Ex-Obama pilot describes lengthy UFO encounter

a reply to: TrueMessiah

This describes a full moon while the OP describes the moon as an easily identified crescent.
Are these even the same event? How can it be?

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: TrueMessiah

This describes a full moon while the OP describes the moon as an easily identified crescent.
Are these even the same event? How can it be?

Yeah it's the same event. The recount of what stage the moon was in may be off but what is consistent, and what really matters, is that the objects (moon and UFO) were clearly differentiated and appeared on opposite sides of the flight in both accounts.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Wow, that cloud video was really compelling. Has it its own thread eyes wonder? Also, wondering what it would look like at night?

Thanks for taking the time to find it…

a reply to: Aliensun

But strangely enough, they take the government's position on UFOs, basically, the things don't exist and as a crew member you damned well better not talk about them. Can we get serious about the constant denial of these events?

Its only recently that the stigma attached to oofos has softened. My experiences occurred back in the 70-80's. You didn't go around talking about it much back then. More fear of ridicule than denial. But I get the 'want to keep my job' aspect.

Good for the pilot here! That took guts as those of us who know the ufo/pilot issue regarding seeing a ufo. As mentioned and pointed out, there is that stigma that pilots are well aware of when it comes to what they see in the sky. I always go back to that pilot with Japan Air who saw a huge ufo over Anchorage back in the 80's, and he was demoted to desk duty when his sighting went to the press.

a reply to: St Udio

when that sighted UFO disappeared in that cloud bank... it entered a dimensional portal /stargate to Heaven from this physical sphere...

They could just disappear without 'going into a cloud'. Why show themselves at all?

Just my opinion, but the cloud was there to hide some thing, most likely an aircraft 'carrier'. The same principle used on Earths oceans by the US military. I can't of course confirm this, your idea is just as plausible, I guess.

Whatever, before it went into the cloud, it made an abrupt angular direction change at enormous speed, totally out of the realm of earth based aircraft.

a reply to: mirageman

We should probably send up the Bat Signal for Jim Oberg. I searched the date and 'Proton Rocket' and notice one went up from Kiruna, Sweden on the day. Seems to have been several hours difference though so an unlikely candidate.

NICAP have a detailed report from Missouri the next day. It's a remarkably literary little number that involves a farmer describing a 'big red ball' over the woods of his land. Coincidentally, or otherwise, he also describes this phenomena as being a bright red that didn't cast its light very far. If you recall, the pilot described his 'big red ball' as being bright and not bright enough to illuminate the airplane.

Above the trees was a huge red ball about 20-35 feet in diameter less than 50 yards away from him. When yellow speckles would show up on the surface the crackling sound could be heard. After hovering there, bobbing slightly up and down. After a few minutes the object started to move off and then rapidly, climbing at a steep angle to the northwest, slowly at first, then a distant dim red star in 10-12 seconds. A moment later it was gone.

www.nicap.org...

Just throwing out there for mischief... : )

a reply to: TrueMessiah

I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion, considering the crew spent 30 to 40 minutes observing a white disk before witnessing the large red ball. The entire report as a whole does not indicate any weather phenomenon that I'm aware of.

I said 'impression' not conclusion, you even quoted me saying 'impression.' You either misinterpreted the post or are trying to put words in my mouth. Considering the pilot himself makes no mention of a structured object, a terrestrial explanation would be more likely in the scheme of things than 'aliens.' Maybe it was an example of some previously unobserved weather phenomena?

a reply to: Kandinsky

The pilot's description of the phase of the moon is contradictory in his own report at www.nydailynews.com compared to what he says on video.

He clearly states it was a full moon whereas historical records show it was an early crescent moon.

Source :
www.calendar-12.com

Both Mercury and Venus were close to each other in the sky that evening. Probably creating the illusion through the clouds of of a huge white disc and then as they moved in the night sky gave the impression of a red ball through the atmosphere. He clearly states this "disc" was only "dimly visible" so he can't have actually got a clear view of it.



Screenshot from Stellarium

The lights flashing in the clouds were almost certainly an early incarnation of the Lyrid meteor showers which occur every April.

So although the pilot ,Mr Danziger, is probably genuine in his observations of what he perceived to be a UFO it has been shown time and time again that pilots are not necessarily any better than anyone else at distinguishing unusual solar and cosmic events.

