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.

 

UFO Hunter Admits And Proves WIth Video Evidence He Has Been Filming Glowing Nocturnal Birds

page: 11
13
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 05:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: 3danimator2014



And yet you dare to call us close minded or ask US to proves they don't exist? Insane.


Loving the 'you' thing in there. Loving the 'we' too. Classy


I haven't called you close-minded and I haven't said UFO reports are of aliens.

Shall I try again? My point was that people (even astronomers) see things they cannot identify. It was also that when someone says they can identify every single thing they see, they are missing out on the small chance that they can be in error.

A good case in point is how you've misidentified me as a believer that UFOs = alien spaceships. Or that you've characterised me as someone who's opposed to science, astronomers or the skeptical position. Errors are natural, right?


Oh for goodness sake. Do we have to play these stupid games? The whole thread is taking about alien ufos. Yes I know what ufo stands for but we are clearly talking about alien ones.

Secondly, I didn't mean YOU personally, im talking about you as in you ufo believers. That should also have been clear.




posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 05:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
Another nail in the already firmly nailed shut coffin of UFOs

Interesting video. Thanks


You spent 11 pages demanding proof that aliens exist... yet here in the first post you make a fairly absolute statement yet provide nothing but ridicule to back up your statement. The way the world works is you make an absolute type of statement you have to prove it... I don't have to disprove your opinion.

On topic...

Kudos on the guy for correcting himself and bringing to light a possible cause for some of the sightings, increased knowledge is never a bad thing.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Good.A moment enjoyed is never wasted.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014




The whole thread is taking about alien ufos. Yes I know what ufo stands for but we are clearly talking about alien ones.

Secondly, I didn't mean YOU personally, im talking about you as in you ufo believers. That should also have been clear.


It's also clear that you have not been clear on some points other members have made in the thread and have also made statements yourself without distinct clarity to the other participants of the thread. No need to apologize. But a little humility often helps when there is a misunderstanding.

As for the topic of the thread to bring it all back round.

I think it's a good thing to eliminate sightings as 'solved', where we can. Some people automatically jump to any UFO sighting as being "alien" craft because of popular culture influences, inherent belief systems and limited thinking. When in fact we know that there have been multiple explanations for UFO sightings in the past. So anything that clears the chaff away is a good thing.

I am also still wondering about the voice used on the video in the OP.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky
Well when members post comments claiming video of a ufo or seeing stars they have never seen before yet at the same time THEY are ALWAYS looking skywards and it obvious they don't have a clue it's laughable.

Also other claims re speed and distance for objects when there is no way to confirm it again laughable.

Youtube is polluted by people out to gain from the gullibility of ufo believers it's an easy sell.

Many threads on here show claims DEBUNKED when people know about photography & optics.

Youtube has loads of ir night videos filmed with equipment that have 320 x 240 resolution so birds appear as a DOT thats all you need to convince a believer that it's a ufo.

When out shooting pictures at night I can recognise satellites meteors iridium flares Sirius flashing the colours of the rainbow etc many posted here as ufo's on more than one occasion.



edit on 25-3-2016 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-3-2016 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

A UFO icon? Those coordinates are not for a street address or i would have given you a street address.

Go to Maps.google.com an put it on satellite mode. Cut and paste the coordinates i gave you into the search box and click the search icon. When it takes you to the site you have to scroll back so you can embrace horror of it all in it's totality.

Why would you say "I don't believe any of that" if you haven't even seen it yet? Is your mind that closed off?

One minute you scoff and the next you say you "really, really, really" want to see a UFO before you die which indicates to me that you "really, really, really" do believe there's something to it.

Babylon

* In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Hiya wmd,

I was pointing out that you were describing your own faculties as infallible. You left no concession for margins of error and implied that astronomers/astrophotographers never see UFOs when it isn't the case.

Of course, when I write 'UFO' you probably think 'space alien' and that's a standard misunderstanding. I use 'UFO' as a term to describe something that's unexplained or unidentified - unidentified flying object.



When out shooting pictures at night I can recognise satellites meteors iridium flares Sirius flashing the colours of the rainbow etc many posted here as ufo's on more than one occasion.


I don't doubt you at all on this.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

It seems like everyone has their own definition for "UFO" which makes discussions difficult if not impossible. Some even have assigned their own granularity. Like there are the regular UFO's that are probably a misidentified something or other and then there are the "real" UFOs that couldn't possibly be a misidentification... but they didn't say it was "alien".



