Dan Smith - May 5th - Part One Dan Smith-May5-07-...
Dan Smith - May 5th - Part Two
Dan Smith-May5-07-...



UFO, ALIEN, DISCLOSURE, SERPO, SEINU, PROJECT-CAMELOT - Open Minds Forum - http://www.openmindsforum.com/
UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed

Jun 4, 2007, 12:59pm





UFO, ALIEN, DISCLOSURE, SERPO, SEINU, PROJECT-CAMELOT - Open Minds Forum - WWW.OpenMindsForum.com :: General :: UFO/ Alien / Exobiology :: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
   [Search This Thread] [Add Bookmark] [Reply] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]
 Author Topic: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed (Read 60,533 times)
10538
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is online

[avatar]


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 213
Location: California
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1680 on Today at 11:11am

I agree that the mass media is avoiding this story. I said early on that they could have been told to bury it by the military or the PTB. Now I'm even more convinced because of the magnitude of this compared to other stories. A single UFO is seen by a Guernsey pilot and it makes worldwide news and this guy did not even have pictures. I'm thinking there must be something unacceptable about this drone sighting case. Maybe it is too real and might cause panic. It could also be that the military is afraid many people may go looking for these things and possibly attempt to harm one of them, sparking a major incident.

I'm convinced the PTB want this entire story to be forgotten.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
TheShadow
Goldstar Contributer Award
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

"The Shadow Knows!"


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Mar 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,062
Location: USA
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1681 on Today at 11:21am


Today at 11:11am, 10538 wrote:
I agree that the mass media is avoiding this story. I said early on that they could have been told to bury it by the military or the PTB. Now I'm even more convinced because of the magnitude of this compared to other stories. A single UFO is seen by a Guernsey pilot and it makes worldwide news and this guy did not even have pictures. I'm thinking there must be something unacceptable about this drone sighting case. Maybe it is too real and might cause panic. It could also be that the military is afraid many people may go looking for these things and possibly attempt to harm one of them, sparking a major incident.

I'm convinced the PTB want this entire story to be forgotten.


I disagree!
As time goes on and no one else has come forward with any new info or sightings, it appears to me that this was after all a non-event. Our witness wasn't hushed up in any way....he just doesnt come off as credible. Chad never materializes.....why? He wanted answers and was concerned for the life of his unborn child, wouldnt that warrant his coming out?
So what do we end up with? 112 pages of speculation about what is obviously nothing more than a hoax!
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
italiclikeitis
Full Member
***
member is online




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 21
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1682 on Today at 11:36am

In effect, those propeller craft have been made public. Because we have seen them in the mass media. Ask yourselves what might come after planes, helicopters, jets, and harriers. The problems with all of those is that they either make noise, need to be re-fueled, most have pilots, and none of them really have the ability to hide like say...Something like the drone craft. And who knows??Maybe this type of technology is just the right thing for hovering around in a forest looking for small fires. Or many other types of data gathering.

I also still stick to my old theory that maybe it isn't even a secret. None of the siting accounts that I have read ever suggested that the craft was really trying to evade them. Just because the woman in Lake Tahoe was following it, doesn't mean that it was trying to escape. Unless I have missed something. In which case, I stand corrected.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
spf33
Senior Member
****
member is offline




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 109
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1683 on Today at 11:38am


Yesterday at 11:51pm, organelle wrote:
Greetings,
In this post I examine some matters related to the phenomenon, and our processing of it.


really enjoyed reading your post.

where do you get the april dates from?:

Chad to C2C (sometime around April 10th, 2007) 7 Pics from: Late April, or ~05.06.07
Mufon 7013 (April 12th, 2007) 2 Pics from: 05.05.07 1st posting online:http://www.ufocasebook.com/strangecraftlaketahoe.html
Rajman1977 ([April 20th, 2007) 6 Pics from: 05.16.07




first appearances online(?):

(can't find the original c2c page, i remember a different one first. chad had not yet responded with a second reply.)

chad -
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page2022.html?theme=light

tahoe -
http://mufoncms.com/cgi-bin/manage_sighting_reports.pl?mode=view_long_desc&id=7013

rajman1977
-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8418528@N06
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
10538
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is online

[avatar]


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 213
Location: California
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1684 on Today at 11:45am


Today at 11:21am, TheShadow wrote:

Today at 11:11am, 10538 wrote:
I agree that the mass media is avoiding this story. I said early on that they could have been told to bury it by the military or the PTB. Now I'm even more convinced because of the magnitude of this compared to other stories. A single UFO is seen by a Guernsey pilot and it makes worldwide news and this guy did not even have pictures. I'm thinking there must be something unacceptable about this drone sighting case. Maybe it is too real and might cause panic. It could also be that the military is afraid many people may go looking for these things and possibly attempt to harm one of them, sparking a major incident.

