Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #57611 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-02-24 23:56 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-02-27 11:18 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 163 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-24 23:56 +0100
Let's talk about UFOs then asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-02-25 00:10 -0800
Let's talk about UFOs then asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-02-25 00:12 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-02-25 09:00 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 02:06 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-02-25 15:47 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-25 17:51 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-02-25 17:03 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-25 18:22 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-25 10:03 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-02-25 10:48 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-25 21:33 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 13:25 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 13:52 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Clark Smith <noaddress@nowhere.net> - 2015-02-25 17:49 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-26 14:13 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-25 17:53 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-25 17:58 +0100
Let's talk about UFOs then Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 13:52 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-25 14:26 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-02-25 21:10 -0700
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-02-25 22:35 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-02-25 14:46 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-25 17:59 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-25 17:53 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-02-26 00:53 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-26 10:38 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-26 04:47 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-02-26 12:51 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-26 16:41 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-02-26 16:46 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-26 10:16 -0800
Let's talk about UFOs then asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-02-25 21:54 -0800
Let's talk about UFOs then mt <mahdert@gmail.com> - 2015-02-26 00:09 -0800
Let's talk about UFOs then asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-02-26 05:56 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-26 13:53 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-26 16:39 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-26 14:00 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-26 21:30 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-26 22:41 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-26 22:56 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-27 10:16 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-02-27 08:25 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-02-27 10:14 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-28 15:39 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-01 15:51 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:12 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-03-02 09:04 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-24 13:04 -0700
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-25 09:22 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-25 21:27 +1300
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-03-25 02:16 -0700
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-03-25 10:22 -0700
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 10:23 -0700
Re: [OT] Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-25 21:29 +0100
Re: [OT] Let's talk about UFOs then Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 16:27 -0700
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-26 14:01 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-26 23:17 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2015-02-27 12:15 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-27 10:29 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-26 14:10 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-27 10:45 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-26 22:12 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-26 22:43 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-26 23:09 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-02-26 22:10 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-02-26 14:19 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-02-27 00:57 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-27 11:09 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-27 09:10 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-02-27 21:38 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-27 13:55 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-28 16:20 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-28 08:09 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-02-28 09:21 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-02-28 09:28 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-01 12:49 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-01 05:59 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-01 15:50 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-01 07:10 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-01 23:01 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:28 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-01 19:39 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-01 12:36 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-01 21:55 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 13:39 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-02 01:33 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-03-01 16:53 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-02 14:49 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-01 16:14 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-01 22:49 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-01 14:02 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-01 23:04 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-02 02:29 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-02 00:41 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-02 08:51 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-02 