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman


Was there more than one photo taken because that's not the picture i found associated with the siting your talking about. I'm not saying that it's not a bird; I'm just wondering where you got the photo.

www.thesun.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: 51Exile

No apologies, it was actually my mistake when searching for it. That was a supposed UFO photo taken in 2011 and used in a GCHQ presentation. Not the same as the one Nick Pope commented on. Although both were taken in Cornwall.

This is the one Nick commented on:



Still looks like a seagull to me.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman


Oh yeah, for sure.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 03:29 AM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Yeah, the terms of engagement are asymmetric thanks to the conflict in the debate. Some members use 'UFO believer' as a synonym for moron, mouth-breather and fool - it's wholly pejorative to them. It's a childish way to drive a discussion and such people are best left to it...in my experience.

With 'UFO' we have a collection of polar extremes, don't we? For some, it means aliens and for others it means something utterly normal if we had more information. Some use it as a cloak to hide behind when they mean demons. Rather than a descriptive term, it's become more of a euphemism for the majority and an innuendo for others.

Ever since NICAP began in the late 1950s, various people have been trying to nail a term that carries the least baggage. It's a waste of time and kinda pretentious imo. Researchers can use UAP to their heart's content and it doesn't stop others from thinking 'aliens' on one hand and 'mouth breathers' on the other.

I generally keep conversations between those who are capable of disagreeing without turning to name-calling.



posted on Mar, 27 2016 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

Yeah, the terms of engagement are asymmetric thanks to the conflict in the debate. Some members use 'UFO believer' as a synonym for moron, mouth-breather and fool - it's wholly pejorative to them. It's a childish way to drive a discussion and such people are best left to it...in my experience.



What discussion is there to be had about videos of drones, chinese lanterns, satellites, iridium flares, venus , private planes etc?
Especially since the alien ufo believers have a reply for everything

- ive never seen a drone move like that
- it was flickering faster than a chinese lantern normally moves
- it was flying heigher than ive ever seen a plane fly
- etc...

Here's a crazy idea, so bear with me.

Present us with some decent footage. Not just a video of a light in the sky and your personal story and we discuss things equally.

Keep presenting us with whatever you can scrape off the bottom of that barrel however and/or your story (which i am supposed to just believe ...why?) and we wont take you seriously. Why should i? If you guys dont respect us non alien ufo believers and insult us, tell us to open our eyes and insult our intelligence by calling videos of bugs flying "supersonic UFO's" etc.. then you wont get any back from me and yes, i will make fun of you.

Present us with something worth discussing and lets talk. Lets see you believers calling out the obvious hoaxes. Lets see you having a go at the hoaxers, the fakers.

On a more personal note, that kitten in your avatar is exceedingly cute


edit on 27-3-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014



What discussion is there to be had about videos of drones, chinese lanterns, satellites, iridium flares, venus , private planes etc?
Especially since the alien ufo believers have a reply for everything

none.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

For starters, you continue to mistake me for a 'UFO believer.' Judging by the way you use it, it's intended to frame the target as uneducated, gullible and driven by wishful thinking. You also seem to include me as someone who refuses to accept that bugs and blurds account for many UFO images. Wrong on all counts.

Mixing arrogance with no evidence of intelligence makes you look stupid. Not even the good stupid that is willing to learn. Nope, the type of stupid that doesn't know how ill-informed they are. Now, I'm not saying you are stupid, just that your posts in this thread make you look stupid and more than a little unpleasant.




Present us with something worth discussing and lets talk. Lets see you believers calling out the obvious hoaxes. Lets see you having a go at the hoaxers, the fakers.


Your attitude to others makes any conversation meaningless doesn't it? Why do you think anyone should 'present' you with anything? What makes you special? Do you think shouting and sneering invites polite discussion? What do you know of calling out hoaxers? Pointing and giggling is all you've done for four pages. Buried within all that scorn, I saw a couple of decent posts. Well done you



