Aliens attacked!

Todd Feinman

Ad Honorem
Oct 2013
6,521
Planet Nine, Oregon
That's correct. These things don't make a sonic boom; neither did (do) the objects during the Nimitz incident, or the ongoing incidents the Navy and Air Force are dealing with. Neither did the "airship" over Kansas City in 1897, that would zip out into space in an instant to twinkle like a star or reverse course and hover over the citizens shining beams on them.
 
Nov 2016
1,040
Germany
These things don't make a sonic boom
Basically one should assume that UFOs are material objects and for this reason, as far as the generation of sound waves is concerned, do not differ from earthly objects, regardless of the technique (antigraviation?) used to move them. To create a boom, a flying object does not have to be big: the bang of a pistol shot is also a supersonic boom. Why very high flying UFOs do not produce an audible supersonic boom could be due to the fact that the sound cone created by supersonic speed does not reach down to the ground but changes into low-frequency sound on its way there. However, with multiple supersonic speed, the sound cone increases in size. Maybe the angle of a UFO supersonic cone is so small that the sound waves become inaudible until they reach the ground. The new Airbus produces a maximum sound cone angle of 15 degrees, which is why it produces much quieter supersonic booms than the very loud Concorde. If the UFOs are able to produce cones with less than 5 degrees, this would be a possible explanation for their apparent silence. However, some UFOs are said to have shot vertically upwards, which should have created a very large supersonic cone angle considering the horizontal flat shape. The small cone angle hypothesis is therefore not very convincing. As far as the Utah object is concerned, it flies very low and close to the observers, so that the above explanation can also not be valid here. But there seems to have been no boom, otherwise the report would have mentioned this. Since I don't want to doubt the authenticity of the object, we are faced here with a physical mystery.

1559347964789.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Todd Feinman

Todd Feinman

Ad Honorem
Oct 2013
6,521
Planet Nine, Oregon
^ Very nice analysis! there are a number of interesting books written about UFO propulsion. I've looked through Sturrock:
https://www.amazon.com/UFO-Enigma-Review-Physical-Evidence-ebook/dp/B002UGU3BI/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=sturrock+ufo&qid=1559349693&s=gateway&sr=8-1
A lot of math.

and there is also one from Paul Potter "Gravitational Manipulation of Domed Craft" ; I haven't read that yet.
Many of these objects have visible fields or "auras" around them. Sometimes they wobble like gyroscopes before shooting off like a bullet. Sometimes they are described as making a ricochet sound when that happens.
 

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,106
Connecticut
They may force it --past the tipping point, I think our civilization is in dire straits.. This wouldn't be in line with Donovan's theories though.
I don’t think the phenomenon will force it. What has happened recently is interesting to us but...isn’t exactly front page news. :) There have been claims of imminent disclosure before, and nothing came of them.
 

Todd Feinman

Ad Honorem
Oct 2013
6,521
Planet Nine, Oregon
I don’t think the phenomenon will force it. What has happened recently is interesting to us but...isn’t exactly front page news. :) There have been claims of imminent disclosure before, and nothing came of them.
I think this kind of thing , the slow drip is all that can be hoped for; this IS disclosure, just as this is all the contact we can handle, too. Also the cat ain't going back into the bag this time; with the announcement about regular experiences the military is having, etc. Now that the upgraded systems can detect them and it's clear they can cloak themselves in the visual band too; not at all surprising.
 
Last edited:

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,106
Connecticut
They may force it --past the tipping point, I think our civilization is in dire straits...
Getting back to this, the book says crises will reach a culminating point but the casualties will be present ideologies not civilization. In other words it’s something ET anticipates as part of his Plan.
 

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,106
Connecticut
Btw note Christopher Mellon’s remarks. A former assistant secretary for defense intel says UFOs are real but asks “Why are they here?” As The Alien Plan for Earth would’ve said, it’s basically like so much else we’ve been told. ET is real but there’s no communication or contact with the government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Todd Feinman

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,106
Connecticut
KDR’s blog also mentions what Ruppelt said, about the Pentagon being “in panic“ in 1947. Very dubious.
 

Maribat

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
5,048
Basically one should assume that UFOs are material objects and for this reason, as far as the generation of sound waves is concerned, do not differ from earthly objects, regardless of the technique (antigraviation?) used to move them. To create a boom, a flying object does not have to be big: the bang of a pistol shot is also a supersonic boom. Why very high flying UFOs do not produce an audible supersonic boom could be due to the fact that the sound cone created by supersonic speed does not reach down to the ground but changes into low-frequency sound on its way there. However, with multiple supersonic speed, the sound cone increases in size. Maybe the angle of a UFO supersonic cone is so small that the sound waves become inaudible until they reach the ground. The new Airbus produces a maximum sound cone angle of 15 degrees, which is why it produces much quieter supersonic booms than the very loud Concorde. If the UFOs are able to produce cones with less than 5 degrees, this would be a possible explanation for their apparent silence. However, some UFOs are said to have shot vertically upwards, which should have created a very large supersonic cone angle considering the horizontal flat shape. The small cone angle hypothesis is therefore not very convincing. As far as the Utah object is concerned, it flies very low and close to the observers, so that the above explanation can also not be valid here. But there seems to have been no boom, otherwise the report would have mentioned this. Since I don't want to doubt the authenticity of the object, we are faced here with a physical mystery.

View attachment 20235
Do I got you correctly - if there are no supersonic booms from the UFOs - there are no real UFOs?