02:07 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-03-04 09:44 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-03-01 14:26 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-01 23:08 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-01 14:31 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-01 12:44 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-03 08:24 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-03 15:11 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-03 15:51 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-03 16:20 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-04 09:48 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-04 01:05 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-04 10:41 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-04 05:06 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-01 20:58 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-03 08:59 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-03 15:52 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-03 12:11 -0500
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-03 11:40 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-03 12:59 -0500
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-03 11:43 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-04 10:00 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-04 12:57 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-03 19:19 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-03 12:55 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-03 22:47 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-03 14:24 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-04 10:22 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-04 11:54 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 03:14 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-04 14:22 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 02:57 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-03-05 14:59 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Aleksandar Kuktin <akuktin@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 15:43 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-03-05 09:57 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 17:59 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-03-05 19:17 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 17:08 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-05 21:27 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 18:22 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-07 19:01 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-05 11:43 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-03-05 20:16 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-06 09:58 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-05 15:59 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-01 23:17 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-01 19:17 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-02 08:30 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-03 09:47 -0600
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-03 16:16 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-04 11:12 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-04 12:09 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-03-04 12:16 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-04 12:40 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-03-05 03:23 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-04 15:30 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-04 17:31 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-04 10:46 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-04 18:56 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-03-16 18:25 -0500
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2015-03-02 12:22 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2015-03-02 14:12 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-03 09:08 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2015-03-03 10:00 +0100
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-02-26 22:07 +0000
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-26 14:21 -0800
Re: Let's talk about UFOs then David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-02-27 11:18 +0100
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-24 23:56 +0100 |
| Subject | Let's talk about UFOs then |
| Message-ID | <mcivjj$nts$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
OK, Ramine is here, swamping everything with his trivialities (Yes, C is not object oriented. What a discovery). I did not participate in the UFO discussion since this is a C group. But anyway, it is still going on, so I thought I could remember everyone that in Spain, in 1980 several UFOs appeared before a plane that was flyng from Madrid to Barcelona. I have still the (scanned) paper "El Pais" reporting that. All passangers of the plane saw it. And in that same year, an UFO visited Madrid staying above the city for 90 minutes. It was 1 AM and people went out to observe it. It did not move, and stayed looking at humans for 90 minutes. I was living In madrid at the time, and was astounded when I saw the newspaper reports the next day. Then, we have the work of the European Space Organization (ESA) whose principal investigator published a book: UFOs: It is true. I bought that book, and in there we have at least 8 further proved reports of that "phenomenon". Well, that was in the last century, before we could know for certain that thousands of alien planets would be detected circling other stars. Now, we know that, but still, people pointing to all those DATA and events that can't be explained otherwise INSIST that people talking about UFOs are somehow "nuts". Why that? Because obviously we do not WANT to know. The implications for our pride (we are the only intelligent race of the Universe) would be as profound as the discovery of Galileo that we are not at the center of the Universe... People looking for rational explanations have arrived at the conclusion that the propulsion of the alien objects can't be other than a modification of gravity. The accelerations of the objects are of such intensity that they must locally modify gravity to avoid that any eventual beings inside are reduced to an atom soup. ALso there are electrical and magnetic disturbances registered in their vicinity. But obviously we have no idea of what they are, nor if there is ONE kind of UFOs or we are being observed by several types of aliens. Obviously too, the aliens are not interested in interacting with