Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered." Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ?" There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world." It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place " What? "The best defence is what the enemy don't you have" Laughable if you consider nuclear weapons, which we know what countries have, and it is the fact that we know they have such weapons, which makes it a deterrent. So no keeping things secret is not a good look especially when billions of mine and your money is unaccountable for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place What? "The best defence is what the enemy don't you have" Laughable if you consider nuclear weapons, which we know what countries have, and it is the fact that we know they have such weapons, which makes it a deterrent. So no keeping things secret is not a good look especially when billions of mine and your money is unaccountable for." Lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place What? "The best defence is what the enemy don't you have" Laughable if you consider nuclear weapons, which we know what countries have, and it is the fact that we know they have such weapons, which makes it a deterrent. So no keeping things secret is not a good look especially when billions of mine and your money is unaccountable for. Lol" There we go.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place " This.. There has to be trust that those I power will use the resources to protect the nation.. Regardless of what crack pot conspiracy theories are about.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place What? "The best defence is what the enemy don't you have" Laughable if you consider nuclear weapons, which we know what countries have, and it is the fact that we know they have such weapons, which makes it a deterrent. So no keeping things secret is not a good look especially when billions of mine and your money is unaccountable for." Said no government ever since the year dot..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Look up "Project Blue Book". A report that started the conspiracy of "The Men in Black." Also The Lockheed Martin SR71 nicknamed "The Black Bird" plane watchers said there was a new plane the US government said there was no such thing. But later the US government had to admit there was such a plane. So nothing a government says is believable to me there will always be questions to ask and to be answered. Why would they publicise a "secret" weapon or defense system ? There is a thing called accountability, when billions are spent of tax payers money, some tax payers want to know where their money is going. At the time billions were being spent on the space race, mean while billions were being spent on a secret plane. American people were unhappy about the billions being spent as these billions were not spent on them. Forcing the US government to reveal the Lockheed Martin SR71 to the world. It's spent in defence that's it. The best defence is what your enemy don't know you have. Putting it in YouTube kinda defeats the object of spending all those billions in the first place What? "The best defence is what the enemy don't you have" Laughable if you consider nuclear weapons, which we know what countries have, and it is the fact that we know they have such weapons, which makes it a deterrent. So no keeping things secret is not a good look especially when billions of mine and your money is unaccountable for." Silly response, as you correctly stated, nuclear arms are a deterrent, not a defense mechanism. You develop defense mechanisms for weapons your enemy possesses, if they know what your deterrent is then it helps them start figuring out a workaround and those billions were wasted. And yes they probably have weapons we don't know about Defence is definitely not for sharing keep that for milk tray | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The video shows some target being hit by a Hellfire missle but the hit is a glancing blow as the missile survives and continues to travel albeit it at a modified angle. The target is knocked off course and several bits of debris are visible before the target disappears from view off the bottom of the screen. Then a different video is shown that's said to be a zoomed out view of the same target continuing to travel but there's no footage linking this to what happened after the target dropped of the bottom of the screen in the first video. What's the fuss about? " As in the OP, if this information is being presented to US congressional hearing as UAP, it brings in to question the capabilities of US military hardware not being able to identify objects, it also adds some strange decision making to fire a Hellcat missile at something they can't identify and finally it start to look like the military and congress are not exactly in line. Now that could be one elaborate cover up exercise by the US government to throw a veil over new tech or known other state tech that has been seen by others inadvertently. Or the military and their subcontractors are developing tech without government knowledge. Whatever the answer, something looks off. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As in the OP, if this information is being presented to US congressional hearing as UAP, it brings in to question the capabilities of US military hardware not being able to identify objects, it also adds some strange decision making to fire a Hellcat missile at something they can't identify and finally it start to look like the military and congress are not exactly in line. Now that could be one elaborate cover up exercise by the US government to throw a veil over new tech or known other state tech that has been seen by others inadvertently. Or the military and their subcontractors are developing tech without government knowledge. Whatever the answer, something looks off." There's no such thing as a Hellcat missile. It's called the Hellfire missile. I agree it's a bit weird the US shooting missiles at a target they haven't identified in the airspace of a foreign country, but they do seem to like shooting at things. It seems to me that this might be just a bunch of conspiracy theory driven congressmen looking for something to latch on to. While the military are just keeping schtum for a variety of possible reason none of which involve little green men. Most probably they just don't want to talk about missile impact success rates. