It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Hangar-1" premiere on 'Presidential UFOs'

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Just watched the premiere of the MUFON files show, and was most interested in their version of the Jimmy Carter sighting. O. They show a nebulous circle about 6 to 8 degrees angular size, red fuzzy rim and white center. hanging above some trees against a broken-cloud sky with blue sky behind it. The 'reconstruction' shows it hanging motionless, then zooming off to the left.

And, BTW, it allegedly took place in October 1969 before a Lions Club speech in Leary, Georgia. That's their story and they're sticking to it.

That's significant since the date has been known to be in error for almost forty years but MUFON refuses to admit it.

See www.debunker.com...

edit on 6-3-2014 by JimOberg because: add link




posted on Mar, 6 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I agree that is a most misleading "reconstruction".
It was Venus and it didn't do a whole lot of zipping around: debunker.com...

Additionally Carter himself never believed the UFO was truly unexplained anyways. If I remember correctly, his first thought was that it was some sort of "electrical phenomenon".

ETA: Oops, you beat me to the link..

I was completely unimpressed with "Hangar 1" in general. Like nearly all UFO TV shows, it went for the dumbed down, sensational and exaggerated approach.

Shows like this one are bad news for the already suffering subject of ufology.

edit on 6-3-2014 by thesearchfortruth because: 3eta



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Check out the last comment on this thread if you want to see a UFO.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Been trying to do research on it but the internet is empty. The website for the UFO brings you to Wikipedia even when you type the website directly into the search engine. Phishy.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:43 AM
link   
It was just like any other show on UFO's it was about ratings and not truth just like any other show like it they hype it up and in the end they show or prove nothing its just more of the same BS that the last show had.There isn't a show on UFO's or any other subject like it on any channel that is really worth a watch that actually has any real tangible information at all.
edit on 7-3-2014 by skeeterslint because: grammer



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 06:01 AM
link   
I have trouble believing that anyone could mistake Venus for a UFO.

I think it is analogous to the weather balloon, and swamp gas. Just another excuse, guys like Jim Oberg, use to discredit any and all sightings.

Jim, are there any legit UFO sightings? Anywhere? Ever?
edit on 7-3-2014 by Jchristopher5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



To pick one aspect that is faulty and then, therefore (by logic or design?), ignore, belittle or infer all other aspects of the event is typical from your position as a mouthpiece for the government and scientific community. That the event is coincidentally related to tons of other, similar events of similar sightings is totally beyond your horizon.

Given you having been a crackerjack sleuth with Soviet rocket technology, I wonder how many bad, suggestive photos or tidbits of tantalizing info it took for you to suspect that they had a new, highly secret product in their hands? A true intelligence agent starts digging to prove or disprove that suspicion to himself and his agency. I guess you've done that with UFOs and regardless, you have come up empty-handed, nada, zip, nothing to prove to that UFOs exist and everything that relates to them (as either domestic or ET craft) is mere pipe dreams and in good faith, you will never stop challenging such claims?

Strange isn't it, that if we were talking about a bank robbery that mistakenly was given one date on the court docket and it happened on another, would that mean that every aspect of that case was wrong, worthless, no charges filed, and the whole case, comprised of physical and circumstantial evidence, prime witnesses, priors, etc. thrown into the trash and wiped from the records because of that one item error?

Of course, Oberg, not just a few of us are aware that your duties are to antagonize the UFO community and yet keep the ball rolling toward the eventual goal post. BTW, things seem to be heating up along that line recently, when are the triangles going to be announced as our space-capable ships?
edit on 7-3-2014 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Jchristopher5
I have trouble believing that anyone could mistake Venus for a UFO.

What does that prove?

No, seriously, it's a fair question. The degree that people can misinterpret weird aerial apparitions is astonishing. That's why you have to study lots of real cases where it can be shown it has happened again and again and again.

My favorite was the 'Barnaul airport case' about a dozen years ago Russia where pilots refused to take off because 'there was a UFO sitting right at the runway.'

But when you took the runway orientation, and the position in the sky of Venus, they matched. Nobody did that until it occurred to me to do it. And the pilots had seen ONE bright ligt, not "a UFO right NEXT to Venus". And when the real Venus set, by the clock, the pilots reported the UFO had 'flown away'.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Jchristopher5
... Jim, are there any legit UFO sightings? Anywhere? Ever?


I think there are useful observations hidden among the mass of observations that are worth the effort to dig out. Separating them out is made nigh impossible by too-eager credulity and by garble and distortion characteristic of the current reporting system, even though there are many serious, dedicated people collecting and documenting what they hope will be useful information..

