Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Space Science

France Opens Secret UFO Files 379

Radon360 notes that France has become the first country to open its files on UFOs. A new website lists over 1600 sightings dating back to the 1950s. "The online archives, which will be updated as new cases are reported, catalogues in minute detail cases ranging from the easily dismissed to a handful that continue to perplex even hard-nosed scientists. Known as OVNIs in French, UFOs have always generated intense interest along with countless conspiracy theories about secretive government cover-ups of findings deemed too sensitive or alarming for public consumption."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

France Opens Secret UFO Files

Comments Filter:
  • Moi (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mipoti Gusundar ( 1028156 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @04:30AM (#18455887) Journal
    Je, pour une, bienvenu notre nouvelle ONVI maitre!
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by jibjibjib ( 889679 )
      How do you say "Mod parent up" in French?
      • Re:Moi (Score:4, Informative)

        by BlueTrin ( 683373 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:25AM (#18456197) Homepage Journal
        You say:
        Donnez une bonne note au parent (there's no literal translation for mod up)

        or

        Votez pour le parent (implied that it is up)

        *Waiting for the freedom fries lovers to mod me down* :)
        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Dammit, it's not called "french fries" or "freedom fries", it's called "chips"! I fear we lost an opportunity to teach Americans real English...
          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by kestasjk ( 933987 ) *
            French fries are long and thin, chips (in England) are thicker and shorter.
            Here in Australia you get a strange crossover between British and American English, and so chips can mean either crisps or fries depending on context.
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by rifter ( 147452 )

              French fries are long and thin, chips (in England) are thicker and shorter.

              Here in the US the thick ones are often called "steak fries."

              Here in Australia you get a strange crossover between British and American English, and so chips can mean either crisps or fries depending on context.

              Actually depending on where you go in the US chips can mean anything, within a restaurant context. Often, ordering "chips" in an Anglophile/English-style pub/restaurant will result in something like what other restaurants c

    • Translation (Score:5, Funny)

      by cabinetsoft ( 923481 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:02AM (#18456053)

      Je, pour une, bienvenu notre nouvelle ONVI maitre!
      I surrender to our new UFO overlords.
    • Re:Moi (Score:5, Informative)

      by dmayle ( 200765 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:31AM (#18456219) Homepage Journal

      <Offtopic>Ok, I won't go into how bad that French is...</Offtopic>

      It's OVNI for Objets Volants Non-Identifié. But the reason I'm posting is that I wanted to point out that this has been released by CNES, which is kind of like NASA in France. Not quite, as it's more of an educational institution, but it's very similar nonetheless...

      • CNES is much more than just an educational institution, they build satelites and interplanetary probes and run telescopes (and, yes, there is a lot of educational work there since there is a lot of pure academic research done there) beside their educational activities. The points NASA does and not CNES are launchers (handled by Ariane Espace) and experimental aircrafts (mostly handled by EADS).
        Of course, on any of these activities, it is 10 to 100 times smaller than NASA.
    • Re:Moi (Score:5, Funny)

      by Mjlner ( 609829 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:55AM (#18456329) Journal

      Je, pour une, bienvenu notre nouvelle ONVI maitre!
      You know, a "pardon my French" would be in order...
    • by Lord Satri ( 609291 ) <alexandreleroux.gmail@com> on Friday March 23, 2007 @06:18AM (#18456441) Homepage Journal
      Surprised by the bad translations in the comments, here's a more appropriate one (no, online translation tools are not as good as humans): Je, quant à moi, souhaite la bienvenue à nos nouveaux maîtres OVNIs.

      Additionally, it's not "secoupe volante" pour rather "soucoupe volante" (flying saucer) (see other comment on parent). And if they wanted to be our masters and already made contact, since they would have the technology to reach us, I guess they'd already be our masters. (well, looking at our politicians' behavior, maybe they already are! ;-)
      • by rifter ( 147452 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @12:06PM (#18460595) Homepage

        And if they wanted to be our masters and already made contact, since they would have the technology to reach us, I guess they'd already be our masters. (well, looking at our politicians' behavior, maybe they already are! ;-)

        Anyone advanced enough to develop interstellar travel would probably be smart enough to come up with better plans than our politicians; if anything the Earth would be much better regulated than it is now. Then again they would also probably be smart enough not to bother ruling a backward planet filled with suicidal primates bent on taking the world with them.

