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.

 

Military Eyewitness Captures 'Transparent UFO' On Night Vision

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Aerial Refueling under 5,000ft with no noise? Possible but then you would have to explain which aircraft can be that low, that quiet.

If you look at the image provided you almost see a triangle or at least a tailless aircraft, however if you resize that image the semi-solid(?) form seems to be related to the lights themselves and one could assume that "shape" is caused by the NVG or recording equipment. You might be seeing active camouflage systems.

Why isn't the video any longer? Why not video it until viewpoint was interrupted?

Nice find

edit on 12-9-2014 by StratosFear because: Typing is not my native form of communication




posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Well said, next he will say its a transparent stealth blimp! LOL these ppl..


originally posted by: boncho

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: boncho

Blimps are not transparent.

This thing is.


When you mix this, with this

The department of transportation as well as law enforcement are already using tethered blimps to spy on you.

Was it two years ago triangle shaped lights were seen from north canada, down throughout the states, all the way to AUS? It wouldn't surprise me if they had an invisible blimp they'd be testing how it operates beyond the limited airspace at a base. Especially for the one that is supposed to be airborne for long periods of time,


This one stays up for 30 days.

security.blogs.cnn.com...

Not saying that's what this is, but invisible ships in the sky are not out of the capabilities of mankind.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 04:00 AM
link   
a reply to: StratosFear
Aerial Refueling under 5,000ft with no noise?

Altitude determined how? Without knowing the distance between the lights, impossible to to provide even a rough estimate by visual observation.

edit on 9/13/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: StratosFear
Aerial Refueling under 5,000ft with no noise?

Altitude determined how? Without knowing the distance between the lights, impossible to to provide even a rough estimate by visual observation.

I was going off the information provided in the article, The observer said it was relatively low. You would hear a KC-10 or KC-135 and you would most certainly hear whatever it was refueling, if it were a known aircraft.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
People try to estimate size and distance anyway, and they fail.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Here is an example of a "UFO" that some witnesses reported as being over 100 meters in length and as you can see its not much over 1 meter long:


"Linn Murphy UFO"

At 400 feet altitude, the UFO (which weighs about a pound) looks like a mammoth spacecraft miles away, dancing, diving, hovering, now flitting away.
I would also note you could potentially see the stars between those lights in that model. It's not the same shape as the lights in the OP video but you can make a model in just about any shape you want.

I'd also note the photography is horrible in the OP video. It's a short video and he doesn't even keep the object he's filming in view for half the video.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
" the stars actually visible through the fuselage."

WOW!

Have we lost any common sense now?

If the stars are shining through the fuselage, scuse me, logic says it's not a solid object but...TATA....as so often with triangle sightings...merely LIGHTS....and only an assumption there is "an object between the lights"....except that you never see the object. If you don't SEE an object, then there IS no object, and if stars shine through we even have proof for that.

Now tell me...blatantly claiming it's a "transparent UFO"...isn't this a "little" far-fetched? Because if we go that route, I am claiming I am having a pink elephant flying through my home right now....except it's not visible.

Common sense here says to look for a "normal" explanation first, eg. what those three lights could be, including to look WHAT EXACTLY HAS BEEN OBSERVED...rather than pulling a ridiculous speculation from thin air.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 10:45 AM
link   
From the article:
>>
The craft was in the shape of a triangle.
>>

He DID not see a craft, he saw three lights. He cannot make a statement about the shape of the "craft", we don't have this information. We can, in fact, not even say whether what as seen was one craft or a number of whatever flying in formation. So far for "reliable" witness testimony....
edit on 9/13/2014 by NoRulesAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: StratosFear




I was going off the information provided in the article, The observer said it was relatively low.

That's where critical thinking enters the picture.
How did the observer come to the conclusion that the lights were relatively low. It's an important question. Such claims should not be accepted at face value.

edit on 9/13/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: StratosFear




I was going off the information provided in the article, The observer said it was relatively low.

That's where critical thinking enters the picture.
How did the observer come to the conclusion that the lights were relatively low. It's an important question. Such claims should not be accepted at face value.


Because that is the visible impression he got when seeing those lights?? Surely the original witness has the intelligence to disterian to a reasonable degree that led him to come to his relatively low comment, after all the observer was there first hand witnessing it and we were not.Nothing worse than being told you got it wrong or were mistaken from those that witnessed nothing and were not there.With all due respect thought its time we gave witnesses more scope for believability on what they witnessed.
edit on 15/07/2010 by K-PAX-PROT because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: K-PAX-PROT

Because that is the visible impression he got when seeing those lights?? Surely the original witness has the intelligence to disterian to a reasonable degree that led him to come to his relatively low comment, after all the observer was there first hand witnessing it and we were not.Nothing worse than being told you got it wrong or were mistaken from those that witnessed nothing and were not there.With all due respect thought its time we gave witnesses more scope for believability on what they witnessed.


I am pretty sure that a HUGE majority of common folks, me included, would not be able to guesstimate altitude, size, height, speed etc. of a craft adequately. IN THIS CASE, we cannot even trust that the guy saw ONE craft and not multiple (like a tanking operation etc.)...and sorry, just the statement about the alleged transparent craft would entirely discount this guy for me as a witness altogether.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
In this screenshot it does look like a larger plane in front.


Agreed. Here's my attempt:



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
You CAN guess broadly if the aircraft are low or high, just depending on how quickly they cross the sky/your field of view. We all see commercial planes flying across the sky and so it doesn't take a monkey to figure it out. Of course some people here are being obtuse & pedantic about it so we can avoid facing what it might be. So lets niggle on minutia.

AA refueling generally takes place min 19000 feet, and I would doubt they'd do it over a populated area. It would most likely be so high up you wouldn't even see the lights to this clarity. So I think its safe to rule out AA refueling. Sorry.
edit on 15-9-2014 by ATSZOMBIE because: (no reason given)


(post by Matamoros removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TLomon



posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Hi all, i am new to this board!!! I have a short story, as I have seen a military aircraft but HAVE no idea what it was or IF anyone else has seen one like it! Anyways I was in a small town called Boron out in CA!! Basically I was in the middle of no where when my car broke down! right next to edwards airforce base!!! across the other side of the street were train tracks!! Anyways while I was waiting for a ride, I heard what I thought was a train! I was wrong, what I had seen was a huge blimp!! HERE is the thing, the only part I could see was the red lights in front and back!! The blimp was well lol SEE THROUGH!? IT seemed to take what ever was on top of it and reflect it back underneath it? It reminded me of that car commercial they have where the car looked invisible!! I tried to get it on video but yeah, did not work out to well lmfao!!! It has been really bugging me , I was wondering if anyone has heard of these blimps and or know what they are!?huh! My wife finally came to pick me up and laughed when I told her, sure enough it made a U turn and out in the distance you could see the lights but not the blimp!! When it flew past a star or something it was like you could see threw it! anyways thx in advance!!!!

IT REMINDED ME OF THIS CAR COMMERCIAL youtu.be...



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join