Pentagon ran secret multi-million dollar UFO programme

Debunker side? I'm on the side of science, so I'm on the skeptical side. In the meantime, you've aligned yourself with the guessers. Now, you, and everyone else is free to guess however you like, and you are also free to proselytize that guess (or belief), but that doesn't mean I think your guess is valid. At least without real evidence.

 

Understood, but there are piles of evidence. What is missing are the things revealing who they are. Which may never happen. And yet, this has to be considered a national security threat, even without knowing what or who they are. Something or someone travel our skies and there isnt a thing we can do to stop it. The evidence for that is there. To be skeptical of such evidence is the problem. For it appears not like a skeptic, but a debunker mentality. How can you be skeptical of scientific evidence? It is there, in regards to these things being in our skies. If you reject such evidence, you are of a debunker mentality, or denier. Same thing.

 

Ah ha ha!

The debate between Lil Mike and One Mind isn't going anywhere. They have already chosen their side.

Meanwhile I had alien encounters when I was a teenager so I got an eye witness view of the subject. Such a shame that no proof survived to this day so I can't really prove it to others.

 

Simply because you see something in the sky that you can't explain does not mean you make the illogical leap that they are craft from other planets. I'm not denying that people are seeing something, but that doesn't prove:

These are vehicles

These are vehicles powered by aliens.

There are "piles of evidence" that we are seeing something, but as far as I know, zero evidence that they are actual alien space ships. Evidence of that would be...you know...an actual alien, not flashes in the sky.

Based on the evidence so far, the belief in aliens is just that, a belief, not based in science, but in far more primitive superstitions like belief in ghosts and other supernatural spookies. So it's more akin to religious belief, which may explain why you are getting angry about a subject that really shouldn't upset you this much.

 

Uh, the head of the program we just learned about made that leap. So, I think I am in good company here. The evidence says they are hard craft, and they operate with a technology that we do not have. Now this fellow in the above posted video after working on this since 07 says they are craft. The only question is, where in the hell are the craft from? Certainly not earth or from humans, so what does that leave...logically. I will let your own logic come into play now, which an open mind would do. A closed mind? Not a chance in hell.

 

I'm logically waiting on hard evidence.

 

There is hard evidence these hard shelled craft are here. It passes the scientific requirements. It can be and has been measured by state of the art instruments aboard fighter aircraft. As well as ground instruments. They even measured them. Since unless these things are some kind of life from, logically and by deduction, that leaves the other option. Intelligent beings are responsible for these craft and they are constructed. And they don't seem to want to meet us. So unless they do decide to meet us one can only conjecture as to their origin. Which logically means if they never introduce themselves, and their technology is so great as to make it impossible for us to take one captive, we will never know where they hail from. But again by logical deduction, if they are not from here, and they are not, they are from elsewhere in this universe. Given this, for you to demand more evidence seems a mite illogical. For they may never introduce themselves to you.

 

What is the "hard evidence" that these sightings are "hard shelled craft?" Do we have one?

 

Supposedly by the trained observers, F18 pilot and partner, and the highest tech sensors in the world. You do not have to touch a craft or an object in order to tell it is a solid object. This evidence from various instrumentation is hard evidence of the existence of an object flying around an aircraft carrier and his support. And it went on for days. The evidence from the instruments and sensors is scieintific evidence.

 

What instrumentation?

 

Fighter aircraft sensors, targeting system, video, radar, and probably more. Plus the tracking of the craft on board the Nimitz. Up to 80 thousand feet, but it is said they can exceed that.

You know, those fighter jets were coloring up the tic tac shaped craft with their lasers. So they exist. The only evidence we need is the evidence that tells us from they hail from.

 

In the BBC and NYT article, there was only mention of a video, no mention of "sensors," or a "tracking system."

 

You know how sophisticated and state of the art the sensors, targeting system, ability to percieve various wave lengths in the spectrum, the use of lasers, all of this was zeroed in on the tic tac ufo that had been hanging around the Nimitz for days. This is what the head of that Reid program at the Dod said. The same one who provided the two recordings of the encounter.

There is scientific evidence that they things, are real objects. They exhibit a technology we may never understand. Only question is, where are these things from? Are they flown by other intelligences? Clearly they are a threat, by technology itself.

 

You keep saying terms like "scientific evidence" "hard evidence" and have not provided any.

 

The head of the DoD program said this. I parroted him. And he should know. He considers the data from what he was privy to, to be scientific evidence. You don't, obviously, so we are at an impasse.

