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.

 

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

page: 19
47
<< 16  17  18   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 04:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: SpartanStoic
An eyewitness here...

They were flares.

However many people incorrectly focus on that and not the giant black triangles many of us saw in the desert north of Phoenix.

I remember it distinctly to this day.
There are two opening posts, the first one talks about the flares.

If you read the second post you can find out what the triangles were. This guy got a look through his telescope so he had a much better view than other witnesses.


I will post the same thing as i posted in the other thread.

This just does not make any logical sense at all. The witnesses said it was a huge craft travelling slow and low. These jets would have been fast. If they were high up, the formation would have been small. If they were low, the noise would be loud and they would fly by quickly.

Goes completely against what the witnesses saw. I do not believe the witnesses are talking about the same thing this guy saw. Just does not make sense.




posted on Feb, 1 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Jay-morris
Of course some witnesses reported the V-shaped object low and slow, barely overhead, and others reported it much higher, so there was quite a bit of variability in the witness sightings, but this is not unusual and is pretty normal.

www.phoenixnewtimes.com...

The witnesses included New Times writers. David Holthouse and Michael Kiefer both saw the pattern of five lights move slowly overhead. Holthouse says he perceived that something connected the lights in a boomerang shape; Kiefer disagrees, saying they didn't seem connected. Like other witnesses, both reported that the vee made no sound, and each saw slightly different colors in the lights. Both watched as the lights gradually made their way south and faded from view.

The many eyewitnesses have elaborated on this basic model: Some saw that the lights were not connected, others swear they saw a giant triangular craft joining them, some felt it was at high altitude, others claim it was barely over their heads and moving very slowly. All seem to be describing the same lights at the same time: About 8:15 the lights passed over the Prescott area, about 15 minutes later the vee moved over Phoenix, and at 8:45 it passed south of Tucson.

That's about 200 miles in 30 minutes, which indicates that the lights were traveling about 400 miles per hour.


So when "some felt it was at high altitude, others claim it was barely over their heads and moving very slowly. All seem to be describing the same lights at the same time" what we have is a case of variability in witness reports.

No witnesses saw both a low V-shaped object and a high V-shaped object yet both were reported in the same places at the same time, so the only way to make sense out of this variation is to conclude that some perceptions were off. Fortunately we have a video to calibrate which observers descriptions most closely match the video V-formation, and which observer descriptions don't. In addition to this, we also know that of the people who saw the V-shape though magnification (telescope or binoculars), every one saw planes, and none saw a giant V or triangle craft, rather everyone who saw the large craft was not using any magnification. We can also plot the V-formation sightings on a map and see they covered approximately 200 miles in approximately 30 minutes so we have a speed estimate of the V-formation from that information, which is more quantitative than an unspecific characterization of "slow".

What doesn't make any sense is to expect that every witness who sees an event is going to report exactly the same thing...that would be so highly unusual that it rarely ever happens. Alan Hendry didn't find it unusual that witnesses couldn't identify planes at night but he admitted some might find that shocking, but he documented one such case where three planes were seen by one witness as a large object and other witnesses saw the event differently, including seeing the planes "hover":

Here are some excerpts from Allan Hendry's 1979 book "The UFO Handbook" pages 38-39:

"One of the leading causes of surprise is the inability of the witness to hear any noise from the aircraft"

"An aircraft explanation was ruled out by the witness simply because no noise was heard" but that sighting was confirmed to be a plane. Planes aren't completely silent, but you can't always hear them and I'm endlessly amazed that so many people don't seem to realize this.

"Does it seem shocking that so many people could be surprised by the sight of conventional aircraft flying at night? Here is an example of a case I investigated: The Air National Guard in Grand Rapids Michigan decided to fly three Cessna skymasters in formation around the suburbs. The planes, outfitted with bright white lights in the front and red and green lights in the back, flew at 2500 feet altitude at 160 mph. I got three "UFO" calls based on these planes, which represented a mere fraction of the ones received by the Grand Rapids airport...

Ten miles away and 15 minutes later, other witnesses caught sight of the planes and provided these descriptions:
***One large round object with lights
***Three lights that whipped across the road almost instantly--"much too fast for aircraft".
***Three white lights followed by red lights that moved all over very quickly, converged, and hovered over a woods.

