How likely is it that UFO's are indeed just secret military aircraft.

I doubt very much the ufo's in the 50, 60's were ufo's because I don't think they started to do reverse engineering until 1947 and I think it would of taken decades to figure how anti gravity works on those miracle machines.

I don't think they perfected saucers until recently, if even they have done that.

Look at Gordon Coopers statement about how he saw ufo's above him when flying in his formation and they had a formation of their own. Also one that landed near the base he was on. He never indicated ANY HINT that we had anything close,. And he never had the impression that we had our own type of saucers.

Because of the military being incredibly secret about the whole thing, you really have to read between the lines.
I think Bob Lazaar is legit and of course so does George Knapp (to a large degree) and he stated that even then when bob was working there, they hadn't mastered the reverse engineering that they needed to be like the big kids on the block. They were starting to lift and do light maneuvers probably but when your dealing with something that could be thousands of years ahead of us, they probably had to keep sending in geniuses and kick em out when the didn't produce as in the case of Bob, David Adair etc. Bob only lasted six months there. David Adair spotted a biological engine the size of a grew hound bus. But the officer that showed him the bio engine, didn't know anybody that had a clue how it worked. At least from David's testimony on youtube. Which is amazing to say the least. And his rocketry expertise was headlined in newspapers when he was a genius teenager.

Originally posted by thetiler
Look at Gordon Coopers statement about how he saw ufo's above him when flying in his formation and they had a formation of their own. Also one that landed near the base he was on. He never indicated ANY HINT that we had anything close,. And he never had the impression that we had our own type of saucers.

In 1951, top-of-the-line Soviet fighters could out-climb US jets over Germany, far above our own operational ceilings.

Also, sadly, nobody else in Cooper's unit, or in the local police or UFO clubs, had a clue what Cooper was talking about. But you probably didn't know that since the UFO websites black out that part of the story.

The 1957 Edwards story is even more dismaying. All the on-scene witnesses Gettys and Bittick], as well as BOTH the AF report AND a later report by a top pro-UFO investigator AND the photos from the incident show NOTHING about the UFO landing. Just a slow drifting fly-past.

The only version that claims that, against the testimony of EVERY other witness and researcher, is Cooper's.

Again, I doubt that this is commonly known since the UFOlogical folks who are familiar with it, refuse to reveal it -- can't confuse their target audiences, it seems. with facts.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Klassified

He said, "We don't have anything remotely that fast or manuverable"

I have heard this and similar statements repeatedly in stories and from individuals. How do we know what TPTB have? We don't.

You're right, we don't know what TPTB have. What we know probably lags what they have by 50 years, or at least several decades.

But I've never seen anyone capture evidence of a claim like "We don't have anything remotely that fast or manuverable" on video, except for one infrared video I saw of what I'm pretty sure was some bats flying overhead. And yes, bats are very maneuverable, even TPTB's secret projects may not have anything as maneuverable as a bat, yet. But if someone's got video evidence of a claim like that that's not birds, bats, or insects, I'd sure like to see it, because the only ones I've seen that aren't flying animals, were CGI.

I assume you proved that in all cases with image-editing software and that it was not in each case merely an assumption based upon no evidence whatsoever other than your irrational need to explain away anything that does not seem to fit the current scientific paradigm?

According to some theories the saucer or foo or triangle ufo ships can can not
carry bullets or bombs as the propulsion system exploded those weapons of war.
That was a kick in the head for Hitler but not telling US Intel probably saved some
of the German scientists and security forces in 1945.

So if descended from WWII Foo, UFO's can not be secret military aircraft.
At best tech research vehicles.

Assorted beams and power signals might be experimented with or the ability
to set off pre planted bombs for special ops could be accomplished as a
military use.

Ed: So the UFO is an anti weapon for all the investments in powder explosives
except for pre planted explosives. The work on the UFO weapons would be on
rays and power and force beams. Observation utility seems high on a list of
capability and perhaps mind monitoring, who knows I never heard of such things.

Originally posted by micpsi

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But if someone's got video evidence of a claim like that that's not birds, bats, or insects, I'd sure like to see it, because the only ones I've seen that aren't flying animals, were CGI.

I assume you proved that in all cases with image-editing software and that it was not in each case merely an assumption based upon no evidence whatsoever other than your irrational need to explain away anything that does not seem to fit the current scientific paradigm?

You didn't read my post very carefully. What part of:
"But if someone's got video evidence of a claim like that that's not birds, bats, or insects, I'd sure like to see it" don't you understand?

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


That's an interesting point about the TESLA (Tesla Electro Super Luminal Acceleration) ships. I don't know if it can be found on the Web these days, but I remember seeing text of a letter from Nikola Tesla to George Westinghouse expressing confidence that he could perfect and fly his pet project, which his description made sound like a craft that imitated the characteristics of what much latter came to be called flying saucers. The date of that letter, I think, was around 1912.

And there's the popular story of a mass sighting of September 24, 1235, by Japanese General Yoritsume and his army, which prompted him to order the earliest known UFO investigation, whereupon his science advisors debunked the objects as stars blowing around in the wind, not secret military aircraft or the work of Nikola Tesla, but perhaps meteors--if the story is not a total fabrication.

reply to post by xpoq47


The TeslaUFOship info is hidden away, some say TFM, Tesla flying machine.
Only few accounts say much about the Oval, Rex Heflin flat disk ship, Hudson Valley Wing
or Belgian Triangle being a Tesla ether ship which they would have to be.

a search for good info
Did you pick this one, most approved:
www.pritchardschool.com/Teslas_Flying_Machine.pdf
Note the speed 300 miles per second and use of the turbine for power and the pulling
force to go up and separate to go side by side.


Pentagon Aliens by researcher Lyne has some insite
first link looks good
Not only is Tesla flying machine talk restricted by overflow of alien talkers taking credit for UFOs
by huge amounts of anti Tesla forces funding. I find tweets are swept about the man who saw
perhaps the first saucer and the pilot come down and film no longer mentioned. Many Tesla
documents are gone as well.