        There is the interesting possibility of an interstellar society which regresses much like our own in that interstellar vehicles and other similar tech are so ubiquitous and education so inadequate that pilots/users actually have no idea how the equipment works or how to maintain it. Then stupid, sadistic fools with far more money than brains could cruise the universe in giant spaceships that deliberately waste energy in search of amusement and happen upon our planet. It would be much like some of the early European settlers and the games they played with natives (which weren't so much fun for them -- see the Yaqui and Tasmanians ), and not unlike that of a small boy molesting a pile of ants. It would require neither wisdom nor intelligence and as unlikely as it is would be more likely than the scenario you describe.

        Unless our planet's resources are more rare than we think, or there is some property of our location that makes it more important than we now know, it just doesn't seem that our planet would be that interesting to your average spacefarers except for the curiousity. If we were to be ruled by some spacefaring race you'd think the first thing they'd do is get rid of us since we are screwing up the planet they want.

        Incidentally, the fact we know of no other planet like ours and no other life than this makes it even more important that we do not mess this one up and start working on finding other systems in which to plant life while we still can. Even if there is life elsewhere this is still a good idea; I am actually pretty glad that Stephen Hawking agrees because people will listen to him before they will listen to anyone else on an issue like this.

        • As above. . . (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Fantastic Lad ( 198284 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:02PM (#18465445)
          Anyone advanced enough to develop interstellar travel would probably be smart enough to come up with better plans than our politicians; if anything the Earth would be much better regulated than it is now. Then again they would also probably be smart enough not to bother ruling a backward planet filled with suicidal primates bent on taking the world with them.

          You are thinking too human-centric.

          Consider the following possibility. . .

          Aliens exist in a higher state of reality than we can perceive; that is, they are with us right now, all the time. They function and exist in a state where time does not exist for them in the same way it does for us. That is, the thousands of UFO reports are not of nuts and bolts technology, but of bits of reality poking through into ours.

          Second. . . What if these aliens are to us what we are to cows. That they are here to eat us. What if they consume the energy from negative emotions such as fear and pain. This would explain our high population, our constant state of screwed up religion, war and general suffering around the globe. It also explains our media's and our education system's aversion of looking at sciences which would help explain the alien presence. That of being living on the "spirit plane", (so to speak). Of chi and magic in general.

          This explanation, as distasteful as it sounds, nonetheless answers all the puzzles presented to us be the short-sighted Carl Sagans of the world. Sci-fi wants us to think in terms of other humans from space. It doesn't look at the idea that aliens are far more intelligent and have no interest in communicating with us beyond manipulation and control.

          Look at our cattle industry. --We breed an entire race of animals totally controlled for our consumption. Aliens need to eat too.

          As above, so below.


          -FL

    • by o'reor ( 581921 )
      Best. Google. Translation. Evar.

      ;-)

  • by oldwindways ( 934421 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @04:33AM (#18455897) Homepage Journal
    Honestly, if the French government though there were UFOs, they wouldn't bother to cover it up, they would just surrender.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Then the US would invade wherever the UFOs came from, only to retreat several years later when no WMDs are found.
    • Re:French Response (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 23, 2007 @06:04AM (#18456379)
      Oh, ha ha. Someone mentions the French and then the next thing you know someone responds with a surrender joke. Quite original.

      French bashing was so 2002/2003. We saw how the other items in the American gung-ho mindset worked out for that time period: French bashing, invading Iraq, Guantanamo Bay prison, restrictive anti-terror laws, waterboarding, extraordinary rendition for torture, etc. Most people recognize that the French were right in 2002 and 2003 and that the rest of the items above were grave mistakes. Why continue to bash the French then? It isn't like they haven't helped out fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda--in fact the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaule is heading out to the Arabian Gulf for another tour. The French were against a war than most Americans are now against (Iraq) and support a war that most Americans still continue to support (Afghanistan). Continuing to bash the French is worse than pointless. It is like a jock beating up the smart kid because he was right and the jock was wrong. The main reason people continue to bash the French is to hide their own shame.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the French been called surrender monkeys since WW2? I know that Iraq is what folks want to focus most recently when it comes to France, but certain reputations have been around for a lot longer.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Castar ( 67188 )
          Yeah, OK. So France in WWII brings up a couple immediate thoughts. First, of course, is the stunningly ineffective defense of the Maginot line - they were fighting the last war. Due to that, there's also the incredibly rapid invasion of the German forces and the subsequent surrender by the French government - an understandable move, when their main defense had just been subverted so entirely.

