hey guys i was checking the net after some new german secret wonder weapons wich i dont know after a while i found several sites claiming the nazis had developed ufos with a so called vril or thule propulsion allowing them to travel hypersonic speeds and to leave the earth orbit and they were also armed with kraft strahl kanonen wich is basicly translated to force ray cannon a kind of laser you know i worship the german military technologi a lot but to my ears thats sound to ridiculus to be true what do you think or did you ever heard about such things :-?
You got it right Al Amin, too ridiculous to be true - there's a UFO thread in The Members Lounge in full swing at the moment, and, good one dude, that's one theory we haven't touched on yet. Join us in there :lol: [/quote]
The Germans did develop some 'flying saucer' (ie: circular) planes towards the end of the war, but thay were a) conventionally powered and armed b) drawing-board projects only. Heck, America produced 'flying saucer' planes at around the same time as well!
If anyone suggested such a thing to me it would utterly destroy any credibility I thought they had. This is just plain ridiculous. I wont even bother with any reasons why I think this is ludicrous, it should be obvious to anyone with any common sense.
Always look for a book as opposed to a website - websites are knocked up by any loony with a PC and an agenda :lol:, a book is the result of hard work, finding a publisher and prospective sales which applies a filter of credibility - but (huge BUT), just because it's in a book doesn't automatically mean it's 100%. One of the first reliable books I came across (as opposed to fringe-pro UFO type) was German Jet Genesis (David Masters IIRC) and published by Janes no less. This book mentioned the von Miethe saucer among others - wow, reputable publisher and numerical data! It has since transpired that Masters got his information from an at-that-time-obscure "factual" book written by an SF writer and copied it without corroboration. There were designs on the board and nobody has managed to fly one then or since (disregarding New World Order Illuminati invisible saucers of course ), but then the Germans went overboard on exotic (ie totally wierd) projects towards the end. If you come across a website that's pro suacer, look for one that's anti and compare arguments - the pro sites tend to give "data" and accept it at face value, the anti point out the inconsistencies, technical errors etc, and then weigh the evidence for yourself. If you believe that they had saucers then you have ask where are they now, why isn't any body using them? Which leads into wide-eyed conspiracy theory etc
An amusing aside: I have heard people dismiss UFO sightings as being Soviet flying saucers built from German WW2 designs!
I have to disagree with you there, Oli. I'm sure you have heard me go off on this before, but here it is again: Books are media just like everything else. In this day and age, anyone can and will be published. Even ridiculous things like books stating that America planted bombs in its own pentagon and staged the 9/11 attack are common place. An example of a dirty work that is more closely involved with what we're talking about is that ghastly book "Death Traps" by Benton Y. Cooper, which has been a thorn in my side since my first debate. There are stupid books out there, just like there are stupid websites. It's just up to the individual to filter out the bad from the good. For example, I never cite a website as a source unless it has a list of no less than three sources backing up its claims. Same as any book, I never really pay it any mind unless it can back up its claim in a convincing manner. The one media source I will absolutely not cite as a source for anything is Television, namely the History Channel or the Discovery Channel but that's a rant for another day.
True there are stupid books out there, but as Oli says they have a certain filter of credibility to them that means on balance information in a book is more likely to be correct than information from a website. Not saying that books are 100% correct, just the very effort that people have to go through to get a book into print means that it's more likely to be accurate, or better researched (Not of course the same thing) (Especially when it comes to some of the more controversial theories) than a conspiracy-nutter website knocked up in a few afternoons by a friendless retard with an X-files fixation and an axe to grind. Same as any book, I never really pay it any mind unless it can back up its claim in a convincing manner. Best policy all round really, if you don't trust it, don't believe it! As for television, I can see your point, but I would have no problem with a decent documentary with refering to interviews on that. That said as with anything it must be taken in context, i.e. if the individual is being interviewed now about events in WWII, how good is their memory likely to be? What are their motives? etc, etc. Basically, the same logic I would apply to a website, a book, a magazine article, and so-on...
Yeah, Belton's 'I hate the Sherman' is one heck of a lopsided book. Check out the Library for a fantastic review of it.
