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.
ManInAsia
I'll repeat, it's CGI mixed with real footage. There's no way the helicopter could fly so close to the ground so many times without contacting it and also jump around like that almost instantly. Fake.
Point is you can't disprove ufo maneuverability by comparing it with modern radio controlled helicopters.
tomra
Do not underestimate the human brains ability to judge scale, speed, secondary movment and light perception.
InhaleExhale
reply to post by bottleslingguy
Point is you can't disprove ufo maneuverability by comparing it with modern radio controlled helicopters.
Got your panties in a not this thread hasn't it.
Was the OP trying to disprove anything or offer possible explanations for what some say about its maneuverability and say it couldn't be ours?
This is proof that ignorant that say such (it cant be ours, nothing can make those sharp turns,etc) are well....ignorant to the fact that we have craft that can maneuver in such a fashion as the OP has shown.
bottleslingguy
Dumbass
reply to post by bottleslingguy
Which of the 10 vids talks about 10 miles? It's not in the text.
oh you're right it doesn't actually say TEN MILES IN ONE SECOND, but how do you account for the fact these objects were being chased by jets who couldn't catch them not to mention the fact they didn't have those psycho rc helicopters back then? Here's something pretty interesting from here "While they could not distinguish any object or light visually, they noticed that the radar object was increasing its distance at a very high rate. With every sweep of their radar, about 1 second apart, the object added five miles to its distance, translating to a speed of 18,000 mph (29,000 km/h).[17][18] The pilot however relayed a speed of 'a mile a second' to the control tower, or a speed of 3,600 mph (5,800 km/h),[19] but confirmed that the target exceeded both the 50 mi (80 km) and 100 mi (160 km) ranges of their radar scope in a matter of seconds" and that was back in '87. Point is you can't disprove ufo maneuverability by comparing it with modern radio controlled helicopters. Can modern videos be showing an rc heli and people confuse them for ufos, absolutely but whats the point we don't need modern ufo video to prove they exist, there's plenty of other more substantial evidence that does that.
My panties? Really?
so everybody needs to stfu
the thing that shuts this whole thread down is the fact the ufos were doing these things waaaaaaaaaaaaaay before rc helicopters.
bottleslingguy
Dumbass
reply to post by bottleslingguy
Which of the 10 vids talks about 10 miles? It's not in the text.
oh you're right it doesn't actually say TEN MILES IN ONE SECOND, but how do you account for the fact these objects were being chased by jets who couldn't catch them not to mention the fact they didn't have those psycho rc helicopters back then? Here's something pretty interesting from here "While they could not distinguish any object or light visually, they noticed that the radar object was increasing its distance at a very high rate. With every sweep of their radar, about 1 second apart, the object added five miles to its distance, translating to a speed of 18,000 mph (29,000 km/h).[17][18] The pilot however relayed a speed of 'a mile a second' to the control tower, or a speed of 3,600 mph (5,800 km/h),[19] but confirmed that the target exceeded both the 50 mi (80 km) and 100 mi (160 km) ranges of their radar scope in a matter of seconds" and that was back in '87. Point is you can't disprove ufo maneuverability by comparing it with modern radio controlled helicopters. Can modern videos be showing an rc heli and people confuse them for ufos, absolutely but whats the point we don't need modern ufo video to prove they exist, there's plenty of other more substantial evidence that does that.
bottleslingguy
reply to post by w810i
thing's pretty loud. how come they never flew it eleven miles in one second like those fake ufos? fail
bottleslingguy
reply to post by w810i
they change the pitch in the rotor blades so it's still pushing downward or another way to look at it is the helicopter is pushing "up"
bottleslingguy
reply to post by w810i
point was one of those rc copters couldn't fly like that so you're wrong
bottleslingguy
Dumbass
reply to post by bottleslingguy
Which of the 10 vids talks about 10 miles? It's not in the text.
oh you're right it doesn't actually say TEN MILES IN ONE SECOND, but how do you account for the fact these objects were being chased by jets who couldn't catch them not to mention the fact they didn't have those psycho rc helicopters back then? Here's something pretty interesting from here "While they could not distinguish any object or light visually, they noticed that the radar object was increasing its distance at a very high rate. With every sweep of their radar, about 1 second apart, the object added five miles to its distance, translating to a speed of 18,000 mph (29,000 km/h).[17][18] The pilot however relayed a speed of 'a mile a second' to the control tower, or a speed of 3,600 mph (5,800 km/h),[19] but confirmed that the target exceeded both the 50 mi (80 km) and 100 mi (160 km) ranges of their radar scope in a matter of seconds" and that was back in '87. Point is you can't disprove ufo maneuverability by comparing it with modern radio controlled helicopters. Can modern videos be showing an rc heli and people confuse them for ufos, absolutely but whats the point we don't need modern ufo video to prove they exist, there's plenty of other more substantial evidence that does that.
bottleslingguy
tomra
Do not underestimate the human brains ability to judge scale, speed, secondary movment and light perception.
that's why the smart people rely on things like radar to confirm the impossible maneuvers of legit ufos
bottleslingguy
InhaleExhale
reply to post by bottleslingguy
Point is you can't disprove ufo maneuverability by comparing it with modern radio controlled helicopters.
