(Part 1) The Phoenix Lights - Laying To Rest The Myth

This may have been discussed, but whether it were one large craft or multiple planes, they would have shown on radar, correct?

originally posted by: AboveBoard

I was very interested in this witness's statement (Terry Mansfield), so I did some more digging...

At first I found a website that had her as a "peace ambassador" and associated with Astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell and his "Quantrek" organization. I immediately wondered if she was associated with this before or after her sighting of whatever "The Phoenix Lights" were, and she clearly was inspired to go in the "ET" and "Peace Ambassador" direction AFTER her sighting. So whatever this event was, it was enough for her to be inspired to change the course of her life to include work for peace and Dr. Edgar Mitchell's organization. Terry Mansfield

In a book titled Aliens in America, by William J. Birnes, there is an excerpt about Terry Mansfield and her sighting, which contains more details than in the clip you shared. All bold text is mine for emphasis:

"Witness Terry Mansfield said she and her friends were meeting about local public school issues when one of them looked out on the balcony windows to see the formation of lights off in the distance...they were awestruck as a huge craft seemed to float directly at them. The whole group fell silent as it glided effortlessly over rooftops. It was actually below the tips of the hilltops surrounding Prescott Valley, moving towards clusters of houses from the northwest to the southeast."

Other witnesses in this same book from the same area as Terry Mansfield:

"Still others on their respective balconies in this valley and hilltop community could observe other aspects of the object as it floated over. One person said she noticed the object had a "wavy" surface..."

Terry Mansfield also said this in the video, and that it was so low she felt that she could have "reached up to touch it." Another of her guests, in the book, said if they'd had a rock they could have thrown it and seen it "bounce off" of the overhead 'craft.'

Another in the area said "it was shiny black," and someone else said it had a "satin surface" that seemed to undulate, according to the book, which Terry Mansfield also corroborates in the video clip, saying it was "wavy."

According to the book, and I'm assuming this came from more than one witness as it is listed as a general fact, "It made no noise, yet was so huge - blotting out the sky from hilltop to hilltop as lights from the houses below played off its bright diamond black texture - and everyone looking at it stood as if in a trance."

Aliens in America, pages 176-178

Link to Google Book "Aliens in America": Link


These are the types of witness accounts that seem to hold evidence of a possible third event, and they certainly do not seem to indicate planes, low-flying or otherwise. I can see how people who give this description of what happened, would be unable to connect to the idea that their sighting was a formation of low-flying planes. The dots do not connect between what people are saying they saw, and the explanation in the OP. Even given a low level of accuracy in individual accounts, the several presented here add up to the same thing. Granted, they are not well documented and I cannot suss out who the "other" witnesses are, as they are anonymous.

peace,
AB

Coast to Coast radio did a show with some researchers who have been following up on witness reports for the past decade. They each tell their findings and have some of the witnesses speak on the phone and tell their stories.
After hearing these interviews it made the case much more interesting.

One of the researchers is Lynn Ketai who also wrote a book detailing her findings. She remained anonymous for the first 7 years of her work and took time off from her medical career.
She mentions having to return to medicine after she wrote the book (and video) because her son was going into college. So it doesn't strike me that she was trying to capitalize on $$ from a ufo book or start a writing career.

There are 11 parts, part 1 is here:
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: joelr
One of the researchers is Lynn Ketai who also wrote a book detailing her findings.

She is not a credible witness. She is proof that people just don't understand what they are seeing.

By her own admission, her pictures and videos are shot in the direction of the airport and Barry-Goldwater training range behind "South Mountain".

Any time the military runs night training exercises with planes and flares, she gets excited and shoots pictures or videos, thinking "aliens!", but doesn't realize it's all terrestrial.

originally posted by: jordan77
This may have been discussed, but whether it were one large craft or multiple planes, they would have shown on radar, correct?

Not correct. All radars have limited range both vertically and horizontally:

Southwest Airlines pilot Greg Aguirre, one of the witnesses who I interviewed, pointed how planes flying above 10,000 feet would be under the jurisdiction of Albuquerque regional controllers, but if they were below 3,000 feet “they wouldn’t have to identify themselves to anybody.”

The formation seemed to spend most of its flight time over Arizona at between 10,000 and 17,000 feet, according to other pilots in the air.

Furthermore, as Martin Hardy, manager of Sky Harbor (Phoenix) Air Traffic Control, explained to me, “We’re really not sure what happened that night. Unless it was some sort of military exercise, I don’t know what it could be. They didn’t show up on our radar. But our tower radar only goes up to 3,000 feet.”

Since the formation of lights (shown to be planes in the OP) were traveling between 10,000 and 19,000 feet, they would not have shown up on Sky Harbor's (Phoenix) Air Traffic Control radar.

