Well, i think a ball of plasma could behave like that. And could be an incredibly powerfull weapon. Virtually unstoppable. Would also jam radar signals.Mindlusion said:dragonrider said:Let's not completely rule out the possibility of these things being human-made though.null24 said:Although this thing seemed to be structural, it did not behave as such. It acheived a speed I couldn't begin to estimate, but probably wouldve gone from horizon to horizon in less than 2 seconds. There was also no acceleration, it went from stationary to full speed instantly.Mindlusion said:Jees said:I don't want to discredit an observation but could it have been modern drones? They come unmanned, capable of g-forces and accelerations/decelerations that no living person could survive.
No actually there aren't, the problem isn't directly the fact that a pilot couldn't survive the G-forces, the problem is there is nothing that exists that can even achieve the impossible acceleration. I'm speaking to the best evidence of the coast sightings off the aircraft carriers.
The only experimental hypersonic drones we have are capable of speeds between mach 5 and mach 7, but the only way they can actually be flown is when deployed by a jet flying at an altitude of 50 000 ft at speed of mach 3, the drones are deployed at this speed and altitude which then they are capable of accelerating to hypersonic speeds. The g-forces experienced there are still lower than that of a space rocket take off, so that isn't the problem. There is no known hypersonic jet or drone that can fly at low altitudes, and its not a matter of technology, the air resistance and incredible heat produced just makes it impractical. If a hypersonic jet was travelling above your head and was low enough for you to see it, believe me, you would know about it.
These things witnessed by pilots in the sky and recorded on multiple state of the art radar systems clocked these things doing mach 30 acceleration from a standstill at sea level. Something like this just doesn't make sense. See kinetic energy is increased exponentially due to speed, vs mass (KE=1/2mv^2). Thats why a relatively small asteroid can cause massive damage because of the extremely high speeds they are moving once they hit the atmosphere. The amount of energy is so great that pure metallic asteroids air-burst with the power of multiple nuclear warheads. An object that accelerates to mach 30 at sea level would provide the same signature, if it didn't detonate, the air would be at least super heated and cause multiple sonic booms. The kinetic energy transferred to the surrounding medium by friction/collisions would be detectable. Nothing at all like that was detected. No heat signature, nothing. It is seriously mind bending.
The laws of aerospace don't apply to these things, they simply aren't flying through the air. Hypersonic drones for example require hundreds of miles in order to make a turn, these things turn at 90 degree angles in 120mph wind as if it wasn't there. Yep, those are UFOs, Navy says about 3 videos of strange sightings
Lazar is an interesting bloke. There is a good Netflix video on him right now that you may be interested in watching.
I'm wondering what the function of the thing is... A lot of the talk around alien spp by alleged contactees speaks about the supposed peaceful motives of these things. Not all of it, there are the Ickes and reptilian theorists, but a lot seems to go that way. If we are using any of their propulsion tech, it is our militaries that are using it. I don't see why, if their agenda is peace, that they would help us build death machines. Although this is most likely just human dogma. Or we couldv'e stolen it from them. Or they themselves are at war. Or they are just observers. Or they made us. Or they are us, from the future, time tourists... Somebody knows.
Haven't met a "man in black", so that's prolly good.
So, if this would be technology from our own planet, secret military technology, it would have to contain either a new sort of stealth technology that can distort radar signals in such a way that their location cannot be accurately determined anymore.
Or, if the data from the radar would be correct, they would have to be experimental weapons that in all likelyhood would not be vehicles, but rather projectiles. Objects, maybe tiny pieces of ceramic or simply plasma balls, accelerated to incredible speeds, maybe with powerfull lasers on the ground, meant to eventually crash into a target, carrying no load, because the energy that accelerates them IS their load. A sort of artificial asteroids or ball lightnings.
Would that be plausible?
Those suggestions aren't plausible based on the data, but don't take my word on it. I suggest you check out the interviews of the multiple pilots and radar controllers about the event, including the detailed reports and timelines, correlating visual report with electronic data. Including the near collisions that happened on the east coast in 2015. Radar malfunction has been ruled out, although the pilots radar systems actually experienced active jamming, which is a technological phenomenon (and actually an act of war if it came from another nation), which is why they couldn't actively track but only passively track via the pixels on the FLIR system. Yet the electro-optical data verifies that whatever the signal is it is of a physical nature, reflective, IR signature, etc etc, it's indisputable, and supported by multiple eye witness. It's not a projectile, at least, you should read the report (what kind of 'projectile' sits still under and above the water, moves erratically like shaking a pingpong ball in a plastic cup, then accelerates at 30x the speed of sound without a trace.).
They are the ones trained to observe and detect these phenomenon, and if they could offer a plausible explanation that didn't make them look crazy, they certainly would. It's not my opinion, I'm just relaying whats out there. The simple fact is, its all been considered, and nothing fits. They can't say what it is, but they can certainly say what it isn't.
By all means, it could be anything, but whatever you can suggest, it must at least fit the data.