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: 8
46
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Something that seems to have been missed is that stars seem to disappear when you look at them.
Why do stars disappear when I look at them?

And fainter points of light dim in the presence of nearer, brighter lights. Just try seeing stars past a street light, etc.

I think these two points can explain the optical illusion of a solid craft reported by some of the witnesses.
edit on 26-1-2015 by timbolarian because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 12:20 AM
link   
The interesting part to me is: here in Europe and all over the rest of the world we are allready kind of agreeing, there is a solid phenomen readable on radars and approached by jets and acknowledged by the trained pilots, etc. while it is like the world doesn't dare to talk to loud about it, till you UsofAcitizens are also getting there... What is that? Don't tell the kid Santa Claus is real? Which he by the way is, a real person lived in Russia and founded an orphaneum, or something.
Could also imagine a few more sinister storylines, why it's kept under the rug, but it looks like the kid is already scared enough...



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:34 AM
link   
Idk the validity of what Im typing, but I recall one documentary on the Discovery Channel talking about the Phoenix lights where it did not mention the A-10s at all, and that one of the nearby bases had scrambled several fighter Jets into the sky after the second event. I've looked at some claims on google, but they are rather shoddy really.

As in they don't have the .com or .gov in their address. I remember it being mentioned in the last few minutes of the documentary, and you know the discovery channels just like the bible.

So its gotta be right.

edit on 26-1-2015 by Specimen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 04:23 AM
link   
I know what I saw that night and they definitely were not flares. These lights were huge, each rectangular shaped, amber in color, and in a L formation (or vee shaped depending on your location). There is just no way these lights where flares or lights on a aircraft because the lights alone were much larger that any aircraft I have ever seen in the sky.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 04:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: CallYourBluff




It seems yourself and bonez have skimmed the evidence are the ones spouting ignorant opinions.

Video analysis of the lights shows the second event were flares and they were behind the mountain , this video shows the lights going out because they are descending behind the mountain.


You are free to believe as you will but to call other members opinions ignorant when they are based on the facts is ignorance in itself.

Here you go. I can play that game too.

edit on 26-1-2015 by CallYourBluff because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 04:42 AM
link   
a reply to: CallYourBluff

flares can't hold a straight line ?





Here you go. I can play that game too.

I'm not playing a game just looking for the truth , over the years I've come to see the Phoenix Lights episode for what it is or rather was not what I want it to be.
If you and others aren't ready to accept that yet then it makes no difference to me , the truth is out there if you choose to look for it and are ready to accept it.

edit on 26-1-2015 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 04:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: CallYourBluff

flares can't hold a straight line ?





Here you go. I can play that game too.

I'm not playing a game just looking for the truth , over the years I've come to see the Phoenix Lights episode for what it is or rather was not what I want it to be.
If you and others aren't ready to accept that yet then it makes no difference to me , the truth is out there if you choose to look for it and are ready to accept it.

Well I guess you have a different definition of truth. If you did your research you would know that the light emitted from the objects was found to be completely different than that emitted from flares, but of course you already knew that.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 05:27 AM
link   
a reply to: aniapi

With the greatest respect, have you ever seen this type of flare dropped to compare?

Only if you have seen both can you say for sure what you did not see.

If you have, fair point!



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 05:38 AM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_

Thanks mate, not sure why that didn't sink in!

Surely there must be other Hog pilots though that can confirm this is a SOP for certain training missions?

Is it true you can't land with a part dispensed pod?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 06:55 AM
link   
Flares are really easy to recognize. Especially if you're in an area where they are dropped a lot. I live pretty close to Fort Hood here in Texas and I see them quite a bit. Nobody around here in this area has ever mistaken them for a UFO....not once.

I lived in Phoenix for three years from 2007 to 2010. I seen quite a few flares in the sky around that area. I even seen them once coming out of the IMAX theater one night and nobody outside was like "OMG A UFO!" - And the other nights that I saw flares in the area there were no "UFO reports" the next day. So this tells me that the people in the Phoenix and surrounding area are used to seeing flares.