They would have shown up on Albuquerque regional radar, though. And numerous researchers at the time were implored to request the radar data from Albuquerque regional. However none did, and since records are destroyed after 11 days, the records are now gone forever.

originally posted by: _BoneZ_

originally posted by: joelr
One of the researchers is Lynn Ketai who also wrote a book detailing her findings.

She is not a credible witness. She is proof that people just don't understand what they are seeing.

No, it is proof that YOU don't understand what they are seeing.

Ok, it is so intriguing and interesting to see how the OP completely sidestepped Brig. Gen. Thomas DuBose' affidavit claiming the US Military flat out lied about the Roswell Incident. That it was not a weather balloon. that the whole story about it being a weather balloon was made up ... a fabrication (pun,pun) ... a story to mislead the press ... a lie.

a reply to: GeisterFahrer

This thread is not about Roswell, therefore I won't be commenting about it. There are other threads for that topic.

originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

This thread is not about Roswell, therefore I won't be commenting about it. There are other threads for that topic.

i think the inference of military lies is completely relevant. and the lies of their stooges. fife symigton's absurd 'press conference' being a prime example. lying to cover up what they don't want people to know about. it's what they do.

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

This thread is not about Roswell, therefore I won't be commenting about it. There are other threads for that topic.

i think the inference of military lies is completely relevant. and the lies of their stooges. fife symigton's absurd 'press conference' being a prime example. lying to cover up what they don't want people to know about. it's what they do.

You're absolutely correct,it is entirely relevant. But, the OP doesn't want to discuss it, why?

Because the only way to even make a case against UFOs being alien contact is to isolate every single incident, and attempt to dismiss it as conventional.

When viewed in totality, in the context and pattern of the enormous record of UFO events,these sightings simply cannot be dismissed or denied as being exactly what they are; ongoing alien contact.

a reply to: _BoneZ_

But here it is again, the discrediting of one or two witnesses does not make the rest of them liars.

I think it will always be the case with this, one of the best sightings in the U.S.; There will never be a definitive proof for either side, so we are faced with a true mystery that acknowledges both sides. The OP did a great job in this presentation. It is the kind of field work that keeps discussions viable, and certainly entertaining.

a reply to: universalbri

I believe you.

I want to thank you for taking time to tell us what you know.
I have many questions. I am curious though.... have you read this thread?

What is your take on it?

Edit to add:

And look to the skies more often. The stars deserve more attention. Because they have something incredible coming our way.

Do you mean what i think you mean? can you be more specific?

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer
Ok, it is so intriguing and interesting to see how the OP completely sidestepped Brig. Gen. Thomas DuBose' affidavit claiming the US Military flat out lied about the Roswell Incident. That it was not a weather balloon. that the whole story about it being a weather balloon was made up ... a fabrication (pun,pun) ... a story to mislead the press ... a lie.

The weather ballon story WAS made up. It was to cover the top secret Mogul balloon mission to spy on the Soviet Union. The Air Force admitted this in the 1990s.

originally posted by: debonkers

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

This thread is not about Roswell, therefore I won't be commenting about it. There are other threads for that topic.

i think the inference of military lies is completely relevant. and the lies of their stooges. fife symigton's absurd 'press conference' being a prime example. lying to cover up what they don't want people to know about. it's what they do.

You're absolutely correct,it is entirely relevant. But, the OP doesn't want to discuss it, why?

Because the only way to even make a case against UFOs being alien contact is to isolate every single incident, and attempt to dismiss it as conventional..

Funny. The only way to scientifically analyze the UFO thing is EXACTLY to isolate every single incident because there are likely different causes for them.

This is not just my opinion but the opinion of Dr. Peter Sturrock and other scientists who have been friendly to studying the UFO topic.

Study this chart carefully and you will see why lumping all cases together and throwing up our hands saying "it's unidentified therefore it must be aliens" is not wise science:



As you can see, different cases require different investigative pathways.

a reply to: JadeStar

The weather ballon story WAS made up. It was to cover the top secret Mogul balloon mission to spy on the Soviet Union. The Air Force admitted this in the 1990s.

I think what he means is Roswell is a great example of the government lying, and certain people never questioning them. What government says goes basically when it comes to UFOs.

If they did not come out and say it was not a weather balloon, then people would still be believing that explanation.

They could turn around tomorrow and say that project M was another cover up, and it was really a secret military craft that crashed, and the same people who believed the weather ball on, project M explanations will believe this too

a reply to: _BoneZ_

So you're telling me, there isn't a radar in the greater Phoenix area, or the state of Arizona for that matter, with all those airports and military bases with a radar capable of tracking whatever this was?

originally posted by: _BoneZ_

She is not a credible witness. She is proof that people just don't understand what they are seeing.

