Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Phoenix Lights explained?

The Lounge is for non-sport-related topics, multimedia, and classified ads (Must be a contributing member to post any ads). No PWR. LANGUAGE: PG-13
Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat May 25, 2019 5:07 pm
  • I know there are some UFO enthusiasts here so I wanted to share...

    My default assumption is that UFOs are experimental military aircraft. An extraterrestrial explanation is extremely implausible for several reasons, which we can debate later...

    I'm sure many here are familiar with the Phoenix Lights incident in 1997. Thousands of people, including Arizona's governor, saw a V-shaped aircraft, like a carpenter's square, flying through the evening sky travelling south through Nevada, Arizona, and Northern Mexico. This aircraft was reported to be almost 1 mile wide in diameter and having 5 large lights along the bottom. It moved slowly, hovering sometimes at just 100-150 feet altitude, and made no sound. Some eyewitnesses said that the bottom looked hazy and distorted "like you were seeing it through water".

    The military's explanation was that these were flares launched during an Air Force training excercise. Governor Symington, himself a pilot and former Air Force officer took exception to this explanation, saying: "It was certainly not high altitude flares because flares do not fly in formation. It was too symmetrical..."

    So, what was it? ETs? Optical illusion? Mass delusion? Here is the Occam`s Razor explanation:

    https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/18/us-navy- ... l-9246755/

    The US Navy patent diagrams look strikingly familiar to what the witnesses described - though, obviously, a newer version. The technology patented also aligns with some of the peculiar phenomena exhibited by the Phoenix lights craft. The military has some incredible top secret tech it's been experimenting with for decades. Of course, it hasn't been declassified due to the need to keep it from our enemies and so that it doesn't obsolete existing transportation markets.

    Anyway, whaddya think? Is this the best explanation of what happened March 13, 1997?
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sun May 26, 2019 6:10 pm
  • IMHO, if it was a craft of some sort, it wasn’t from this earth, as there no way we have a mile wide/long aircraft.
    22 years and this is the best explanations they can come up with?
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 30779
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sun May 26, 2019 9:41 pm
  • https://patents.google.com/patent/US101 ... Cezar+Pais

    Above is the link to the patent. Similarities between what is described by eyewitnesses and the patent:

    1) Shape: The diagrams are consistent with the V-shaped craft seen. The patent states: "the craft (which can be, but without limitation, a cone or lenticular triangle/delta wing configuration)."

    2) Propulsion: The first-hand witnesses consistently reported that the lights appeared as "canisters of swimming light", while the underbelly of the craft was undulating "like looking through water". The patent states: "This hybrid craft would move with great ease through the air/space/water mediums, by being enclosed in a vacuum plasma bubble/sheath, due to the coupled effects of EM field-induced air/water particles repulsion and vacuum energy polarization." The "bubble sheath" surrounds the exterior of the craft and *could* produce the optical effects described.

    3) Silence: Witnesses said the craft was quiet. Nothing about the propulsion system described in the patent is inconsistent with silent running engines. It moves using "microwave-induced vibration within a resonant annular cavity". The cavities are within the V-shaped arms and likely mask any noises, which wouldn't be very significant anyway since this is a non-combustion system with few moving parts.

    So, some weird similarities. But, yeah...the size?

    Wiki: "Thousands of witnesses throughout Arizona also reported a silent, mile wide V or boomerang shaped craft with varying numbers of huge orbs. A significant number of witnesses reported that the craft was silently gliding directly overhead at low altitude."

    A mile wide? The immensity of the craft is the most perplexing part of this. If it was a military prototype why would it need to be so big? Where would you store it so that it could remain inconspicuous? What if it crashed? Nothing in the patent indicates that the craft would need to be massive for the propulsion system to function, though it never explicitly addresses size at all. Still, why use so much physical material if you could produce the desired results with less? This is definitely the biggest objection to my theory.

    However, it may be possible that the distorted visual effects of the "bubble sheath" may have magnified the appearance of the craft. It was night time and perhaps the inconsistent descriptions of the lights and their locations were a byproduct of seeing them through this EM field? If the lights were subject to location and "liquid" distortion, perhaps the witnesses were seeing the illusion of larger lights? Admittedly, I'm reaching here but I'd rather try to explain what happened based on terrestrial phenomena first, especially since so much in this patent is otherwise consistent with the reports.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 12:59 am
  • Thunderhawk wrote:https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en?inventor=Salvatore+Cezar+Pais

    Above is the link to the patent. Similarities between what is described by eyewitnesses and the patent:

    1) Shape: The diagrams are consistent with the V-shaped craft seen. The patent states: "the craft (which can be, but without limitation, a cone or lenticular triangle/delta wing configuration)."

    2) Propulsion: The first-hand witnesses consistently reported that the lights appeared as "canisters of swimming light", while the underbelly of the craft was undulating "like looking through water". The patent states: "This hybrid craft would move with great ease through the air/space/water mediums, by being enclosed in a vacuum plasma bubble/sheath, due to the coupled effects of EM field-induced air/water particles repulsion and vacuum energy polarization." The "bubble sheath" surrounds the exterior of the craft and *could* produce the optical effects described.

    3) Silence: Witnesses said the craft was quiet. Nothing about the propulsion system described in the patent is inconsistent with silent running engines. It moves using "microwave-induced vibration within a resonant annular cavity". The cavities are within the V-shaped arms and likely mask any noises, which wouldn't be very significant anyway since this is a non-combustion system with few moving parts.

    So, some weird similarities. But, yeah...the size?

    Wiki: "Thousands of witnesses throughout Arizona also reported a silent, mile wide V or boomerang shaped craft with varying numbers of huge orbs. A significant number of witnesses reported that the craft was silently gliding directly overhead at low altitude."

    A mile wide? The immensity of the craft is the most perplexing part of this. If it was a military prototype why would it need to be so big? Where would you store it so that it could remain inconspicuous? What if it crashed? Nothing in the patent indicates that the craft would need to be massive for the propulsion system to function, though it never explicitly addresses size at all. Still, why use so much physical material if you could produce the desired results with less? This is definitely the biggest objection to my theory.

