Triangular U.F.O. phenomimon.

reply to post by FoxfilesMulder


Yeah, it comes in typo flavor.

Got anything on-topic to share, or just trolling the board for typos?

reply to post by redmage


Nope, nothing on topic to share.

I'm pretty much trolling for typos on threads that offer nothing I haven't heard 15 years ago and offer me no links, videos or any further information.

Thank you for your concern, it means a lot to me to have fans like you around.

reply to post by FoxfilesMulder


Hey # head I am trolling this thread I was the first post and pointed it out.

There's no such thing as the TR-3B. Many former military people have said if black triangles are man-made, they are not the US. If it was the US we would not be testing over foreign soil. Back during the Belgian flap the US was directly asked if was the US, the only response from the US was they were not ours. Reports of flying black triangles go back before manned flight and the first Belgian Flap was over 20 years ago, technology like the triangle is a game changer it certainly would not be used just to perpetuate psychological warfare in the form of making people think we were being visited by aliens. Read up on both Belgium flaps if you really want to know about the black triangles, it's the best documented sightings of them.

Originally posted by Kali74
There's no such thing as the TR-3B. Many former military people have said if black triangles are man-made, they are not the US. Back during the Belgian flap the US was directly asked if was the US, the only response from the US was they were not ours.

The same military that officially denies the existence of the Area 51 airstrip. Do you mean that military? We have a long history of denial when it comes to black projects. The F-117 was operational in the early 80's, based off 70's tech, and wasn't publicly acknowledged until the first gulf war in 1990. Besides, the TR-3B is more likely a CIA/NSA deal, so these "former military people" who are talking may not even have access to the need-to-know TS-SCI program (a.k.a. plausible deniability).

Frankly, there's absolutely no need to publicly acknowledge the TR-3B, nor the replacement for the SR-71 Blackbird when the air-crafts that have been publicly acknowledged still provide air superiority; it's bad for business/sales.

I disagree, saying all triangular aircraft being seen from the 40`s on are US aircraft is like saying all red cars are Chevy Corvettes. Do I believe that we have triangular craft yes, if something works you use it. Saying its back engineered from alien craft makes statement void.

Bill

reply to post by redmage


The US military still denies an airstrip at area 51? I don't think so. I'm not going to argue every single secret project with anyone, is the military/government transparent? no, of course not. What I'm saying is that they specifically deny the black triangles are ours, and considering the length of time they have been reported (pre-manned flight as I said before) I doubt we could keep such technology in our closet this long.

Also, with the ability to silently hover and then take off from hover to mach speeds along with the ability to avoid radar detection at will...I personally would be outraged that these things haven't been used in rescuing POWs or taking out key targets before 10's of thousands lives were needlessly lost...not to mention the massive drain on the economy and the building up of debt that I don't think we can ever get out from under. Think about it.

Originally posted by FoxfilesMulder
Whats a phenomimon?

Is it a new ice cream out or something?

Also what flavors does it come in?

Nah. The spell check does that sometimes.I think you know what i am talking about.these sightings are starting to become a world wide phenomenon like the big foot sightings.for some reason the spell check doesn't work on the title for a thread.

Originally posted by Kali74
The US military still denies an airstrip at area 51? I don't think so

Curently, the federal government concedes that the USAF has an "operating location" near Groom Lake, but they don't go any further. While that isn't the flat denial they put forth for decades, it's hardly much of a direct confirmation either. There's a few USAF sites "near Groom Lake", and Area 51 is on Groom lake.

Originally posted by Kali74
What I'm saying is that they specifically deny the black triangles are ours, and considering the length of time they have been reported (pre-manned flight as I said before) I doubt we could keep such technology in our closet this long.

Our government has a long history of denial, compartmentalization is a powerful tool, and our closets are BIG. To this day, most people still don't know the U.S. has had three space programs running parallel; civilian, military, and intelligence programs.

Originally posted by Kali74
Also, with the ability to silently hover and then take off from hover to mach speeds along with the ability to avoid radar detection at will...I personally would be outraged that these things haven't been used in rescuing POWs or taking out key targets before 10's of thousands lives were needlessly lost...

Our B-2 Spirit, and F-117 already excel when it comes to taking out "key targets" for maintaining air superiority. We've also publicly added the F-22 Raptor to that lineup, and are soon to add the F-35 Lightning as well. Again, there's absolutely no need to publicly acknowledge the TR-3B, nor the replacement for the SR-71 Blackbird, when the air-crafts that have been publicly acknowledged still provide air superiority; it's bad for business and sales.

Originally posted by Kali74
not to mention the massive drain on the economy and the building up of debt that I don't think we can ever get out from under. Think about it.

Rest assured, I've thought about it, and the drain on the economy has been HUGE. Many forget Rumsfeld's pre-9/11 admission of unaccounted for trillions, and that's on top of the already off-the-books black budget.

reply to post by redmage


I appreciate your replies but I just don't buy that they are man-made, maybe someday I'll eat my words and if I have reason to, I will happily, however I don't think we have the capability to do what these things have been reported to do and I'll stand by my words that there is no such thing as the TR-3B.

reply to post by redmage
redmage;I'm getting board of the typos and you nagging about it. Lets try to stay on topic here. Yea I misspelled a word on the title of this thread big whoop wanna fight about it?. It' the title spell check. It doesn't help me correct the titles for a thread. Anyway I have been doing allot of reading on this subject of this U.F.O. and I have noticed this U.F.O. has been seen during daylight ours mainly. Some reports are of this craft being invisible with only the running lights showing. It must have a cloaking device on board.

reply to post by Deebo
This might be the TR3B. But it could be an alien craft to. It's all about getting the opinions from fellow A.T.S. members. I'm interested on what people have to present on A.T.S.

reply to post by paranormal78


Your reply here, to me, makes no sense at all. I didn't "nag you" about any typo. I made a single post clearly replying to another member who was off-topic trolling. You may want to re-read my post, and the post it was replying to before jumping to baseless conclusions. Unless your moniker is FoxfilesMulder, the post in question wasn't directed towards you. My prior, and subsequent posts were all on topic till you dredged the issue back up for some unknown reason.

Could be a nuclear powered aircraft, the military were developping some in the 60s I think but they ''stopped'' producing it due to its high cost and probably because the public probably doesn't want a nuclear craft flying on top of them, who knows what it could be.
I would think with all the research in producing a quiet propulsion device on submarines that maybe they did similar research for aircrafts and created a large craft that would be capable to stay in the air indefinitely with a quiet propulsion and produce a lot of power to evade enemy fighters.
With all the money they spend on the military, it could be a possiblity.

reply to post by redmage
Yea your right. My bad redmage. I just get carried away sometimes and do things like that.

Could this craft be nuclear powered? If so how would that work? I think it would be to dangerous for any military have a nuclear powered aircraft. The U.N. wouldn't agree to this type of power source to be used on a military aircraft. It's common sense. Would you want an aircraft doing spy missions with a nuclear core on board where there always could be the possibility of getting shot down and crashing releasing nuclear radiation? That could be very bad for the environment. And people are going in the "green" direction with federal and governmental laws regarding the use of nuclear power and things like that.