I'm convinced the PTB want this entire story to be forgotten.


I disagree!
As time goes on and no one else has come forward with any new info or sightings, it appears to me that this was after all a non-event. Our witness wasn't hushed up in any way....he just doesnt come off as credible. Chad never materializes.....why? He wanted answers and was concerned for the life of his unborn child, wouldnt that warrant his coming out?
So what do we end up with? 112 pages of speculation about what is obviously nothing more than a hoax!


Witnesses do not need to be hushed up. The lack of attention is enough to do the job. Not even mufon is touching this story. I find that very suspect itself. But this case is way to complicated to be a hoax. Five witnesses and three of them with very close up and clear photographic evidence come forward. All from different locations and all with similar descriptions and this goes down as a non-event?

As far as Chad goes, everthing you have said about him is pure speculation. You don't know what his mindset is. He may want this whole story to go away just like the PTB. All he cares about is his family's health and if this thing never shows up again over his house, he's happy. Not everyone is as interested in UFOs as we are. I still think that we should attempt to contact him as was done with Raj. So I'll say it again. Admin, can you contact Chad through Lex and invite him to come here?

To me, this thing is simple. You want to talk about Occam's Razor? OK. The only logical explaination is the ET theory. No other explaination makes sense. Can't accept it? I submit that if you can't then that simply indicates that you don't believe in ETs at all. Maybe you like to dabble in this subject. You have fun talking and reading about ETs and UFOs. But when the reality of it becomes apparent you can't bring yourself to believe.

Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
italiclikeitis
Full Member
***
member is online




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 21
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1685 on Today at 11:53am

There is nothing about this craft that suggests it is of extra terrestrial design. That is probably my best argument or the ET theory.

What other explanation doesn't make sense?
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
TheShadow
Goldstar Contributer Award
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

"The Shadow Knows!"


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Mar 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,062
Location: USA
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1686 on Today at 11:57am

Numbers....simple logic dictates there is nothing to this but Raj/Chad creating this thing on their computers for fun. What proof do you have there are 5 witnesses? A bunch of anonymous reports on the web! Hardly conclusive! Could all be from one person with access to several computers. Without a verifiable and credible witness this thing doesnt stand up to scrutiny! If you (or anyone you know) saw this thing (weather you are into UFOs or not) would you not be all over it trying to figure out just what the hell it was? Come on smell the coffee......this thing is not UFO it is CGI!!
I do believe we are not alone in the universe, but i am also wise enough to know a scam when i see one...and my friend this is a scam!!
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
10538
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is online

[avatar]


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 213
Location: California
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1687 on Today at 12:01pm


Today at 11:53am, italiclikeitis wrote:
There is nothing about this craft that suggests it is of extra terrestrial design. That is probably my best argument or the ET theory.

What other explanation doesn't make sense?


I already said why the hoax theory doesn't make sense in my last post. The terrestrial device theory doesn't make sense for four important reasons:

1) Strange ET markings on the crafts.

2) Absence of landing gear

3) Object was flying over an urban area with total disregard for secrecy.

4) This kind of technology does not exist on Earth. This is the most important reason.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged 
whoopeddog
Junior Member
**
member is online




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 17
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1688 on Today at 12:07pm

spf: I think Organelle put the April dates by mistake and meant to say May.

10538: I don't know that it's fair to say that MUFON "isn't Touching the story." I don't know that MUFON acts and thinks as a single entity. I don't know what their role or responsibility in the manner might be. It looks to me like they get more reports than they know what to do with.

I don't think the appearance of multiple reporters is persuasive evidence against a hoax, without confirmation that these indeed were separate and non-connected individuals. If I wanted to, I could open up multiple email accounts through Yahoo and pretend to be a large number of different people. I could also have one or two friends who were in on the fun helping me out.

I find persuasive evidence of the reality of "something out there" in other reports, but not from this one as of yet. It's not fair to say that if you doubt this, you doubt them all.