    However, it may be possible that the distorted visual effects of the "bubble sheath" may have magnified the appearance of the craft. It was night time and perhaps the inconsistent descriptions of the lights and their locations were a byproduct of seeing them through this EM field? If the lights were subject to location and "liquid" distortion, perhaps the witnesses were seeing the illusion of larger lights? Admittedly, I'm reaching here but I'd rather try to explain what happened based on terrestrial phenomena first, especially since so much in this patent is otherwise consistent with the reports.


    I believe it’s possible to have the technology for points 1-3.
    The problem like you and I stated is the size, unless like you stated the size is magnified somehow.
    Unless this thing can make itself literally invisible, it would be a deterrent for us here on earth to have a craft that big.
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 30779
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 9:29 am
  • I believe that the military has reverse engineered captured craft from non-human intelligence for several decades so finding out that they have designed craft that resembles "UFOs" in both form and function is not in the least bit surprising. I have no problem assuming most of what is seen is likely ours but what does not make any sense is if they are top secret craft, why fly them over highly populated areas? Doesn't that negate the whole "top secret" element? I think it showcases the true origin of some of these craft such as what was witnessed in Phoenix in 1997.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 11:05 am
  • I have quite a bit of experience with military aviation. We do have "secret" aircraft that the general population doesn't know about. But they're still planes. Wings, cockpit, propellers or jet engines. Airplanes. And we're still using planes built in the 1960s and 1970s.

    Yeah, we're developing technology that's super smart and stealthy. It's largely F-35s and F-117s.

    I think a corollary to Fermi's paradox applies to this as well. If we're developing all this super high speed alien technology, where is it?
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 22928
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:23 am
    Location: California via Negros Occidental, Philippines


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 11:36 am
  • You guys are funny. Do you really, actually think that the Navy would reveal super-secret technological advances via patent application? Did you see the patents for the F117 or B2 before they were revealed? Do you see patents for the stealth technology even now, all these years later? And yet you eat up these reports about patents for warp drives and all kinds of other crap. Sheesh!
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 6:14 pm
  • GeekHawk wrote:You guys are funny. Do you really, actually think that the Navy would reveal super-secret technological advances via patent application? Did you see the patents for the F117 or B2 before they were revealed? Do you see patents for the stealth technology even now, all these years later? And yet you eat up these reports about patents for warp drives and all kinds of other crap. Sheesh!

    The patent application was provided by the US Secretary of The Navy on 4/28/2016:

    https://patents.google.com/patent/US101 ... Cezar+Pais

    So you think this patent application is fake? Okay. I'll await your proof.

    The inventors working on behalf of the US Gov do file patents whether you were aware of it or not. Do they file patents on top secret tech? No. Only on tech that is either declassified or is about to enter the public domain via other governmental or commercial enterprises.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 7:27 pm
  • Aros wrote:I believe that the military has reverse engineered captured craft from non-human intelligence for several decades so finding out that they have designed craft that resembles "UFOs" in both form and function is not in the least bit surprising. I have no problem assuming most of what is seen is likely ours but what does not make any sense is if they are top secret craft, why fly them over highly populated areas? Doesn't that negate the whole "top secret" element? I think it showcases the true origin of some of these craft such as what was witnessed in Phoenix in 1997.

    I'll defer to your knowledge in this area, Aros. I know there has been a ton of research into ETs that I haven't read.

    With that said, I think the mind of man is capable of making machines that seem like they come from some advanced alien planet. If every device we currently have had been shown to somebody in the middle ages they might have assumed that it came from a god or outer space. They probably couldn't imagine that it came from human ingenuity. Yet it did. I don't believe we need to reverse engineer other tech. Man has proven he can make miracles if allowed to do so.

    But you make a very good point about why a top secret aircraft would be flown over a highly populated area for hours. On the other hand, why would an alien species do it? They traveled a massive distance to get here. They are displaying their existence to thousands of people. Why not simply land and say hello? My point is that your question of intentionality cuts both ways. I can only speculate about the military's intent and you about the alien's intent.

    Regarding why the military might risk flying a top secret aircraft over a densely populated area: Because they needed to test it and knew they could do so with impunity since the eye-witnesses would assume it was aliens. Example: the stealth bomber was assumed to be an alien UFO when it was spotted during test flights.
    People have been programmed by the media to ascribe extraterrestrial explanations to highly advanced tech, despite we humans having all the brain power and terrestrial material to make that tech ourselves. I think the military exploits this programming to provide cover for technologies that, if disclosed, might prove economically disruptive.

    Anyway, I was hoping for your input. Tons of speculation obviously. I doubt we'll ever know...
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 8:20 pm
  • Seahawk Sailor wrote:I have quite a bit of experience with military aviation. We do have "secret" aircraft that the general population doesn't know about. But they're still planes. Wings, cockpit, propellers or jet engines. Airplanes. And we're still using planes built in the 1960s and 1970s.

    Yeah, we're developing technology that's super smart and stealthy. It's largely F-35s and F-117s.

    I think a corollary to Fermi's paradox applies to this as well. If we're developing all this super high speed alien technology, where is it?

    Well, some of this " high speed alien technology" is described in this US Navy patent app, though it's nothing to do with aliens, imo. I respect your first hand experience with military aircraft and I think you're mostly right, but you probably didn't get to see everything - especially if what you saw was "still planes".

    Just in the last five years we've had dozens of guys in their back yards designing custom drones that they fly around in. Larger corporations are doing their versions of flying cars: Ehang, Uber Air, Lilium, Flyboard Air, etc. Even the naz** made a flying saucer 80 years ago. My point is that if these DIYers and companies are innovating beyond "still planes" then I would hope our vastly better funded government is innovating too.

    So why don't we see these innovations? Most of them likely remain classified because they are dangerous or give us a competitive advantage over other powers. Some might obsolete commercial technologies and prove injurious to stock portfolios. A few could prove so disruptive that they would fundamentally change society. Example:

    Let's say that this patent describes a kind of anti-gravity device. That's an oversimplification, but let's pretend. The implications are staggering: real estate prices would plummet since you could live anywhere and still have rapid access to cities, the Panama and Suez canals would be made superfluous since freight could be easily transported through the air, construction industries would experience massive retrenchment, and a thousand other central elements of modern life would undergo tremendous disruption. The unintended consequences of releasing that tech into the wild might make the gov more than just a little hesitant.