us, not any more anyway that WE didn't went to the ants colonies and told some ant: "Take us to your chief"... Ants are just too far away from us to really communicate about anything. We just observe them, but we do not interfere with their internal affairs, nor do we try to act in their society. I think that the same thing happens with us and the UFOs. Maybe they take samples of humans, to grow them natively in some galactic zoo, who knows. Taking a few humans out of a 7-8 billion population will not make any detectable difference. In their book "The origin map" Thomas G. Brophy (that worked for JPL and the Voyager project) associates an ancient prehistoric site (7 thousand years ago) to a detailed map of the stars and the galaxy around us. This map could never have been done by humans 7 000 years ago since it contains too much astronomical knowledge impossible to get without a telescope. Again, we are left with conjectures, speculations, but at least those stones prove that somebody with an incredible god knowledge of the galaxy visited the Sahara desert 7 thousand years ago. Actually, our intelligent signal (radio signal) is more than 50-60 light years away, and all stars within a sphere of that radius centered on the earth have received a signal coming from us... Maybe that will prompt some computer somewhere to send a signal back, or even to send anoher signal to us. Obviusly too, nobody is listening in this planet since SETI was shut down so... Our planet is KNOWN by all aliens out there to be a biologically active planet since the composition of the atmosphere with all that oxygen is a tell-tale signal that there is a planetary ecological system in this planet. THAT signal can be detected since at least 1 BILLION years... ANY advanced civilization in the stars near us KNOWS that there is life here. Obviously if they visited this planet, say 1 million years ago, thet found only animals. Maybe they left something to warn them if anything "interesting" happens, that was the idea of A. Clarke in his novel "2001". Look, I do not know, I do not have any theory about this, and I can't do anything about it. Personally I have never spoken with the green men (or women, or whatever they have), but the evidence is truly overwhelmingwhen you search a little bit. Yes, there are a lot of people trying to make money out of the curiosity of the unwashed masses of ignorants but you can't reduce everything to that. jacob
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | asetofsymbols@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 00:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <51588f7a-bda4-4b31-8615-de64d81c9fe6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57611 |
The stars and galaxy map someone wrote, as they effectively are 7000 years ago could be have origin not in alien that could not exist but in angels or demonic assistance that I know they exist... The same ufo could be someone have technology for build one here...and no alien could be...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | asetofsymbols@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 00:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <75374241-29b4-4b7d-92aa-7fb87b8c9856@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57611 |
The stars and galaxy map someone wrote, as they effectively are 7000 years ago could be have origin not in alien that could not exist but in angels or demonic assistance that I know they exist... The same ufo could be someone have technology for build one here...and no alien could be...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 09:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mck2tj$mm6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #57616 |
On 25/02/15 08:12, asetofsymbols@gmail.com wrote: > The stars and galaxy map > someone wrote, > as they effectively are > 7000 years ago could be have > origin not in alien that could > not exist but in angels or demonic > assistance that I know they exist... This is a technical newsgroup for discussing the C language. Do you use the C language at all? If so, it is in your own interest not to pollute this newsgroup with off-topic nonsense such as the above. And if not, why are you here? -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 02:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <290d0792-c258-487e-9710-fbd0176ea18d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57611 |
better not talk UFO here, imo mentioned 'Ramine' is very harmfull dork- abuser (fuck you Ramine) he trashes whole well living groups into a trash.. imo he is most probably responsible for death of comp.programming as it is hard to fill this group in some content when it is instantly filled with sh*t that disgusts all potential user literally he is one and only person i seen in 15 years of my usenet history that i think should be blocked as abuser by some usenet server holders or something like that.. (I seen many priimitive insulters but never yet such level mass abuser) he is not interested in answers, he is 'lunatic', he often produces banal and stupid s*th, he uses some kind of automats to populate it.. etc Imo if he could publicate his trash in one thread tree it would be not a problem but he populates and destroys whole group and this is a problem At google groups i have an option to mark given post (and if it is initial whole branch) as a spam or abuse and it is working surprisingly well (yet better sometimes some other persons mark such spams as an abuse and i dont even have to mark it, can unfould the message if curious what it is) - so i only see a rest healthly part of the group, and it feels okay But i am a bit worriled this trash 'Ramine' produces in general may have very negative inpact on most users.. It would be better imo to cut this trash of ramine down, are there some possibilities? If nothing will work maybe some should wrote a letter to president of his country ;o I know it feels both sad and fun but thats how it is..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <P8mHw.118931$0s4.3663@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #57611 |
