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.

 

Five of my favourite from the "best" UFO sightings/encounters

page: 5
84
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Wolfenz

A Blimp in Alaska in 1936. Seems pretty unlikely.

The Norge was in Alaska in 1926. It was part of a polar expedition and had to be dismantled in Nome and shipped due to damage. It was never near the southcentral area.

This article from 2013 says the blimp that visited at that time was the first since the 1920's.

I can't find any evidence of a blimp in 1936?


I search too.. and NADA in the 1920s and during WWII




Dirigible balloon ""Alaska Yukon Pacific Exposition"" readying for takeoff, Alaska Yukon Pacific Exposition, Seattle, June 1909.
digitalcollections.lib.washington.edu...


but it does Sound from the Description a Blimp /Dirigible /AIRSHIP 40-50 miles an Hour Engine Turbines sounds in 1936 ? more likely the sound of a Prop engine whining out ..

and of Course Cigar shaped


Updated: I did find this .. it was thought of , but... never occurred apparently

LTA Japan

A 1936 "Flight" magazine mentioned an Eastern Hemisphere Airways proposal to operate a two Zeppelin service Tokyo - British Columbia - San Fransisco. Also, Pacific Aviation Company planned to fly Zeppelins from Tokyo to San Fransisco via the Aleutian Islands and Alaska. This never occured.

spot.colorado.edu...


edit on 32016WednesdayfAmerica/Chicago233 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: mirageman
The lower altitude sightings seen at RAF Shawbury that occurred about an hour after the decay of the booster rockets were identified as a Welsh police helicopter following a stolen car down the A5. Snr. Ballester Olmos also contacted Nick Pope with an explanation for the sightings a year later enclosing copies of a NORAD statement and computer simulation showing the UFO as the booster rockets from the Russian Cosmos 2238 satellite.


Hmm. Lets see what the RAF Meteorological Officer at the base said



He described to me how it had moved slowly across the countryside towards the base, at a speed of no more than 30 or 40 mph. He saw the UFO fire a narrow beam of light (like a laser) at the ground and saw the light sweeping backwards and forwards across the field beyond the perimeter fence, as if it were looking for something. He heard an unpleasant low frequency humming sound coming from the craft and said he could feel as well as hear this - rather like standing in front of a bass speaker. He estimated the size of the craft to be midway between a C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and a Boeing 747. Then he told me that the light beam had retracted in an unnatural way and that the craft had suddenly accelerated away to the horizon many times faster than a military aircraft.


Now, not wishing to be picky, but I think an RAF Officer would be able to tell the difference between a Police Helicopter and what is described there - wouldn't you?



Now, not wishing to be picky, but I think an RAF Officer would be able to tell the difference between a Police Helicopter and what is described there - wouldn't you?


Apparently the answer to that seems to be that the officer concerned, Wayne Elliot didn't know it was a police helicopter.


.........And meteorological officer Wayne Elliott, whose evidence at Shawbury was central, has pointed out that his sighting was an hour after the one at Cosford – and he now believes what he saw was a police helicopter.

Source : Shropshire Star






......At the time it did not strike me as being something familiar,” he told me. “However, it’s clear in hindsight that what I saw was not the same object seen at Cosford as it was much later. I never made anything of it, I just reported what I had seen. Nick Pope was very excited about it and made a great deal of the fact that I was an official observer which was true. He assured me that he had checked with all the military sources for aircraft and ruled them out…I believed what I was told at the time, but now I’m convinced that what I saw has been explained. I have to accept that the noise like a humming and the beam of light are very similar to what you would expect of a police helicopter.”

Source: Dr. David Clarke



Nick has claimed claim there is no proof there was a police helicopter and the witness suddenly changed his mind because of his career. Maybe he did? There's always that slight element of doubt in these cases.

I do not wish to spoil your excellent idea for a thread any more.


So - I'll happily do a thread on the Cosford incident (and include both the points of view if you think it's worth debating).


ETA : this thread is all about what people's favourite cases are and one of mine I didn't mention is the Washington DC Sightings of 1952. Even for those who don't think it was aliens the whole back story around the case is an interesting study in early Cold War paranoia and how the US government really did instigate a cover-up of the UFO issue back then.


edit on 3/2/16 by mirageman because: ETA



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

The JAL case just didn't happen the way it has been reported by the various UFO believers. The Smithsonian Channel has a series entitled UFO Declassified that blows the common version of events out of the water. For example, there was a major discrepancy between what the pilot says he saw and what the co-pilot reported. The copilot says he never saw the lights but was going along with his pilot in reporting via the radio. Also, Tarriuichi (or whatever the pilots name is) had reported four or five UFO's to JAL management previously and as the narrator said, "They had had enough" and grounded him.