    So, disruption is my answer as to why we don't see this "high speed alien technology". Economic and social disruption that threatens commercial and political interests.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Tue May 28, 2019 9:49 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:...So, disruption is my answer as to why we don't see this "high speed alien technology". Economic and social disruption that threatens commercial and political interests.


    This paradigm is at the very foundation of why I believe there still exists such secrecy concerning the UFO topic. Look no further than the "Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs" otherwise known as The Brooking's Report that NASA commissioned the Brookings Institution in 1960 to evaluate in essence, what the cultural impact would be if it were to be revealed that extraterrestrials existed and were to some degree, here.

    In a December 1960 article, the institutes finding was discussed. “The discovery of intelligent space beings could have a severe effect on the public, according to a research report released by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The report warned that America should prepare to meet the psychological impact of such a revelation. The 190-page report was the result of a $96,000 one-year study conducted by the Brookings Institution for NASA’s long-range study committee.”

    “Public realization that intelligent beings live on other planets could bring about profound changes, or even the collapse of our civilization, the research report stated. ‘Societies sure of their own place have disintegrated when confronted by a superior society,’ said the NASA report. ‘Others have survived even though changed. Clearly, the better we can come to understand the factors involved in responding to such crises the better prepared we may be. Although the research group did not expect any immediate contact with other planet beings, it said that the discovery of intelligent space races ‘could nevertheless happen at any time.”

    “…previous thinking by scholars who have suggested that the earth already may be under close scrutiny by advanced space races. In 1958, Prof. Harold D. Lasswell of the Yale Law School stated: ‘The implications of the UFOs may be that we are already viewed with suspicion by more advanced civilizations and that our attempts to gain a foothold elsewhere may be rebuffed as a threat to other systems of public order.’ The NASA warning of a possible shock to the public, from the revelation of more advanced civilizations, support’s NICAP’s previous arguments against AF [Air Force] secrecy about UFOs. All available information about UFOs should be given to the public now, so that we will be prepared for any eventuality.”

    The Cold War mindset demonstrated by The Brookings Report lives on to this day and I believe with all my heart that very powerful men and women will continue to do whatever it takes to deflect attention away from the phenomenon, and to protect their secrets, much of which would completely blow our minds and shatter our world view.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 5:09 am

Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 8:34 am
  • I was walking through the kitchen for some Golden Grahams when I accidentally stepped into an alternate dimension and soon I was abducted by some aliens from space who kind of looked like Jamie Farr. They sucked out my internal organs, then they took some Polaroids and said I was a darn good sport, and as a way of saying thank you they offered to transport me back to any point in history that I would care to go. And so I had them take me back to last Thursday night so I could pay my phone bill on time.
    fenderbender123
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6365
    Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:47 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 9:08 am
  • Thunderhawk wrote:So you think this patent application is fake? Okay. I'll await your proof.


    See, this right here is a basic problem with these days when people start to argue for conspiracy theories. If you ever learned the first thing about classic logic, corollaries, or any of that you would know that it is impossible to prove a negative. I can't "prove" that anything doesn't exist, just as I can't "prove" that the sun won't rise in the west tomorrow. I can't "prove" that one particular photon of outer space radiation didn't cause Alex Trebec's cancer. I can say that thinking the sun will rise in the west is stupid, I can say that thinking one particular photon of outer space radiation did it is way out there, or that all this warp drive stuff is $h!t. Can't "prove" any of it. Are you looking forward to the sun rising in the west tomorrow? Do you think it won't? Prove it.

    :roll: :roll: :roll:
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 9:34 am
  • Aros wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:...So, disruption is my answer as to why we don't see this "high speed alien technology". Economic and social disruption that threatens commercial and political interests.


    This paradigm is at the very foundation of why I believe there still exists such secrecy concerning the UFO topic. Look no further than the "Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs" otherwise known as The Brooking's Report that NASA commissioned the Brookings Institution in 1960 to evaluate in essence, what the cultural impact would be if it were to be revealed that extraterrestrials existed and were to some degree, here.

    Aros wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:...So, disruption is my answer as to why we don't see this "high speed alien technology". Economic and social disruption that threatens commercial and political interests.


    This paradigm is at the very foundation of why I believe there still exists such secrecy concerning the UFO topic. Look no further than the "Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs" otherwise known as The Brooking's Report that NASA commissioned the Brookings Institution in 1960 to evaluate in essence, what the cultural impact would be if it were to be revealed that extraterrestrials existed and were to some degree, here.

    Do you know whether this report has been updated in the last 10-20 years? I think the results would be quite different. Most people these days seem to assume the existence of advanced extraterrestrial life and I doubt there would be much social upheaval if the gov were to publicly confirm alien existence. Obviously the form such alien life took and the objectives of this new species could be disturbing, but movies/TV have largely prepared the masses for various potential iterations of alien life - humanoid, insectoid, benevolent, hostile, etc. I think most would be unsurprised by such an announcement, not shocked into madness.

    Again, I think the disruption the government is concerned with is financial and political rather than social. The confirmation of alien life wouldn't create near the social turmoil of something like the release of free energy technology. Existing energy stocks would be worthless, commodity prices would plummet, pension funds would be wiped out, millions of jobs lost, entire nations would collapse causing a global depression, rioting, terrorism, etc. So, DARPA, et al, have to experiment but they must be very selective about which tech is allowed into the public sphere. Occasionally this tech is discovered and a cover story is required. Therefore UFOs = aliens. Otherwise taxpayers might ask: "Why aren't you letting us play with these toys you're building? After all, we're paying for them." Can the Gov respond: "Well, we need to protect the share price of Delta Airlines." I think the alien misdirection allows them to avoid the central issue: protectionism.

