UFO Orange Triangle Formations Are The F.A.R Giving Birth? [Archive]

AlphaNumeric

11-06-09, 11:26 AM

What the hell are you talking about? I'm beginning to wonder if you aren't in need of medication of some kind. You have gone from claiming the existence of a mythical creature to arguing about its evolution to now claiming the creature is now an explanation for UFOs?!

That's literally a guess built on a random idea built on an unsupported claim lacking any evidence or even coherent logic.

You lied about working in aeronautics, didn't you? No one with your incoherent and utterly illogical thought patterns could work in an industry where methodological approaches and technical knowledge are important. Hell, I'm wondering how you managed to learn how to use a computer.

GeoffP

11-06-09, 11:27 AM

Please don't mentally cesspool this idea just yet! The breaching experience of the manta ray is known to induce the birthing process to a live miniature ray. In addition..

What?

MacGyver1968

11-06-09, 11:43 AM

Please don't mentally cesspool this idea just yet! The breaching experience of the manta ray is known to induce the birthing process to a live miniature ray. In addition..

In addition...what? More stuff pulled straight from your ass?

Grim_Reaper

11-06-09, 01:21 PM

I Third the What? and add a What The Fuck?

MacGyver1968

11-06-09, 01:41 PM

I Third the What? and add a What The Fuck?

I see your "What the fuck" and raise you one "God damn that's crazy" :)

Grim_Reaper

11-06-09, 01:44 PM

I see your "What the fuck" and raise you one "God damn that's crazy" :)

I see your "God Damn that's crazy" and rise you a "Come on ban this guy before he hurts himself posting"

draqon

11-06-09, 01:53 PM

you know even a crazy guy cannot make the stuff up that OP makes up, its just so innovative

MacGyver1968

11-06-09, 02:26 PM

It must be "the month of Woo" this month. So many wacky posts.

(Q)

11-06-09, 03:44 PM

The question remains, is he really a seeker of common sense or is common sense seeking him?

MacGyver1968

11-06-09, 03:56 PM

well...considering that none of us can derive a meaning of the OP...something about manta rays giving birth being confused for UFO's? Wow..that's some grade "A" woo.

(Q)

11-06-09, 04:16 PM

I once gave birth to twin manta rays while skiing just outside Denver, near a small town. Can't quite remember the name, started with an 'S'.

Anyways, there was this group of eight year old's watching, one of the manta rays killed one of the kids and they called me a bastard.

That's all I can get from the OP, how about you?

draqon

11-06-09, 05:14 PM

you know what beats the bush completely, the "in addition..."

Grim_Reaper

11-06-09, 05:36 PM

Was the Kids name Fred? If so I may have witnessed that

MacGyver1968

11-06-09, 06:32 PM

Is there a full moon or something? Lots of crazy posts lately...one guy who thinks he's solved everything in science...a 9/11 thread with "no planers", and this thread, so Woofullicious, that no one even know what the OP is talking about. Ahh...fall at SciForums :)

Ophiolite

11-06-09, 07:53 PM

Well for once common_sense_seeker I agree with you. It is clear that the baryonic matter at the centre of the moon causes a drag effect on the diamond at the Earth's core, which in turn sends parametric resonance waves through the mantle in a way that leads to oscillations in sea level that are both short and long term. This instability in sea level not only provided, in the medium term, a route for Flores Man to reach the island, but also induces neurological changes in bouyant bottom dwellers such as rays, attracting them to sub-aerial exploits in an attempt to reach the baryonic matter that initiated their reaction.

I must say when you lay it out so cleary as you did in the opening post it is impossible not to......

GeoffP

11-06-09, 09:00 PM

...barf.

Trippy

11-07-09, 01:32 AM

I find myself wondering, not for the first time, id thigs such as these triangular UFO's are due to things like 'recognized' aircraft with PG clouds.

http://11.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kqyzua89ZZ1qa4x0vo1_500.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4RUDNsqzYHk/RqVWh0r0XDI/AAAAAAAAACo/dO1iyNVvH7I/s400/mach1buff.jpg

common_sense_seeker

11-07-09, 04:07 AM

you know even a crazy guy cannot make the stuff up that OP makes up, its just so innovativeI ran out of computer time yesterday. As I was saying; "In addition, rays are known to give birth when stressed from capture or from a predatory pursuit. This makes the aerial birth of the proposed bioluminescent F.A.R (flying amphibious ray) a possible scenario for an unexpected early delivery. Three adults would shield the newlyborn on it's maiden flight and guide it to a safe den. A crypt-creature explanation for the lighted triangle formation; flying adults looking after a youngster in the middle, is just as plausible as any other suggestion I've heard of.

