• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Happy 70th UFO Anniversary!

skyeagle409 said:
This is the same General De Brouwer conducting the international press conference pointing out the radar lock-on on the F-16's radar screen of the UFO that night. The diamond proved the object in the sky that night, which was also visually confirmed and by ground-based radars.
Click to expand...

So it is the same one. Excellent.
Please quote him saying the radar contacts were proven to be alien spacecraft.
 
skyeagle409 said:
Thrusters had nothing to do with the object's movements.
Click to expand...

So.
We have a video of a speck moving in one direction, slowly.
There's a flash to the lower right, then the speck moves rapidly in a different direction, followed shortly by another speck moving rapidly in the same direction.

But you assert there's no thruster (or the other possibility of simple venting).

Guess your assertion wins!

Space aliens it is!
 
Cosmic Yak said:
How is this proof of aliens? :confused:
Click to expand...


The verified data provided by the Belgian Air Force had summed it up. The lock-on diamond proved that there was an object in the sky, which was confirmed by ground-based radar and witnessed by observers on the ground. Three sources of information confirming the object in the sky that night that was not an aircraft which was proven by its extreme maneuvering capability.

The data was analyzed by the military and radar experts who confirmed the object in the sky that night and the lead F-16 pilot also confirmed his radar contact was also tracked by his wingman and ground-based radar. Remember, witnesses on the ground observed the object and later, ground-based radar confirmed the object that witnesses were observing. That is why the F-16's were scrambled to investigate.

The F-16's were guided to the object whereas they own radars tracked the object. In other words, there can be no denying there was an object in the sky that night as confirmed by airborne and ground-based radar and ground-based observers.

Now, what the object was could not have been an aircraft or balloon, which were ruled out by the investigation because of its extreme maneuver performance and it is that extreme maneuvering performance depicted in the data the proves the object was not that of mankind because mankind has no such aircraft. The incident that night was also published in the Wall Street Journal. The target speed changes within seconds from 150 to 970 knots, altitude coming down from 9000 to 5000 feet, then up to 11000 feet, and, shortly after, down to ground level. From this results a "break lock." The object also sent jamming signals at the aircraft.

Despite the object exceeding the speed of sound there was no sonic boom and its airspeed is clearly depicted in the radar data provided by the Belgian Air Force so the facts we have are:

1. The object was a real craft in the sky that night as confirmed by airborne and ground-based radars and observers on the ground

2. The extreme maneuvering performance rules out any aircraft produced by mankind

3. The fact the object produced no sonic boom also turns the page toward the ET explanation.

4. Thousands of people saw the object during sightings that lasted many months, and the object was also sighted in other countries during that time frame that spanned a number of months.

No aircraft in existence can duplicate such maneuvers nor fly at supersonic speeds and not generate a sonic boom. Since we don't have such a flying vehicle, whose triangular vehicle was it?

.
 
Last edited:
skyeagle409 said:
The verified data provided by the Belgian Air Force had summed it up. The lock-on diamond proved that there was an object in the sky, which was confirmed by ground-based radar and witnessed by observers on the ground. Three sources of information confirming the object in the sky that night that was not an aircraft which was proven by its extreme maneuvering capability.

The data was analyzed by the military and radar experts who confirmed the object in the sky that night and the lead F-16 pilot also confirmed his radar contact was also tracked by his wingman and ground-based radar. Remember, witnesses on the ground observed the object and later, ground-based radar confirmed the object that witnesses were observing. That is why the F-16's were scrambled to investigate.

The F-16's were guided to the object whereas they own radars tracked the object. In other words, there can be no denying there was an object in the sky that night as confirmed by airborne and ground-based radar and ground-based observers.

Now, what the object was could not have been an aircraft or balloon, which were ruled out by the investigation because of its extreme maneuver performance and it is that extreme maneuvering performance depicted in the data the proves the object was not that of mankind because mankind has no such aircraft. The incident that night was also published in the Wall Street Journal. The target speed changes within seconds from 150 to 970 knots, altitude coming down from 9000 to 5000 feet, then up to 11000 feet, and, shortly after, down to ground level. From this results a "break lock." The object also sent jamming signals at the aircraft.

Despite the object exceeding the speed of sound there was no sonic boom and its airspeed is clearly depicted in the radar data provided by the Belgian Air Force so the facts we have are:

1. The object was a real craft in the sky that night as confirmed by airborne and ground-based radars and observers on the ground

2. The extreme maneuvering performance rules out any aircraft produced by mankind

3. The fact the object produced no sonic boom also turns the page toward the ET explanation.

4. Thousands of people saw the object during sightings that lasted many months, and the object was also sighted in other countries during that time frame that spanned a number of months.

No aircraft in existence can duplicate such maneuvers nor fly at supersonic speeds and not generate a sonic boom. Since we don't have such a flying vehicle, whose triangular vehicle was it?

.
Click to expand...