    Last, when you truly understand the implications of abiogenesis - how hugely improbable life is - it makes the possibility of alien life even more remote. There are over 18,000 requirements for even simple life to develop and the more we learn the higher that number rises. Scientists are beginning to admit this in books like Rare Earth. Mathematicians have understood it for some time. The protein folding problem is unovercomable, 10 to the 168 power probability that the correct sequence is arranged to produce a functional protein. That is only for one protein and would require more time to synchronize than all the seconds in the history of the universe. Then you have to make RNA, DNA, a cell, etc. The objection to this argument is that alien life might take an entirely different pathway than terrestrial life. It's possible, but the physical laws are the same throughout the universe and life, no matter how it develops, is subject to numerous hostile forces that would extinguish it in its infancy - that is, if it could spontaneously develop at all which is virtually impossible.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 9:43 am
  • Proof is a five-letter word that should be a four letter word in this field of study. To GeekHawk's point, it's impossible to prove one's theory - either way - unless quantifiable, definitive scientific proof is offered by those with the power and prestige to do so. Otherwise, no matter how much one has or has not studied a topic, all you can offer is opinion and educated guesses based on what evidence exists out there, and providing proof that is accepted by all sides for a phenomenon this enigmatic is problematic at best.

    I have been studying the UFO phenomenon for over 30 years. The evidence that some UFOs are from Non Human Intelligence is well beyond my scope to impress that fact here in a forum thread. From the deathbed confessions of some top military and government personnel to physical trace cases, radar reports and eyewitness testimony, a profound mosaic manifests that is both humbling and extraordinary.

    What I say to those who still think the topic of ETs/UFOs belongs in the realm of science fiction and the tabloid section, go ahead and keep your head in the sand, trickle-by-trickle disinformation and denial is giving way to true disclosure. It's in plain sight to such a level it's like being thrown into the ocean and wondering why your feet are wet.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 9:45 am
  • GeekHawk wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:So you think this patent application is fake? Okay. I'll await your proof.


    See, this right here is a basic problem with these days when people start to argue for conspiracy theories. If you ever learned the first thing about classic logic, corollaries, or any of that you would know that it is impossible to prove a negative. I can't "prove" that anything doesn't exist, just as I can't "prove" that the sun won't rise in the west tomorrow. I can't "prove" that one particular photon of outer space radiation didn't cause Alex Trebec's cancer. I can say that thinking the sun will rise in the west is stupid, I can say that thinking one particular photon of outer space radiation did it is way out there, or that all this warp drive stuff is $h!t. Can't "prove" any of it. Are you looking forward to the sun rising in the west tomorrow? Do you think it won't? Prove it.

    :roll: :roll: :roll:

    How is a US Navy patent a conspiracy theory? Did you even look at it? It exists. This is not theory. It is fact.

    All that I'm speculating upon is whether this patent conforms to the eyewitness accounts of the Phoenix Lights incident in 1997. Feel free to dispute my theories on that subject but, perhaps, first read the patent and confirm its origin so you can speak intelligently about it.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 9:48 am
  • So Arrival was all made up?
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 36653
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:38 pm
    Location: The Tex-ASS


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 12:18 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:The patent application was provided by the US Secretary of The Navy on 4/28/2016:

    https://patents.google.com/patent/US101 ... Cezar+Pais

    So you think this patent application is fake? Okay. I'll await your proof.


    So, I believe this "patent application" is fake. Please provide a link to the actual patent application in the US Patent Office website. There is no patent or application with any of the associated numbers or the name of the "inventor" or with that title. You've been duped. Then you doubled down on it. Just because you really really really want to believe something is true doesn't make it true.
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 12:41 pm
  • Call it project : ...Stormy Daniels.....shhhhhhh.
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 36653
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:38 pm
    Location: The Tex-ASS


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 4:12 pm
  • GeekHawk wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:The patent application was provided by the US Secretary of The Navy on 4/28/2016:

    https://patents.google.com/patent/US101 ... Cezar+Pais

    So you think this patent application is fake? Okay. I'll await your proof.


    So, I believe this "patent application" is fake. Please provide a link to the actual patent application in the US Patent Office website. There is no patent or application with any of the associated numbers or the name of the "inventor" or with that title. You've been duped. Then you doubled down on it. Just because you really really really want to believe something is true doesn't make it true.

    Wow. I'd say you are the person that really really reallly wants to believe something. I just follow evidence. So here is the evidence you requested from the USPTO:

    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Pars ... 0144532.PN.

    Wasn't even hard to find. Again, next time you want to venture an opinion at least do a simple Google search.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 4:38 pm
  • What I got when I clicked your link.
    Attachments
    patent search.jpg
    patent search.jpg (116.66 KiB) Viewed 1502 times
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Wed May 29, 2019 6:29 pm
  • Sorry, Geekhawk, it keeps truncating the link for some reason. You could also just search for patent # 10,144,532.

    Or, here is the tiny url: https://tinyurl.com/y5vsoeu5

    It looks like the patent was granted, btw.

    Does anyone know why longer links get truncated?
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 8:09 am
  • Thunderhawk wrote:Do you know whether this report has been updated in the last 10-20 years? I think the results would be quite different. Most people these days seem to assume the existence of advanced extraterrestrial life and I doubt there would be much social upheaval if the gov were to publicly confirm alien existence. Obviously the form such alien life took and the objectives of this new species could be disturbing, but movies/TV have largely prepared the masses for various potential iterations of alien life - humanoid, insectoid, benevolent, hostile, etc. I think most would be unsurprised by such an announcement, not shocked into madness.


    There has been no update to the report since its release in 1960. NASA has used that as its modus operandi ever since. Those involved in the report were concerned about the dissemination of the biggest discovery in human history and wrote in part;

    "...Historical and empirical studies of the behavior of peoples and their leaders when confronted with dramatic and unfamiliar events or social pressures. Such studies might help to provide programs for meeting and adjusting to the implications of such a discovery. Questions one might wish to answer by such studies would include: How might such information, under what circumstances be presented to or withheld from the public for what ends? What might be the role of the discovering scientists and other decision makers regarding the release of the fact of discovery?"

    Before the report NASA was considered to be more of a transparent "by the people for the people" space exploration organization but soon after the report became the far more secretive federally funded organization known today. There's a reason many half-jokingly say the acronym for NASA is Never A Straight Answer.

    I too agree the cultural climate has changed dramatically since the early 1960's in regards to new generations more open minded to the reality that we are not alone in the Universe. I also strongly believe the proliferation of aliens in entertainment via movies and television is an integral part of the indoctrination process to collectively and subliminally get us used to the reality of extraterrestrials.

