Earth planes vs. UFOs from Outer Space?

[Adam Ben Nalois]

You know, soon alien will invade the world.Maybe 5-10 years from now,
than it´s time.

So do you think Earth planes, including prototypes and experimental
planes could have a chance against UFOs if

- UFOs have anti-grav
- laser guns
- space-flight abilities
- possibly deflector shields
- faster

means more advanced technology.

But earth pilots are more experienced on this planet.Have to defend
the homeworld.Have bases on earth whereas aliens must return to
mothership.

Who would win?

Aliens or humans?

[Tuollaf43]

(Adam Ben Nalois) wrote in message >...
> You know, soon alien will invade the world.Maybe 5-10 years from now,
> than it´s time.

Yes ofcourse.

> So do you think Earth planes, including prototypes and experimental
> planes could have a chance against UFOs if
>
> - UFOs have anti-grav
> - laser guns
> - space-flight abilities
> - possibly deflector shields
> - faster
>
> means more advanced technology.
>
> But earth pilots are more experienced on this planet.Have to defend
> the homeworld.Have bases on earth whereas aliens must return to
> mothership.
>
> Who would win?
>
> Aliens or humans?

As long as the human pilots were helmets covered with tin-foil, they
win. Podded ECM (ESP Counter measures) would help too.

What we desperately need to invest in are stand-off loon-mallet
launchers... something that could strike with precision across
newsgroups.

[tim gueguen]

"Adam Ben Nalois" > wrote in message
om...
> You know, soon alien will invade the world.

You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so we
can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.

tim gueguen 101867

[Krztalizer]

>
>You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so we
>can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.

Oh yeah? Then how do you explain Tarver??

[Tarver Engineering]

"Krztalizer" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so
we
> >can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
>
> Oh yeah? Then how do you explain Tarver??

Ask General Clark, he has been visited by aliens.

[QDurham]

>Oh yeah? Then how do you explain Tarver??

oh GOOD point!

Quent

[BackToNormal]

Adam Ben Nalois > wrote:

> You know, soon alien will invade the world.Maybe 5-10 years from now,
> than it´s time.
>
> So do you think Earth planes, including prototypes and experimental
> planes could have a chance against UFOs if
>
> - UFOs have anti-grav
> - laser guns
> - space-flight abilities
> - possibly deflector shields
> - faster
>
> means more advanced technology.
>
> But earth pilots are more experienced on this planet.Have to defend
> the homeworld.Have bases on earth whereas aliens must return to
> mothership.
>
> Who would win?
>
> Aliens or humans?

The cockroaches.

ronh


--
"People do not make decisions on facts, rather,
how they feel about the facts" Robert Consedine

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(Krztalizer) wrote:

> >You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so we
> >can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
>
> Oh yeah? Then how do you explain Tarver??

Inbreeding.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Ugly Bob]

"Adam Ben Nalois" > wrote in message
om...
> You know, soon alien will invade the world.Maybe 5-10 years from now,
> than it´s time.
>
> So do you think Earth planes, including prototypes and experimental
> planes could have a chance against UFOs if
>
> - UFOs have anti-grav
> - laser guns
> - space-flight abilities
> - possibly deflector shields
> - faster
>
> means more advanced technology.
>
> But earth pilots are more experienced on this planet.Have to defend
> the homeworld.Have bases on earth whereas aliens must return to
> mothership.
>
> Who would win?
>
> Aliens or humans?

Perhaps you could give us something more specific like "UFO"
performance data (though, how one could relate performance
data of unidentified objects is beyond me).

-Ugly Bob

[Eugene Griessel]

(Adam Ben Nalois) wrote in message >...
> You know, soon alien will invade the world.Maybe 5-10 years from now,
> than it´s time.
>
> So do you think Earth planes, including prototypes and experimental
> planes could have a chance against UFOs if
>
> - UFOs have anti-grav
> - laser guns
> - space-flight abilities
> - possibly deflector shields
> - faster
>
> means more advanced technology.
>
> But earth pilots are more experienced on this planet.Have to defend
> the homeworld.Have bases on earth whereas aliens must return to
> mothership.
>
> Who would win?
>
> Aliens or humans?