Hard to say what he saw but the conclusion was not a flying saucer.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: icewater

I was going to post this last night, but I didn't want to sidetrack the thread into a debate about JAL 1628. I believe in order to give an honest evaluation of any incident, all of the available data needs to be personally studied rather than relying on biased and sensationalized retelling of the story through TV shows or UFOlogists. This goes for all cases mentioned.

Re: JAL 1628
The Captain Terauchi was the only one of the crew who claimed to see the "mothership" the size of two aircraft carriers. This was even with a requested 360 degree turn around the "object" to identify it. Neither the co-pilot or navigator claimed to see a gigantic spacecraft. In fact, in the FAA transcript the flight navigator Tsukuba said- "The second one, it was so hard to see. In my mind, I am not certain whether it was lights of a distant town or a strange object."

Two flights were diverted to identify this giant mothership and upon sighting JAL 1628, neither flights saw it.

The radar signal was spotty and not a consistent signal. That's shown in the transcript exchange between the towers and crew in the 400 page report. It was frequently dropped and was concluded to be an echo signal off JALs own transponder which is a common occurrence.

Terauchi also claimed to see UFO motherships on two other occasions. He admitted he probably misidentified one account for distant city lights.

All of this information is freely available online, along with info of other cases mentioned, and should be reviewed before supporting claims via biased sources.
edit on 3-2-2016 by Ectoplasm8 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: icewater

I was going to post this last night, but I didn't want to sidetrack the thread into a debate about JAL 1628. I believe in order to give an honest evaluation of any incident, all of the available data needs to be personally studied rather than relying on biased and sensationalized retelling of the story through TV shows or UFOlogists. This goes for all cases mentioned.

Re: JAL 1628
The Captain Terauchi was the only one of the crew who claimed to see the "mothership" the size of two aircraft carriers. This was even with a requested 360 degree turn around the "object" to identify it. Neither the co-pilot or navigator claimed to see a gigantic spacecraft. In fact, in the FAA transcript the flight navigator Tsukuba said- "The second one, it was so hard to see. In my mind, I am not certain whether it was lights of a distant town or a strange object."

Two flights were diverted to identify this giant mothership and upon sighting JAL 1628, neither flights saw it.

The radar signal was spotty and not a consistent signal. That's shown in the transcript exchange between the towers and crew in the 400 page report. It was frequently dropped and was concluded to be an echo signal off JALs own transponder which is a common occurrence.

Terauchi also claimed to see UFO motherships on two other occasions. He admitted he probably misidentified one account for distant city lights.

All of this information is freely available online, along with info of other cases mentioned, and should be reviewed before supporting claims via biased sources.


No derail in here re: JAL 1628. Glad you posted; none of the information I had heard of the incident included what you provided. Thank you. It does a great service to those of us who 'want to believe' to receive ancillary information that puts the incident in a clearer perspective. What I 'knew' of JAL 1628 suggested something truly unexplainable happened....what you provided doesn't debunk the possibility of a 'UFO', but it does showcase the power of editing and preconceived notions being reinforced through shows that have a narrative to push.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
This is a new favourite of mine , although i only recently read about it tbh
www.bbc.co.uk...

Neil



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

Posting so I can come back later.

S&F for these compelling stories!



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: BeefNoMeat

As far as I know, the first part of the JAL1628 sighting remains a mystery, all the crew saw the lights appear right in front of the airliner. Bruce has the best rundown of the event that I have read.

I have doubts about the large UFO now, potentially a large cloud. However I still fail to understand how they had so much trouble shaking a stationary cloud when they are going few hundred miles an hour.

If you google search jal1628 site:abovetopsecret.com or use the sites own search, there is plenty of discussion about this case.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude


Until I see proof, I treat that as a professional drive by


I always wonder, is there "proof" people expect to see on ATS before its on a major news site? Any high def pics/video is going to be covered by all the major media outlets.

