We need to stop obsessing about FLYING objects and look DOWNWARDS instead

True or not????

www.project1947.com...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MissSmartypants

Eventually it turned into a giant seaweed monster grabbing the Seaview and shaking it, giving the cast another opportunity to run back and forth across the set. Every week. I was 10 and I could tell how cheezy it was.

The flying sub was cool though.

But have you so soon forgotten The Abyss?

My 10 year old self thoroughly enjoyed the show. And for some strange reason I've never seen "The Abyss" but now I want to...with the 30 minutes of cut footage restored.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Is "Flying" is the most overrated aspect within Ufology? Then again, it is engraved within the acronym itself (including "UAP"), so perhaps that is the inherent problem. Furthermore, if the inter-dimensional theories of Jacques Vallee & Co are to be investigated with any real resolve, we really do need to stop wasting time looking UP and instead perceive more closely what is AROUND or BENEATH us, ground or water.

Disagree, despite the fact USO's are an interesting aspect of the phenomenon, you forget to mention the reports of instantly disappearing objects (in the sky obviously) or similar, my favorite was a report from a British pilot who described a flight on a clear day in which he seen a triangle shadow on the ground and yet where the object should have been in the sky, there was nothing there.

Possibly this still falls into the inter-dimensional theory?

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

British pilot who described a flight on a clear day in which he seen a triangle shadow on the ground and yet where the object should have been in the sky, there was nothing there.

For that instance I'd venture less inter-dimensional and more a triangular craft with a system that projects it's background , giving it a form of invisibility but leaving a shadow. I've actually seen the same thing when a perfectly straight, huge shadow moved down my street with nothing visible above. See the Astr0 account on this site for a better than merely plausible explanation.

But it's likely that there are other realms, frequencies, dimensions... whatever terms one desires... too.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

I agree. Considering we've explored less than 5% of our oceans which make up 70% of the planet it seems logical if one were to "hide" then the oceans would be a great place to do so.

The topic might be interesting to discuss from a hypothetical perspective.

Everyone on Earth, with normal vision, can look up in the sky. Whereas looking deep into the seas is something a lot more difficult to do. Especially far away from the coastline.

Any real attempt to study USOs would first have to consider the extremely high costs of resourcing any such exercise against extremely low chance of getting positive results.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Good thread mate - long history of speculation about UFO origin being 'closer to home' than many people like to think and the idea of a companion civilisation (or non human intelligence) coexisting with our own is a pretty fascinating one.

Loads of extremely strange USO reports from around the world's oceans and also specific UFO cases where unknown objects are witnessed emerging (or submerging) into large bodies of water so God knows what's going on.

originally posted by: mirageman

The topic might be interesting to discuss from a hypothetical perspective.

There's an interesting topical, hypothetical discussion here which could encourage different perspectives.

There are a few landing cases where the weight-to-volume ratio of a UFO could be estimated from the indentations. It was of the same order of magnitude as a submarine (see Paul R Hill, Unconventional Flying Objects).
This means they are sturdy enough to go underwater.

If they have a propulsion system based on ‘anti-gravity’, they are not limited to the sky, either. Traveling under water would probably only limit their speed because of the higher drag.

That doesn’t necessarily mean they live there; they may simply be using the oceans now and then to evade detection.

As for Fravor’s sighting, the `tic tac’ might have been a decoy to draw attention away from a much bigger craft that hid below the water surface. There are some rumors something was detected in the ocean as well, so who knows? It traveled to his CAP and stayed there, acting as bait to draw the F18’s away.

originally posted by: mikell
True or not????
www.project1947.com...

"“A large spheroidal mass seen floating in the air at an unknown distance to the north.” - 1850

“3 remarkable meteors” bright red. Lead object egg-shaped the others round. Approached from NNW toward ship. Soared through clouds at angle 75 deg. Departed WNW..." - 1904

Good job Mike - Great website!

a reply to: Guest101
Nice post. As I mentioned to Brit over a month ago, I believe they dock their Motherships underwater and those serve as their underwater bases. Earth bound bases yet movable to multiple locations. They can evade radar in the skies and can probably do the same to sonar under the seas.

originally posted by: underwerks

Do we try to hide ourselves when we step over an anthill?

Well, no, but at least we are more or less on the same ground level when we do, and that's the important point - in other words, we don't have to wrestle with the interstellar travel conundrum when we see an anthill ahead. At least I don't!

If we are dealing with an inter-dimensional mystery, though, your point has stronger impact. Harder to prove, of course, especially if we expand the theory to Human Zoo/Sanctuary dimensions. The argument goes that we would never approach the leader of say a colony of gorillas on Earth and sit down for a informal chat; they simply exist within the boundaries of a human-controlled world. Are WE the 'inmates' of another higher intelligence's controlled enviroment?

Again, virtually impossible to prove and very easily dismissed, but ideal fodder for campfire philosophical ramblings.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
a reply to: Guest101
Nice post. As I mentioned to Brit over a month ago, I believe they dock their Motherships underwater and those serve as their underwater bases. Earth bound bases yet movable to multiple locations. They can evade radar in the skies and can probably do the same to sonar under the seas.

The notion that an alien intelligence is already here, and has been for centuries if not far longer, is pretty much the thrust of the thread. And the oceans and seas would be an entirely logical 'base of operations', in fact, perhaps the only sensible option for any extraterrestrial intelligence that desires deeper covertness whilst analysing its human 'host''s activities.

Far more work needs to be done in the USO area, but it's difficult to imagine the resources or motivation existing for any nation state to pursue that line of inquiry rather than just responding to invasions of air-space.

SETI, for example, needs to dunk its head in water for change.

a reply to: Phage

Phage, have you ever had an experience you couldn't explain?

a reply to: Phage

Had that been me in that boat I would have ruined every stitch of clothing on my body in foul, unspeakable ways.
And the boat wouldn't have fared much better.
It's things like that damned glow-streaking eagle ray that keep me out of natural bodies of water. That goes fifty fold for night excursions. Bathtubs and swimming pools are my absolute limit and I'll avoid even these options after sundown.

"And the oceans and seas would be an entirely logical 'base of operations'..."a reply to: ConfusedBrit

And lakes, don't forget lakes.
I'm sure you're familiar with Lake Baikal in Russia, more specifically the numerous accounts of bizarre happenings in and around the ancient lake. These include some of the strangest and most disturbing reports of encounters with non-human intelligences on record.