I didn't get any sense at all that Raj felt intimidated into silence. I agree that it would be good to hear more from Chad, the only one to report multiple sightings, even through the windows of his own house.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Guest
Co-Administrator
*****
Admin Team
member is online

[avatar]

You must dive in to see it all.


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,462
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1689 on Today at 12:08pm

If a hoax, then it's a good one. Real good.

But when looking at Chad/Raj craft pics - it looks more like a Honda, then advanced alien.

Last Edit: Today at 12:09pm by Guest Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

God does not play dice with the Universe. We are being recreated by the moment. We've only just begun.
italiclikeitis
Full Member
***
member is online




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 21
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1690 on Today at 12:11pm

I have pretty much put that whole hoax issue behind me. I don't think that it matters if it is a hoax or not. I have read enough information to accept that its existence is plausible and can be manufactured by human beings. There is no reason for me to question the witnesses. Even if all of the witnesses were liars. We now are aware of this technology. Whether or not you accept this technology as a reality is down to how much research you do. The information is out there on the web. It isn't a secret.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
TheShadow
Goldstar Contributer Award
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

"The Shadow Knows!"


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Mar 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,062
Location: USA
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1691 on Today at 12:16pm


Today at 12:01pm, 10538 wrote:

Today at 11:53am, italiclikeitis wrote:
There is nothing about this craft that suggests it is of extra terrestrial design. That is probably my best argument or the ET theory.

What other explanation doesn't make sense?


I already said why the hoax theory doesn't make sense in my last post. The terrestrial device theory doesn't make sense for four important reasons:

1) Strange ET markings on the crafts.

2) Absence of landing gear

3) Object was flying over an urban area with total disregard for secrecy.

4) This kind of technology does not exist on Earth. This is the most important reason.


Your logic is beyond flawed!!
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
admin
Co-Administrator
*****
Open Minds Forum Founder
member is online

[avatar]

"It's been a long, strange trip..."


[email] [send pm]

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,770
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1692 on Today at 12:20pm


Today at 11:57am, TheShadow wrote:
Numbers....simple logic dictates there is nothing to this but Raj/Chad creating this thing on their computers for fun. What proof do you have there are 5 witnesses? A bunch of anonymous reports on the web! Hardly conclusive! Could all be from one person with access to several computers. Without a verifiable and credible witness this thing doesn't stand up to scrutiny! If you (or anyone you know) saw this thing (weather you are into UFOs or not) would you not be all over it trying to figure out just what the hell it was? Come on smell the coffee......this thing is not UFO it is CGI!!
I do believe we are not alone in the universe, but i am also wise enough to know a scam when i see one...and my friend this is a scam!!


Shads, you are pushing your luck, pal. >:( I don't care what you want to believe - but if you want to make claims here, then you have to prove that claim. It's no good just saying something is 'so', just because that's what you *think* >:( - that's the easy way out - it takes more of man to uphold the notion 'innocent until proved guilty' . There could be a thousand reasons why things haven't transpired the way people 'expect' them to - the EASY / LAZY option is to just call it a hoax without proof.

*ONE* reason alone could be that Raj is not bothering to come back here (or anywhere else) because of the simply disgusting and repulsive things Cartoon (Kim) said bout his Fiance and future father-in-law. I had promised to keep this particular thread ultra-'clean' in order to facillitate this thing to some kind of conclusion - either way, we need more detail. I let Kim push the envelop, until he went WAY to far. And I feel partly responsible for letting that happen.

I will NOT make the same mistake twice. If you want to blame a 'thread crackdown' on anyone - blame it on Cartoon/Kim. >:(

You have been here for nigh on two years - you KNOW what we do here and why we do it. Recently you have been warned NOT to make those sort of claims without proof. You aren't saying anything about your *opinion* (which would be OK) - you are making bold, direct claims!! Last warning.
Last Edit: Today at 12:36pm by admin Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

Imagine: http://disclosure-ufo.blogspot.com/
italiclikeitis
Full Member
***
member is online




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 21
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1693 on Today at 12:24pm

10538...


1) Strange ET markings on the crafts.

---If this craft is man made, it might be in the interest of it's creators to create a diversion. And creating Klingon type writing is just the ticket, in my opinion. The controversy that was created just from that is mind boggling.

2) Absence of landing gear

---Planes, and Helicopters need landing gear. This isn't one of those. Someone a while back suggested a cone that it might land on. Very clever.

3) Object was flying over an urban area with total disregard for secrecy.