          However, then there's the second thing that springs to mind: the famous La Resistance movement, that continued fighti
      • Re:French Response (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @09:23AM (#18458203) Journal
        Now, speaking as a Brit, we've been bashing the French for a good thousand years or so (and they have been bashing us for at least as long). We see no reason to stop just because the Americans have started to join in (although, we do find that pretty funny, since the main reason that they are not still a colony of ours is that the French fought for their independence).
    • by 4D6963 ( 933028 )

      lol. Funny tho how "UFOs" seems to mean to you "alien spaceships" as it really means "thing in the sky that we don't really know what it is". But yeah, I get your point, we would surrender.

  • Link seems broken (Score:2, Informative)

    by atamyrat ( 980611 )

    To visit the website: www.cnes-geipan.fr.
    The article points to website http://www.cnes-geipan.fr/ [cnes-geipan.fr], which I couldn't access.

    Does anyone know the correct link?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 23, 2007 @04:39AM (#18455927)
    Radon360 notes that France has become the first country to open its files on UFOs.

    Because Radon360 is a twat.

    May 2006:
    http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FreedomOfInforma tion/PublicationScheme/SearchPublicationScheme/Uni dentifiedAerialPhenomenauapInTheUkAirDefenceRegion .htm [www.mod.uk]
    • Yes, but France is the first country to do so only one mounth before a presidential election, maybe it is not a coincidence.
    • Gee, Thanks. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Radon360 ( 951529 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @10:22AM (#18459121)

      I didn't realize that submitting a story made me a "twat".

      That's great that you brought the fact that the UK government has released some similar information to the public, long before France had done so. Perhaps the reporter of this article should be labelled a "twat" for not researching the topic further and bringing up that point, or at least not make the bold comment about France being the first.

      Which brings up another point. If you ever have submitted a story to Slashdot, you'd recognize that the editors tend to take quite a bit of liberty on rewriting the story summaries (for better or worse). I didn't "note" anything...the summary was just rewritten to say I did.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 23, 2007 @04:42AM (#18455951)
    will the database contain a field on whether or not the aliens looked delicious?
  • Tag zis (Score:5, Funny)

    by ootykumar ( 996813 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @04:52AM (#18455999)
    Ze truth iz out zere
  • I wonder if this means that we'll finally find out what happened to SHADO [ufoseries.com]?
  • by rucs_hack ( 784150 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:09AM (#18456081)
    If you consider UFO to be what it actually means, that it is an object in the sky for which there is no current explanation, then that's fine. Ball Lightening was a 'UFO' till it was explained.

    To believe that these unexplained things are extra terrestrials is a huge leap, and one I would tend to scoff at. Not least because the whole 'flying saucer' and 'greys' crap only appeared in the US during the early cold war, with greys not being named till later.

    I will never believe that an advanced race can travel all the way across the inconceivable distance between stars, and be dumb enough to crash. Nor that they would travel that far and buzz people on their own, which is all that has supposedly happened.

    Not once have they made proper contact and opened a dialogue, or established a visible presence. That's would be like Christopher Columbus landing in America, blowing a rasberry at a native American, jumping back in his ship and heading home without another word. It's just silly.

    Most alien visitation theories read like children's stories, and most 'the aliens operated on me' stories read like early memories of visits to a dentist mixed with sexual fantasies.

    And yet I do believe that other life exists, to do otherwise is to be a fool, given the size of the universe.

    I do not, however, subscribe to the 'aliens are morons who can't steer a ship, and like to cut on us some from time to time' line of thought.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:16AM (#18456127)

      I will never believe that an advanced race can travel all the way across the inconceivable distance between stars, and be dumb enough to crash.
      Yeah, humans definitely have the market on that particular brand of stupidity (RIP Beagle 2). :-P
      • [koff] Well, being British I am given to ignore that particular event [koff]
      • by mpe ( 36238 )
        Yeah, humans definitely have the market on that particular brand of stupidity (RIP Beagle 2). :-P
        BR>There's a slight difference between crashing a robot probe on an unihabited planet next door and crashing a crewed ship on an alien planet, which you know full well has intelligent natives (with an industrial society) on it, in an alien star system...
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by BlueTrin ( 683373 )
      You might want to look at the Drake equation [ufoevidence.org]
      • by Oligonicella ( 659917 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @07:44AM (#18457017)
        Love the link. It reminds me of the dumb crap I bought into at age 12.

        Equation: N = R* fp ne fl fi fc L

        This is followed by an explanation of the 'variables' and the sentence "Most of these have not altered to any significant degree since that conference in 1961."