 

So there is no hard evidence, or none that any scientist can review and confirm.

 

Not sure how you can logically say that, given the nature of the evidence. The pod on that jets can ever measure the objects. Measure? Oh, the most fundamental tool of science. Instruments measure as well as accumulate other data. Saved. So, scientific evidence that these things are objects, not illusions. But not enough for you, and so you say there is no evidence. Yet the head of that program disagrees, and given he was in science before intel, his views suffice for me. He says yes, you say no. Who is to be believed? Or who is the most credible here?

This chap quit a couple months ago because he could not get the attention of higher ups in regards to the critical nature of this. That objects, crafts, can operate at will around our battle groups and then burn us in acceleration so we couldn't catch one if we tried. There is no doubt these things are in our skies.

 

What measurements? None of that data was in the article linked here.

 

Those would be in the paper work, right? We are only privy to what the head of this program at DoD said about the scientific based evidence. He said it existed. My position is based upon what this dude has told us. I figure he has seen this evidence or he would not mention it.

 

How can you so confidently state that these craft aren't terrestrial? Consider if you will this scenario, and ask yourself if it is not a more likely one under Occam's razor than your scenario involving an alien race traveling impossible distances to come to our pissant planet only to not talk to us.

What if they are simply secret manmade aircraft, and the "aliens" story is just misdirection? What if this head of the program is just spouting misinformation, because people saw aircraft they didn't have clearance to know about, so a cover story was needed. In fact, the "UFO" they were showing in your video had a visible corona surrounding it, so there is a good chance that it is simply the current state of the art of the flying saucers first pioneered by Thomas Townsend Brown in the 50s. Brown's saucers operated by ionizing the air around them, which would produce coronas like this. So when the guy in your video says these aircraft violate the laws of aerodynamics, that is not the same thing as saying they violate the laws of physics. Brown's discs did not operate using aerodynamics, but by a method known at the time as "electrogravitics".

 

Because of their 90 degree turns? Being able to accelerate like a bullet? Being able to shut down electronics on fighter aircraft?

If we have had this technology, it would be used in the military, which means we would have seen its use in the wars in the middle east, like the invasion of Iraq. Wars bring out the new weapons.

If something can get here from elsewhere in the universe, it is so far ahead of us that it probably could not even relate to us, nor want to talk to us. But I dunno what kind of intelligence is involved with these objects, its origin. All that I do know is they exist, and they exhibit a technology which is far ahead of us or anyone on earth. The origin of these flying objects may never be known. Not like we can capture one. Be like an ant crawling up and elephant's leg screaming rape!!

 

Yep, these things are also indicative of Brown's electrogravitics. Again, they don't operate using aerodynamics.

Sounds like an EMP. No alien tech required for that.

Maybe they were used and they just were not seen. Maybe Iraq wasn't deemed a big enough deal to pull out all the stops. I don't know, but I'm not going to assume that the US gov puts all its cards on the table every time we kick ass on a non-threat country like Iraq.

Then it would be pointless to make the ridiculously huge journey. You don't travel trillions of miles through the void to not say hello.

You don't know that.

You don't know that, either.

 

OK so you've been prattling on about "evidence" as if you had any. The fact is, you don't have any, there isn't any available for anyone to examine, and you've been tried to tell me for days about this "evidence" which for all we know, doesn't exist.

It's pretty clear that this isn't about "evidence" for you and never was; that's how religious like belief is; no proof required. Sorry but I'm not like that. You may restart this discussion with me when we have some real evidence that independent scientists can examine.

 

I know they exist in the same manner that I would know that anything that can be detected, sensored and observed, exists.

In regards to antigravitics? It would be a huge conspiracy that such technology has been kept from humanity and its commercial uses. So, I do not believe we have it. For what is seen with these objects, the military contacts, is high tech. So, they don't know about their own technology?

 

What did this project that Eligondo was the head of do? It gathered EVIDENCE. You must have decided to not listen to any of his interviews? He says the scientific evidence is there. As if we didn't have decades of evidence already. The people who say there is no evidence have not looked for it. Not surprised by this as I think this has an emotional, non rational, factor involved, and that isn't on my side, but yours, IMO.

It seems that scientists have examined the evidence, from the program Eligondo was the head of. And while he says the evidence is there, scientific evidence to support the existence of these objects, the details are classified. Imagine that. So, of course if you do not believe the head of the program, because you cannot see the evidence, personally, you can retain your position with ease. But I do not think that position has integrity.