I was just watching a video clip(start in at 16:26) someone posted in the resurrected Belgium thread . General De Brouwer chooses his words carefully like a political vet, but still gives reasons why he doesnt think the black triangles are military. He wont claim they are ET, but says it shouldnt be ruled out. He never saw the triangles personally, but reading between the lines, imo hes a closet believer. Everyone requires different levels of evidence I suppose.




posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Some of my favorites

Levelland 57 - Several motorist encounter a glowing sphere that stops their motor, police try to locate the object and also see it.
Westall 66 (start in at 9:47, picture at 11:00). Daylight sighting of a drone like craft levitates up on a school campus.
Ravenna 66 - Several police chase ufo through 2 states
Minot AFB B-52 incident 68 - radar confirmation case
Colares 1977 - UFOs burning residents
Belgium 89,90 - Resurrected thread on Wave of UFO sightings
edit on 4-2-2016 by 111DPKING111 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
a reply to: BeefNoMeat

As far as I know, the first part of the JAL1628 sighting remains a mystery, all the crew saw the lights appear right in front of the airliner. Bruce has the best rundown of the event that I have read.

I have doubts about the large UFO now, potentially a large cloud. However I still fail to understand how they had so much trouble shaking a stationary cloud when they are going few hundred miles an hour.

If you google search jal1628 site:abovetopsecret.com or use the sites own search, there is plenty of discussion about this case.



Re: The first part-

Co-pilot Tamefuji described in his FAA interview after the incident- "I remember red or orange, hum, and a white landing light, just like a landing light, and ah weak green, blinking." That suspiciously not only describes navigation colored and style of lighting of human aircraft, but also the blinking characteristics of the same. It would be an odd coincidence an alien spacecraft would be zipping through our atmosphere with the same colored blinking lights.

Further, the pilot Terauchi described in his interview- "First of all it's like amber and whitish color, came closely it seems like all output exhaust positions of the jets, all these Challenger." This was viewing the UFO from behind as it moved in front of their plane. He described human aircraft style of afterburner propulsion. Again, an odd and coincidental method of drive for an alien spacecraft.

There's more to debate about the first part, but I'll leave it at that. My point being, many things have been left out of this incident that should be addressed. It's nowhere near a slam-dunk, unexplainable case. People should be doing deep research into claims like this.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

I admit I thought more of the case at one time


It's nowhere near a slam-dunk, unexplainable case.


Not a slam dunk, they didnt really get a good look at what this thing was, but I know of no conventional explanation for what they describe.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Along the same lines as my post about proof,

I think its good idea to try and identify what would put the case (or any other case) over the top for you? If the pilots had seen a full craft in the initial part of the sighting, that would do it for me in the JAL1628 case.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Smart list. Here is another way to look at it...an essentially day by day history from 1946-1963 @ sohp.us...

Thanks Kandinsky.



posted on Feb, 6 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: icewater

I was going to post this last night, but I didn't want to sidetrack the thread into a debate about JAL 1628. I believe in order to give an honest evaluation of any incident, all of the available data needs to be personally studied rather than relying on biased and sensationalized retelling of the story through TV shows or UFOlogists. This goes for all cases mentioned.

Re: JAL 1628
The Captain Terauchi was the only one of the crew who claimed to see the "mothership" the size of two aircraft carriers. This was even with a requested 360 degree turn around the "object" to identify it. Neither the co-pilot or navigator claimed to see a gigantic spacecraft. In fact, in the FAA transcript the flight navigator Tsukuba said- "The second one, it was so hard to see. In my mind, I am not certain whether it was lights of a distant town or a strange object."

Two flights were diverted to identify this giant mothership and upon sighting JAL 1628, neither flights saw it.

The radar signal was spotty and not a consistent signal. That's shown in the transcript exchange between the towers and crew in the 400 page report. It was frequently dropped and was concluded to be an echo signal off JALs own transponder which is a common occurrence.

Terauchi also claimed to see UFO motherships on two other occasions. He admitted he probably misidentified one account for distant city lights.

All of this information is freely available online, along with info of other cases mentioned, and should be reviewed before supporting claims via biased sources.