        Wow! Talk about disingenuous. fp is changing as we get new pictures. Planetary systems are thought common instead of fairly rare as in '61. The rest are a joke.

        ne (planets suitable for life) - unknown, we can't examine the small planets yet.
        fl (planets with life) - unknown, we can't examine the small planets yet.
        fi (those with intelligence) - unknowable.
        fc (those with radio) - unknowable.
        L (lifetime of advanced races)- unknowable.

        Lessee, that's five of seven that are unknown and three of those cannot in any reasonable stretch of the imagination even be known. Great equation.

        Well, they follow that with a lame caveat:
        "Values for some of these parameters are, of course, open to considerable disagreement..."

        Following that are the explanations for the current set of values. This is filled with such gems as (for fi and fc) "however many researchers of the topic agree 0.01". First, there are no researchers on this topic. Research cannot be done on this topic. What the author means is "however, many geeks during parlor talk fervently believe that 0.01". Not the same thing as science. Not a value to be used in anything but a parlor game.

        L is another good example. They're just using the length of our civilization with nukes. That's right. They consider us to be the average for the lifetime of advanced civilizations. Our one known example is used to average a galaxies worth of possible civilizations. Utter drek.

        This is what happens when dried scientists try to get sexy with parlor talk.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Unless visiting Earth and scaring humans is the alien equivalent of cow tipping...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by teslar ( 706653 )

      I will never believe that an advanced race can travel all the way across the inconceivable distance between stars, and be dumb enough to crash.

      I'm with you on the entire alien-free-planet-to-date argument, but you may want to reconsider that particular belief. Travelling distances between stars is a completely different thing from landing on a planet and this includes the mechanics involved. You may be incredibly fast in a vacuum but perhaps you've never encountered Earth-like gravity before or this Nitroge

      • by argent ( 18001 )
        Basically you assume two things in your belief: (1) familiarity with the Earth environment and experience therein and (2) total absence of mechanical/electrical/whatever failures.

        And (3) sanity. What you're describing is the equivalent of trying to land on Jupiter in a Cessna. And we have a lot less experience with the Jovian atmosphere than any people capable of intersteller travel would have with rocky planets like the Earth.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by mpe ( 36238 )
          And (3) sanity. What you're describing is the equivalent of trying to land on Jupiter in a Cessna. And we have a lot less experience with the Jovian atmosphere than any people capable of intersteller travel would have with rocky planets like the Earth.

          Even if such a species evolved in an environment very different from Earth they'd still know about rocky planets with gas atmospheres because such planets are common.
          Of course any alien from an environment unlike the Earth's surface would probably have to we
      • by rucs_hack ( 784150 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @07:09AM (#18456735)
        1: Any race lacking in the ability to calculate the basic math of gravitational calculations would probably never get into space in the first place.

        2: Any Race unable to enter the atmosphere of a planet safely in a crewed ship would also be unlikely to be inclined to do so, or they would have gathered experience. After all, we've barely got started and already we know the problems involved in landing on different planets.

        Give aliens a little credit...

        • 2: Any Race unable to enter the atmosphere of a planet safely in a crewed ship would also be unlikely to be inclined to do so, or they would have gathered experience. After all, we've barely got started and already we know the problems involved in landing on different planets.

          We might be their first try. Or if they aren't some kind of hive mind, they have a Capt. Zaph Branigan at the helm...
          • So, instead of exploring orbiting bodies in their system, they leapt across the galaxy to ours first thing? Get a grip.

      • While I agree that aliens aren't going to master interstellar flight, just to crash on Earth - I also don't think they're going to plow into our own atmosphere willy-nilly without sending probes in or running earth's gravity through their systems to ensure they have the proper equipment to land safely.

        Interestingly, if they were sending in probes, it wouldn't be at all surprising if several of them failed.
        So we see that the question of: "would little green men crash?" is too narrow. Stepping back, the quest
      • by Kjella ( 173770 )
        You may be incredibly fast in a vacuum but perhaps you've never encountered Earth-like gravity before or this Nitrogen floating around in the atmosphere so much.

        Well, you wouldn't even have a snowflake's chance in hell unless you can calculate the gravity pull from all the other objects like say the sun on your entry trajectory to our solar system, so they'd have the theory of gravity pretty much nailed down. If it's a very primitive probe it might only be designed to reach earth, in which case it'd crash l
      • by mpe ( 36238 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @09:31AM (#18458321)
        I'm with you on the entire alien-free-planet-to-date argument, but you may want to reconsider that particular belief. Travelling distances between stars is a completely different thing from landing on a planet and this includes the mechanics involved.

