Why does the government hide UFO's?

[river]

If you wish to re-pen arguments about the Roswell case, start a new thread.

But you've nicely disqualified it as any support for this thread.

So, the issue stands: it has yet to be established that the government hides UFOs.

This thread is about UFO's, no need to start a new thread .

So you are unable to distinguish the difference between a saucer shaped object and a ballon shaped object .

 

[DaveC426913]

So you are able to produce evidence of the government recovering weather balloons?
This thread is about UFOs.

 

[DaveC426913]

So you are unable to distinguish the difference between a saucer shaped object and a ballon shaped object .

Well since this happened before you or I were born, I think the only rational answer is: No. And neither are you.

I guess we'll have to look at the reports. Ah. The reports say it was a weather balloon.

 

[river]

So you are able to produce evidence of the government recovering weather balloons?
This thread is about UFOs.

Nice twist dave; it won't work .

Roswell is about a saucer crash .

 

[river]

Well since this happened before you or I were born, I think the only rational answer is: No. And neither are you.

I guess we'll have to look at the reports. Ah. The reports say it was a weather balloon.

The original report was of a saucer craft .

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Why ?

Because the damn officials charged with investigation take bribes from the aliens.
And Sherlock would agree.
Gee...even the razor will give you that answer.
Money River it always just about the money and an aliens gold is as good as the next Man's.
Alex

 

[DaveC426913]

The original report was of a saucer craft .

It does NOT say "saucer craft" at all.
It says "flying disc".

Balloons can be disc-shaped, and they fly.


And that, my friends, with a subtle twist of words, is how myths are created - and believed.


By the way:

"The military decided to conceal the true purpose of the crashed device – nuclear
testmonitoring"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roswell_UFO_incident

 

[river]

"The military decided to conceal the true purpose of the crashed device – nuclear testmonitoring"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roswell_UFO_incident

Ah .... so you can't rationalise the difference ; shape ; between a saucer and a ballon.

 

[DaveC426913]

Ah .... so you can't rationalise the difference ; shape ; between a saucer and a ballon.

 

[river]

Don't be silly dave.

 

[DaveC426913]

Don't be silly dave.

That's three for three.

You claimed the Roswell incident was a UFO. It wasn't - as evidenced.
You claimed it was a saucer craft. It wasn't. As evidenced.
You claimed balloons can't be disc-shaped. They can - as evidenced.

 

[river]

That's two for two.

You claimed the Roswell incident was a UFO. It wasn't - as evidenced.
You claimed balloons can't be disc-shaped. They can - as evidenced.

Care to make it a threefer?

So a metalic saucer object behaves as a ballon?

Is that your logic ?

 

[DaveC426913]

Ooh! I forgot one!

You claimed it was a saucer "craft". It isn't - as evidenced.

So a metalic object behaves as a ballon?

No where it is referred to as a metallic object.

That's five out of five.

Stop making stuff up.

 

[river]

Ooh! I forgot one!

You claimed it was a saucer "craft". It isn't - as evidenced.


No where it is referred to as a metallic object.

That's five out of five.

You're just making stuff up.

No you simply can not understand the difference between a saucer metallic obeject and a ballon.

And you believe what the government tells you . even when the RAAF originally tells you it was a saucer that crashed .

You have become irrational .

You only believe what was told to you the next day. Not what was originally reported .

 

[DaveC426913]

No you simply can not understand the difference between a saucer metallic obeject and a ballon.

Complain all you want; I have shown you a metallic, saucer-shaped balloon.

Can you explain to our readers the difference between a metallic saucer-shaped balloon and a metallic saucer-shaped balloon?

And you believe what the government tells you .

Interesting you say that. You posted the article. You believed it was evidence for your claim. Do you dismiss your own evidence now?

It is also interesting that you invoke the word irrational.
In a discussion where
- I am presenting extant, irrefutable facts (mostly that your claims are demonstrable falsehoods, spoken by you - I can go back over them again if you like)...
- and your best response is "that's silly".

Methinks that world irrational is weighing heavily upon your mind right now.

How much more of this public whipping can you take?

 

[river]

Complain all you want; I have shown you a metallic, saucer-shaped balloon.

Can you explain to our readers the difference between a metallic saucer-shaped balloon and a metallic saucer-shaped balloon?



Interesting you say that. You posted the article. You believed it was evidence for your claim. Do you dismiss your own evidence now?

It is also interesting that you invoke the word irrational.
In a discussion where
- I am presenting extant, irrefutable facts (mostly that your claims are demonstrable falsehoods, spoken by you - I can go back over them again if you like)...
- and your best response is "that's silly".

Methinks that world irrational is weighing heavily upon your mind right now.

How much more of this public whipping can you take?

Analyze the architecture from your post #1149 to a saucer , whats the difference ?

Think about it ..... the ballon has no reverse structure .

The ballon has no inverse structure built into it .

Inotherwords the ballon has no underneath structure . no inverse structure attached to the top .

 

[DaveC426913]

Analyze the architecture from your post #1149 to a saucer , whats the difference ?

What does a "saucer" have to do with anything? It is never mentioned in the article. You made it up out of whole cloth.
What is the value in discussing the structure of something you made up?

Think about it ..... the ballon has no reverse structure .
The ballon has no inverse structure built into it .

Inotherwords the ballon has no underneath structure . no inverse structure attached to the top .

I'm afraid I don't l know what a "reverse structure" or an "inverse structure" might be. These are not things.

Regardless, the thing they recovered at Roswell does not have them either.

I guess that's just further evidence it's not ... whatever you're imagining.

 

[river]

What does a "saucer" have to do with anything? It is never mentioned in the article. You made it up out of whole cloth.
What is the value in discussing the structure of something you made up?


I'm afraid I don't l know what a "reverse structure" or an "inverse structure" might be. These are not things.

Regardless, the thing they found in Roswell does not have them either.

I guess that's just further evidence it's not ... whatever you're imagining.

In otherwords; take the parachute and attach it so you have a top and bottom .

 

[DaveC426913]

In otherwords; take the parachute and attach it so you have a top and bottom .

Why make stuff up? The picture shows a flat, metallic balloon. They exist. They are not only an extremely plausible explanation, they nicely match the report.

Why have you abandoned the evidence? It is the only link to an event than occurred before you or I were born.

Strange, when there's something that supports what you want to believe, you are all hot on it. "Read this!" you cry.
When it turns out it does not support what you want to believe, you're all "I've changed my mind. Look at what I've imagined!"


Stop. It's been refuted. It's a dead horse you're kicking. This is causing me pain on your behalf.

 

[river]

Why make stuff up? The picture shows a flat, metallic balloon. They exist. They are not only an extremely plausible explanation, they nicely match the report.

Why have you abandoned the evidence? It is the only link to an event than occurred before you or I were born.

Strange, when there's something that supports what you want to believe, you are all hot on it. "Read this!" you cry.
When it turns out it does not support what you want to believe, you're all "I've changed my mind. Look at what I've imagined!"


Stop. It's been refuted. It's a dead horse you're kicking. This is causing me pain on your behalf.

you believe what supports what is given to you by the government ; the next day .

There is no way that one can confuse a saucer craft with a ballon.