Stephenville Revisited

Hercules Rockefeller said:
disconnect_brain.jpg
Click to expand...

lol, be nice to the "Paranoids" ("newly evolved species").

It's pretty much this situation: You can't really disprove what they can't prove. You can try to dismiss what people claim they've seen in a few ways: (A) They didn't know what they saw (B) They saw something that wasn't there (C) They lied (D) It actually happened

Of course the "Paranoids" will say: "It's just something you won't believe until you see it for yourself."

I suggest you watch this Monte Python short film to avert your mind to something "more productive" :D
 
I agree with much of what you say.
Diode-Man said:
Of course the "Paranoids" will say: "It's just something you won't believe until you see it for yourself."
Click to expand...

I believe this would be true for many indivduals as this would have been the case with me so I'm assuming I'm a paranoid, lol.
Although I'm not sure what there is to be paranoid about.
Funny vid by the way and yeah that does seem like what goes on in these forums quite a bit:)

What did you think of the video clips regarding the witnesses and radar evidence?
 
moementum7 said:
I can empathize with you in theory, but in all practicallity suggesting that others are foolish because of their current beliefs is of no benefit to anyone other than for the short term alleviation of your own frustration with regards to the continuing divide among us on this phenomena, even if your intentions are indeed honorable which I am sure they are.
Myself and a friend without a doubt witnessed 30-40 mettalic type saucer shaped crafts first hand in/over Kelowna, B.C Canada a few years back.

Military or not I don't know, but either way there is some shit going down that I believe needs to be investigated and there is no way our military doesn't know what's going on whether it is them or not.

So when I see people adamantly and even aggresively saying there is no such thing as the UFO phenomena...well, that's just where they are at right now.

Sure it would be nice if we were all together on this, but...until a major event happens on a serious global scale it's just not gonna happen, so in the mean time just breathe and relax my good man.:)
Click to expand...

I'll raise that empathy. Myself, and several other people, two which where my parents, wittnessed the most extraordinary lights in the sky, one night. It was evenn reported in the local Observer, and a big report went under way... but nothing was ever resolved.
 
Stryder said:
I wouldn't be surprised if that particular event coincided with a nearby Texas balloon event. I'm sure I dug that up some time back, the balloons in question were actually ones that lit up in various shapes and was kind of a festival for the beginning of the year.

I'd suggest when people spot something in the sky they first check the internet and local news for nearby Events like Balloon Festivals as they are more common than most would think.
Click to expand...

Stryder, with much respect I challenge you to watch these videos (there's four parts, I think.) and comment further.
 
So the sheriff said these lights were at an altitude of 3,000ft, ... but how can he judge that? I live near an airport, and I can only judge the altitude of the aircraft I see by the size and detail I can see. A light, without any shape, or reference though surely that is a pure guess.
 
I like the guy in the woods who says it was three hundred feet directly above him. It was so large he couldn't see where it ended.

King: "Do you think it was military?"
Guest: " I hope so. Otherwise, we're in big trouble"

They're estimating this thing at around a mile wide. (over 1.5 kilometers) :eek:
 
Estimating distances can be done accurately if someone has the training. That is the advantage of having two eyes, depth/distance perception.
 
joepistole said:
Estimating distances can be done accurately if someone has the training. That is the advantage of having two eyes, depth/distance perception.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what that training entails. For instance, since the fuel price explosion, I've noticed that the airliners look like they're skimming along just high enough to be safe. I'm guessing it's the simple matter of less altitude equals less fuel usage, yet, I'd like to know just by looking, how to estimate their height.
 
clusteringflux said:
I'd like to know what that training entails. For instance, since the fuel price explosion, I've noticed that the airliners look like they're skimming along just high enough to be safe. I'm guessing it's the simple matter of less altitude equals less fuel usage, yet, I'd like to know just by looking, how to estimate their height.
Click to expand...

Are you familar with snipers? They estimate distances all the time. Not only do the estimate distances accurately, but they also estimate wind speed, etc. Pilots do the same.
 
joepistole said:
Estimating distances can be done accurately if someone has the training. That is the advantage of having two eyes, depth/distance perception.
Click to expand...

A dot of light 100metres away looks exactly the same as a dot of light a kilometre away. Eyes cannot resolve the difference.
 
joepistole said:
Are you familar with snipers? They estimate distances all the time.
Click to expand...


As I shoot rifle, and have read various sniper manuals, I'll tell you how it it is done. IT's not an estimate, but a measurement. You calibrate the parallax and focus of your scope to a certain distance. You then dial in the distance on your parallax ring, and focus up, and that means you are focussed for that distance, and no other. You can then judge the bullet drop using the mil-dot reticle.