    However, as closely guarded as the phenomenon remains to this day - despite the sheer volume of eyewitness testimony - indoctrination remains a painfully slow process, especially for those of us in our mid lives staring down the not-so far off barrel of mortality. My hope is that I will still see true disclosure in my lifetime but I am not holding my breath.

    Thunderhawk wrote:Again, I think the disruption the government is concerned with is financial and political rather than social. The confirmation of alien life wouldn't create near the social turmoil of something like the release of free energy technology. Existing energy stocks would be worthless, commodity prices would plummet, pension funds would be wiped out, millions of jobs lost, entire nations would collapse causing a global depression, rioting, terrorism, etc. So, DARPA, et al, have to experiment but they must be very selective about which tech is allowed into the public sphere. Occasionally this tech is discovered and a cover story is required. Therefore UFOs = aliens. Otherwise taxpayers might ask: "Why aren't you letting us play with these toys you're building? After all, we're paying for them." Can the Gov respond: "Well, we need to protect the share price of Delta Airlines." I think the alien misdirection allows them to avoid the central issue: protectionism.


    There is no doubt whatsoever that the ET phenomenon has been used as an effective cover story for various secret military and government programs. It's been a tremendous success but make no mistake about it, just because they use it as an effective form of misdirection does not in the least mean that the phenomenon is science fiction. There are segments of government and military that know far better than that. As for the financial and political ramifications over social, I wouldn't disagree necessarily. One of the primary motivations of secrecy is to keep the knowledge and technology discovered out of the hands of the enemy, perceived or otherwise.

    Thunderhawk wrote:Last, when you truly understand the implications of abiogenesis - how hugely improbable life is - it makes the possibility of alien life even more remote. There are over 18,000 requirements for even simple life to develop and the more we learn the higher that number rises. Scientists are beginning to admit this in books like Rare Earth. Mathematicians have understood it for some time. The protein folding problem is unovercomable, 10 to the 168 power probability that the correct sequence is arranged to produce a functional protein. That is only for one protein and would require more time to synchronize than all the seconds in the history of the universe. Then you have to make RNA, DNA, a cell, etc. The objection to this argument is that alien life might take an entirely different pathway than terrestrial life. It's possible, but the physical laws are the same throughout the universe and life, no matter how it develops, is subject to numerous hostile forces that would extinguish it in its infancy - that is, if it could spontaneously develop at all which is virtually impossible.


    And here it is. What is virtually impossible is to debate the UFO/ET hypothesis without the inevitable, anthropocentric commentary i.e.; "Well we know ETs aren't here because of the vast distances required to travel here, etc, etc..." Not singling you out personally, as this is a narrative as old as the topic itself. There are numerous holes in this Newtonian line of reasoning not the least of which is the fact that it is highly presumptuous to place our limited understanding of the nature of reality and the cosmos on a civilization that could be millions of years ahead of our own. Our species is still in the infancy - relatively speaking - of understanding the cosmos, time and space, reality and our place in it. I am quite convinced an advanced species would find our level of comprehension, um, "charming."

    In other words, our top scientists may know a lot, but there is also a lot they do not know. Look how much we have discovered (and learned we were wrong about) in just the last 100 years. What will we learn and know we were wrong about in another 100 years? 500? 1,000? I personally do believe ETs who are here and have been here are thousands if not millions of years ahead of us in technology and knowledge. There is no space ships being propelled by fossil fuels to get to point A to point B. They are manipulating the very fabric of space and time to achieve unfathomable distances in ways that would make our top sci-fi authors astounded.

    There's so much to say but I have to pretend to work at some point today. :)
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 8:53 am
  • fenderbender123 wrote:I was walking through the kitchen for some Golden Grahams when I accidentally stepped into an alternate dimension and soon I was abducted by some aliens from space who kind of looked like Jamie Farr. They sucked out my internal organs, then they took some Polaroids and said I was a darn good sport, and as a way of saying thank you they offered to transport me back to any point in history that I would care to go. And so I had them take me back to last Thursday night so I could pay my phone bill on time.


    Those aliens are called Klinger-ons!!!! < rimshot >

    Get it, Klinger-ons....... < canned laughter >

    < tap, tap, tap> Hey, is this thing on?
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 30779
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 8:59 am
  • Thanks for responding, Aros. I appreciate you addressing the actual arguments being made. Too few seem to do that anymore.

    I'm not trying to debunk the possibility of aliens. I am mainly focusing on the Phoenix Lights event in relation to the US Navy patent and asking whether it is more probable that what was witnessed was terrestrial rather than extraterrestrial? I think that's my usual approach to this debate. I'm not really bothered whether aliens exist or don't. I think it's improbable, not impossible. I just want to see the evidence. If the evidence presented can be attributed to terrestrial origins than we should first do so. If there is non-terrestrial evidence - like new elements, new states of matter, tech that is truly millions of years more advanced than ours, new species with an entirely different form of genetics - then I would welcome the corroboration.

    Perhaps the evidence is being suppressed. We've seen that happen many times before with other controversial issues. But, eventually the truth seeps out. Hopefully we are nearing that moment.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 5:06 pm
  • So, I read that patent "writeup" in full detail. I'm pretty sure it was done as either a joke, or a dare. It even addresses the "fact" that a top that spins in one direction loses mass, but not in the other direction. Apparently space-time is right-handed or something...
    It's hard to :roll: :roll: :roll: hard enough. Absolute drivel.
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 8:00 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:Thanks for responding, Aros. I appreciate you addressing the actual arguments being made. Too few seem to do that anymore.

    I'm not trying to debunk the possibility of aliens. I am mainly focusing on the Phoenix Lights event in relation to the US Navy patent and asking whether it is more probable that what was witnessed was terrestrial rather than extraterrestrial? I think that's my usual approach to this debate. I'm not really bothered whether aliens exist or don't. I think it's improbable, not impossible. I just want to see the evidence. If the evidence presented can be attributed to terrestrial origins than we should first do so. If there is non-terrestrial evidence - like new elements, new states of matter, tech that is truly millions of years more advanced than ours, new species with an entirely different form of genetics - then I would welcome the corroboration.

    Perhaps the evidence is being suppressed. We've seen that happen many times before with other controversial issues. But, eventually the truth seeps out. Hopefully we are nearing that moment.


