Why UFO's wink out.

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

river

I did some very basic calculations on the speeds of UFO'S ;

For instance ; at

2000mph = divided by 60 mins = 33.33 miles / min.
by 60 secs = 0.56 miles/sec.

5000mph = divided by 60 mins. = 83.33 miles/min.
by 60 secs. = 1.39 miles/sec

10,000mph = divided by 60 mins. =166 miles/min.
by 60 secs. = 2.7 miles/sec.

50,000mph = divided by 60 mins. = 833.33 miles/min.
by 60 secs. = 69.45 miles/sec.

So we can see why they can seem to " blink out " . Because within one second these craft will have gone at least a half a mile.

Plus I think this refutes this " another dimension theory " as to why they just blink out or just disappear.

The most puzzling thing about all this ; is that ; nobody has bothered to do these simple calculations before.

These simple calculations changes one's perspective .

I know that I have ; or rather did have a thread ; with these calculations ;but before it was hijacked into this or that opinion ; my POINT of the thread was to argue against the theory that the reason they wink out or blink out was because they come and go from other dimensions.

The calculations show that per/second ; even at the minimum is 0.56 miles per second ; now think about this as far as the ability to keep site of anything having this kind of acceleration.

It challenges the mind ; to keep track of the object.
 
What's next? Are you going to discuss the typical number of eggs that Nessy lays?

I am getting the strangest feeling of deja vu....
 
Posting it a second time doesn't make it any less invalid.
Reported.
 
Except that - in that previous thread - I didn't post opinion I posted facts.
And you completely failed to address them.
 
river said:
You and your opinion are not valid.
Click to expand...
Why? Isn't that a rather ludicrous pretentious statement?
Just because someone offers facts that you are unable to refute, does not mean that your fantasy still stands as valid...except perhaps in your own mind.
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is."
 
Dywyddyr said:
Except that - in that previous thread - I didn't post opinion I posted facts.
And you completely failed to address them.
Click to expand...

We look at these facts differently dywr. You look at them as no evidence.

I on the other hand ; I look at the evidence as a detective would ; not there at the scence ; so piece together the evidence given ; then come to a logical conclusion based on the facts given; conclusion; to me; UFO's are real ; they have since been since at Donald Keyhoe's book; THE FLYING SAUCERS ARE REAL.

And you never convince me differently no matter your thinking
 
river said:
We look at these facts differently dywr.
Click to expand...
That would be a lie.
For example, you DON'T look at the facts about the arc covered because you didn't understand it (as you admitted).
And how, precisely, does "looking at the fact" that an SR-71 does 2,000 mph and not "blink out" help your contention that some other object doing the same speed does?

You look at them as no evidence.
Click to expand...
Wrong, it's not "no evidence" it's direct evidence against your "hypothesis".

I on the other hand ; I look at the evidence as a detective would ; not there at the scence ; so piece together the evidence given ; then come to a logical conclusion based on the facts given; conclusion; to me; UFO's are real ; they have since been since at Donald Keyhoe's book; THE FLYING SAUCERS ARE REAL.

And you never convince me differently no matter your thinking
Click to expand...
Yeah...
The problem here is that you treat such books the way some theists treat the Bible or the Quran - as "holy writ" that cannot be questioned.
You spend your time thinking up ways to show they're correct (no matter how ridiculous those methods/ claims are) as opposed to to checking the validity of the source material.
 
Dywyddyr said:
That would be a lie.
For example, you DON'T look at the facts about the arc covered because you didn't understand it (as you admitted).
And how, precisely, does "looking at the fact" that an SR-71 does 2,000 mph and not "blink out" help your contention that some other object doing the same speed does?


Wrong, it's not "no evidence" it's direct evidence against your "hypothesis".


Yeah...
The problem here is that you treat such books the way some theists treat the Bible or the Quran - as "holy writ" that cannot be questioned.
You spend your time thinking up ways to show they're correct (no matter how ridiculous those methods/ claims are) as opposed to to checking the validity of the source material.
Click to expand...

You are irrelevant to this thread dwyr.
 
river said:
You are irrelevant to this thread dwyr.
Click to expand...
Again, dishonesty.
What you ACTUALLY mean is that I'm "irrelevant" to your viewpoint: because you either won't listen to, or are ignorant of, the facts.
 
Dywyddyr said:
That would be a lie.
For example, you DON'T look at the facts about the arc covered because you didn't understand it (as you admitted).
And how, precisely, does "looking at the fact" that an SR-71 does 2,000 mph and not "blink out" help your contention that some other object doing the same speed does?


Wrong, it's not "no evidence" it's direct evidence against your "hypothesis".


Yeah...
The problem here is that you treat such books the way some theists treat the Bible or the Quran - as "holy writ" that cannot be questioned.
You spend your time thinking up ways to show they're correct (no matter how ridiculous those methods/ claims are) as opposed to to checking the validity of the source material.
Click to expand...
:)
Bingo!


As I have said previously, shows such as the X-Files and Millenium, certainly have a lot to answer to, although I quite enjoyed the X-Files as entertainment.
 
river said:
Irrelevant to this thread
Click to expand...
I cannot answer you anymore truthfully and sensibly than the following reply to your previous ludicrous claim.

Dywyddyr said:
Again, dishonesty.
What you ACTUALLY mean is that I'm "irrelevant" to your viewpoint: because you either won't listen to, or are ignorant of, the facts.
Click to expand...


http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/89281.Why_People_Believe_Weird_Things

In this age of supposed scientific enlightenment, many people still believe in mind reading, past-life regression theory, New Age hokum, and alien abduction. A no-holds-barred assault on popular superstitions and prejudices, with more than 80,000 copies in print, Why People Believe Weird Things debunks these nonsensical claims and explores the very human reasons people find otherworldly phenomena, conspiracy theories, and cults so appealing. In an entirely new chapter, "Why Smart People Believe in Weird Things," Michael Shermer takes on science luminaries like physicist Frank Tippler and others, who hide their spiritual beliefs behind the trappings of science.

Shermer, science historian and true crusader, also reveals the more dangerous side of such illogical thinking, including Holocaust denial, the recovered-memory movement, the satanic ritual abuse scare, and other modern crazes. Why People Believe Strange Things is an eye-opening resource for the most gullible among us and those who want to protect them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top