As one image in one eye is magnified, and the other not, you cannot use the parallax between your own eyes to estimate range.

Also, snipers do no shoot at dots of light in the sky, where there is nothing in the foreground or background to give an estimate of size.

Simpler methods of rangefinding with mil-dot scope simply require the sniper to measure the size of his target (human) against the gradations of the mil-dot.

Rangefinding requires a known object or quantity for reference, .. not an Unknown, ....!!
 
phlogistician said:
A dot of light 100metres away looks exactly the same as a dot of light a kilometre away. Eyes cannot resolve the difference.
Click to expand...

If you watch the entire 4 parts, you find that the constable's was pretty close to other accounts. They triangulated the sightings of multiple witnesses from differing angles of view. All of which, placing the object in the same area.
On the other hand,a sighting with so many witnesses would surely generate some gossip in a small town, meaning they could've collectively came up with a general consensus before the media frenzy.
 
"I went fishing once and caught a fish which was this big" - moves hands a foot apart to a friend
"I went fishing once and caught a fish which was this big" - Speaking to a group of friends down the pub, hands moved to a couple of feet.
"I went fishing once and caught a fish which was this big" - Speaking to a large congregated audience that have gathered to hear the story after it's circulated for a few months, by this time arms are spread as far as they can reach.

Of course what spoils this fishing story is when some bright spark says, "So what did you do with it: Eat it, Stuffed and mounted it, Threw it back?" and the usual answer is "I lost it".

Anecdotal evidence is useless. It's been proven time and time again that people can build delusional realities (This is proven often enough in regards to the material that usually finds it's way into Pseudoscience) people can often be programmed in regards to such delusions to (Mass Media/Hysteria) So peoples anecdotal evidence I'm afraid is not much to go on without supporting physical evidence.

Before you try to find pictures online, I know that one site that claims to report on it deals with images from the Mexican DOD images (Which incidentally were from a Commercial Aerospace Exposition that was occurring in Mexico City. The end of the show had a "Balloon" send off, I mean of the manned type)

There is the potential that it's a Prototype Single wing Air Tanker (refueler) however obviously I've no information to share with people on that. A Single Wing Air Tanker would obviously have however greater Fuselage space for fuel storage as well as if it was military it would potentially be armoured and/or Stealth (I mean whats good having a whole wing of stealth aircraft if they have to queue to refuel and the plane they are refueling from is seen on Radar?. A large enough single wing could theoretically refuel entire wings [multiple aircraft] at a time)
 
Stryder said:
"I went fishing once and caught a fish which was this big" - moves hands a foot apart to a friend
"I went fishing once and caught a fish which was this big" - Speaking to a group of friends down the pub, hands moved to a couple of feet.
"I went fishing once and caught a fish which was this big" - Speaking to a large congregated audience that have gathered to hear the story after it's circulated for a few months, by this time arms are spread as far as they can reach.

Of course what spoils this fishing story is when some bright spark says, "So what did you do with it: Eat it, Stuffed and mounted it, Threw it back?" and the usual answer is "I lost it".

Anecdotal evidence is useless. It's been proven time and time again that people can build delusional realities (This is proven often enough in regards to the material that usually finds it's way into Pseudoscience) people can often be programmed in regards to such delusions to (Mass Media/Hysteria) So peoples anecdotal evidence I'm afraid is not much to go on without supporting physical evidence.

Before you try to find pictures online, I know that one site that claims to report on it deals with images from the Mexican DOD images (Which incidentally were from a Commercial Aerospace Exposition that was occurring in Mexico City. The end of the show had a "Balloon" send off, I mean of the manned type)

There is the potential that it's a Prototype Single wing Air Tanker (refueler) however obviously I've no information to share with people on that. A Single Wing Air Tanker would obviously have however greater Fuselage space for fuel storage as well as if it was military it would potentially be armoured and/or Stealth (I mean whats good having a whole wing of stealth aircraft if they have to queue to refuel and the plane they are refueling from is seen on Radar?. A large enough single wing could theoretically refuel entire wings [multiple aircraft] at a time)
Click to expand...

Well, Stryder, it's not anecdotal anymore. There's radar records that support, in full, what over eight eye witnesses reported. That would be more than enough to make a jury conviction in a court of law.
Also, I've never heard of a silent tanker.The only sound was reported to be the very noticeable F16s seemingly sent to try and intercept what ever it was(which the military denied,,then confirmed).
 
Would you show me a direct link to this Radar Evidence rather than just anecdotes?
 
if i was an alien, i wouldnt give a shit rat ass about inferior humans. coming here? were lucky they dont blow us up to make room for a hyperspace freeway or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top