Ophiolite

11-07-09, 04:42 AM

A crypt-creature explanation for the lighted triangle formation; flying adults looking after a youngster in the middle, is just as plausible as any other suggestion I've heard of.You actually believe your proposal is more plausible than misinterpetation of mundane natural and man made phenomena by untrained observers? You are certifiable my friend. Get professional help before it is too late.

draqon

11-07-09, 04:49 AM

common_sense_seeker..."you ran out of computer time"...are you in a jail/asylum/facility?

common_sense_seeker

11-07-09, 04:59 AM

common_sense_seeker..."you ran out of computer time"...are you in a jail/asylum/facility?lol. I'm using the library internet facilities and get 2hrs free a day.

You actually believe your proposal is more plausible than misinterpetation of mundane natural and man made phenomena by untrained observers? You are certifiable my friend. Get professional help before it is too late.There's too many good mass eye-witness accounts imo. Just the other day a triangle formation was filmed and seen by many in Russia: UFO sends St Petersburg residents scrambling for cameras, Video (25 Oct 2009) (http://www.allnewsweb.com/page9299793.php). Check out the footage.

Ophiolite

11-07-09, 05:02 AM

There's too many good mass eye-witness accounts imo. How many times do you have to be told that your opinion is not worth diddly.

AlphaNumeric

11-07-09, 05:09 AM

lol. I'm using the library internet facilities and get 2hrs free a day.I guess we should all be grateful for small things....

There's too many good mass eye-witness accounts imo.That doesn't mean they are flying animals giving birth and which bio-illumines. You haven't even managed to give a reasonable justification for why such creatures are even possible, never mind that they fly at night, give birth during such flies and are connected to possible UFO sightings.

Don't you think it would be common sense to first establish if such a creature can even arise via evolution before claiming its responsible for X, Y and Z?

MacGyver1968

11-07-09, 10:33 AM

How many times do you have to be told that your opinion is not worth diddly.

Actually...this Diddley had lots more value than his opinion. :)

http://thehostess.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/bo_diddley.jpg

draqon

11-07-09, 03:39 PM

You sound like KillJoy, MacG...soon it will be tank pictures in every thread with names matching a word someone else said. =p

common_sense_seeker

11-10-09, 10:06 AM

you know even a crazy guy cannot make the stuff up that OP makes up, its just so innovativeThat's right. There's been some controversy regarding the propulsion technique of the proposed F.A.R, so let me explain:

1. They glide by maintaining the 'saddle-shape' similar to this photo link (breaching manta ray (http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/m/manta-ray-leap-skerry-1070447-xl.jpg)).
2. The muscles which contract from anterior to posterior now do so in a quick-fire vibration which causes the spring-loaded plactoid scales to flick open and snap shut.
3. It is this 'cloak of bees wings' which give the FAR a unique flying ability; the ghost-like appearance of floating in mid-air! (A characteristic of many eye-witnerss accounts of the owlman etc). Mexican wave - shimmering bees (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7l75XUQ8-M)

sighting (http://canadaufo.blogspot.com/2009_01_01_archive.html)

MacGyver1968

11-10-09, 10:48 AM

AlphaNumeric

11-10-09, 11:21 AM

Common_sense_seeker, why is it all of your ideas and claims require the complete absence of common sense to be even vaguely entertained?

parmalee

11-10-09, 11:26 AM

phlogistician

11-11-09, 03:40 AM

lol. I'm using the library internet facilities and get 2hrs free a day.

You are in a library? THEN READ A FUCKING BOOK OR TWO.

Oh, and your little thought experiment that rays give birth and then then fly and protect the newborn? Show me ONE example of a newborn being able to fly immediately after birth please. Any flying species will do.

Also, abandon this stupid idea that rays can fly. It's been shown to you that a ray weighing in at several tonnes hasn't got a hope in hell, but you cling to that stupid idea. Do you get it yet, ... a ray weighing between two and three tonnes with a floppy cartilage support structure isn't ever going to fly. Never. Give up, get sane.

phlogistician

11-11-09, 03:45 AM

there's an awful lot of information in this thread, i'm feeling overwhelmed.

anyways, why does every topic about ufo's have to go in the pseudoscience subforum? i saw a bird today, but i don't know what kind of bird it was--and there was noone present to tell me: ufo. occasionally, when i'm out in the middle of nowhere late at night, i see an light in the sky which i can't determine whether it is a satellite or a falling star--again, noone there to be so kind as to identify it for me: ufo.

IF you saw a light in the sky, to qualify as a UFO it would have to demonstrate controlled FLIGHT. Many people shout UFO for stationary lights. Sorry, that's bogus.

But to label a light as a UFO even after it demonstrated controlled flight, it would have to do something extraordinary, to rule out a prosaic explanation.

Being ignorant of the type of aircraft you are witnessing does not mean you can use the term UFO either.