If humans are as stupid and gullible as the majority of posters on usenet then
it the Aliens for sure.

[steve gallacci]

Depends on assumptions of technology used. Things like lasers can be
iffy, as they are not necessarily very effective weapons, and other
particle weapons may have issues in an atmosphere. On the other hand,
things like real anti-gravity means that "they" can do a lot more than
fly fast or radically maneuver, things like tweak time/space reality or
the nature of local universal forces, so that "they" wouldn't need
weapons in the normal sense at all. Which also begs a more basic point,
what would a really advanced technology/society need with bothering with
Earth?? There is nothing here that can't be gotten/made cheaper closer
to "home". Like the gods of old, we are projecting our own fears or
wishes into these "aliens", giving them motives and technological
assumptions that fit what we believe. If the real thing ever shows up,
they'll be more different than what we might expect.
But enough of this rational wet blanket, basically Earth is screwed, as
even fairly conservative Sci-Fi aliens can whip our butts (barring some
ridiculous secret weakness that will bring us final triumph over the
icky green hoards).

[David Bromage]

Adam Ben Nalois wrote:
> Who would win?
>
> Aliens or humans?

Us, of course. We've got Jack O'Neil and Samantha Carter to fly the X302.

Cheers
David

[David Bromage]

> Us, of course. We've got Jack O'Neil and Samantha Carter to fly the X302.

Oh, and Jeff Goldblum to feed them a virus.

Cheers
David

[B2431]

There's no law against eating space aliens. We could solve world hunger.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
David Bromage > wrote:

> Adam Ben Nalois wrote:
> > Who would win?
> >
> > Aliens or humans?
>
> Us, of course. We've got Jack O'Neil and Samantha Carter to fly the X302.

Ah, Sam...

(They're on TV right now. Sam's trying to explain something technical
to Jack...)

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[tim gueguen]

"Krztalizer" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so
we
> >can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
>
> Oh yeah? Then how do you explain Tarver??

Dropped on his head too many times presumably. And I mean as an adult, not
as a baby.

tim gueguen 101867

[robert arndt]

"tim gueguen" > wrote in message news:<TVICb.696620$9l5.531095@pd7tw2no>...
> "Adam Ben Nalois" > wrote in message
> om...
> > You know, soon alien will invade the world.
>
> You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so we
> can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
>
> tim gueguen 101867

Ever heard of the Tehran Incident?:

http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/tehran1.htm

This is one of the few documented cases where an AF aircraft actually
tried to engage a UFO.
The Iranian pilot lost in that engagement as the UFO knocked out its
fire control system preventing launch of a missile.

Rob

[Mark and Kim Smith]

Billy Connolly, the Scottish comedian / actor, had a solution for world
hunger and over population. Eat the person standing next to you. Not
only will you cut the world population in half overnight, but you would
end world hunger at the same time. I believe he said it on the Conan
O'Brien where it was met with a few hisses and boo's, to which Billy
replied "Oh shut up!"

B2431 wrote:

>There's no law against eating space aliens. We could solve world hunger.
>
>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
Mark and Kim Smith > wrote:

> Billy Connolly, the Scottish comedian / actor, had a solution for
> world hunger and over population. Eat the person standing next to
> you. Not only will you cut the world population in half overnight,
> but you would end world hunger at the same time. I believe he said
> it on the Conan O'Brien where it was met with a few hisses and boo's,
> to which Billy replied "Oh shut up!"

<ftp://sailor.gutenberg.org/pub/gutenberg/etext97/mdprp10.txt>

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Mark and Kim Smith]

Yikes!