On 2015-02-24, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote: > > And in that same year, an UFO visited Madrid staying above the city for > 90 minutes. It was 1 AM and people went out to observe it. It did not > move, and stayed looking at humans for 90 minutes. I was living In > madrid at the time, and was astounded when I saw the newspaper reports > the next day. > > Then, we have the work of the European Space Organization (ESA) whose > principal investigator published a book: > > UFOs: It is true. > > I bought that book, and in there we have at least 8 further proved > reports of that "phenomenon". > > Well, that was in the last century, before we could know for certain > that thousands of alien planets would be detected circling other stars. > > Now, we know that, but still, people pointing to all those DATA and > events that can't be explained otherwise INSIST that people talking > about UFOs are somehow "nuts". > > Why that? > I can't speak to why one person might think another nuts but there is no scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species visiting earth, despite the tremendous number of measuring devices aimed at the skies and scientists that would love to find them. > Because obviously we do not WANT to know. The implications for our pride > (we are the only intelligent race of the Universe) would be as profound > as the discovery of Galileo that we are not at the center of the Universe... > > People looking for rational explanations have arrived at the conclusion > that the propulsion of the alien objects can't be other than a > modification of gravity. The accelerations of the objects are of such > intensity that they must locally modify gravity to avoid that any > eventual beings inside are reduced to an atom soup. ALso there are > electrical and magnetic disturbances registered in their vicinity. But > obviously we have no idea of what they are, nor if there is ONE kind of > UFOs or we are being observed by several types of aliens. > A modification of gravity would very likely be detectable. > Obviously too, the aliens are not interested in interacting with us, not > any more anyway that WE didn't went to the ants colonies and told some ant: > > "Take us to your chief"... > > Ants are just too far away from us to really communicate about anything. > We just observe them, but we do not interfere with their internal > affairs, nor do we try to act in their society. > We interfere constantly with ants. We aren't ants and have maths sufficiently advanced to communicate with other beings even if there maths were considerably more advanced. > I think that the same thing happens with us and the UFOs. > > Maybe they take samples of humans, to grow them natively in some > galactic zoo, who knows. Taking a few humans out of a 7-8 billion > population will not make any detectable difference. > > In their book "The origin map" Thomas G. Brophy (that worked for JPL and > the Voyager project) associates an ancient prehistoric site (7 thousand > years ago) to a detailed map of the stars and the galaxy around us. This > map could never have been done by humans 7 000 years ago since it > contains too much astronomical knowledge impossible to get without a > telescope. > > Again, we are left with conjectures, speculations, but at least those > stones prove that somebody with an incredible god knowledge of the > galaxy visited the Sahara desert 7 thousand years ago. > > Actually, our intelligent signal (radio signal) is more than 50-60 light > years away, and all stars within a sphere of that radius centered on the > earth have received a signal coming from us... > > Maybe that will prompt some computer somewhere to send a signal back, or > even to send anoher signal to us. Obviusly too, nobody is listening in > this planet since SETI was shut down so... > > Our planet is KNOWN by all aliens out there to be a biologically active > planet since the composition of the atmosphere with all that oxygen is a > tell-tale signal that there is a planetary ecological system in this > planet. THAT signal can be detected since at least 1 BILLION years... > > ANY advanced civilization in the stars near us KNOWS that there is life > here. Obviously if they visited this planet, say 1 million years ago, > thet found only animals. Maybe they left something to warn them if > anything "interesting" happens, that was the idea of A. Clarke in his > novel "2001". > Humans were living on this planet a 1 million years ago. Humans were living on the planet 2 million years ago. > Look, I do not know, I do not have any theory about this, and I can't do > anything about it. Personally I have never spoken with the green men (or > women, or whatever they have), but the evidence is truly > overwhelmingwhen you search a little bit. Yes, there are a lot of people > trying to make money out of the curiosity of the unwashed masses of > ignorants but you can't reduce everything to that. > I've little doubt that there is life out there and there might be life capable of travelling here. The universe is of a size that is beyond the imagination and the possibilities are unlimited. We have looked out to a distance of over 10 Billion light years to see galaxies from long before the earth existed, and that is what we see: the past. We see the nearest stars as they were 5 years ago. New stars as close as 400 light years could have been born and we would have no way of knowing yet. Examining planets is difficult since they don't emit light of there own and the reflected light is so weak as to be unseeable next to the light of a star. Any species looking back at us would experience the same difficulty. We determine the potential for life on distant planets by the location and size of them and the possibilies this implies. Keeping in mind the known minimum size of the universe then, finding life becomes difficult and there is no reason to believe that this would not be true for more advanced cultures. -- http://www.softsprocket.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 17:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mckui5$ik9$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #57621 |
Le 25/02/2015 16:47, Greg Martin a écrit : > I can't speak to why one person might think another nuts but there is no > scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species > visiting earth, despite the tremendous number of measuring devices aimed > at the skies and scientists that would love to find them. The CNES (the NASA equivalent in France) created in 1977 the GEIPAN, a special group dedicated to the study of the UFO phenomena. It was later replaced by the SEPRA, that continues the investigations publishing each year dozens of new cases... You can visit the site of the GEIPAN here: http://www.geipan.fr That is the activities in France. There are many other countries in the world, and many other groups investigating this facts, publishing results, etc. But you tell me that... "...there is no > scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species > visiting earth" Of course not. Everyone is hallucinating collectively, and those hallucinations can be photographed, followed by radar, etc. Of course there is NO extraterrestial being in some zoo somewhere that I could bring to convince you, so, you can still say hat there is no evidence because you refuse to see the evidence! Like all people that speak negatively about this subject without taking care to investigate the problem! The book "The origin Map" by the sientist of JPL that I mentioned is published by iUniverse (www.iuniverse.com) ISBN: 0-595-24122-0 Printed in 2002 in the U.S.A