So I have high doubts that flares would cause such a huge ruckus in the area due to this.

There were a lot of eyewitnesses the night that this Boomerang V shaped object flew across the area. People that didn't know each other all described the same thing. As I said before, that many people cannot be lying, hoaxing or seeing illusions.
edit on 26-1-2015 by Bloodydagger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: CallYourBluff




If you did your research you would know that the light emitted from the objects was found to be completely different than that emitted from flares, but of course you already knew that.

What I do know is Jim Dilettoso reversed his position in 2010 and now believes that the second event lights were likely flares , the tests he did were deeply flawed and not at all scientific.
Here it is in his own words.
www.disclose.tv...

Now what was that about research ?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 07:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: CallYourBluff




If you did your research you would know that the light emitted from the objects was found to be completely different than that emitted from flares, but of course you already knew that.

What I do know is Jim Dilettoso reversed his position in 2010 and now believes that the second event lights were likely flares , the tests he did were deeply flawed and not at all scientific.
Here it is in his own words.
www.disclose.tv...

Now what was that about research ?


Is that the guy who pretended to be able to do a spectral analysis of light recorded on video?

It doesn't work that way, I'm afraid.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 08:06 AM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_




This thread will show that the first event was a formation of planes, and that the second event was flares dropped by the military during a training exercise.


I guess thousands of testimony's along with video and pictures mean nothing??? Furthermore, flares do not fly around a state(s) for 300 miles. I'm calling BS on this thread. You obviously do NOT know all the facts about this event.
edit on 26-1-2015 by Staroth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: universalbri
First hand witness here, i was a resident in Arizona from 1980 until 2011ish.

My first hand account of what I saw was this:

I was sitting on the balcony of a friend's place in Central/North Phoenix, talking to him while he was smoking his cigarette, and from the south OVER the mountains was a MASSIVE V shaped wing.

Now whatever this thing was, it WAS NOT lit, and we - my friend Joe Wade and myself, watched in awe as this thing which I'd say was about 3/4 of a mile off the ground - flew slowly from south to north.

Now I'm a private pilot, and I do have some experience gauging relative altitude, and I would surmise this thing was at least - and I mean at least - 1.5 miles wide! This is what blew me away about the event, not only was there no audible engine noise, but the thing - for it's size - seemed too massive to stay aloft at that of a speed.

That is: I SHOULD have - at least logic suggests - that I should have heard something with engine noise/wind friction, etc.

But I did not.

Now Fife Symington and a few local business people - along with a separate friend of mine - ALL witnessed the SAME thing. But we DID not see the lights, but the object we all saw CAME from that direction.

Now I have heard the conflicted accounts of what happened. What I suspect happened was this was an introduction into the very real phenomena of perceptual relativity - a side benefit of Einstein's theory of relativity - as there has been at least 10 different variations of stories I have heard concerning this same event.

Now this made news the next day in Phoenix, and has created the event you're refuting.

My advice is - think of this as a Roswell incident. Roswell happened. I have spoken to people who saw it firsthand, and quite literally have worked with the material .. and databases... recovered from that crash under the employ of the federal government.

In my opinion, the public is ready for the acceptance of alien life and not being alone in this existence.

And with the Phoenix lights, there are those of us, like me, who know darn well what we saw in Phoenix that evening - we aren't going to be dissuaded from this observational reality through refutations such as yours.

That's... an exercise in futility!

No. I cannot prove I saw what I saw. Nor can you prove you're not a product of my mind.

So what's the purpose in proof with perception?

Don't answer that. In any case. There's enough evidence to suggest that - like a lawyer in a courtroom interviewing eywitnesses - there were MANY different things that happened. As we skirt the veil of imagination, I suspect we're going to see more and more of this. My advice is - quit playing whack a mole and instead spend some time educating others and yourself on the possibilities an unbridled imagination presents.

cya!