Chad Irby wrote:

>In article >,
> Mark and Kim Smith > wrote:
>
>
>
>>Billy Connolly, the Scottish comedian / actor, had a solution for
>>world hunger and over population. Eat the person standing next to
>>you. Not only will you cut the world population in half overnight,
>>but you would end world hunger at the same time. I believe he said
>>it on the Conan O'Brien where it was met with a few hisses and boo's,
>>to which Billy replied "Oh shut up!"
>>
>>
>
><ftp://sailor.gutenberg.org/pub/gutenberg/etext97/mdprp10.txt>
>
>
>

[B2431]

>From: (robert arndt)

>"tim gueguen" > wrote in message
>news:<TVICb.696620$9l5.531095@pd7tw2no>...
>> "Adam Ben Nalois" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> > You know, soon alien will invade the world.
>>
>> You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so we
>> can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
>>
>> tim gueguen 101867
>
>Ever heard of the Tehran Incident?:
>
>http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/tehran1.htm
>
>This is one of the few documented cases where an AF aircraft actually
>tried to engage a UFO.
>The Iranian pilot lost in that engagement as the UFO knocked out its
>fire control system preventing launch of a missile.
>
>Rob
>
The part that scares me is that people like you who actually believe that
garbage reproduce and vote.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[robert arndt]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (robert arndt)
>
> >"tim gueguen" > wrote in message
> >news:<TVICb.696620$9l5.531095@pd7tw2no>...
> >> "Adam Ben Nalois" > wrote in message
> >> om...
> >> > You know, soon alien will invade the world.
> >>
> >> You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so we
> >> can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
> >>
> >> tim gueguen 101867
> >
> >Ever heard of the Tehran Incident?:
> >
> >http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/tehran1.htm
> >
> >This is one of the few documented cases where an AF aircraft actually
> >tried to engage a UFO.
> >The Iranian pilot lost in that engagement as the UFO knocked out its
> >fire control system preventing launch of a missile.
> >
> >Rob
> >
> The part that scares me is that people like you who actually believe that
> garbage reproduce and vote.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Dan,

For someone who was in the USAF you seem pretty ignorant on all
subjects relating to aviation. What exactly was your MOS- spit-shining
the latrines?
The Tehran Incident is heavily documented and was even picked-up by
one of our own DSP-1 spy satellites as an IR anamoly.

http://iiaf.net/stories/warstories/s8.html

I suppose you can't handle the documented Belgian Wave Incidents
either, and while I tend to support terrestrial-based HUFO tech of a
military nature, these incidents remain a mystery; however, you
cannont doubt the qualifications for documentation in these two cases.
They have eyewitness accounts, both civilian and military radar
confirmation, aircraft radar confirmation, and in the Tehran case spy
sat verification.
What more do you want? In the case of the Belgian Wave the craft are
more likely to be black budget aircraft: black field-effect triangles
flying in formation, unmarked, headed back towards the UK (to Bae
Warton, perhaps?)... but the Tehran Incident involved a
glowing/burning sphere which sent out two other spherical craft- one
that tried to approach the F-4, the other that landed nearby.
It doesn't seem likely this was one of ours and little probability of
the F-4 fire control system going out PRECISELY when the pilot
attempted to fire at the object.
I do not support the UFO conspiracy theories anymore than believing
tabloid news; however, much of this UFO material can be attributed to
misinterpretation. Up to 80% of UFO sightings are explianed right off
the bat, leaving 20% unexplained. Further investigation usually
uncovers between 10-15% of these as hoaxes, or technical deficiencies
in the film used to photograph/record the sightings which produce a
flawed photographic anamoly. That leaves barely 5% unexplained of
which under intense scientific analysis another percentage is
eventually proven a hoax. So that leaves us barely 2% of unexplained
UFO sightings that remain credible.
The Tehran Incident is in this group.
The original poster asked about such a confrontation and I told him
what happened. So my answer would be not so good in a confrontation
with that type of technology. However, I don't believe it would be
impossible for us to match that technology if a world effort on a
Manhatten Project scale was initiated. Man is already toying with
cloning, teleportation, antimatter, cloaking technology, beam weapons,
and a range of exotics under cover of the non-lethal military
application.