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As in the OP, if this information is being presented to US congressional hearing as UAP, it brings in to question the capabilities of US military hardware not being able to identify objects, it also adds some strange decision making to fire a Hellcat missile at something they can't identify and finally it start to look like the military and congress are not exactly in line. Now that could be one elaborate cover up exercise by the US government to throw a veil over new tech or known other state tech that has been seen by others inadvertently. Or the military and their subcontractors are developing tech without government knowledge. Whatever the answer, something looks off. There's no such thing as a Hellcat missile. It's called the Hellfire missile. I agree it's a bit weird the US shooting missiles at a target they haven't identified in the airspace of a foreign country, but they do seem to like shooting at things. It seems to me that this might be just a bunch of conspiracy theory driven congressmen looking for something to latch on to. While the military are just keeping schtum for a variety of possible reason none of which involve little green men. Most probably they just don't want to talk about missile impact success rates. " Well that is a shame, I like the sound of a Hellcat missile, Hellfire is a little to aggressive 
The congress task force is so odd, it puts the government and military at odds with one another, or in bed with one another pulling the wool over our eyes. Either way, why show a video of your own military firing their hi tech weapons at something unidentified, and showing the world that they no effect.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well that is a shame, I like the sound of a Hellcat missile, Hellfire is a little to aggressive The congress task force is so odd, it puts the government and military at odds with one another, or in bed with one another pulling the wool over our eyes. Either way, why show a video of your own military firing their hi tech weapons at something unidentified, and showing the world that they no effect." Congress committees rightfully have a lot of power to extract info from the military, so they sometimes get raw data like this. However, many of these politicians don't exactly have expert level analytical skills. The military will be happy that this is the case. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The chances of 2 fairly advanced civilizations existing simultaneously seems fairly remote, when you consider the billions of years when they might exist. And not only coexisting but also managing to engage in active travel to get together at the right moment, despite the vast distances between planets, seems like childlike magical thinking. We've been around in our current form for c. a quarter of a million years. It's the blink of an eye, just in our galaxy s timeframe. We'll probably not be around for much longer, either. Did a lifeform from somewhere far, far away pop-up at this very moment, who perhaps had a similar evolutionary window of opportunity to do so?" The Fermi Paradox is interesting and becomes more paradoxical the larger the numbers of Earth like planets deemed possible in our universe with modern observations. We obviously don't expect little green men to be flying in Yemeni airspace but one might expect signals from outer space. One interesting theory is that the universe is teeming with life but it's virtually all Prokaryotic single-cellular life. The reason that intelligent life is rare might be down to the extremely low probability of Eukaryotic cells evolving. Life on earth could be something quite special. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The chances of 2 fairly advanced civilizations existing simultaneously seems fairly remote, when you consider the billions of years when they might exist. And not only coexisting but also managing to engage in active travel to get together at the right moment, despite the vast distances between planets, seems like childlike magical thinking. We've been around in our current form for c. a quarter of a million years. It's the blink of an eye, just in our galaxy s timeframe. We'll probably not be around for much longer, either. Did a lifeform from somewhere far, far away pop-up at this very moment, who perhaps had a similar evolutionary window of opportunity to do so? The Fermi Paradox is interesting and becomes more paradoxical the larger the numbers of Earth like planets deemed possible in our universe with modern observations. We obviously don't expect little green men to be flying in Yemeni airspace but one might expect signals from outer space. One interesting theory is that the universe is teeming with life but it's virtually all Prokaryotic single-cellular life. The reason that intelligent life is rare might be down to the extremely low probability of Eukaryotic cells evolving. Life on earth could be something quite special. " Light is our limiting factor we can’t see further back than about 13.8 billion years. In theory, if intelligent life did broadcast signals, we should be able to pick them up if they are broadcast within our realms of understanding, but our time on Earth is just a blink of an eye compared with the age of the universe. Life could have risen and fallen billions of years ago, leaving no trace we could ever detect. Was it flying over Yemen, I hope not, I want the wow factor and billions of years of knowledge, not an orb that can deflect a missile. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The thing about the window of opportunity to receive signals is that if there are a very large number of sources spread relatively evenly throughout space then one would expect to be able to receive some of them. Signals from near by might only take a few years to arrive while those emitted billions of years ago from planets billions of light years away would also arrive about now. And everything inbetween. So the Fermi Paradox stands. Which is why the idea of a "great filter" comes in. This filter may be that civilizations are very rare and only last a very short time or as I said it might be down to the very low probability of something like Eukaryotic cells evolving. Another idea is that other civilizations might not emit electromagnetic signals but this is problematic given our current understanding of physics. I guess it's possible that very distant signals might be too weak to detect because they would dissolve into the noise floor. Something I should research to get a better understanding of." If you want a scientist that mixes science with possibility, a rare breed, Michio Kaku. His idea of traveling through space is rather inventive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you want a scientist that mixes science with possibility, a rare breed, Michio Kaku. His idea of traveling through space is rather inventive." Yeah, I'm something of a fan of Kaku. He's a charismatic promoter of science, big in String Theory and also something of an environmentalist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