Thank you for your testimony, hopefully more people like you come forward and but this debunking attempted thread to rest.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_

I only skimmed through your...debunking.

I have no firm position on this sighting...but as far as debunking goes...your's, like so many others...fails to incorporate the most weird facts of the case...

"Moving slowly and soundless" - not addressed with your "planes" theory.

also...lines like these....


Those witnesses who thought they saw a solid craft were mistaken



...don't help your case.

It is much more likely that people that saw stars in between lights were mistaken...but...I guess that's not the way you want it.

Anyway...I applaud your effort to explain...away...but am not satisfied by a long shot.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: universalbri

My advice is - think of this as a Roswell incident. Roswell happened. I have spoken to people who saw it firsthand, and quite literally have worked with the material .. and databases... recovered from that crash under the employ of the federal government.


No offense, but you are an anonymous poster on a conspiracy forum citing alleged first hand accounts by other anonymous people working in some alleged, undisclosed capacity for the government.

I'm more than willing to give your personal eyewitness account the benefit of a doubt, but you'll have to do better than "I talked to a guy who said" when it comes to the Roswell incident.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Staroth




I'm calling BS on this thread. You obviously do NOT know all the facts about this event.

Perhaps you should read the thread and the evidence provided in it before you call BS on anything , the first event was likely planes as has been shown and the second event were without any doubt flares , even one of the chief doubters Dilettoso now admits that.

If nothing else this thread has shown peoples belief blinds them to the truth , you can lead a horse to water....



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Great thread. Great argument. Of course, as you can see, the hardcore believers will NEVER, EVER take a dose of logic over a leap of faith, lol. Star and flag, thanks.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar


It's a triangular shaped rigid airship also known as a "stealth blimp". Apparently it's used to ferry cargo like a sky-going container ship.

See this thread: UFO's of the Future


Thanks for the pointer, sad there were no pictures of said triangular craft and little in the way of description.

To sort of add to that what I saw was as said, MASSIVE, do the test with the newspaper at arms length while looking at the sky to see just how big it was. It was a matt black with the London lights just about illuminating it to see the shape, just short of each corner underneath had a yellowish round light which didn't blink and in the middle underneath was a larger red light that also didn't blink. The edges seemed rounded but from the angle its hard to tell the height of the craft itself, as in how tall, there was no top side that I could see so it would have been fairly flat / rounded but neither I or my wife could see enough of the top to make out any mounds or domes.

But with the size of this thing there was definitely room for a LOT of human sized objects to walk around and then some..

Not sure of how far up it was but it looked quite low, certainly way lower than the planes on the Heathrow flight path and bar the road noise which was minimal I could not hear any noise from it unlike the Heathrow Planes which did.

Again, I'm not claiming aliens but this was mega tech beyond the scale of stuff seen in that thread you kindly pointed to. I'd so love to see that in the sky again, the first time left two totally sober non drug takers in shock, when something that big just about goes over your head it makes the hairs on your neck stand up, to see it again would be a more agreeable time


What was clever about it was that without the London lights flare it would have been nigh on impossible to spot, on a dark cloudy night in the suburbs it would have been almost invisible bar the non flashing lights, Most people would have looked up, saw some lights and thought plane or helicopter (even though theirs flash), so thanks to the brightness of the London lights we got to see something awesome and frightening..
edit on 26-1-2015 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: jaffo
Great thread. Great argument. Of course, as you can see, the hardcore believers will NEVER, EVER take a dose of logic over a leap of faith, lol. Star and flag, thanks.


I am a believer but I'm also logic based so my mind is open but not so much my brain falls out.

I look, analyse and see if I or others see a conventional reason for what you are seeing and with most things it IS conventional, the lights were clearly flares, anyone thinking different really is in too deep and needs to step back.







 
46
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join