Conclusion - a set of rare coincidental astronomical events produced an unusual visual light display in the evening sky to fool the pilots.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: St Udio

when that sighted UFO disappeared in that cloud bank... it entered a dimensional portal /stargate to Heaven from this physical sphere...

They could just disappear without 'going into a cloud'. Why show themselves at all?

Just my opinion, but the cloud was there to hide some thing, most likely an aircraft 'carrier'. The same principle used on Earths oceans by the US military. I can't of course confirm this, your idea is just as plausible, I guess.

Whatever, before it went into the cloud, it made an abrupt angular direction change at enormous speed, totally out of the realm of earth based aircraft.

the 'UFO' did not require a cloud to disappear in... It is very likely that in the other 160 degrees of viewing angles --- the cloud was-not-in-the-way... the perspective of the pilot viewer was not the same scene that another observer 3 miles to the Port side would have seen--- consider that possibility

however...if the Drone-from-the-dimension-Heaven was doing Its 'jump' to a wormhole/portal/stargate... then the UFO might have projected the conditions for a 'rip' in the time-space continuum which might very well cause a vapor-cloud to come about as a consequence of the projected energy required to jump into a Dark Matter Universe


the 'abrupt' change in vector...could also be an illusion... the object might not have veered by 90degrees but instead have diminished Its size-visibility and only appeared to track an obtuse or acute angle (as interpreted by observer via their easily fooled brain)



hey, intrptr... I am not locked into this thinking~~~ I am just presenting the possibility

ty

a reply to: Kandinsky

Another quote I notice from the pilot, Andy Danziger, in his own report was that he said :

...........After deplaning we called the number. "National UFO Reporting Center" said the voice from the other end. At the time I didn't even know such a place existed, but they took collect calls from pilots and air traffic controllers. Bruce told the person on the other end of the line that we wanted to report a UFO. We were interviewed separately, first the captain and then me. When my interview was finished the man on the other end of the line said that we would never hear from him again and would never receive any additional information, this was going to be our first and only contact regarding the sighting. I asked, "Can I ask just one question, do you think we're crazy, has anyone else ever reported something like this?"

"Oh no, you're not crazy at all," he replied. "This very same thing has been reported by pilots countless times." And while neither of us had any idea what we had saw one thing we were certain of, it wasn't from here.


www.nydailynews.com

So he actually reported it at the time and apparently countless pilots do! Another contradiction of sorts.

a reply to: mirageman

Those comments sound very much like Pete Davenport's. He's the mainstay at NUFORC as you probably know. I've heard Bob Gribble say the same words on the audio release of NUFORC reports from the 70s and 80s.

It's part-myth that pilots can't report sightings. I've no doubt that it might blemish their credibility in some cases. On the other hand, if the flight crew say they saw something collectively, where's the harm?

The US FAA funnels reports to BAAS (Bigelow) and there's nothing stopping pilots from reporting beyond ridicule.

a reply to: mirageman

You could be right; I'll have a closer look tomorrow.

He clearly states it was a full moon whereas historical records show it was an early crescent moon.

Doesn't he say 'crescent moon' in the video? If so, I'd say the spoken word holds more value than the ones that have been transcribed in the written report. Straight from the horse's mouth or straight from the keyboard of someone relaying something from a third party?

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
Sorry but this could have been a political statement. If we are to believe that a break away group of scientists exist (and currently there is evidence to prove this) the whole appearing could be a political statement of theirs saying something along the lines of "We're watching you". After all didn't Reagan, Clinton, and Bush jr have similar reports during their campaigning's?

In fact Jimmy Carter also had an encounter. I think it was Nixon who tried to rally an investigation into these sightings (but my Nixon UFO investigation is for some other time).

a reply to: St Udio

hey, intrptr... I am not locked into this thinking~~~ I am just presenting the possibility

I get that, no problem. I can only relate what I saw.

the 'abrupt' change in vector…could also be an illusion… the object might not have veered by 90degrees but instead have diminished Its size-visibility and only appeared to track an obtuse or acute angle (as interpreted by observer via their easily fooled brain)

No illusion, me and a friend were observing it directly when it changed direction. It did that just before it reached the southern end of the valley, it changed direction upwards to enter the cloud from below (at that point it was below the rim of the valley, below 5000 feet).

Both of us exclaimed in surprise when this happened, the cloud it disappeared into was the only cloud in a perfectly clear sky. The maneuver was sudden, distinct and one of the confounding aspects of the sighting overall, the most distinct memory I had of the episode, the one that sticks in my brain to this day, because earth based air craft can't do this without flying into bits.