I was trying to make the point that, in general, a book is regarded (by me at least) as a more reliable source than a website, simply because the extra work in getting a book published acts as a bozo-filter. I agree entirely that total rubbish gets published, but it's far easier to publish rubbish on the web. I can only suggest (and I'm sure Danyel will agree on this one) the only sensible course (for subject) is look at all arguments at the start (even the loony ones, there MIGHT be something in there that adds an extra datum) and filter through your own sensibilities, look for weight of credible and credited/ accredited information. One thing to watch for in books is who is the publisher? A lot of fringe books are actually published by an organisation with the same agenda - ie the subject is so off-base no-one else will touch it, or is it a mass appeal publisher, who will publish hot-topic controversy just to get the sales. One reason I initially gave credence to Masters' work is that Janes have a steady and largely reliable history of military technology publishing since the somewhere around the beginning of the twentieth century and have a reputation as trustworthy to protect. In house publishers don't because they're largely preaching to the converted, and mass-market don't because they change publishing lists to suit sales to sensation-seeking *cough*half-wits*cough* 1000 loonies quoting each other does not outweigh one sensible person that can show his research, methods, data and conclusions. Case in point, one site out there has a detailed description of daily life in Atlantis (which, if you get deep enough into Nazi UFO theory, is actually the source of Nazism/ flying saucers etc - honest, follow their chains of argument, you'll get deeper and deeper into bozo territory, but leave a trail of breadcrumbs to find your way back to the real world :lol: ). How did they get this information?? Most of them got by "recieving higher knowledge from the elder races" ie they made it up wholesale and there's other idiots take it on faith. Look for facts, corroboration, evidence.
Not you Toastinaor, something glitched and my last post was a reply to Danyel, I never saw yours. You must have done it while I was composing my masterpiece of logic :lol: Re TV, I caught History Channel this afternoon doing a PR job for the P-51. Quotes from memory so don't hold me to numbers exactly: While the Spitfire was a superb fighter the most highly regarded was the MKV (oh yeah?? Oli) and only 380 were built. In contrast over 12000 Mustangs were built (and comparing production numbers of one mark of Spit against the entire run of P-51 proves what exactly?? Oli). Normally it carried machine guns but the RAF variant had 4 20mm cannon and six machine guns. (Ouch, which kid's book did that come from?? Oli) And someone will go to work or school tomorrow after watching that and spread the lies... Although, Simon, your comment the problem is how do you know what to trust? I'm in a disagreement with a "suppressed technology from UFOs" nutter on SciForum at the moment, because he trusts everything except science books and government statements. I'm currently working it back on him that instead of suppressing technology the military-industrial complex is acting as if it's suppressed and getting a million anti-military conspiracy freaks to test the theories at home while the government pays one guy to trawl the web looking for genuine breakthroughs - cheaper than a NASA lab! I think I'll have him in my pocket by the end of next week :lol:
When I first starting reading up on military tech history I was inclined to believe everything (I was very young.. ). Then I began to notice that not all books said the same thing, so I tended to believe things that appeared in more than one book. Then I realised that most authors copied from each other because it's much easier than the slog of researching it yourself, and that errors could be copied just as easily as facts - and frequently were. Ultimately, you have to use your own judgment and common sense. On the subject of secret Nazi tech all you have to do is consider the following: - The last couple of years of the war were desperate in Germany, and lots of crazy ideas were proposed which sounded great but turned out not to work at all. One strong motivation for scientists developing such research projects was that it might save them from having a rifle shoved into their hands and being sent to the Eastern Front. - The winners of WW2 grabbed everything they could from Germany and took up anything that was useful (swept-wing aircraft, V2 rockets, revolver cannon etc). The German scientists who were working on these projects were usually only too happy to help rather than stay in their bombed-out wreck of a country. - NATO and the Warsaw Pact were soon at each other's throats and explored and fielded every advanced weapon that worked. - German tech was ahead of the Allies in a few areas as mentioned (although behind in others, like radar and the A-bomb), but not that far ahead; it is inconceivable that they invented some wonder-weapon which has not only remained a secret for sixty years, but one which no-one has thought of since. In conclusion, the mythical German wonder-weapons were, at best, wild ideas which stood no chance of making it into reality. If you want to find some way of assessing the validity of people's statements and beliefs, then try this: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Scales.htm Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
I quite like the theory that the Twin Towers were designed and built with emergency demolition in mind and were lined with explosives that no-one noticed during construction........just as likley to be a Klingon Bird of Prey that can fire when clloaked. And you are right about the History Channel and Discovery Channel - I keep expecting Homer Simpson to start narating.
Oh that's what brought the Twin Towers down! I might have known those nasty Klingons would be involved somehow... Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
Well IIRC Tiornu invoked the 'Klingon Bird of Prey' scenario on the Warships1 board when someone suggested the RN cruisers fired the killing shot on the Hood..... :smok:
The science fiction author David Drake wrote a short story entitled "The Last Battalion", wherein an American senator discovers that the Nazis created a very advanced flying saucer in the last days of WW2, then built a fleet of less-advanced craft (material shortages prevented them from completely duplicating the original) from a secret Antarctic base (they also had one on the moon) after the war. The crews were SS troopers, and they told the senator of encountering and destroying several other UFOs that they thought were Soviet. Turns out that the destroyed craft were extraterrestrial, and the Nazis had managed to get the Earth into an interstellar war. It's a very interesting story.
nonsense Complete nonsense. But it asks a question. Does anyone know of german reports from pilots seeing ufo's? Did the luftwaffe have a policy on sightings?
