CC Give us your best guess

Since you made a jab at the little green men scenario earlier, i thought i'd present you with this.

Consider the following points.

1) The psychometric evaluations of first world air force pilots - Think live munitions, carried on billion dollar aircraft over cities populated with civilians and also in war zones.

2) The people best able to identify all aircraft, form private to military, including ATA, ATS, STA, STS, ICB missiles, are air force pilots.

3) There are only two types of aircraft in the human inventory(that we know of) capable of any decent speed and altitude - Fixed and Rotary wing. Both leave clearly identifiable markers that no pilot, military or not, in unfamiliar with.

Here is a video, released by the Pentagon about two years ago. Captured on a Ratheon targeting system aboard an F18 Super Hornet.  

It comes with the actual audio recording of the pilots comms. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9D8dzl4zGk

The pilot in question is this guy, and here is an interview that he gave. Note his credentials, his rank at retirement and the fact that he makes no bones about what he saw. You're a bit older, so my guess is that you probably know that "loons" don't get to become fighter pilots with 3500 hours of flight time, let alone squadron commanders in the world's premier air force. Neither his rank or his testimony are opposed by the DOD. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCaruUtiPHo

To make it easy, i'll ask you just one question, with a bonus one after.

Explain to me how that craft, travelling at that speed, identified as hot by its white color in infrared, leaves ZERO signature? 

As an added extra, it'd also be great if you could explain how the craft adopts a vertical position without altering its trajectory.

Note1: The only reasonable explanation would be that it's a US experimental/prototype craft being tested. If that was the case, then the Pentagon would not approve this video for release, for obvious reasons. The first time the enemy should see it is when it's firing missiles at them. 

Note2: Even if it were an electrically powered craft, you'd still see a vague heat plume since its moving parts would heat up and the heat would seize the system were it not evacuated. The infrared cameras would cause you to see a plume of heated air. 

And the Foo Fighters in WW2...more than enough scope for speculation .

"@Lost Sheep, can you take us through the great flood again . That was a good laugh. "

Yes come on Klown.

Noah's Ark literalists are my favourite . . . apparently "educated" adults who believe that an Arctic Fox looks and behaves the way he does . . . not because of natural selection and adaptation to one of the harshest and coldest environments on the planet. . . but because two of his ancestors happened to be wandering around the Sinai desert somewhere near Mount Ararat just before big water came and covered eveything.

Animals that have evolved to take every tiny little advantage they can to survive extreme cold . . . captured in the baking hot desert and put onto a big wooden boat where they lived for months eating only unicorns and dinosaur meat.

That's what the bible says anyway.

Cumon guys, try to tackle the post I made. 

Shark, you say you "doubt". The above two clips along with the background story is rather compelling, no?

Show me the holes in it.

Your main point, I'm guessing, is to do with the speed of light and that the universe is just too big.

Right now, the current thinking is that first law of thermodynamics doesn't hold up. Not fringe science, it's becoming mainstream.

And then one wonders, if something that has been held has fundamental fact is suddenly not so fundamental nor factual. Are we better or worse off making statistical predictions rather than ones based on rules that we can't confirm are true constants?

Just for your research purposes, the video is from the 2004 Nimitz incident.

The argument is normally that it's a wild claim and the evidence must support it.

In this case it does. 

The onus then rests on those opposing the claim to disprove the evidence presented.

Guess what the best argument is thus far.

That the targeting system malfunctioned. 

Basically all scientific "facts" as we know it, regarding our universe, are guestimates, and nothing more.

And these "facts" are amended or changed completely, all the time, when newer developments are made or discovered

I wouldn't know, Plum.

I wouldn't even hazard a guess. It could be anything.

Believing in little green men flying around in saucers with their lazer guns readied has never grabbed me. Next thing you'll be telling they speak Klingon.

Have you ever seen an alien, Plum? How about their ships? Have you ever spoken to one or heard them speaking to you?

Can you claim to have been abducted ... or anally probed by them ... or are all you hopes rooted in a whole lot of "what ifs"?

Bottom line ... there's no proof of any of it. You go ahead and believe in it all you like ... I certainly won't be wasting my time on that nonsense. 

SharkShit ... Abraham married his half sister who's name was Sarah. As usual, you have you facts arse about face.

Are you sure you're not a 10 year old kid with some kind of brain retardation. You sure sound like one.

CC

All the extra stuff you added is unnecessary.

I'm just asking you to look at this video along with the interview from the pilot and make a reasonable assessment.

If evolution is a natural phenomena , the universe should be crawling with signs of life...so it obviously is, and it's ( all the signs of life) hidden from us, or it isn't, we are alone and we are in some way unique. ..for some odd reason??? Puzzle, whatever way you are looking at it.