The only thing I can compare it to is a tracer round that ricochets off a surface angling skywards. I would have expected the "object' to come out the top of the cloud in a moment and it didn't. Another compelling aspect, and one which made us aware of the cloud , focusing our attention on it, subsequently becoming aware it was the only cloud in the sky.

Rattled us, because it displayed so many behavior characteristics that were unexplainable. years later when I saw Close Encounters I nearly fell off my chair. The cloud thing in the movie was cover or camouflage for alien craft. Why did Spielberg do that?

Even more compelling this pilot also seems to have encountered something in conjunction with clouds. This is familiar. I'd replying but my mother is disturbing me right now, I'll be back later.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Yes he did say "crescent moon" in the video. However the written piece is his own report and appeared about a month before the video. Perhaps his memory wasn't that good so he checked on the internet and then corrected himself for the video?

I don't know exactly what the pilot saw. Of course it is fun to speculate and it can take people off in many different directions. But if you read my post very carefully you will see that I am in no way trying to debunk the story either.

a reply to: Guyfriday

The breakaway civilization idea goes back a long way to a 1977 TV program shown in the East Anglia region of England called "Science Report"

The show was actually a serious popular science series at the time. This particular episode though dealt with the brain drain of British scientists going abroad and never being heard of again. It also delves into a conspiracy to deal with the fragile environment and the "Alternative 3" to take humans off-planet to survive.



Originally scheduled for a broadcast on April 1st 1977 it was delayed until the early summer and so missed it's intention of being a spoof. Many have been convinced that this was actually a true representation of the times and so it has become part of the lore like Roswell and everything that followed.

Worth a watch though for entertainment purposes.

a reply to: mirageman

I don't know exactly what the pilot saw. Of course it is fun to speculate and it can take people off in many different directions. But if you read my post very carefully you will see that I am in no way trying to debunk the story either.

Yeah, I know : up:

originally posted by: Kandinsky
I said 'impression' not conclusion, you even quoted me saying 'impression.' You either misinterpreted the post or are trying to put words in my mouth. Considering the pilot himself makes no mention of a structured object, a terrestrial explanation would be more likely in the scheme of things than 'aliens.' Maybe it was an example of some previously unobserved weather phenomena?

Sorry about that choice of wording there. Substitute conclusion with impression.

I find it hard to believe this "disc" wasn't a structured object being that the pilot ruled out other physical considerations (bird, plane, blimp, satellite, hot air balloon) when attempting to identify it. Since when has a disc been equated to any form of weather phenomena? Regardless, you are entitled to your interpretation.

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
Sorry but this could have been a political statement. If we are to believe that a break away group of scientists exist (and currently there is evidence to prove this) the whole appearing could be a political statement of theirs saying something along the lines of "We're watching you". After all didn't Reagan, Clinton, and Bush jr have similar reports during their campaigning's?

In fact Jimmy Carter also had an encounter. I think it was Nixon who tried to rally an investigation into these sightings (but my Nixon UFO investigation is for some other time).

Richard Nixon, US President from 1969 to 1974: "I'm not at liberty to discuss the government's knowledge of extraterrestrial UFO's at this time. I am still personally being briefed on the subject."

Jimmy Carter, US President from 1976 to 1980, promised while on the campaign trail that he would make public all documents on UFOs if elected. He said: "I don't laugh at people any more when they say they've seen UFOs. I've seen one myself."

Ronald Reagan, US President from 1980 to 1988, "I looked out the window and saw this white light.It was zigzagging around. I went up to the pilot and said, 'Have you ever seen anything like that?' He was shocked and he said, 'nope.' And I said to him: 'Let's follow it!' We followed it for several minutes. It was a bright white light.We followed it to Bakersfield, and all of a sudden to our utter amazement it went straight up into the heavens. When I got off the plane I told Nancy all about it."

a reply to: gortex

Yes, it seems with hosts that interview people about UFO and abduction stories there is no happy medium, you either get hosts rolling their eyes and mentioning little green men, or this kind with their breathy excitement. It is one of those few subjects where it is tough to find almost anyone unbiased, people either think it is complete nonsense, or people are enraged the lie (allegedly) has gone on so long.

I guess we can try to set an example here. I hope my OP didn't come across as too biased, though I did qualify my opinions as such and tried not to pass them off as facts.