        If these aliens evolved on a planet with an atmosphere they'd have had to work the mechanics out in order to get into orbit around their own planet. Even if an alien species could evolve in some completly different environment gravity is a fundermental universal force.

        You may be incredibly fast in a vacuum but perhaps you've never encountered Earth-like gravity before or this Nitrogen floating around in the atmosphere so much.

        Hence you'd probably want different vehicles for travelling through intersteller space vs looking around planets vs descending into planetry atmosphere.

        Looks harmless enough, but what do you know, it just happens to set the primary coil reactor on fire and corrode the entire fusion circuitboard in a matter of seconds, what an awkward time to find this out.

        Hence you could use these useful things called "robot probes". Also "seconds" is plenty of time for an autopilot to select "abort to orbit", unless the pilot has reaction times several times slower than humans it is also plenty of time for them to do something about the emergency.

        Or maybe you just have no idea to compensate for 10 times the gravitational pull of your own home planet, maybe simply because your landing thrusters have nto been designed with that in mind.

        The only thing any aliens need to know is the mass of their own craft. From that they can work out the mass of every object in the Solar system.

        Basically you assume two things in your belief: (1) familiarity with the Earth environment

        Actually "familiarity of a planet gas around it".

        (2) total absence of mechanical/electrical/whatever failures

        Or using multipally redundent systems. Especially of a a vehicle you intend taking into an alien environment.
        The idea of intelligent aliens who are capable of intersteller travel, yet ignorant of the basic mechanics of the universe and incapable of the engineering needed to stay alive is just incredible.
    • I would believe that a race can traveel entire galaxy and crash. Suppose they are like us. They WILL have "people" that are not really smart and can't understand ALL the technology they have properly (look at typical windows user). So if it's so easy to fly entire galaxy that anybody can do it, then somebody dumb will fly here to earth and crash.
    • "Not once have they made proper contact and opened a dialogue, or established a visible presence."

      How do you know such things?! Are you one of "them"?

      Seriously though, consider the prime directive... if a dialogue had been established, do you think they would choose Chester from the West Virginia hills on his pig farm, or an established, secretive authority to handle any contact. I wonder...

      And, until you can dismiss every one of these guys [disclosureproject.com] and their witness testimony without one ounce of repercussion o
      • I dismiss them for one simple reason. There is not one shred of scientifically viable proof. Not one single bit.

        People can wax lyrical or appeal to my compassion all they want, without proof of Aliens I will never accept that they have visited Earth.

        You mention fantastic proof, but that's not what is needed. Anything at all, even the meanest verifiable piece of alien material, organic or artificial would do, no matter how small, but no such evidence has ever been produced.

        And another thing 'Prime directive'
      • In our courts of law, alien visitation would be able to be easily proven
        I doubt that's true be it's definitely irrelevant. All that is required to prove your theory is one single bit of physical evidence. To date no such evidence has ever been discovered.

    • by mpe ( 36238 )
      If you consider UFO to be what it actually means, that it is an object in the sky for which there is no current explanation, then that's fine. Ball Lightening was a 'UFO' till it was explained.

      Many many UFOs are only UFOs for a short time (possibly seconds) until they become IFOs e.g. aircraft. In other cases it can take longer. There are also photographs and video footage which are likely to remain "unidentified" simply because of poor technical quality.

      To believe that these unexplained things are extr
      • I'm not going to argue that aliens exist (odds say they probably do, but I like proof) or that they don't. I just don't agree with some of your arguments...

        The only thing likely to crash would be a robot probe.

        You don't explore this idea; is there any reason that the supposedly crashed alien ships can't be probes?

        Here's another possibility, stolen straight out of sci-fi but I forget what book; let's say that interstellar travel is only possible (on a reasonable time scale) by folding space. Then let's sa

    • will never believe that an advanced race can travel all the way across the inconceivable distance between stars, and be dumb enough to crash.

      Bring a caveman (or even someone from as recent as a thousand years ago or so) to our society, and they may think the same thing about us and our ability to make advanced technology like planes and cars. Basically every form of transportation we've ever created we've managed to smash into something or each other on a regular basis.

      • Bring a 'caveman' of even tens of thousands of years ago into the present, and educate him for a couple of years, and he would be indistinguishable from a great many people alive today.

        We don't evolve that fast....