---I admittedly still have a problem with this one. Good argument. Although, we are the only ones who call it a secret.

4) This kind of technology does not exist on Earth. This is the most important reason.
---Who said?? Want some information?
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
italiclikeitis
Full Member
***
member is online




[email] [send pm]

Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 21
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
Reply #1694 on Today at 12:36pm

If you can refer to comments made at rajman1977's Flickr site under "PICT0017",
There were some fairly technical explainations presented by two people who seem to have a good understanding of a technology that could drive this craft.
Linked here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8418528@N06/506533536/

I hope these guys do not mind me quoting them.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

robert3clemens says:
I think that this is NOT a hoax. It's not from outer space, either. I mean, look at the damn craft. It's got a number of ionization rods arranged around a central core. What does that tell you? It's driven by ion wind, i.e. the rods ionize the air (at their tips), and a powerful magnet draws them through the donut hole. It thereby stays afloat. The "fat" leg features a number of correction jets (much better visible in the previous sighting linked by the_paper_boy17). Such ion "lifters" have been built for years, although I must admit, none to my knowledge weighing this much. My guess is that the donut houses a commonplace superconducting ring carrying a very, very large current. The current supplies the slingshot effect that draws ions toward the ground. In time, the action of the passing ions drags on the ring current, and the craft needs a recharge (hence its apparent interest in the telephone pole?). The writing is probably either to make it look cool (is that Klingon?) or to disguise key components because the inventor wants to patent it. I suspect the "fat" leg houses an antenna assembly, and maybe a camera, through which a remote human controls the craft. But hey, nice work. It would make a great upgrade to that old model airplane in my garage!

By the way, the reason I don't think it's from outer space is because it's so obviously atmospheric. (Ion lifters don't work in space where there's basically no gas to ionize.) And if you have the technology to speed across space, why do you want to design a probe that can only function in the atmosphere?

Anyways, great photos!


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NASAnerd1947 says:
I'm not an expert on faking digital images, but I have studied the field of electric and electromagnetic propulsion as a professional aerospace engineer. If the object is real, the explanation put forward by robert3clemens is pretty much right on. This would be an example of an endoatmospheric Hall-effect thruster. The curved electrodes on the top would be charged to a high positve voltage. Since they are arranged in a radially symmetric manner, they would create a radially symmetric electric field gradient that goes to zero in the middle. Any positive ions in the air (nitrogen, oxygen, etc.) in the vicinity of and interior to the electrodes would therefore be forced radially inward. No central electrode would be necessary. Electrons would of course be attracted to the electrodes and collected on their surfaces. Since the positive ions are tens of thousands of times more massive than the electrons, virtually all of the momentum flow is carried by the positive ions. A superconducting ring or rings inside the donut shaped annular shell would be arranged so as to create circular magnetic field lines centered around the symmetry axis. There are a couple of different winding geometries that would work. As the ions move radially inward, they cross the magnetic field lines at essentially right angles. The Hall effect says that charged particles crossing magnetic field lines will receive an acceleration that is proportional to the size of the magnetic field and at right angles to both it and the velocity vector of the particle. If the velocity of the particle is radially inward and the magnetic field line is tangential, then the particle will be accelerated downward and through the hole. This is the slingshot effect that robert3clemens was talking about and can increase the size of the ion wind by an order of magnitude. Usually the limiting parameter on an ion wind thruster is the very low level of ionization in normal air (a few hundred per cc). There simply aren't very many charged particles around to "grab" with the electric field, and this is why ordinary "lifters" don't have enough thrust to get themselves and their power supplies off the ground. Theory and experiment show that this can be dramatically improved by artificially boosting the ion concentration in the air. This can easily be done with ultraviolet radiation; I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't some excimer lasers pointing upward, interior to the electrodes.

The electrodes on the top are curved because they follow the stream lines of the ion wind; they define what is known as the "stream tube". Since air molecules flow radially inward between and around the electrodes, the volume of air flow increases as you move axially downward to the annular hole; that's why the stream tube is bigger at the entrance to the annular hole than it is at the top.