Rob

[Dweezil Dwarftosser]

robert arndt wrote:

> ... but the Tehran Incident involved a
> glowing/burning sphere which sent out two other spherical craft- one
> that tried to approach the F-4, the other that landed nearby.
> It doesn't seem likely this was one of ours and little probability of
> the F-4 fire control system going out PRECISELY when the pilot
> attempted to fire at the object.

Heheh. "Little" probability?
I've worked at least two aircraft that did *exactly*
that! (In both cases, the water dumped into the radar
cooling plenum by the malfunctioning air conditioning
system literally welded component LRUs to the equipment
rack before they kicked the aircraft generators off-line.
That's when all the gyros tumbled, too...)

Besides - I'm amazed that the Iranians (who attended
the same schools I did at Lowry) were able to field
an operational F-4 radar set two two weeks after we
delivered them to them.

- John T., old F-4 Weapons Control Systems toad.
> I do not support the UFO conspiracy theories anymore than believing
> tabloid news; however, much of this UFO material can be attributed to
> misinterpretation. Up to 80% of UFO sightings are explianed right off
> the bat, leaving 20% unexplained. Further investigation usually
> uncovers between 10-15% of these as hoaxes, or technical deficiencies
> in the film used to photograph/record the sightings which produce a
> flawed photographic anamoly. That leaves barely 5% unexplained of
> which under intense scientific analysis another percentage is
> eventually proven a hoax. So that leaves us barely 2% of unexplained
> UFO sightings that remain credible.
> The Tehran Incident is in this group.
> The original poster asked about such a confrontation and I told him
> what happened. So my answer would be not so good in a confrontation
> with that type of technology. However, I don't believe it would be
> impossible for us to match that technology if a world effort on a
> Manhatten Project scale was initiated. Man is already toying with
> cloning, teleportation, antimatter, cloaking technology, beam weapons,
> and a range of exotics under cover of the non-lethal military
> application.
>
> Rob

[B2431]

>From: (robert arndt)

>
(B2431) wrote in message
>...
>> >From: (robert arndt)
>>
>> >"tim gueguen" > wrote in message
>> >news:<TVICb.696620$9l5.531095@pd7tw2no>...
>> >> "Adam Ben Nalois" > wrote in message
>> >> om...
>> >> > You know, soon alien will invade the world.
>> >>
>> >> You know, there is no proof any aliens have ever visited our planet, so
>we
>> >> can hardly speculate on their military capabilities.
>> >>
>> >> tim gueguen 101867
>> >
>> >Ever heard of the Tehran Incident?:
>> >
>> >http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/tehran1.htm
>> >
>> >This is one of the few documented cases where an AF aircraft actually
>> >tried to engage a UFO.
>> >The Iranian pilot lost in that engagement as the UFO knocked out its
>> >fire control system preventing launch of a missile.
>> >
>> >Rob
>> >
>> The part that scares me is that people like you who actually believe that
>> garbage reproduce and vote.
>>
>> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
>
>Dan,
>
>For someone who was in the USAF you seem pretty ignorant on all
>subjects relating to aviation. What exactly was your MOS- spit-shining
>the latrines?

I won't even waste my time on the rest of your spiel, but the USAF doesn't use
MOS.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Bertil Jonell]

In article >,
robert arndt > wrote:
>This is one of the few documented cases where an AF aircraft actually
>tried to engage a UFO.
>The Iranian pilot lost in that engagement as the UFO knocked out its
>fire control system preventing launch of a missile.

Thus proving the need for a gun! :)

>Rob

-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
exercise for your kill-file."