        Also, if you look at the failure rate of technology over time you will find that it reduces as time progresses and the technology is improved. That applies to every form of technology.
  • by KlausBreuer ( 105581 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:11AM (#18456089) Homepage
    Why do people keep wanting to babble on about this idiocy? I want them to keep quiet about it - if you have to be a UFO-nut, I am certainly not interested in it.

    Sheesh, ACC offered my this planet for a nice quiet vacation, but everywhere I see people babbling about UFOs...
  • by jmmerliot ( 248420 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @05:19AM (#18456145)
    Never forget,

    "Comment servir l'homme ?" (How to serve man ?)

    is a cooking guide....

    Juste loved this old TZ episode

    -- a true frog from France ^^
  • by jpellino ( 202698 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @06:26AM (#18456471)
    The French are looking to prosecute any UFOs who aren't using open standards for their communications.
  • You'll have to excuse me for going all tinfoil hat here... but how hard would it be to say "We're releasing all our UFO files!" and only really reveal the ones that won't cause "public panic." I'm usually not the conspiracy theory type, but any time a government says they're releasing "all" the information on something, a part of me wants to cry "bullshit."
  • by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @07:24AM (#18456861) Homepage Journal
    especially you, americans !

    you should remember that the freedoms you are enjoying now were put forward in their current forms mostly by french intellectuals in 18th century, matured in this country and then were accepted by your founding fathers and incorporated into your constitution and the consequent revolution. not to mention french aiding you against the british, lafayette and all.

    and i dont even need to mention the french revolution, which is the social movement that set the way to the modern civilized society by overthrowing aristocracy not only in france, but in most of europe. it was eventually messed up by a short megalomaniac who is known as napoleon, but eh - revolution still did its thing.

    french are ok.

    the only problem is that, they hatch on stuff TOO long, only to put the stuff into action in 100-200 year intervals. and then, major things happen. all in the meantime they sleep, ruled by egotistic megalomaniacs.
  • UFOs exist (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @07:25AM (#18456867)
    Aliens and flying saucers may not exist but anyone who has seen something flying in the sky (bird, airplane or anything else) and cannot identify what it is has seen a UFO. More to the point, many secret "black" aircraft (both projects like the SR71, B2, F117 and U2 that have been revealed already and projects we don't know about) would be considered UFOs to anyone who doesn't know what they are.

    All those people who have reported UFO sightings near Area 51 are probably right, they most likely DID see UFOs. Since the prime use of Area 51 is to test secret aircraft in a way that makes sure that no-one finds out about them, most of the air operations out of the base would have appeared as UFOs to anyone except the few people working on whatever top secret project it is.

    As to why countries like America have not released their "UFO" files, its more likely to be because said files could contain information about "black" projects (those of the US, those of allied powers and those of enemy powers such as the Russians). Some of those aircraft are still flying (and some may well still be "top secret") and the US probably doesn't want information about aircraft that may still be used now or in the future to be made public.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ajpr ( 921401 )
      Yeah I agree with this. It's hard to imagine how much R&D the US spends on black projects. I'm still quite in awe of the Stealth Fighter which was on the drawing board in the 70s. Surely by now there is something else the money is being spent on? Maybe a nuclear pulse powered aircraft similar to Orion?

      Also even if some UFO's are aliens, the reason they might not contact us is that we are too stupid. We're unlikely to go to Mars and try conversing with any bacteria, and even on Earth we don't spend much
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by unity100 ( 970058 )
      There are no technology on earth capable of making any aircraft do 90 multiple degree turns while going with a 3000 km/hour speed, or disappear from naked eye.
      • There are no technology on earth capable of making any aircraft do 90 multiple degree turns while going with a 3000 km/hour speed, or disappear from naked eye.

        90 multiple degree turns? I can make ninety turns of two degrees each at 3000kph! If I could go that fast.

        There are however technologies that could apparently create that effect.

        On THAT note, I wonder if HAARP's localized heating of the atmosphere ever produces visible effects.

        As for disappearing, it wouldn't be very hard at night, or near dusk. W

  • The files show that between 1949 and 1972, France surrended a total of 122 times to suspected UFO invaders. There was another incident in which they negotiated a collaboration with alien grays, only to find out they were Basque shepards in ultra-lights, the language difficulty causing the misunderstanding.

  • by jerryodom ( 904532 ) on Friday March 23, 2007 @10:31AM (#18459249) Homepage Journal
    toute votre base sont appartiennent à nous

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Working...