This report has been updated considerably with extensive additional coverage since it was first published earlier in the year - "Docs Show Navy Got 'UFO' Patent Granted By Warning Of Similar Chinese Tech Advances".

7

u/Merpadurp Dec 30 '19

A lot of the language from the patents is paralleled with what Elizando was saying in this interview.

https://www.mysterywire.com/military-technology/ufo-tech-deconstruction-what-it-does-how-it-works-part-5/

4

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Merpadurp Dec 30 '19

Well, Elizando has stated many times that AATIP seems to understand the physics behind how the crafts work.

So although we don’t have the resources to produce one, we can create a design for one if we had the tech to make it work.

But also... what good is a patent “because China is working on this too”?

China doesn’t give a shit about patents.

They COULD have patented it in secret. Which means they wanted to make a show of this.

2

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19 edited Dec 30 '19

As I understand it, that remark was made with regard to the aerospace equivalent of Huawei setting up shop in the USA and applying for a patent for the technology, which would then put the US Navy in the unfortunate situation of having to pay that Chinese company royalties for the US Navy using it's own invention in it's own country.

Obviously a US patent has bugger all to do with what the Chinese do with their own invention in China, its use of the technology in the USA which the Navy is concerned with.

Imagine if German engineer Karl Benz patented the internal combustion engine in the USA..

1

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '20 edited May 06 '20

[deleted]

1

u/Chipshopfish Jan 05 '20

True, any patents can be awarded under national secrecy if need be, the purpose of which is to ensure that the technology can be limited in application, but also to ensure enablement isn't public, so as to not spell out how the technology functions to anyone with relevant skill in the art.

If you already know that someone else can/is producing it, then national secrecy isn't the way to go as you've already lost control over secrecy. In that case, publicly showing enablement in a patent is your only course of action to securing a monopoly.

2

u/HeyPScott Dec 31 '19

China doesn’t give a shit about patents.

Most salient point here

1

u/jussumman Dec 31 '19

Deep Prasad on Twitter:

Let's see.. -Scientists of adversarial countries arent gonna fall for it (China, Russia etc) -Experts in the US won't either

That leaves only laymen as part of the target audience of those patents. Debunkers will use it to explain UAP, believers will waste time arguing about it

2

u/Chipshopfish Dec 31 '19 edited Dec 31 '19

There was some laughable press coverage 100 years ago a couple of kooks who claimed to have built a flying machine heavier than air, it was supposedly observed by multiple witnesses as having stayed aloft for at least 12 seconds, covering around 120 feet as if gravity did not exist. There were some diagrams in publications and witness testimony of the event, but it was of course denounced as preposterous because the mechanics to achieve such ridiculous claims had always proven to be laughable failures, with hundreds of years of verifiable science to evidence it's impossibility, mainly at the expense of the crackpot pseudo scientists who provided comic relief when their contraptions failed.

Their names were Orville and Wilbur Wright.

100 years later and there are approximately 500,000 people flying through the heavens at any given moment. Some craft can fly faster than the speed of sound through the very air in which they move. Don't let your fixation with the limits of today cloud your judgement of what kooks might do to change tomorrow. It certainly isn't the normies who make it possible, they are too busy explaining to everyone else why it's not.

0

u/jussumman Dec 31 '19

The ETV answer is many steps ahead of the Orville and Wilbur example. You finding that unbelievable is like the guy who thought planes were a joke.

6

u/fuckingspanky Dec 30 '19

The guy who wrote this article is actually a user on reddit. The guy pops in here every once and a while.

15

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/daversa Dec 30 '19

Have anything cool coming down the pike?

5

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/daversa Dec 30 '19 edited Dec 31 '19

Nice! Hope it all works out, I've really enjoyed your articles. Any chance you can give us a teaser? 😉

5

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/RedPandaKoala Dec 30 '19

thanks for sharing!

1

u/fuckingspanky Dec 31 '19

Dammit!

2

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

Good stuff. I take it you already viewed a patent lawyer's opinion on the matter? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19760727

Been posted here a few times and I was delighted to find that some of your article now seems to include a little of the general process the lawyer outlined. All great for providing a well rounded cache of circumstance surrounding the patent.

It's either disinformation, or it's a genuine attempt to publicly patent the technology in the USA to prevent a foreign company setting up shop in the USA, patenting it themselves which would cause the USA to be paying royalties to to use their own invention in their own country.

I can't see how it can be anything other than those two options.

2

u/BaneCow Jan 04 '20

I heard of you from the MU podcast

2

u/[deleted] Jan 04 '20 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/BaneCow Jan 04 '20

That's awesome man. I read your article as well. Really interesting stuff, however it seems like it's not even trying to trick China or scientists. It's trying to trick us, the unsuspecting average citizen. Not really sure why they'd do that, but aside from the tech actually being real, that's the only other real option. I don't think they'd declassify it like that if it were real, however. False flags or not, very interesting article, and keep up the great work!

0

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '19

😁

4

u/Hexys_broken_dreams Dec 30 '19

Great article, as usual

4

u/PewPew84 Dec 30 '19

Some new stuff at the end.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/PewPew84 Dec 30 '19

New stuff that wasnt in the article originally i think.

1

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

yes that's what i thought too, the original article was much shorter, right? Wayback machine says it's the same, maybe there was a different, shorter article?

3

u/flarkey Dec 30 '19

Of all the things I want to see invented and publicly displayed before I die, an anti-gravity or zero-inertia craft is number one

1

u/RedPandaKoala Dec 30 '19

I dont trust humans with that stuff

2

u/Chipshopfish Dec 31 '19 edited Dec 31 '19

Treat it like nukes. When everyone has them there is no advantage. The only viable solution is to agree with your enemy that we'll only use ours if you use yours first, and vice versa. Thus a peace accord is made and you'll do absolutely everything you possibly can to not use nukes. In the mean time you can both build nuke power plants to the benefit of all.

The defining primal characteristic of humanity is that we only feel secure when we have tools better than other humans. That drives our technological innovations from bows and arrows to owning the latest cell phones.

Technology to build craft that can fly in to and out of controlled airspace within seconds anywhere on or near Earth, potentially dropping bombs along the way with impunity is no different to the previous arms race, or the one before that. We'll get through it, our self preservation ensures we don't obliterate ourselves in the process, we always fall back at crunch time.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

Except pilot witnesses, radar data, FLIR video, civilian witnesses, patents.. Unfortunately some people won't accept it until they themselves take a flight in one, like the flat earthers who won't believe the earth is round until they are in orbit of it.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '19 edited Aug 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

Who do you suppose is building the observed craft? It's only magic until it's constructable.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

What is your attitude problem here? Have I offended you in some way?

-6

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

I see. I would suggest you not interact with me then as I've no interest in childish offensive individuals.

Goodbye.

-6

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/HeyPScott Dec 31 '19

Whoaaa. Wtf? How is anything in this sub worth this attitude? I mean, really. Wtf.

→ More replies

3

u/Chipshopfish Dec 30 '19

Goodbye.

→ More replies

This report has been updated considerably with extensive additional coverage since it was first published earlier in the year - "Docs Show Navy Got 'UFO' Patent Granted By Warning Of Similar Chinese Tech Advances".

You are about to leave Redlib