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 17:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <%fnHw.1166899$Ub6.794839@fx20.iad> |
| In reply to | #57622 |
On 2015-02-25, jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote: > Le 25/02/2015 16:47, Greg Martin a écrit : >> I can't speak to why one person might think another nuts but there is no >> scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species >> visiting earth, despite the tremendous number of measuring devices aimed >> at the skies and scientists that would love to find them. > > The CNES (the NASA equivalent in France) created in 1977 the GEIPAN, a > special group dedicated to the study of the UFO phenomena. It was later > replaced by the SEPRA, that continues the investigations publishing each > year dozens of new cases... > > You can visit the site of the GEIPAN here: > > http://www.geipan.fr > > That is the activities in France. There are many other countries in the > world, and many other groups investigating this facts, publishing > results, etc. > > But you tell me that... > > "...there is no > > scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species > > visiting earth" > > Of course not. Everyone is hallucinating collectively, and those > hallucinations can be photographed, followed by radar, etc. Of course > there is NO extraterrestial being in some zoo somewhere that I could > bring to convince you, so, you can still say hat there is no evidence > because you refuse to see the evidence! > > Like all people that speak negatively about this subject without taking > care to investigate the problem! > > The book "The origin Map" by the sientist of JPL that I mentioned is > published by iUniverse (www.iuniverse.com) > > ISBN: 0-595-24122-0 Printed in 2002 in the U.S.A > > You sound religous on the issue. You haven't addressed any of the comments I made other then to suggest many people believe it so, it is so. Many people believe in a virgin birth, virgins in paradise, ghosts, bigfoot, miracles of various description and improbability. They speak in tongues and pray to any number of hypothetical beingsthat live on other planes of existence, everywhere at the same time, in heaven or in invisible caves on distant mountain tops. I don't speak French but the existance of agencies investigating mysterious phenomena is common around the world and implies only that there are many reports of unexplained phenomena. -- http://www.softsprocket.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 18:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mcl0bo$n92$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #57625 |
Le 25/02/2015 18:03, Greg Martin a écrit : > You sound religous on the issue. You haven't addressed any of the > comments I made other then to suggest many people believe it so, it is > so. Many people believe in a virgin birth, virgins in paradise, ghosts, > bigfoot, miracles of various description and improbability. They speak > in tongues and pray to any number of hypothetical beingsthat live on > other planes of existence, everywhere at the same time, in heaven or in > invisible caves on distant mountain tops. > > I don't speak French but the existance of agencies investigating > mysterious phenomena is common around the world and implies only that > there are many reports of unexplained phenomena. > You sound religous on the issue. 1) I am not "religious" about UFOs. I do not "believe" in UFOs. I just refuse to ignore the evidence. 2) You haven't addressed any of the > comments I made other then to suggest many people believe it so, it is > so. See my other posts. 3) > I don't speak French Maybe you speak english? Former president Jimmy Carter describes his UFO sighting and then... he backtraks saying that what he saw is impossible. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9ZoKfYCNlM This is a typical situation. People just REFUSE to see anything that would imply that more advanced beings are observing us. As you refuse to see the analogy with the ants. :-) But look, I do not want to convince you anyway. This is a C group, I said my opinion about the subject, and ig you prefer not to accept any evidence because ...whatever, it is your right. jacob
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 10:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7fc49240-2d22-4d14-a9c8-2f8c68bb4dbb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57626 |
On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 5:22:10 PM UTC, jacob navia wrote: > > > You sound religous on the issue. > 1) I am not "religious" about UFOs. I do not "believe" in UFOs. I just > refuse to ignore the evidence. > It's a C group, not a UFO discussion forum. But since you're a regular and the thread has attracted some comments, I'll weigh in. People see objects in the sky that they can't identify all the time. Almost always they turn out to be something mundane, like aircraft, birds, streetlights (I saw something I was convinced was a hovering craft of some sort, until I plucked up courage to approach it, it turned out be a streetlight). Just occasionally they're secret aeronautical devices of some description or other, that seems to have been true of the Roswell UFO - it appears to have been a ballon of some kind the military were testing. Whilst not a very dramatic secret, the army wouldn't want an enemy to know that battlefield communications relied on a vulnerable ballon, so they tried to hush thing s up when one crashed. We don't know alien psychology and we don't know what technology they might have, but it's likely that launching spacecraft is a very expensive and technically challenging process for them, as it is for us. So would they just do a five minute aerial reconnaissance, and then disappear? It seems a bit implausible, a very small mission for an interstellar voyage.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 10:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87bnkh7rol.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #57628 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes:
> On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 5:22:10 PM UTC, jacob navia wrote:
>> > You sound religous on the issue.