So, to recap, the 'F' in UFO stands for flying, not 'in the sky', or 'in orbit'. You need to witness flight, and that flight needs to be inexplicable by conventional aircraft. Get all those factors together, you can shout UFO.

common_sense_seeker

11-11-09, 04:47 AM

I'm just wondering CSS...I did a little google fu, looking for any reference for "Flying Amphibious Ray", and I can't find anything, not even on cryptozoology sites. Did you just make up this creature?You must have missed this mirror thread of mine in the Unexplained_mysteries.com forum Umboi: Did Rays Evolve The Ability To Fly? (http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=167022&st=90&gopid=3162830&). A similar reaction incidentally. It's the only logical explanation which fits all the facts imo, however unbelievable to the layman.

I inferred the identity of the flying cryptid from a lifetime of interest and research, yes. Intuitive detective work. Lateral thinking outside the box etc

Dywyddyr

11-11-09, 05:18 AM

It's the only logical explanation which fits all the facts imo, however unbelievable to the layman.
Fits the facts?
So these rays (which are NOT amphibious (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/amphibious) by the way, even if they could fly) can fly to/ at altitudes of several thousands (or several tens of thousands) of feet where the formations are (claimed to be) seen?

I inferred the identity of the flying cryptid from a lifetime of interest and research, yes. Intuitive detective work. Lateral thinking outside the box etc
Nope, you're spouting unsubstantiated and insupportable nonsense. As per usual.

phlogistician

11-11-09, 06:51 AM

It's the only logical explanation

There is no logic in any of your leaps of faith.

which fits all the facts

You have no facts, just myths.

however unbelievable to the layman.

Layman, ... you demonstrate no knowledge in any scientific area. Please, what qualifications are you claiming now?

I inferred the identity of the flying cryptid from a lifetime of interest and research,

Using the library computer, ... you don't even own a computer of your own? Why is that. Odd for anybody who allegedly graduated in a science field not to these days, ... and if you have spent your lifetime coming up with this crap, you have wasted your life.

common_sense_seeker

11-11-09, 07:11 AM

Fits the facts?
So these rays (which are NOT amphibious (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/amphibious) by the way, even if they could fly) can fly to/ at altitudes of several thousands (or several tens of thousands) of feet where the formations are (claimed to be) seen?The word 'amphibious' is used in a general context in the F.A.R abbreviation, meaning it is adapted for life on land as well as in the sea. There's no definite reason why triangle UAPs couldn't be crytozoological, is there?

Dywyddyr

11-11-09, 07:21 AM

The word 'amphibious' is used in a general context in the F.A.R abbreviation, meaning it is adapted for life on land as well as in the sea.
Exactly on land and sea.
Not in the sea and in the air.
In other words you're as sloppy about linguistic nuance as you are about science.

There's no definite reason why triangle UAPs couldn't be crytozoological, is there?
None. (Or even zoological. Seagulls in the right light look very shiny and non-seagull-like.)
But the "F.A.R." isn't it.

You still haven't explained how they get to that altitude.
And St. Petersburg is how far inland? How far away from ray normal "stomping grounds"?

It's pure (uninformed) speculation on your part with not a single ounce of science involved.

common_sense_seeker

11-11-09, 07:34 AM

Exactly on land and sea.
Not in the sea and in the air.
In other words you're as sloppy about linguistic nuance as you are about science.

None. (Or even zoological. Seagulls in the right light look very shiny and non-seagull-like.)
But the "F.A.R." isn't it.

You still haven't explained how they get to that altitude.
And St. Petersburg is how far inland? How far away from ray normal "stomping grounds"?

It's pure (uninformed) speculation on your part with not a single ounce of science involved.The 'flying' part of F.A.R was the giveaway. They could reach a high altitude if there was a uplifting wind, such as by a hilly coastline. Where's the problem?

phlogistician

11-11-09, 08:33 AM

The 'flying' part of F.A.R was the giveaway. They could reach a high altitude if there was a uplifting wind, such as by a hilly coastline. Where's the problem?

I gave you the answer already in the other thread.

My friend is an avid Kitesurfer. One of his kites has 14 square metres of sail area. He weighs about 80 Kg.

All of that aerofoil surface in a good wind can loft him.

But if we weighed say, two FUCKING TONNES. He'd be going nowhere.

Now, a 6metre span ray, weighs between two and three tonnes, depending on the species. THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL WIND WILL LIFT THAT WEIGHT.

What is it about the sheer weight of a ray that you do not grasp?

Stryder

11-11-09, 09:18 AM

http://sciforums.stryderunknown.co.uk/images/woowoo.png

I'm sure a number of alarm bells are ringing. This thread is being closed mainly due to the fact that there is no way this is pseudoscience... (I mean pseudoscience is one thing but this actually has it beat.)

So to save the trolling, flaming and outright abuse layercake that would develop, it's time to have a Lockdown.