By her own admission, her pictures and videos are shot in the direction of the airport and Barry-Goldwater training range behind "South Mountain".

Any time the military runs night training exercises with planes and flares, she gets excited and shoots pictures or videos, thinking "aliens!", but doesn't realize it's all terrestrial.

I can't agree with that.
There is a video of her getting all excited over "orbs" that as far as I can tell from doing research are actually flares.
I forget what videos I saw but I saw people describing flares in the phoenix area, with video, and her description fits exactly what flares look like.
It's silly how much she thinks they were "intelligent orbs".

But this has no bearing on the 7 years she took off from her medical career to interview witnesses. That may have been her motivation, so she is bias towards ufos being real. But her witness interviews are still interesting. She did find one person who reported seeing planes in the distance through his telescope. I think she describes the general area and time and weighs that against the area and times of 1000's of other sightings. She claims to have looked for other witnesses who also saw planes but no one else had that experience that she could find.

I haven't been able to find any other people who claim to have seen planes either except for references to that one telescope sighting.

But the other 2 guys on the radio show who had some witnesses speak on air had some good stories. One guy was from Mufon and they do their fare share of debunking sightings.
They had hundreds or thousands of calls that night so over the years they have been doing follow-up interviews in person.

The main point here is that there are over 1000 other people who had sightings that day besides the usual group used in all of the Phoenix lights videos. There are like 3 families who give testimony in several different videos.
So this gives further insight. The Out Of The Blue documentary by Mr. Fox only gives a small fraction of the picture of what happened. There were earlier daylight sightings starting near Las Vegas and moving up the interstate. 100's of them.

Lynn Keti's personal opinion is not what's under consideration here.

But all of the witnesses from Out of the Blue and the Nat Geo doc. give clear descriptions that the lights on the underside of the thing were large, yellow-orange, set back in a well, not beaming and other similar features.
That is very unlikely to be the lights on an A10. It really seems to be a large triangle, military or other.
The earlier witnesses contribute a lot to that theory.

The other problem is groups of low flying planes in formation are not known to cause this illusion. Sometimes planes way up high look like a triangle craft but not anything like this.
The only other thing like this was the Illinois police incident. And that was a triangle ship. The question is was it military?
If one has been shown to have been flying around Illinois why not Arizona?

originally posted by: joelr
The only other thing like this was the Illinois police incident. And that was a triangle ship. The question is was it military?
If one has been shown to have been flying around Illinois why not Arizona?

I wouldn't rule it out, but they got a photo of the thing in Illinois, which by the way makes it an excellent UFO case. Even if the photo is low quality, it's still good enough to rule out some alternate explanations.

Don't you find it odd that this alleged object in Arizona was flying slowly around the state for hours and not a single person got any photos or video of it? Especially if the lights were large as you say, at least those should have shown up even if the rest was too dark.

originally posted by: joelr

The only other thing like this was the Illinois police incident. And that was a triangle ship. The question is was it military?
If one has been shown to have been flying around Illinois why not Arizona?

For what it's worth, my father was a witness to one of those Southern IL triangles, as were a couple of very close friends.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: joelr
The only other thing like this was the Illinois police incident. And that was a triangle ship. The question is was it military?
If one has been shown to have been flying around Illinois why not Arizona?

I wouldn't rule it out, but they got a photo of the thing in Illinois, which by the way makes it an excellent UFO case. Even if the photo is low quality, it's still good enough to rule out some alternate explanations.

Don't you find it odd that this alleged object in Arizona was flying slowly around the state for hours and not a single person got any photos or video of it? Especially if the lights were large as you say, at least those should have shown up even if the rest was too dark.

Sure it is odd.
But it was 1997, I remember those days. Not everyone had camcorders and if we did they were usually put aside somewhere and the battery often needed a charge. The witnesses said they were either outside or were called outside and it was such an unusual sight they had to keep watching it to understand what they were seeing.
Anyone who ran inside to get a camera would have missed the best part where it flies overhead or it's closest approach point.

The comet that was flying over wasn't yet visible (I think).

Plus one man did video the triangle, the video is around. It's from a distance but is definitely fitting the description.

It still is a little odd but we didn't have cameras and camcorders on our person back then.

Two of the witnesses from an earlier sighting who was speaking on Coast to Coast radio was in a car on the highway and said she tried to take a photo from the car but it was so low it just showed all orange in the viewfinder or all black so she didn't take a photo. She did regret it in hindsight.

If you hear these other stories it's clear that either a bunch of people are lying (possible) or there was that triangle.
They are on that radio show with other witnesses and 3 researchers, 11 parts on youtube.