# Why UFO's wink out.

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### river

I did some very basic calculations on the speeds of UFO'S ;

For instance ; at

2000mph = divided by 60 mins = 33.33 miles / min.
by 60 secs = 0.56 miles/sec.

5000mph = divided by 60 mins. = 83.33 miles/min.
by 60 secs. = 1.39 miles/sec

10,000mph = divided by 60 mins. =166 miles/min.
by 60 secs. = 2.7 miles/sec.

50,000mph = divided by 60 mins. = 833.33 miles/min.
by 60 secs. = 69.45 miles/sec.

So we can see why they can seem to " blink out " . Because within one second these craft will have gone at least a half a mile.

Plus I think this refutes this " another dimension theory " as to why they just blink out or just disappear.

The most puzzling thing about all this ; is that ; nobody has bothered to do these simple calculations before.

These simple calculations changes one's perspective .

I know that I have ; or rather did have a thread ; with these calculations ;but before it was hijacked into this or that opinion ; my POINT of the thread was to argue against the theory that the reason they wink out or blink out was because they come and go from other dimensions.

The calculations show that per/second ; even at the minimum is 0.56 miles per second ; now think about this as far as the ability to keep site of anything having this kind of acceleration.

It challenges the mind ; to keep track of the object.

And to those who don't even think UFO's are real ; it is irrelevent to the thread

What's next? Are you going to discuss the typical number of eggs that Nessy lays?

I am getting the strangest feeling of deja vu....

What's next? Are you going to discuss the typical number of eggs that Nessy lays?

I am getting the strangest feeling of deja vu....

So ......

Edit: Yes, you did.

Last edited:
To reiterate: sonic booms.

To reiterate: sonic booms.

To reiterate ; post # 1

Posting it a second time doesn't make it any less invalid.
Reported.

Posting it a second time doesn't make it any less invalid.
Reported.

You and your opinion are not valid.

Except that - in that previous thread - I didn't post opinion I posted facts.
And you completely failed to address them.

You and your opinion are not valid.
Why? Isn't that a rather ludicrous pretentious statement?
Just because someone offers facts that you are unable to refute, does not mean that your fantasy still stands as valid...except perhaps in your own mind.
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is."

Except that - in that previous thread - I didn't post opinion I posted facts.
And you completely failed to address them.

We look at these facts differently dywr. You look at them as no evidence.

I on the other hand ; I look at the evidence as a detective would ; not there at the scence ; so piece together the evidence given ; then come to a logical conclusion based on the facts given; conclusion; to me; UFO's are real ; they have since been since at Donald Keyhoe's book; THE FLYING SAUCERS ARE REAL.

And you never convince me differently no matter your thinking

We look at these facts differently dywr.
That would be a lie.
For example, you DON'T look at the facts about the arc covered because you didn't understand it (as you admitted).
And how, precisely, does "looking at the fact" that an SR-71 does 2,000 mph and not "blink out" help your contention that some other object doing the same speed does?

You look at them as no evidence.
Wrong, it's not "no evidence" it's direct evidence against your "hypothesis".

I on the other hand ; I look at the evidence as a detective would ; not there at the scence ; so piece together the evidence given ; then come to a logical conclusion based on the facts given; conclusion; to me; UFO's are real ; they have since been since at Donald Keyhoe's book; THE FLYING SAUCERS ARE REAL.

And you never convince me differently no matter your thinking
Yeah...
The problem here is that you treat such books the way some theists treat the Bible or the Quran - as "holy writ" that cannot be questioned.
You spend your time thinking up ways to show they're correct (no matter how ridiculous those methods/ claims are) as opposed to to checking the validity of the source material.

That would be a lie.
For example, you DON'T look at the facts about the arc covered because you didn't understand it (as you admitted).
And how, precisely, does "looking at the fact" that an SR-71 does 2,000 mph and not "blink out" help your contention that some other object doing the same speed does?

Wrong, it's not "no evidence" it's direct evidence against your "hypothesis".

Yeah...
The problem here is that you treat such books the way some theists treat the Bible or the Quran - as "holy writ" that cannot be questioned.
You spend your time thinking up ways to show they're correct (no matter how ridiculous those methods/ claims are) as opposed to to checking the validity of the source material.

You are irrelevant to this thread dwyr.

You are irrelevant to this thread dwyr.
Again, dishonesty.
What you ACTUALLY mean is that I'm "irrelevant" to your viewpoint: because you either won't listen to, or are ignorant of, the facts.

That would be a lie.
For example, you DON'T look at the facts about the arc covered because you didn't understand it (as you admitted).
And how, precisely, does "looking at the fact" that an SR-71 does 2,000 mph and not "blink out" help your contention that some other object doing the same speed does?

Wrong, it's not "no evidence" it's direct evidence against your "hypothesis".

Yeah...
The problem here is that you treat such books the way some theists treat the Bible or the Quran - as "holy writ" that cannot be questioned.
You spend your time thinking up ways to show they're correct (no matter how ridiculous those methods/ claims are) as opposed to to checking the validity of the source material.

Bingo!

As I have said previously, shows such as the X-Files and Millenium, certainly have a lot to answer to, although I quite enjoyed the X-Files as entertainment.

Bingo!

As I have said previously, shows such as the X-Files and Millenium, certainly have a lot to answer to, although I quite enjoyed the X-Files as entertainment.

I cannot answer you anymore truthfully and sensibly than the following reply to your previous ludicrous claim.

Again, dishonesty.
What you ACTUALLY mean is that I'm "irrelevant" to your viewpoint: because you either won't listen to, or are ignorant of, the facts.