    I cannot rule out terrestrial origin for what was witnessed in Phoenix, Arizona back in 1997. Only because of my research for 30 years into the matter of UFOs would I still say it is unlikely terrestrial and if it is then I am 100 percent convinced it was utilizing technology not from our planet. I wouldn't feel that way if there wasn't so many people over the past several decades - people in high positions of power - who flat out have said as much. Despite what many think (especially those who haven't taken the time to sift through the mountain of evidence for years), too many people with eye-opening credentials both in government and military have made claims that much of our advancement in technology be it stealth or other, has directly come from reverse engineering extraterrestrial technology.

    I think why this bothers some is it is perceived as some kind of hit on our ego as a species. I hear "humans are perfectly capable of developing this technology without help from aliens" and while I believe we are a resourceful and intelligent species, I don't believe that we suddenly developed anti-gravity, circular, oval or triangular shaped craft that in some cases is the size of a small city that makes absolutely no noise and can take off at speeds only seen on Star Trek episodes just using the ol' noggin.

    From the S4 complex at Area 51 to Wright Field Patterson AF Base, Los Alamos and a host of other places most have never heard from, too many powerful or influential people have said stealth technology is directly attributed to what we have learned and reverse engineered from craft and species not of this earth. Like I've said before, this phenomenon is a rich, profound mosaic that is confusing at best up close, but step back and it reveals an unfathomably rich tapestry that blows your mind. This is the position I have been able to view the mosaic from and it's life changing.

    So getting back to your point about The Phoenix Lights, could it have been caused by a terrestrial source? Yes and no. Yes, the craft(s) witnessed that evening by thousands could have come from some secret base a sector of our military operates completely off the books but where did that technology come from? Not us. I won't ever believe that for a minute due to the points made above and for all the thousand things I'm not even mentioning in a public forum.

    If you want evidence, I am afraid you have to take the long way home like I and many others passionate about this field have. A video here, a photograph or interview there, will never convince you. That, my friend, is being far too close to the mosaic to truly see the evidence. No, the evidence is in the sheer volume of eyewitness testimony, death bed confessions, video, photos, radar reports, FAA/pilot reports (commercial and military), documents released through the Freedom of Information Act, physical trace cases, and on and on. Once you have taken the time to study the evidence that exists, only a fool could believe it's all hoax and disinformation.

    I will end with a few quotes to offer as food for thought...

    “Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that unknown flying objects are nonsense.”

    - Former CIA Director, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, public statement, 1960.

    “These UFOs are interplanetary devices systematically observing the Earth, either manned or under remote control, or both. Information on UFOs, including sighting reports, has been and is still being officially withheld.”

    - Colonel Joseph J. Bryan III, founder member of the CIAs psychological warfare staff, advisor to NATO.

    “More than 10,000 sightings have been reported, the majority of which cannot be accounted for by any ‘scientific’ explanation, eg that they are hallucinations, the effects of light refraction, meteors, wheels falling from aeroplanes, and the like…. They have been tracked on radar screens… and the observed speeds have been as great as 9,000 mph. I am convinced that these objects do exist and they are not manufactured by any nation on earth. I can therefore see no alternative to accepting the theory that they come from an extraterrestrial source.”

    - Air Chief Marshall Lord Dowding, Commanding Officer of the RAF during WWII.

    “The Air Force had put out a secret order for its pilots to capture UFOs. For the last six months we have been working with a congressional committee for investigating official secrecy concerning proof that UFOs are real machines under intelligent control.”

    - Major Donald Keyhoe, during a live TV broadcast on CBS in 1958 in which he was pulled from the air when he began to deviate from the prepared format of the program.

    “The UFO was bouncing around the 747. (It) was a huge ball with lights running around it… Well, I’ve been involved in a lot of cover-ups with the FAA. When we gave the presentation to the Reagan staff, they had all those people swear that this never happened. But they never had me swear it never happened. I can tell you what I’ve seen with my own eyes. I’ve got a videotape. I’ve got the voice tape. I’ve got the reports that were filed that will confirm what I’ve been telling you.”

    - John Callaghan, FAA Chief of Accidents and Investigations during a videotaped interview for the Disclosure program.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 8:28 pm
  • GeekHawk wrote:So, I read that patent "writeup" in full detail. I'm pretty sure it was done as either a joke, or a dare. It even addresses the "fact" that a top that spins in one direction loses mass, but not in the other direction. Apparently space-time is right-handed or something...
    It's hard to :roll: :roll: :roll: hard enough. Absolute drivel.

    Your incredulity is inspiring. Also, thanks for that heartfelt apology for accusing me of being an idiot taken in by a fake patent. It seems like you have finally admitted that the patent is USPTO certified - so your new tactic is to bash the scientist. Slick misdirect.

    Regarding the gyro experiment, Dr. Pais is referring to a phenomena observed by two Japanese scientists in the late 1980s:

    "Hayasaka and Takeuchi found that when a gyroscope spins in a clockwise sense – looking down on it from above – it loses weight. The amount it loses is only about five-thousandths of one per cent of its resting weight. The researchers also found that the faster the gyroscope spins, the more weight it loses (see Figure). They published their work in Physical Review Letters (vol 63, p 2701)."

    A similar experiment: https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 006-9049-z

    FYI: the universe is weird. I'm sure you probably reacted like Einstein when confronted with QM superposition which he referred to as: "spooky action at a distance". Yet the double slit experiment confirmed that merely measuring an entangled particle changes its state, i.e. reality is altered by observation, AKA the observer effect. Google 'Schrodinger's Cat'. There are some strange, counterintuitive phenomena out there, dude.

    Anyway, I eagerly await your next parade of eye rolls opining on topics you don't understand...
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 8:43 pm
  • Believe whatever the hell you want. That "study" was disproved over and over. Spinning a top one way or the other has no such effect. The frame of reference that it's spinning in is already spinning way way faster. Do you understand what the physics term 'frame of reference' means? Also, the data they provided followed an exact line way better than statistically possible. Do you understand statistics?

    I repeat: :roll: :roll: :roll:
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu May 30, 2019 10:13 pm
  • @ Aros I respect that there are voluminous eye witness accounts. I think that most of these people are probably being honest. They saw something. But...