My favorite 'space UFO' is Kovalyonok's 1981 report. And my favorite 'non-sighting' was when the hunk of Columbia's busted heat shield that drifted past a window a day after launch and NOBODY SAW IT, thus missing the chance to alert Earth to the lethal threat and begin a rescue/repair campaign.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   
The show is a rehash of another History Channel TV show from 2005 UFO Files episode titled "UFOs and the White House" It has the same people essentially, Richard Dolan and Grant Cameron. Same format and same cases pretty much. How Grant Cameron can be considered an "expert' on anything is beyond me. He's seriously gone off the deep end lately and Dolan is heading in that direction. Cameron is just a true believer who is incapable at looking at things objectively and Dolan is just chasing that next paycheck so much so as to try to appeal to a wider audience. He is now showing up at UFO conferences where people who think they are "star seeds" and "light workers" run the show and are "abducted" by aliens on a regular basis. It too bad because Dolan has some fairly solid cred with his two volumes of UFO history, but he's pandering to the woo woos and writing it off as "having an open mind". Its sad really.



posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Why is it on all the UFO programs the reconstructions are nearly always lights. Round lights, square lights, oblong lights yet the witnesses talk about structured craft. Probably lit up but structured craft non the less.



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
At The The UFO Collective,
Robert Hastings has been quoted on his opinions of the MUFON show, Hangar 1:

“I don’t agree with some of the statements this skeptic makes about the UFO cover-up in general and Roswell in particular, but he nicely summarises the first episode of the latest crappy UFO program on H2. And the second episode was even worse!

He links this article:
Review of Hangar 1: UFO Files S01E01 "Presidential Encounters"



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by CardDown
 


Episode 2 is about underground alien bases, in particular Dulce. Phil Schneider is presented as being legit. So too Thomas Castello!



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Had it recorded (Episode 2) just watched it, and it never ceases to amaze me how crappy most of these shows can be. Hangar 1 was exceptional only for it's badness. None Dare Call it Ufology!

Having said that, if Robert Bigelow has basically commandeered MUFON, does that mean this show has his blessing...or are those separate issues? I really need to know this if anyone can help me out on it.



edit on 9-3-2014 by The GUT because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   

CardDown
At The The UFO Collective,
Robert Hastings has been quoted on his opinions of the MUFON show, Hangar 1:

“I don’t agree with some of the statements this skeptic makes about the UFO cover-up in general and Roswell in particular, but he nicely summarises the first episode of the latest crappy UFO program on H2. And the second episode was even worse!

He links this article:
Review of Hangar 1: UFO Files S01E01 "Presidential Encounters"


Highly recommend that article. I posted a few comments to IT.



SAK: "It is very foolish to think that Carter and 10 people saw Venus." The trick on the MUFON show is to FALSIFY the date of the sighting as "October 1969" when the Lions Club records -- and witnesses -- agree it was in January. And since Venus was burning BRILLIANTLY in the sky exactly in the position Carter recalls a 'strange light', and he did NOT describe it as "a strange light up there near Venus", it is foolhardy to NOT admit the likelihood he and the others [whe were unimpressed with the light] were seeing Venus. But the MUFON files, and the TV program, must be falsified to make people like YOU avoid the real explanation. Now, who's feeling foolish?



posted on Mar, 9 2014 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Funny, thing is the Carter UFO was the best thing the first show covered. I mean at least it involved a sighting of something, while the rest of the stories were rumors about deals, meetings, alien bodies,and didn't involve UFOs at all!

There's an interview up at the MUFON website where the director basically admits compromising integrity just to be able to get MUFON on television. My interpretation may be a bit harsh, but listen for yourself:
www.mufon.com...



posted on Mar, 10 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   
For you viewing pleasure, the second episode is now online, along with the first:
MUFON's TALES From HANGAR 1



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Jchristopher5
I have trouble believing that anyone could mistake Venus for a UFO.

I think it is analogous to the weather balloon, and swamp gas. Just another excuse, guys like Jim Oberg, use to discredit any and all sightings.

Jim, are there any legit UFO sightings? Anywhere? Ever?
edit on 7-3-2014 by Jchristopher5 because: (no reason given)


I don't.

It was prominent in the evening sky a few months ago and it immediately caught my attention. Looked like it was a low flying aircraft of some sort... certainly did not give the impression of a distant planet. It can look very close and 3D.



posted on Mar, 11 2014 @ 06:13 PM
link   
John Ventre, of Hangar 1 is getting out in from of the missing airliner story:
Malaysia Flight 370 Solved By John Ventre



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Next on Hangar 1, looks like they go to Lazar and Corso for material!


"Alien Technology
Premiere Date:March 14, 2014 - 10:00-11:00PM ET
Could the greatest inventions of the twentieth century and beyond potentially be the products of reverse engineered alien technology? Inside Hangar 1, MUFON files trace mankind's technological boom to materials reportedly recovered from UFO crashes in the 1940s. MUFON investigates allegations of alien engineering, from the birth of the transistor in the 1950s, to military UFOs in the Middle East. Is our modern world built on a foundation of borrowed–or stolen–technology?"


They need to stop representing this material as being from "case files" and call it what it really is:



posted on Mar, 13 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by CardDown
 

In my eyes, MUFON has become a joke.

I was originally under the impression this series was going to take a look at some of the more recent sightings that MUFON has investigated. Instead, the show just brings up old material (not even UFO cases!) and has a bunch of 'ufologists' spout conspiracy theories without supporting evidence...



reply to post by JimOberg
 




My favorite "space UFO" is Kovalyonok's 1981 report. .

If you had to take a guess, what would you say this object was?


edit on 13-3-2014 by thesearchfortruth because: eta, formatting



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join