrust/weight & control, allowing some reusability. Our presence in earth orbit is in a can that probably smells of feet and is subject to constant bickering between partners AND still restricted in occupancy because we can't figure out how to build a re-entry vehicle that sits more than 3. Any and all are still non-robust & remarkably fragile. Even our unmanned efforts are locked into whatever physical size the roman candle de jour can tolerate, and people lose their minds whenever one fires off with an RTG because "it's nuc'lar!". Plus it takes decades to reach the outer planets.

The one thing we've gotten pretty good at is shrinking electronics, logic based computing power, and design and integration. It lets us do some ok things. But all of this is nothing more than putting a FADEC on your 1920's tractor.
 
Something that has always puzzled me is how rapid our technology grew in such a short amount time compared to a civilization that ruled for a thousand years never really did.

I assume you’re referencing the Romans? Well, they did make some pretty significant advances. Things like fresh water plumbing. But what has made the difference for us is the scientific method and the enlightenment in general. We didn’t start using these methods en masse until after Galileo in the 17th century. That’s when things kicked into high gear.
 
I assume you’re referencing the Romans? Well, they did make some pretty significant advances. Things like fresh water plumbing. But what has made the difference for us is the scientific method and the enlightenment in general. We didn’t start using these methods en masse until after Galileo in the 17th century. That’s when things kicked into high gear.

The Romans did ok, but as I understand their society, they didn't particularly reward innovation for innovation's sake, something we hold in very high regard. They advanced in certain areas only to the extent required or to the minimum needs of the moment, and then stagnated.

A common theme in the alternate history crowd is what if the Romans had industrialized. Certainly some understood the power of steam and even built toys that utilized it (the aeolipile). Technically speaking, they had the materials, had the ability to machine the parts, and understood the principals well enough to refine it into a useful tool, but for some reason it was never seen as anything but a novelty. They also had cheap labor, the lack of which is usually a primary driver to innovation.
 


Watch the embedded Twitter video. Want to explain what that orb is? I'm not saying aliens either. But you tell me what that is.
 

Watch the embedded Twitter video. Want to explain what that orb is? I'm not saying aliens either. But you tell me what that is.

A not-all-that-fast-moving ball?

I have no idea what it actually is, but if you think that thing would require some unheard-of technology, you don’t spend much time in the toy section of Wal-Mart.
 
A not-all-that-fast-moving ball?

I have no idea what it actually is, but if you think that thing would require some unheard-of technology, you don’t spend much time in the toy section of Wal-Mart.

Enlighten us, genius.
 
You're honestly comparing what was seen in the video to something like this?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfnYd5Rr5tk


This is intellectual bankruptcy, and why I can't take these ultra-skeptics seriously. These two things literally bear zero resemblance.

Ugh.

You posted a grainy video and are drawing all kinds of “how is this possible?!?!” conclusions from it.

Questions for you, genius: how big is your orb? How fast is it going? Are you sure there aren’t some form of lifting surfaces on the outside that you wouldn’t be able to discern from your crap quality video if it were spinning and stabilized like the $20 toy you found?

I don’t think you can answer any of those with any level of certainty, which is why I have a hard time taking you seriously when you insinuate that there’s no technology that could explain this. You posted a poor quality video of a flying ball, I showed you a flying ball that could be delivered to your house tomorrow but that’s not good enough because it doesn’t look identical to the pixelated thing you showed. Good grief.
 
Sorry, but this is too much into the realm of what-if. I’m more likely to believe the ghost of my dead grandparents still stick around making an unexplained noise before I believe it’s an alien we can’t see.
Do UV rays and radio waves exist? Can we see them with the naked eye?

Just because the general public doesn’t have the tools necessary to detect them, doesn’t mean they’re not there. I think most pilots are hard pressed not to acknowledge their might be that possibility because of ridicule or that they simply can’t see them. Maybe we’re looking in the wrong places
 
Ugh.

You posted a grainy video and are drawing all kinds of “how is this possible?!?!” conclusions from it.

Questions for you, genius: how big is your orb? How fast is it going? Are you sure there aren’t some form of lifting surfaces on the outside that you wouldn’t be able to discern from your crap quality video if it were spinning and stabilized like the $20 toy you found?

I don’t think you can answer any of those with any level of certainty, which is why I have a hard time taking you seriously when you insinuate that there’s no technology that could explain this. You posted a poor quality video of a flying ball, I showed you a flying ball that could be delivered to your house tomorrow but that’s not good enough because it doesn’t look identical to the pixelated thing you showed. Good grief.

You’re confusing my point. I’m not saying it’s alien tech either.

I am discrediting lazy analysis by people like you, and merely stating that we don’t know what it was, and that it bears further investigation.

The pentagon wouldn’t be interested in this stuff it was just weather balloons and atmospheric anomalies.

But you knew that.
 
Do UV rays and radio waves exist? Can we see them with the naked eye?

Just because the general public doesn’t have the tools necessary to detect them, doesn’t mean they’re not there. I think most pilots are hard pressed not to acknowledge their might be that possibility because of ridicule or that they simply can’t see them. Maybe we’re looking in the wrong places

So aliens exist but we can’t see them. If I was an invisible alien, I would be Hollow Man-ing humans as the ultimate form of trolling.
 
Back
Top