***



On the subject of the video, it's good to see a guy offering some sensible ideas about filming 'unknowns' in the skies. Takes me back to Ed Grimsley's stuff from a few years ago and some of his obviously bird-like UFOs that he argued were space battles. The tone of 'SuspendedBelief' is conducive to making people listen to him. I'd never even heard of IR footage of 'flying angels' before so live and learn. If it's in the sky and flapping, it's gonna be birds right? Nevertheless, his quiet approach could encourage believers in those examples to reappraise their footage and beliefs.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Unfortunately, the term "UFO" has become encrusted with a mass of assumptions and interpretations that make objective examination or discussion of the phenomena nearly impossible. The 1950's interpretation of certain perceived aerial phenomena as material aircraft has a stranglehold on some investigators. The parallel with the word "ghost" is exact. So much folklore identifies certain nocturnal phenomena with the shades of the dead that it is difficult to look at the experience objectively. Other paranormal phenomena have similar handicaps: fairies, etc. All of these paranormal experiences share a predominantly subjective aspect, but there is great resistance among those interested in them to admit that the psychological aspect is important. This is because modern Western culture has emphasized the physical nature of reality over the mental. The mind is every bit as important as matter, and it should not be considered insulting if some of these phenomena are viewed as primarily "mental" in nature.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Psychological causes will run deep in the archives of UFO sightings reports. As a species, I suspect we're hard-wired to see apparitions under particular circumstances. The psycho-social approach holds a lot of weight imo.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
Another nail in the already firmly nailed shut coffin of UFOs

Interesting video. Thanks


Yes, just like that.


Well, this and not a single convincing/non fake image or video of a UFO in existence, yes.


I think it's important to distinguish between the commonly interchangeable "Alien UFO" and "general UFO".

This is the problem, people seem to forget that UFO means "Unidentified Flying Object", that's got nothing to do with Aliens and implies nothing about the source of those witnessed phenomena.

Unfortunately, too many people seem to think UFO = Aliens. That's not the case.

UFO's do exist, they absolutely do. By very definition anything unidentified in the skies is a UFO. This is the classification various Militaries have given such things. They are unidentified, therefore they are UFO's.

The question you should really be asking, or the assertion you should really be making, is as follows:

Are UFO's simply misidentified natural or man-made phenomena?
Are any UFO's of an extraterrestrial source?

Again, there is absolutely no doubt at all that UFO's exist. The only question is whether they are a natural phenomena as yet unknown to us, misidentification of known object or phenomena, man made, or extraterrestrial in nature.

Of all the examples we have seen over the course of recent Human history, it's fair to say that there is no evidence at all that any of these are extraterrestrial, but there absolutely are UFO's, and there is plenty of evidence in witness statements and physical remnants at scenes that these are most likely man-made craft.
edit on 28-3-2016 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: 3danimator2014

For starters, you continue to mistake me for a 'UFO believer.' Judging by the way you use it, it's intended to frame the target as uneducated, gullible and driven by wishful thinking. You also seem to include me as someone who refuses to accept that bugs and blurds account for many UFO images. Wrong on all counts.

Mixing arrogance with no evidence of intelligence makes you look stupid. Not even the good stupid that is willing to learn. Nope, the type of stupid that doesn't know how ill-informed they are. Now, I'm not saying you are stupid, just that your posts in this thread make you look stupid and more than a little unpleasant.




Present us with something worth discussing and lets talk. Lets see you believers calling out the obvious hoaxes. Lets see you having a go at the hoaxers, the fakers.


Your attitude to others makes any conversation meaningless doesn't it? Why do you think anyone should 'present' you with anything? What makes you special? Do you think shouting and sneering invites polite discussion? What do you know of calling out hoaxers? Pointing and giggling is all you've done for four pages. Buried within all that scorn, I saw a couple of decent posts. Well done you



***



On the subject of the video, it's good to see a guy offering some sensible ideas about filming 'unknowns' in the skies. Takes me back to Ed Grimsley's stuff from a few years ago and some of his obviously bird-like UFOs that he argued were space battles. The tone of 'SuspendedBelief' is conducive to making people listen to him. I'd never even heard of IR footage of 'flying angels' before so live and learn. If it's in the sky and flapping, it's gonna be birds right? Nevertheless, his quiet approach could encourage believers in those examples to reappraise their footage and beliefs.



Funny. Because the only person hurling insults is you. And im supposed to be the stupid one?

I obviously hit a nerve with you. You are a thoroughly unpleasant person judging by your last post. Bye bye.
edit on 28-3-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DebtSlave

I'd just like to put another word in for two relatively recent books -- books that deserve to be on most Top Ten lists, IMO, but which just haven't had the time to become true classics.

-- UFOs and Government: A Historical Inquiry, by Swords, Powell, et al.

-- The Myth and Mystery of UFOs, by Thomas (Eddie) Bullard.

Both offer very sober, reasonable looks at the UFO phenomenon, even though they attack the problem from very different angles. The Swords (et al.) book relies solely on government documents, while Bullard approaches it from the myth/sociological angle. (Don't let the word 'myth' scare you; Bullard is not a debunker.)

When skeptical science & tech-oriented people ask for the 'best' single UFO book to read, I almost always point to Hynek's The UFO Experience. For less techy people, I usually point to Leslie Kean's book.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join