I am no different than most people on this subject. I would love to see a big ol' flying saucer descend over my town and experience what follows but I have concluded it just isn't going to happen. here is my UFO story and you will probably understand why I feel the way I do:
I was a seven year old kid living on the east coast in the mid sixties. One night around twilight my friends and my daily sandlot baseball game had just broken up and I was gathering up my bats and glove etc (all my friends had gone home) I happened to look up and saw a bright light about the size of a full moon with a long tail go streaking across the sky directly over my head. No noise but it scared the crap out of me. I ran home to tell my parents who didn't believe a word of it. I checked the newspaper the next couple of days but there was nothing there. But I knew what I saw. Over the years I believed I saw a UFO and you could not convince me otherwise. I read everything I could get my hands on, book after book, for the next 35 years trying to find out what it was I saw. I was certain we were being visited. Of course life goes on and eventually I embarked on a long career in the US Navy. In 1999, while stationed at an Air Force base I had a chance to visit one of the bases in Colorado Springs that had an advanced physics lab. While there among other things the big-brained astrophysicists there showed me some video of what a satellite that has lost its orbit looks like. It was an exact match to what I saw so many years ago. It could have been the actual event it was so exact. From that incident I concluded there is so much that we don't know or understand about space that most if not all sightings are probably explainable with the right amount of information.

Several years ago I bought a fairly expensive amateur telescope. Astronomy is a fabulous hobby but it takes patience, study, and plenty of trial and error. You have to take your opportunities when they present themselves because you may not get another shot for several years. I found getting a good look at Venus was difficult, given the time of day it shows and the weather and opportunity I had. I learned through reading several books that Venus is like the moon, it has phases unlike say Saturn which is a full sphere all the time. So, I finally got a look at Venus one night. It looked exactly like many photos of UFO's I had seen on the internet and on a couple of those shows on cable tv. Exactly. Another example of people whose imagination got away from them. Someone probably took a photo of Venus and posted it as a UFO because most people don't have the kind of telescope it takes to get that kind of look.



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

JAL 1628 has a lot of problems. One of which is that when Anchorage offered an escort (who could verify the sighting) he declined. He also seems to be a believer in UFO's, and was apparently knowledgeable about Mantell.

I also believe nothing showed up on Radar.

Would have been nice if some other planes came to verify it .. rather than being told to not come.



posted on Feb, 8 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
This one is still my favorite.
www.ufobc.ca...

It would seem lots of action up in the north we don't hear too much about?



posted on Feb, 8 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
The Exeter incident in Exeter, New Hampshire 1965 was strange.

Not so sure a refueling flight even come close to an explanation. The Air Force didn't even claim it as a probable explanation.



posted on Feb, 11 2016 @ 04:04 PM
link   
For people unfamiliar with the Trumbull Ohio UFO incident, the short documentary below is a must-see!

First some information:

This incident is a remarkable UFO situation happening in 1994 near Youngstown, Ohio. The case involved the pursuit of a low-flying object by numerous police officials from a wide area. One officer approached the object at close range, saying it 'lit up the ground as if daylight,' and also declared that the electronic/radio instrumentation of his patrol cruiser was "shut down" by the object.

When did this happen?
The incident actually began before 12:01 a.m. in the early morning hours of Wednesday, December 14, 1994. Before midnight, the Trumbull County 9-1-1 center had already logged several UFO reports from residents near the Sampson Road vicinity. Curiously, UFOs were reported in the area the previous evening, as well as two weeks prior.

Where, exactly, did this occur?
In an area within Liberty Township, about 4-miles north of Youngstown, surrounded by Weathersfield Township to the west, Vienna Township to the north and Hubbard Township to the east. The happening occurred near and above the Youngstown Air Reserve Station, where public relations officers adamently deny the event ever transpired, despite the acquisition of 9-1-1 police dispatch tapes to the contrary.

How were the 9-1-1 tapes acquired?
Several telecommunicators at the Trumbull County 9-1-1 center read the 1996 report entitled: "The Trumbull County Disturbance: The Wrong Liberty," which appeared on the internet. Intruiged by this account, they researched the case and acquired a date of the event. Acting strictly as private citizens and not on behalf of the department, they retrieved the data from the audio tapes stored at the center. The original tapes were said to have been 'missing,' but a backup set was located in another storage area.

It can be demonstrated that police departments across Ohio and other states are more reluctant than ever to associate their departments or officers with alleged UFO occurrences, and understandably so. Those armed with the "badge of truth" do not usually relish their position as the 'middleman' between the U.S. Air Force and the UFO phenomenon.

"From my information, calls placed from police departments to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base are forwarded directly to secret offices at the air base that are solely responsible for monitoring the UFO situation," charges George Clappison, UFO researcher and investigator.

www.sightings.com...





edit on 11-2-2016 by Neill887 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: neformore

Interesting reading, thanks.

Belgium and Rendlesham are always of interest.
I don't have a particular favourite apart from the ones that I THINK I know what they were, but can't say for certain so I have to bite my tongue.

Actually my favourites would be USOs not UFOs so that's against thread rules.

Cheers.



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join