>> 1) I am not "religious" about UFOs. I do not "believe" in UFOs. I just
>> refuse to ignore the evidence.
>>
> It's a C group, not a UFO discussion forum. But since you're a regular and
> the thread has attracted some comments, I'll weigh in.
[...]
And this is why the group is polluted with off-topic crap.
Please stop.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 21:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mclbig$jfj$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #57633 |
Le 25/02/2015 19:48, Keith Thompson a écrit : > [...] > > And this is why the group is polluted with off-topic crap. > > Please stop. > No. It is polluted by on topic crap. Like for instance Bill Cunningham. Too much boring posts, no content, stupid questions about some detaails nobody cares about. Consequence: people go away, and only guys like this ramine stay...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 13:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4638e214-136a-48e6-9159-49b88e7eaaff@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57645 |
W dniu środa, 25 lutego 2015 21:33:34 UTC+1 użytkownik jacob navia napisał: > Le 25/02/2015 19:48, Keith Thompson a écrit : > > [...] > > > > And this is why the group is polluted with off-topic crap. > > > > Please stop. > > > > No. It is polluted by on topic crap. Like for instance Bill Cunningham. > Too much boring posts, no content, stupid questions about some detaails > nobody cares about. > if this is merithoric 'crap' this is okay, even if it is boring (whats boring may be a bit subjective thus is better to use this word in single mode not plural) - also nobady cares about is not good argument for some reason (for example ramine production is not merithoric' but is large burst of trashingm feels like nota normal material for discussion)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 13:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <49434294-7e64-4554-9cd4-9b6718339830@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57646 |
W dniu środa, 25 lutego 2015 22:25:50 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > W dniu środa, 25 lutego 2015 21:33:34 UTC+1 użytkownik jacob navia napisał: > > Le 25/02/2015 19:48, Keith Thompson a écrit : > > > [...] > > > > > > And this is why the group is polluted with off-topic crap. > > > > > > Please stop. > > > > > > > No. It is polluted by on topic crap. Like for instance Bill Cunningham. > > Too much boring posts, no content, stupid questions about some detaails > > nobody cares about. > > > if this is merithoric 'crap' this is > okay, even if it is boring (whats boring may be a bit subjective thus is better to use this word in single mode not plural) > - also nobady cares about is not good argument for some reason > > (for example ramine production is not merithoric' but is large burst of trashingm feels like nota normal material for discussion) ps at all in such topics who polutes a group and why, there are two steps needed to be done 1. define 2. prove I personaly think I could define and prove criteria for both why ramine acting is abuse and why ufo talk is also not good, and why for example my own posts are not (but this costs a bit of time, but can be done evenyually)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clark Smith <noaddress@nowhere.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 17:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mcl205$s41$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #57622 |
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:51:18 +0100, jacob navia wrote: > Of course not. Everyone is hallucinating collectively, and those > hallucinations can be photographed, followed by radar, etc. Of course > there is NO extraterrestial being in some zoo somewhere that I could > bring to convince you, so, you can still say hat there is no evidence > because you refuse to see the evidence! You are rather naive, and have very little knowledge of human psychology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-26 14:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mcn655$1sq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #57622 |
On 25/02/15 17:51, jacob navia wrote: > Le 25/02/2015 16:47, Greg Martin a écrit : >> I can't speak to why one person might think another nuts but there is no >> scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species >> visiting earth, despite the tremendous number of measuring devices aimed >> at the skies and scientists that would love to find them. > > The CNES (the NASA equivalent in France) created in 1977 the GEIPAN, a > special group dedicated to the study of the UFO phenomena. It was later > replaced by the SEPRA, that continues the investigations publishing each > year dozens of new cases... > > You can visit the site of the GEIPAN here: > > http://www.geipan.fr > > That is the activities in France. There are many other countries in the > world, and many other groups investigating this facts, publishing > results, etc. > > But you tell me that... > > "...there is no >> scientifically, peer reviewed evidence of non-terresterial species >> visiting earth" > > Of course not. Everyone is hallucinating collectively, and those > hallucinations can be photographed, followed by radar, etc. Of course > there is NO extraterrestial being in some zoo somewhere that I could > bring to convince you, so, you can still say hat there is no evidence > because you refuse to see the evidence! > > Like all people that speak negatively about this