Hall effect thrusters have been used in space for decades. In that case, you have to bring your working fluid with you (usually Xenon or some other noble gas). Here, the air is the working fluid. One of the problems that all Hall effect thrusters have to deal with is charge build-up. What you're doing in the vicinity of the curved electrodes is stripping electrons off and accelerating the positively charged ions downward. Therefore you've got a positivley charged column of air moving away from the device. If you didn't do anything about that, you would eventually build up a pretty good charge separation that would tend to kill the thrust and also possibly cause destructive arcing or sparking. That's where the "paddles" or "wings" come in. I think their first purpose is to serve as electrodes that recombine the electrons with the downward flowing ion wind and thereby neutralize it. In order to do that, you need a lot of surface area, because the natural conductivity of the air is low. I think they also serve a secondary purpose of steering the thrust vector of the ion wind. If you supply a slightly different electron current to each of an opposed pair of paddles, you will pull the column of positively charged air to one side or the other. The different photos of what is probably the same device ("Chad's", Lake Tahoe, and now Capitola) have different numbers and configurations of paddles. However, the one thing they all have in common is that they all have a minimum of two pairs of paddles, diametrically opposed to each other. This always allows control of pitch and roll. They also appear designed to have a large surface area in contact with the air at the exit plane of the thruster. If this is a real object, I would guess that whoever built it is experimenting with different models of paddles. For one thing, the long paddles appear to have hinges where they join the body of the "donut". This implies that they are designed to be folded up to make storage or transport of the object easier. The short paddle with six corona discharge needles on it looks like it might not have to be stowed.

The superconducting coil or coils serve two purposes, as robert3clemens alludes to. First, they provide the very strong magnetic field necessary to produce the Hall effect; second, they are an energy storage medium. Superconducting magnets are capable of being charged and discharged extremely fast and have very low internal losses. Depending on the quality of the superconductor material, the energy density can be equal to or greater than primary lithium batteries. The main power consumption would for supplying the current necessary for maintaining the high voltage on the top curved electrodes, and "pumping" the collected electrons down to the paddles

We are not the first to think about this. The attractiveness of a purely electrically fueled aircraft with no moving parts is self-evident. The intellectual history of Hall effect (or magnetohydrodynamic) endoatmospheric thrusters goes back at least to the 1950's, when a great deal of classified work was done in the area. What makes it feasible today is the availability of "high temperature" superconductors on an industrial scale (pioneered, I might add in Silicon Valley, which appears to be at the epicenter of these sightings).

All of this says that these devices, if real, were built by otherwise ordinary, but extremely well educated and well informed human beings with a few tens of millions of dollars to play with. A discussion of where the original idea for this kind of vehicle came from will be left for another day.

OK, so why are these things being flight tested over Capitola and Lake Tahoe, instead of Edwards Air Force Base or China Lake Naval Weapons Test Center, or Area 51? Good question, it seems pretty risky. Actually, we don't know they didn't fly around Area 51 or China Lake, first. If these things were built by one of the usual suspect aerospace contractors for a government Agency, they almost certainly would have been tested at a restricted flight test center first. Maybe they have already undergone preliminary testing and they are now getting ready to move into the operational phase and they are intended to operate in the mountains and near the sea. If that's the case, we shouldn't assume that the flights are occurring without the knowledge of Homeland Security Department and other agencies. Maybe the Agency that built them wants to determine what fraction of sightings will be conveniently dismissed by skeptics as hoaxes. On the other hand, any number of dot-com millionaires and billionaires live within a fifty mile radius of Capitola. One of them could have decided to build something like this out of petty cash. In that case, they would not necessarily want or need access to a government test site. Still, flying something like this inside continental airspace without permission would be illegal most places and pretty cheeky, even for a dot-commer.

Why isn't there a video? Again, how do you know there isn't? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I often see such comments along the lines of "If I had seen something like this, I would have taken a perfectly focused and professionally produced video and instantly published it everywhere in order to satisfy the curiousity of random skeptics bent on character assassination." The facts are otherwise. Anyone who has ever spent any quality time investigating UFOs or other cryptic phenomena knows that only a tiny fraction of witness sightings ever get reported to anybody outside the immediate family. First of all, exactly who are you supposed to report it to? There is no official collection point for this kind of story. Second, and probably more important, what's the motivation? In most cases you simply bring down accusations of being an idiot, a fraud, or both.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
   [Search This Thread] [Add Bookmark] [Reply] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]
 


Quick Reply
Message:

Shortcut to Quick Reply box: Alt+Q. Shortcut to post message: Alt+S.

The Alien Seeker News

Click to discover what is: - 'Exempt From Disclosure'


Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free



This Board Hosted For FREE By ProBoards
Get Your Own Free Message Board!