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.
Originally posted by thektotheg
reply to post by MrsBlonde
There's so much to say in this thread, but I'm enjoying reading. I just wanted to add to your video post regarding the Denver Airport which IS crazy as all get out, one other interesting note that wasn't mentioned in the video...
The CIA is no longer based in Langley...
Where were they moved....
That's right... Denver.
Great thread. I'm going to continue reading.
Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by Advantage
Just a thought... You said, "its definitely unmanned. The human body cant handle the kind of maneuvers I saw myself " This would be true with known craft. This craft could be using an anti-gravity device such as "The Bell" which the Nazis were developing at the end of WWII. In that case, it would be posssible to be :"manned".
edit on 19-10-2010 by romanmel because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by thektotheg
reply to post by darkventures
This made me LOL.
Call me old-fashioned, but you'd be more interesting if you had a basic understanding of grammar and punctuation.
Originally posted by thektotheg
reply to post by Advantage
My issue is this: I think it presumptuous to make a blanket statement regarding it being unmanned. What we don't know about energy propulsion systems would likely fill more books than currently exists in terms of the "known" on the subject. The very idea that it is an unknown craft opens it up to infinite possibilities, most of which I don't think we are currently in any position to understand outright. Ufology is full of plenty of video/witness accounts (including proffesionals in the fields of topic) of craft that behaved in fashions that defied conventional science. Couple it with modern ET lore and you've got more than a case for the possibility that such a craft could be not only manned, but also (likely) be well beyond our current comprehension of physics. Just food for thought. I don't think it safe to make such assumptions is all.
Probably right.. but Im talking on a message board about something I have admittedly no clue about and just signed up here a little bit ago. Im certainly not well versed on any of this UFO info.. as I do not believe in aliens. Even though a "UFO" isnt coupled with aliens in normal conversation, it sure seems to be on THIS message board after looking through a few threads. All I know about are existing things and prototypes that would never look or behave like what I saw myself or what was on youtube from NY. Im just now learning and I may be presumptuous, but Im here asking for information with an open mind.
Originally posted by Scramjet76
reply to post by Advantage
Probably right.. but Im talking on a message board about something I have admittedly no clue about and just signed up here a little bit ago. Im certainly not well versed on any of this UFO info.. as I do not believe in aliens. Even though a "UFO" isnt coupled with aliens in normal conversation, it sure seems to be on THIS message board after looking through a few threads. All I know about are existing things and prototypes that would never look or behave like what I saw myself or what was on youtube from NY. Im just now learning and I may be presumptuous, but Im here asking for information with an open mind.
So let me get this right... you admit you have no clue. But then come right back the next sentence and say you don't believe in aliens. Looks like you did great research before coming to opinions/conclusions. Good job.
Originally posted by thektotheg
reply to post by MrsBlonde
MrsBlonde did you happen to listen to Coast to Coast am last night? The guest was on talking about the dangers of vaccines and the like, but they also talked extensively about the denver airport. The link to his site presented really broke it down nicely, so I'll include it.
web.mac.com...