What does it mean when independent witnesses can be equally excited over these Cessna planes and offer inconsistent accounts of their appearance and behavior?"

It means we shouldn't be surprised if people can't always identify planes and night and may offer inconsistent accounts of them in other cases too, such as the V-formation in Phoenix.



posted on Feb, 1 2018 @ 05:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

It means we shouldn't be surprised if people can't always identify planes and night and may offer inconsistent accounts of them in other cases too, such as the V-formation in Phoenix.


There was an initial report of a small private plane that was on approach to Phoenix airport and reported a very bright unusual craft strangely close the airport. They radioed it in but radar had no hits.

Recently it came out that that was Kurt Russell and his son. He tells an interesting story.

If nothing else it offers corroboration that there was a strange craft flying near the airport that didn't show up on radar. Also the brightness was too much for a conventional plane. So that adds something to the idea that something weird was going on.



posted on Feb, 1 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: joelr

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

It means we shouldn't be surprised if people can't always identify planes and night and may offer inconsistent accounts of them in other cases too, such as the V-formation in Phoenix.


There was an initial report of a small private plane that was on approach to Phoenix airport and reported a very bright unusual craft strangely close the airport. They radioed it in but radar had no hits.

Recently it came out that that was Kurt Russell and his son. He tells an interesting story.

If nothing else it offers corroboration that there was a strange craft flying near the airport that didn't show up on radar.


I don't know if your misrepresentation is intentional, but unintentional or not I find it annoying. Russell didn't mention "craft" as in singular, he mentioned "lights" as in plural, and we have a video of the lights showing they moved independently verifying they were not part of a giant craft.



1:08 "I saw six lights over the airport"
1:35 "I'm going to declare it's unidentified, it's flying, and it's six objects"

Your substitution of the singular word "craft" for his description of "six lights" and "six objects" shows a complete disregard for factual accuracy and had you instead referred to what Russell actually said you would find it's more consistent with the video tape showing multiple objects, and not one large craft.

Military planes have no requirement to fly with their transponders on at certain altitudes, so why would they show up on radar if there's no transponder active?

The V- formation of lights

In the "Great UFO Coverup", Tony Ortega has a few key points to add on this matter.

"Air traffic controller Bill Grava was on duty on March 13 at Sky Harbor International Airport. He, too, saw the lights, but not until they were on the southern horizon, slowly disappearing behind South Mountain. The lights were so bright that he thought they might have been flares.

He confirms that the object or objects did not register on radar as they passed overhead, a fact seconded by Captain Stacey Cotton of Luke Air Force Base. But both admitted that that doesn't rule out the possibility of a group of airplanes. Cotton says that the radar used by air traffic controllers reads signals emitted by transponders in the airplanes themselves.

Normally, in a formation of seven planes, only the lead plane would turn on its transponder so air traffic controllers could track it. If the lead plane's transponder was turned off, however, the seven planes could have passed by without detection.

Grava says that depending on the planes' altitude, that may have been perfectly legal."

If the aircraft were above the 18,000-foot ceiling, which defines the controlled airspace for the airport, then the Air Traffic Controllers would not be interested in tracking them. Instead it would have been the enroute flight controllers job to track these aircraft. The enroute controller is at a completely different location than the airport! ...

"Whether the 8:30 vee formation did register on the FAA's radar monitored in Albuquerque will apparently never be known. Despite the fervent activities of UFO investigators in the days following the sightings, no one bothered to make a formal request with the Federal Aviation Administration's regional office for radar tapes of the Phoenix area for March 13. If anyone had made such a request by March 28, there would be a permanent record for the public to examine, says the FAA's Gary Perrin."



Also the brightness was too much for a conventional plane. So that adds something to the idea that something weird was going on.
How did you come up with that claim? I didn't hear Russell say that. We have the video tape of the Vee formation but there doesn't seem to be any exceptional amount of bloom in the video as might be expected with particularly bright lights. See the following clip, showing what doesn't appear to be exceptional brightness to me.



edit on 201821 by Arbitrageur because: clarification




top topics
 
47
<< 16  17  18   >>

log in

join