🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:14:53 UTC No. 16263308
What are these things?
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:29:56 UTC No. 16263338
>>16263308
Pulse Induced Plasma Decoys.
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:32:58 UTC No. 16263345
>>16263338
how was it rotating?
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:49:29 UTC No. 16263378
>>16263345
It was not. The camera was.
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:51:43 UTC No. 16263381
>>16263378
the pilot said it was rotating
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:53:18 UTC No. 16263383
https://www.aaro.mil/UAP-Cases/Offi
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 22:50:28 UTC No. 16263459
>>16263308
Shitty videos produced by Eglin Air Force Base as part of the failed (but we're still going forward with it!!!) blue benis.
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 22:51:29 UTC No. 16263461
>>16263381
>Trusting a glownigger
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 23:54:26 UTC No. 16263529
>>16263308
UFN's
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 23:59:05 UTC No. 16263537
>>16263461
why should we trust you? I'm pretty sure a guy who flies fucking Jets knows more about flight than you who just sits on your computer 160hrs a week googling things and posting memes.
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 00:02:16 UTC No. 16263543
>>16263537
Because I don't work for the american-israeli government.
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 02:44:19 UTC No. 16263664
some kind of a gravity bubble, or a quantum consciousness bubble
electromagnetic gravitics
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 19:18:16 UTC No. 16264764
>>16263543
prove that you dont.
say 1 thing bad about israel.
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 19:18:47 UTC No. 16264767
>>16263308
birds
/thread
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 20:05:40 UTC No. 16264846
>>16263308
Project blue balls
Daily reminder that these videos were floating around for years on internet before their official declassification.
What a joke.
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 20:15:47 UTC No. 16264867
a fighter jet in poor focus
you people will believe anything you see
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 00:03:41 UTC No. 16265176
>>16264848
which incident is this?
what is the source of this video?
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 00:44:05 UTC No. 16265204
>>16263308
HOLY SHIT!!!
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 00:51:03 UTC No. 16265210
>>16264767
>birds
Hush, the joke is that you're supposed to habeeb in arien.
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 05:01:42 UTC No. 16265469
>>16263308
It's a very advanced radar/IR/EO spoofing system being developed by [redacted] since the 60s or 70s. Bob Lazar saw it being tested over Area 51 and lost his shit because he thought he was seeing UFOs.
There kinda sorta probably is a legit classified US space program that runs on certain interpretations of Mach's theory of inertia but it's impossible to discuss since half the details are in obscure research papers, the other half is in a SCIF somewhere, and the only people who ever want to discuss it are autistic obsessed goofballs and the people calling them fake and gay.
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 05:06:30 UTC No. 16265476
>>16263308
Whatever you want them to be. Since you can’t actually fucking see the things
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 18:03:14 UTC No. 16266311
do they teach gravity control in school yet, or no?
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 18:14:06 UTC No. 16266322
Looks like airplane exhaust in infrared
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 12:52:03 UTC No. 16267546
>>16265176
Recreation for a documentary about the Washington DC ufo incident in the 50s. In reality no photos were taken but they were all over the place on radar, and visually sighted by air force pilots.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 16:37:22 UTC No. 16267768
>>16267546
i thought this was a real photo
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 17:11:19 UTC No. 16267806
>>16263308
probes
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:29:00 UTC No. 16267890
>>16267546
>>16265176
what's interesting about the 1952 incident is that old astronomical plates during that exact day, the plates showed a triple transient 'star' source that occurred.
Before Sputnik. With no radiation exposure. They also all 'turned on' and 'turned off' at the same exact moment--which should not be if they were different stars.
Calculations show that they could have been objects in orbit but they would have been very very bright objects in earth orbit.
So that night, we have multiple radar contacts with visual confirmation from onlookers, multiple radar stations reporting this independently of each other with reports from pilots at different air bases seeing objects take off, hover and those sightings corresponded with the radar from independent stations both commercial and military stations.
And the objects also showed up on astronomical plates during an independent study of old plates for transient objects.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.09035
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:41:12 UTC No. 16267912
>>16267890
>we find no evidence that the transient is anything
other than a bona fide unresolved, point source of light. In particular,
the profiles show no evidence of a moving source such as an aircraft,
asteroid, or elementary particle nor of a defect in the photographic
plate. Interestingly, the northern two transients have profiles that
are slightly flat-topped compared to reference stars. This flat top is
probably not due to saturation, as 16th mag stars are only slightly
saturated in POSS I Red photographic images. This departure from
the profiles of comparison stars is so slight that we can’t be sure if
it is due to the blending of the two objects, or some sort of noise, or
a real effect.
neat
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 19:04:22 UTC No. 16267938
>>16267890
>>16267912
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 19:29:17 UTC No. 16267967
>>16267938
I was not aware of this, thank you! This looks very likely as an explanation.
I believe the original authors also requested the original plates from Carnegie and was denied--that would either confirm or refute the paper linked explaining the blemish/copy error.
I do find it suspect this has not once been spoken about by the VASCO authors....
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 19:35:43 UTC No. 16267982
>>16267967
It's a bit disappointing. I really liked the mysterious transients.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 19:58:32 UTC No. 16268009
>>16263338
More or less, this. Advanced decoys created by beam crossing, so that at the intersection air is ionized into a plasma.
I find it funny how people look at what basically is a 3 dimensional equivalent of a laser pointer and the first thing they think of is how it must be some kind of physics breaking vehicle.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:16:25 UTC No. 16268033
>>16268009
>physics™
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:18:53 UTC No. 16268039
Travellers or from another point in space time.
This is obvious. It is clear they have cracked relativity. Now they’re probably just observing whatever the hell they want to.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:19:38 UTC No. 16268040
>>16268039
you can't break the lawz of fizix, it's not possible
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:20:54 UTC No. 16268043
>>16268039
the physiks police are coming to get those vehicles, there is clearly a violation of the laws
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:28:34 UTC No. 16268052
>>16268039
>from another point in space time.
Could be a different dimension, another time (this is also another dimension), or maybe they are higher dimensionals that look “down” on us—maybe even *made* us if we’re to assume they view time a lot fucking differently. The answer is likely a lot more profound than simply “aliens”.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 21:36:38 UTC No. 16268117
>>16263308
>birds are UFO now
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 21:56:08 UTC No. 16268140
>>16268117
Anything's a UFO if you don't identify it.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 22:48:20 UTC No. 16268188
>>16268039
They're all rogue adolescent aliens metaphorically jumping the fence and tapping on the glass despite the clearly displayed signs telling them not to.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 14:02:35 UTC No. 16268977
>>16267890
>>16267912
>>16267938
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 14:14:57 UTC No. 16268983
>>16268043
Good luck catching them
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 14:16:41 UTC No. 16268985
>>16268040
The laws of physics are derived from observation. If observation conflicts with theory, then it's the theory that's wrong, not the observation.
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 18:47:14 UTC No. 16269295
>>16268985
Nuhh uhhhh
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 18:49:20 UTC No. 16269300
>>16269295
i agree
if the data doesn't match the theory, it must be discarded
theories exist for a reason, they are limitations on the data
only data that conforms to the theory should be accepted, that's how theories are maintained
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Jul 2024 16:34:27 UTC No. 16270441
so they're using consciousness physics?
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Jul 2024 19:36:20 UTC No. 16270636
>>16268977
what?