    (Please don't hate me for mentioning this) There have been over 23,000 eyewitness reports of...Bigfoot. Over 1,100 reports of seeing the Loch Ness monster. I concede that the many of the UFO witnesses are extremely credible: military, intelligence, cops, etc but eyewitness accounts without hard evidence leave me a little dubious. Again, I want to see something non-terrestrial.

    Regarding the advanced tech, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think the species that unlocked the secrets of the genome needed help in designing a craft that could evade radar. I mean if that's an example of the otherworldly innovations the aliens are sharing with us then they needn't have made the trip. We're good.

    Now, what the military pilots saw in 2015 is on another level, no doubt. But alien? Why need it be alien? Nikola Tesla described a craft that he hoped to eventually build that was to exhibit speed and maneuverability similar to what the pilots witnessed. That was almost 100 years ago. I am more inclined to believe that the military is "reverse-engineering" his designs than aliens.

    Finally, regarding reverse engineering, consider this: the citations in the Pais patent build off of 25 separate scientific breakthroughs going back to 1957. Each breakthrough was the result of a number of scientists and engineers working in independent teams over a series of decades. Each successful experiment paved the way to the next breakthrough ultimately resulting in the requisite data to establish the propulsion system in the Pais patent. It was incremental progress requiring 60 years research. It wasn't simply handed in total, then taken apart and put back together. It was instead the typical steady march of human inquiry and discovery that leads to technological advancement. Had the alien tech been gift wrapped that journey would have been either superfluous or serendipitous, insomuch as the human science perfectly correlated with the alien designs. Bottom line: this patent is man-made.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 8:07 am
  • I’m going to type this real slow, so try to keep up. If you really really think that the secret to warp drive is to point a microwave oven at a double-walled structure and spin it at 2 billion rpm, and if you really really think that this has been developed by the US military, and if you really really think that scientists around the world are looking at this joke patent app and facepalming themselves while saying “My God, it was just that simple the whole time!”, and if you really really think the US military would ever develop such a game-changing military technology and then release it to the public and the whole world for free, and if you really really think you would read about it first on the internet via a British tabloid and not via the Nobel Prize committee, then you, son, are already so far down the rabbit hole that you can’t be brought back. So I say, feel free to believe anything you want to. Really really believe. I’m taking my multiple college degrees and going back to my day job of being an actual nuclear engineer and dealing with real Einsteinian quantum $h!t.

    :roll:
    GeekHawk
    US Navy ET Nuc
     
    Posts: 7482
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 pm
    Location: Orting WA, Great Northwet


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 9:07 am
  • You two must see how ridiculous you come off in this thread.
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 19416
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:34 am


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 10:21 am
  • Thunderhawk wrote:@ Aros I respect that there are voluminous eye witness accounts. I think that most of these people are probably being honest. They saw something. But...

    (Please don't hate me for mentioning this) There have been over 23,000 eyewitness reports of...Bigfoot. Over 1,100 reports of seeing the Loch Ness monster. I concede that the many of the UFO witnesses are extremely credible: military, intelligence, cops, etc but eyewitness accounts without hard evidence leave me a little dubious. Again, I want to see something non-terrestrial.

    Regarding the advanced tech, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think the species that unlocked the secrets of the genome needed help in designing a craft that could evade radar. I mean if that's an example of the otherworldly innovations the aliens are sharing with us then they needn't have made the trip. We're good...


    If you can convince me that all of these people in government and military - many in high ranking esteem who had nothing to gain and everything to lose - have lied about the involvement of ET reverse engineering and it's eventual place in both the public sector and military applications, then I might join your terrestrial hypothesis but don't hold your breath.

    :smilingalien:
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 10:57 pm
  • There have been depictions for centuries.

    Image

    Image

    The drawings in Valcamonica, near to the central Alps in northern Italy, are believed to be 10,000 years old and are part of a collection of more than 200,000 petroglyphs carved into the rocks of the valley.

    Image

    There has been depictions all over the world well before our ability to take pictures and have videos. The depictions here and there are many more in my mind show we are being watched and involved with on some level.

    Why would different Civilizations draw this stuff and have a reference to be able to if it wasn't there to put on stone to remember or tell a story of an event.

    They can make or come up with Gods to explain stuff, but Space Craft, Space Suits and the way we see them draw the Aliens which is very similar to our current Eras descriptions.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 32733
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 11:06 pm
  • Why would civilizations draw this stuff? Dude, civilizations throughout history have drawn every conceivable thing you can think of.

    Wanting something to be real doesn't actually make it more likely to be; and that's a statement coming from someone who wants intelligent extraterrestrial life to exist and become a known commodity in his lifetime.
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 31743
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 11:08 pm
  • RolandDeschain wrote:Why would civilizations draw this stuff? Dude, civilizations throughout history have drawn every conceivable thing you can think of.

    Wanting something to be real doesn't actually make it more likely to be; and that's a statement coming from someone who wants intelligent extraterrestrial life to exist and become a known commodity in his lifetime.


    Use your head, why would they draw them with helmets, why would they draw the ships with a cover over the occupant, and with exhaust of a flame out the back end if they had not seen it. They had no concept of lack of oxygen or different environments or propulsion.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 32733
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 11:16 pm
  • And so the nun sees Jesus in the potato chip.
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 31743
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Fri May 31, 2019 11:29 pm
  • RolandDeschain wrote:And so the nun sees Jesus in the potato chip.


    But they knew of Jesus to see him in the Potato Chip, Ancient man did not that that point of reference.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 32733
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat Jun 01, 2019 9:42 am
  • chris98251 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:And so the nun sees Jesus in the potato chip.


    But they knew of Jesus to see him in the Potato Chip, Ancient man did not that that point of reference.


