It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It was addressed elsewhere in-thread. The higher a plane is, the slower it appears to be traveling. A-10's are the Air Force's quietest jet plane. You're not going to hear them when they're thousands of feet in the air.
I just find it hard to believe that so many people could mistake a formation of planes, thousands of feet in the air, and believe it to be a huge low object that blocked out the stars and moved slowly and silently.
Just does not make sense!
originally posted by: Morg234
a reply to: _BoneZ_
Except that it made no noise. The A-10 is still a jet aircraft and would be clearly heard.
originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: Forensick
If it flew directly above you, at 10-15k you would hear it? If it was really high, directly above, would you still hear it? It's lights would diminish in size the further up they are so... If the lights are large, then they are flying low and could be heard if going directly overhead? If the lights are small and in the distance, it might seem silent, but that would make it seem pretty small???
Hm. Also, to appear to be going slowly, they would have to be high up. That would make them less able to be heard as well. If they were low down, they would appear to be going much faster and they would then be clearly loud.
???
AB
originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
originally posted by: draknoir2
I seem to recall accounts of the flying "V" blocking out the stars while reflecting the city lights from more than just the witnesses mentioned in the O.P.... one being a retired U.S. Marshal.
I think this thread could have been a bit more objective in its presentation of the evidence. A lot more, in fact. The obvious intent is to debunk.
You're Fired!
originally posted by: universalbri
a reply to: draknoir2
Ok. Have you seen The Empire Strikes Back? You know when Han Solo is frozen in the carbon based material that levitates above the ground?
While working with the NSA as a programmer for eight years time, technically 'in the same class' as Snowden in 2003, but according to 'written record here' it's 2002 for reasons I will get into in a bit - It was my job to decode a 'foreign' database's and decipher the information within it.
On asking questions about the origin, I was introduced to a material which was being used to transport heavy goods back and forth, a material which could levitate at hip height level 'at touch'. Another material, the one presented in the Roswell images and claimed to be 'mylar' - is bs - to demonstrate its structure, I was told to take a pen to it, an engineer working on the material actually had sharp knife like blades to assert this - but the material could NOT be perceived. Heck, it didnt even leave a 'scar' from where we'd tried to pierce it.
In any case. Look. I get it. You're all programmed to be skeptics and like any good programs you're expected to elicit responses which provoke support.
Reality's created by imagination, that was the end result of our dive into the 'alien' database, which the true origin of it would defy your imagination. In any case, ATS is about believing. not suspending belief and eliminating the opposition.
New here? Nope. I've lurked since this site's been around. ;-) Probably before you were in diapers, kid.
originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: Forensick
If it flew directly above you, at 10-15k you would hear it? If it was really high, directly above, would you still hear it? It's lights would diminish in size the further up they are so... If the lights are large, then they are flying low and could be heard if going directly overhead? If the lights are small and in the distance, it might seem silent, but that would make it seem pretty small???
Hm. Also, to appear to be going slowly, they would have to be high up. That would make them less able to be heard as well. If they were low down, they would appear to be going much faster and they would then be clearly loud.
???
AB
originally posted by: JadeStar
originally posted by: charlyv
The analysis is good. No question. However, it flies in the face of the testimony of some of the witnesses.
Eyewitness testimony is the lowest standard of evidence. The other evidence Bonez presented (the videos) trumps it.
originally posted by: charlyv
That testimony, again, flies in the face of the data presented, so you have to put a nail in that testimony that explains it.
originally posted by: draknoir2
originally posted by: charlyv
That testimony, again, flies in the face of the data presented, so you have to put a nail in that testimony that explains it.
That's my problem with the OP. It's not about aliens and airplanes... it's about assertions and assumptions.