Got your panties in a not this thread hasn't it.
Was the OP trying to disprove anything or offer possible explanations for what some say about its maneuverability and say it couldn't be ours?
This is proof that ignorant that say such (it cant be ours, nothing can make those sharp turns,etc) are well....ignorant to the fact that we have craft that can maneuver in such a fashion as the OP has shown.
My panties? Really? the thing that shuts this whole thread down is the fact the ufos were doing these things waaaaaaaaaaaaaay before rc helicopters. so everybody needs to stfu
bottleslingguy
reply to post by InhaleExhale
I'm such a dumbass! lol let's see if they remove this
ok fine but there ARE night time videos of things that would require a controller to be in some pretty unlikely places in order to pull it off such as someone seeing something while camping way out in the middle of nowhere. Are you suggesting there are roving bands of rc controllers pulling random stunts hoping someone is watching (not to mention the viewer will also have to be far enough away not to hear the damn thing. That's another aspect of this you guys fail to mention. The fact that 265 feet away would allow you to hear it very clearly. Got any silent ones around?
w810i
The main point of the thread was to show that we have terrestrial objects that can maneuver in very incredible ways that have in the past been reserved solely for UFOS. The thread is not saying that RC helicopters are the cause of UFO reports or vice versa. A minor point was what could be done with a RC with LED lights flown at night by a talented pilot.
Your first sentence is so incoherent I'm not sure if even you know what your point is.
You just said "have in the past" and then made fun of me pointing out they couldn't explain the sightings from the past before there were these types of rc copters.
I know it is not your point of the thread but I'm not sure even you know what that was.
bottleslingguy
reply to post by InhaleExhale
I'm such a dumbass! lol let's see if they remove this
ok fine but there ARE night time videos of things that would require a controller to be in some pretty unlikely places in order to pull it off such as someone seeing something while camping way out in the middle of nowhere. Are you suggesting there are roving bands of rc controllers pulling random stunts hoping someone is watching (not to mention the viewer will also have to be far enough away not to hear the damn thing. That's another aspect of this you guys fail to mention. The fact that 265 feet away would allow you to hear it very clearly. Got any silent ones around?
bottleslingguy
w810i
The main point of the thread was to show that we have terrestrial objects that can maneuver in very incredible ways that have in the past been reserved solely for UFOS. The thread is not saying that RC helicopters are the cause of UFO reports or vice versa. A minor point was what could be done with a RC with LED lights flown at night by a talented pilot.
the stfu was not serious Mr Panties In A Bunch
Your first sentence is so incoherent I'm not sure if even you know what your point is.
"The main point of the thread was to show that we have terrestrial objects that can maneuver in very incredible ways that have in the past been reserved solely for UFOS."
You just said "have in the past" and then made fun of me pointing out they couldn't explain the sightings from the past before there were these types of rc copters. If you are now including "terrestrial objects from the past" without supplying videos of these other examples you are diluting your point and back stepping.
What other "terrestrial objects" can you give as examples other than a modern rc copter? But again we're not clear on "when" it is you mean by "in the past". In the past like yesterday or fifty years?
"The thread is not saying that RC helicopters are the cause of UFO reports or vice versa. A minor point was what could be done with a RC with LED lights flown at night by a talented pilot."
You call it a minor point but it was the only example given and we weren't supposed to think that was all the evidence you had? Where are the other examples of terrestrial objects other than rc copters if those are the ones you were talking about? and why didn't you include them to begin with?
bottleslingguy
reply to post by InhaleExhale
no actually I'm really sorry things have gotten like this let's be friends and prove that good things can come out of ATS. how bout it?
tomra
ManInAsia
I'll repeat, it's CGI mixed with real footage. There's no way the helicopter could fly so close to the ground so many times without contacting it and also jump around like that almost instantly. Fake.
That is a seriously ignorant comment. Search for Tareq Alsaadi, Curtis Youngblood, Jason Krause or any other world class 3D RC helicopter pilot.
Do not underestimate the human brains ability to judge scale, speed, secondary movment and light perception.