subject without taking > care to investigate the problem! > > The book "The origin Map" by the sientist of JPL that I mentioned is > published by iUniverse (www.iuniverse.com) > > ISBN: 0-595-24122-0 Printed in 2002 in the U.S.A > > According to one poll, there are something like 3.7 million Americans that have been "abducted by aliens" - and that's not including those that have merely "seen a UFO" or had "alien encounters". Yet there is /no/ scientific, peer-reviewed evidence of any encounter between aliens and humans or any evidence of "alien visitations" to earth. There are plenty of cases of strange things happening to people (or at least, people believing strange things have happened to them), and plenty of cases where there is no clear explanation - but exactly /zero/ cases where there is any evidence that anything alien was involved. Previously people gave such "unexplained events" religious interpretations (divine intervention, daemons, angels, etc.). For people who still have a non-scientific frame of mind but don't have strong traditional religious believes, the religious explanations get swapped by modern replacements such as UFOs, "new age" beliefs, "paranormal activity", or whatever. It is scientifically rational to believe in the existence of aliens - the numbers are such that it is practically guaranteed that there will be at least single-cellular life on planets in our neighbourhood, and I expect that within the next couple of decades we will get definitive proof of that (such as finding a "goldilocks" planet with significant oxygen in the atmosphere). It is also reasonable to believe that there are other intelligent civilisations in the galaxy - it would seem to involve a lot more luck before civilisations can form, but the galaxy is a big place. But a belief that aliens are flying around the earth in UFOs uses the same part of the brain as a belief in gods or the healing power of crystals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 17:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mckumu$ik9$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #57621 |
Le 25/02/2015 16:47, Greg Martin a écrit : >> jacob wrote >> ANY advanced civilization in the stars near us KNOWS that there is life >> >here. Obviously if they visited this planet, say 1 million years ago, >> >thet found only animals. Maybe they left something to warn them if >> >anything "interesting" happens, that was the idea of A. Clarke in his >> >novel "2001". >> > > Humans were living on this planet a 1 million years ago. Humans were > living on the planet 2 million years ago. > We were barely different from apes then. We had no technology besides some polished stones! There was no agriculture, not even some kind of civilization 1 million years ago. For a space faring civilization we would be one of the many animal species roaming around. Nothing else.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 17:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mckv0a$ji5$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #57621 |
Le 25/02/2015 16:47, Greg Martin a écrit : > Keeping in > mind the known minimum size of the universe then, finding life > becomes difficult and there is no reason to believe that this would not > be true for more advanced cultures. No. We will be able to detect life with the telescopes planned for a time scale of 5-10 years. An advanced civilization would have NO PROBLEM AT ALL taking the spectra of earth's atmosphere. We have been able ALREADY to detect water vapor in the atmposphere of an alien planet. See: NASA Telescopes Find Clear Skies and Water Vapor on Exoplanet http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/september/nasa-telescopes-find-clear-skies-and-water-vapor-on-exoplanet/#.VO3-2ELvbqM We have already the technology to detect oxygen in abnormal levels. What will have a civilization with just 10 000 more years? jacob
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 13:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <31a1f46c-2fe3-4658-9e43-aaceb181c383@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57611 |
There have been reports that UFOs make no sonic boom when they go beyond the sound barrier. This would imply there is a vacuum around the object since sound does travel in a vacuum. Likewise the abrupt movements would imply no inertia and hence no gravity. This is because general relativity predicts an object with no gravity has no inertia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-25 14:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <582c24ce-a254-43bf-b941-c768440f575a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #57648 |
On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 9:52:51 PM UTC, Chad wrote: > There have been reports that UFOs make no sonic boom when they go > beyond the sound barrier. This would imply there is a vacuum around > the object since sound does travel in a vacuum. Likewise the abrupt > movements would imply no inertia and hence no gravity. This is because > general relativity predicts an object with no gravity has no inertia. > That's one possibility. Alien technology creating a vacuum for the craft to travel in. Another possibility is that the object is unidentified because it's actually a small near object travelling relatively slowly that has been misinterpreted as a large distant object travelling at over the speed of sound. So no sonic boom, and seemingly amazing manoeuvrability.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web