    My argument would be.. "imagination"

    My counter argument... the prevailing similarities of ancient civilizations depictions of these things without any way of connecting with each other to share. Always intrigued me... and I do not believe in UFO conspiracy, while I may believe in alien visitation.
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 19416
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:34 am


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:10 am
  • GeekHawk wrote:I’m going to type this real slow, so try to keep up. If you really really think that the secret to warp drive is to point a microwave oven at a double-walled structure and spin it at 2 billion rpm, and if you really really think that this has been developed by the US military, and if you really really think that scientists around the world are looking at this joke patent app and facepalming themselves while saying “My God, it was just that simple the whole time!”, and if you really really think the US military would ever develop such a game-changing military technology and then release it to the public and the whole world for free, and if you really really think you would read about it first on the internet via a British tabloid and not via the Nobel Prize committee, then you, son, are already so far down the rabbit hole that you can’t be brought back. So I say, feel free to believe anything you want to. Really really believe. I’m taking my multiple college degrees and going back to my day job of being an actual nuclear engineer and dealing with real Einsteinian quantum $h!t.

    :roll:

    Your arrogance is indicative of someone with intellectual inferiority complex. The scientists I've worked with are usually humble because they admit that our current understanding is limited. Therefore a smart scientist is always challenging his assumptions with facts. You flaunt your assumptions like they are facts:

    Assumption 1): The Navy wouldn't patent their technological advances. Proven false:
    https://patents.justia.com/assignee/the ... f-the-navy (hundreds)
    Assumption 2): This patent is a fake. Proven false:
    https://tinyurl.com/y5vsoeu5
    Assumption 3): This patent is written as a joke. So, you imagine that the Secretary of the Navy is just having a laugh? Is the other governmental research into non-traditional propulsion drives also a joke?

    Is NASAs EM Drive (that defies some laws of physics) just a joke?
    https://news.nationalgeographic.com/201 ... e-science/
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/ ... a-emdrive/

    The Interagency Propulsion Committee is set up as a joke?
    https://www.jannaf.org/node/70

    The Navy's patent for Magnetic flux pinning levitation a joke?
    https://patents.justia.com/patent/10301221
    Demonstration of the phenomena: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWkcnOjyQa0

    Princeton's Superconductor mag propulsion a joke?
    https://www.pppl.gov/news/2018/10/pppl- ... plications

    MITs Ionic propulsion a joke?
    http://news.mit.edu/2018/first-ionic-wi ... parts-1121

    The Chinese working on mag tech for subs a joke?
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... on-system/

    Russia's "Spiral-based Magnetic Open Trap" Plasma Drive a joke?
    https://sputniknews.com/science/2019010 ... mentation/

    Whether you agree that the money and personnel are being deployed wisely is irrelevant. These scientists are not joking but seriously attempting to invent new forms of propulsion.

    With every post you prove that you don't know what you're talking about. One would expect a "nuclear engineer" with "multiple degrees" to read up on some of the current research into tech that will probably revolutionize travel. You'd rather remain smugnorant.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:17 am
  • chris98251 wrote:There have been depictions for centuries.

    Image

    Image

    The drawings in Valcamonica, near to the central Alps in northern Italy, are believed to be 10,000 years old and are part of a collection of more than 200,000 petroglyphs carved into the rocks of the valley.

    Image

    There has been depictions all over the world well before our ability to take pictures and have videos. The depictions here and there are many more in my mind show we are being watched and involved with on some level.

    Why would different Civilizations draw this stuff and have a reference to be able to if it wasn't there to put on stone to remember or tell a story of an event.

    They can make or come up with Gods to explain stuff, but Space Craft, Space Suits and the way we see them draw the Aliens which is very similar to our current Eras descriptions.

    People have also drawn flying horses, centaurs, six armed goddesses, birdmen hieroglyphs, etc. Why would you assume they were using their imaginations in these cases but not in the images you shared? They aren't photographs they are just drawings...
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:23 am
  • chris98251 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:And so the nun sees Jesus in the potato chip.


    But they knew of Jesus to see him in the Potato Chip, Ancient man did not that that point of reference.

    It was referring to you.
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 31743
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: North Miami Beach, FL


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:26 am
  • Uncle Si wrote:You two must see how ridiculous you come off in this thread.

    Oh, definitely. Really, I just wanted Aros' take on the patent and whether he agreed that there were elements that seemed to conform to Phoenix Lights. He knows a lot more than I do about this subject.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Sat Jun 01, 2019 12:51 pm
  • Uncle Si wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:And so the nun sees Jesus in the potato chip.


    But they knew of Jesus to see him in the Potato Chip, Ancient man did not that that point of reference.


    My argument would be.. "imagination"

    My counter argument... the prevailing similarities of ancient civilizations depictions of these things without any way of connecting with each other to share. Always intrigued me... and I do not believe in UFO conspiracy, while I may believe in alien visitation.


    Imagination would be fine if you had a point of reference, Helmets for breathing, Spaceships before there was even a propelled transportation technology, they had no knowledge of Space and atmosphere issues.

    It's not like they were related to George Lucas and had NASA or some other Organization, hell look at the 40's and 50's after Atomic Power and how far off those Science Fiction writers were in general, some were on target in some things but even with that much advancement we almost laugh looking at them today.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 32733
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:22 am
  • Thunderhawk wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:You two must see how ridiculous you come off in this thread.

    Oh, definitely. Really, I just wanted Aros' take on the patent and whether he agreed that there were elements that seemed to conform to Phoenix Lights. He knows a lot more than I do about this subject.


    To be clear... I meant it in an endearing way. Two smart people arguing physics.
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 19416
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:34 am


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:44 am
  • Sadly, this topic never seems to exist without degrading into "Believers vs Skeptics". I can't convince anyone of my convictions anymore than the next person, regardless of how many years I've invested into the study of it. People are going to believe what they want to believe whether that belief is backed by evidence or not. It's not like we are discussing things that can be verified objectively. This is something that would quite literally change our world as we know it.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14182
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:04 am
  • Good point. People have a right to believe what they want to. If someone doesn't like it, too damn bad.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 15777
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Phoenix Lights explained?
Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:07 pm
  • https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... h-advances

    Fascinating article on the USN patents, implying that the recently witnessed UFOs are possibly man-made.

    Doesn't address the idea that this tech is reversed engineered from alien technology. You're free to believe that, but most of these patents appear to rely on previous human scientific breakthroughs.

    Either way, the world is going to look a lot different in the next 20-50 years. Rather than bailout the airlines better to let them slowly die off and release these new propulsion systems.
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 672
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:44 pm


Next


It is currently Wed Sep 23, 2020 8:31 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE LOUNGE ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: Hawkfan509 and 61 guests