All you've written can be ignored in answering your last question which I've bolded. Your last question should be asked in this manner: Since we don't have such a flying vehicle, whose triangular vehicle was it? what was it? As I've stated before, you jump to conclusions. I doubt there's a skeptically minded person whom would not like definitive proof of ETs, but the way you and all the others present this argument isn't persuasive. What is, is physical evidence. Such as seeing said objects up close. Close enough to touch. Got any of that?
 
Last edited:
Your preferred explanation depends heavily on the 'extreme maneuvering capability' of the F-16's radar contact. Can you address the anomaly in the data which shows the contact climbing at supersonic speed while showing its speed as 570 knots or less?
 
skyeagle409 said:
The lock-on diamond proved that there was an object in the sky.
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

Radar lock is fallible.The F-16AMs and F-16BMs flown by the Belgian Air Force uses the same AN/APG-66 Pulse Doppler X-Band Multi-Mode Weapons Radar that we used in our A4Ks after the Project Kahu refit. APG-66 was well known for getting "False lock", a condition sometimes brought about when the radar receives information from another friendly aircraft (possibly the wingman's F-16). It can also occur if the radar locks onto a spurious X-Band signal. for example, synthetic aperture radar (used in J-Stars and AWACS), weather monitoring, air traffic control, shipping traffic control, air defence tracking, and vehicle speed detection. When testing them on the ground, we were able to get a lock on the local TACAN transmitter. Its even been known for the radar to lock on a flock of birds or on dense ice crystals in storm clouds

Now, while I am not suggesting that any of these are the reason the Belgian Air Force's F-16 got a missile lock, I am pointing out that your blanket statement to the effect that missile lock PROVES that an aircraft or a UFO must have been there, is wrong. Its a good indication of the presence of an aircraft, but its not proof.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
Your preferred explanation depends heavily on the 'extreme maneuvering capability' of the F-16's radar contact. Can you address the anomaly in the data which shows the contact climbing at supersonic speed while showing its speed as 570 knots or less?
Click to expand...


I can show the vertical movements at supersonic speed.

07 270 570 6000

11 210 570 10000

14 270 770 7000
18 290 1010 4000
 
arthwollipot said:
It's ghosts, I tell ya! Time travellers would still leave a radar shadow duh!
Click to expand...


Radar "ghost angels" have been ruled out, thanks to an Air Force study.


Quantitative Aspects of Mirages

"According to a 1969 study by the Air Force Environmental Technical Applications Center, the conditions needed to produce the UFO-like effects attributed to inversions cannot exist in the Earth's atmosphere."

Menkello, F.V., "Quantitative Aspects of Mirages," USAF Environmental Technical Applications Center, 1969.

https://books.google.com/books?id=Z...study Quantitative Aspects of Mirages&f=false
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Yes and no.

Radar lock is fallible.The F-16AMs and F-16BMs flown by the Belgian Air Force uses the same AN/APG-66 Pulse Doppler X-Band Multi-Mode Weapons Radar that we used in our A4Ks after the Project Kahu refit. APG-66 was well known for getting "False lock", a condition sometimes brought about when the radar receives information from another friendly aircraft (possibly the wingman's F-16). It can also occur if the radar locks onto a spurious X-Band signal. for example, synthetic aperture radar (used in J-Stars and AWACS), weather monitoring, air traffic control, shipping traffic control, air defence tracking, and vehicle speed detection. When testing them on the ground, we were able to get a lock on the local TACAN transmitter. Its even been known for the radar to lock on a flock of birds or on dense ice crystals in storm clouds

Now, while I am not suggesting that any of these are the reason the Belgian Air Force's F-16 got a missile lock, I am pointing out that your blanket statement to the effect that missile lock PROVES that an aircraft or a UFO must have been there, is wrong. Its a good indication of the presence of an aircraft, but its not proof.
Click to expand...


In the Belgian UFO incident, that was not the case. As the lead F-16 pilot stated in his video interview, ground-based radar tracked the same UFO that he and wingman were tracking. There was no "buddy spike" calls during the encounter.
 
skyeagle409 said:
I can show the vertical movements at supersonic speed.





07 270 570 6000





11 210 570 10000





14 270 770 7000




18 290 1010 4000
Click to expand...



That wasn't the question. Can you explain how supersonic changes in altitude were contemporaneous with subsonic speed readings? How does any object climb 4000 feet in 3 seconds at 550-570 knots?
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
That wasn't the question. Can you explain how supersonic changes in altitude were contemporaneous with subsonic speed readings? How does any object climb 4000 feet in 3 seconds at 550-570 knots?
Click to expand...


I think I see what you mean now. It all has to do with the kind of radar that was in use, which was a Pulse-Doppler radar that measures velocity of an object as it approaches and pass by the radar and if you fly perpendicular to a Pulse-Doppler radar, you will not get an accurate airspeed measurement.

It reminds me of slant range error readings regarding an aircraft's DME.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom