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: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave
a reply to: 3danimator2014

I understand the context of your argument, but some people don't believe UFOs to be material, but rather spiritual. For instance, Ghost Adventures shows lots of tiny balls of light the talk into their EVP devices. I think it is the ghost hunters, not the UFO hunters, who are keeping these glowing bird videos alive and popular in demand. You are right though, most people classify these balls of light as material UFOs.



Ah well, you see, i don't believe in spirits or ghosts or god or anything like that for the very same reason i don't believe in UFOs (alien UFOS...). Zero proof.

I'm open to change my mind about anything, but it will have to be hard proof.




posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

I wonder, frequently, how you UFO deniers explain away--and I'm sure you do if not simply ignore--all of the work that the Army Air Corp/Air Force did to prove UFOs. Are any of you familiar with the ill-fated The Estimate of the Situation" that was a report demanded by the high brass and which concluded that UFOs were alien craft after exhausting all of the alternatives? And do you also know that General Hoyt Vandenberg ordered that report destroy? And that later the excuse was given that official government policy could not be based on that "estimate"?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Define, "hard proof." If you have a personal experience, such as witnessing a UFO in the sky, or a ghost manifesting in your bedroom, would that be proof? And if so, why are others personal experiences not taken into account with your reasoning that the paranormal is BS?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: 3danimator2014

I wonder, frequently, how you UFO deniers explain away--and I'm sure you do if not simply ignore--all of the work that the Army Air Corp/Air Force did to prove UFOs. Are any of you familiar with the ill-fated The Estimate of the Situation" that was a report demanded by the high brass and which concluded that UFOs were alien craft after exhausting all of the alternatives? And do you also know that General Hoyt Vandenberg ordered that report destroy? And that later the excuse was given that official government policy could not be based on that "estimate"?



I cant explain it. I just dont belive it. I think it could be that the people recounting these episodes got the story wrong. All it takes is one word changed and the story changes. It happens all the time. Look at all the "proof" that chemtrail believers post. Various air force guys giving evidence, politicians mentioning chemtrails etc...its all hard proof right? How can it be denied?

Except when you actually look at exactly what had been been said yourself rather than from a conspiracy site post, you see that no one is admitting anything and no one is even using the word chemtrail.

Same thing applies here with UFOs. Stores are being slightly embellished most likely and it becomes like chinese whispers., until we reach the point where it becomes undeniable proof.

No. undeniable proof will be when millions of people witness the same thing and its reported by any of the tens of thousands of news agencies around the world. THEN, i will listen. When there are thousands of youtube videos of the same incredible lights seen in the sky, i will listen.

My position, i think, is very reasonable.
edit on 21-3-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is only conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.

OP: Birds are are always a real nut buster when so often misidentified. Those who have never seen something more profound usually use cases of mis-identification as fodder for ridiculing the real ones, especially the air force and military.

edit on 21-3-2016 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Define, "hard proof." If you have a personal experience, such as witnessing a UFO in the sky, or a ghost manifesting in your bedroom, would that be proof? And if so, why are others personal experiences not taken into account with your reasoning that the paranormal is BS?


Hard proof would be undeniable video or photographic evidence and/or MASS experience (i.e: whole cities) and/or serious news coverage.

If YOU experienced a UFO or a ghost..good for you, but its not going to convince me. The mind and the eyes are very very well known to play tricks on people.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Just because you or anyone else has claimed to see one up close is no reason for me to believe you.

I discovered unicorns that poop Osmium. Why would you believe me if i said that if i offered zero proof, Its hilarious, you guys get so touchy...all i want it some hard proof of your incredible claims. As if that's in any way unreasonable.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Just because you or anyone else has claimed to see one up close is no reason for me to believe you.

I discovered unicorns that poop Osmium. Why would you believe me if i said that if i offered zero proof, Its hilarious, you guys get so touchy...all i want it some hard proof of your incredible claims. As if that's in any way unreasonable.


That is just it though. I am not asking for your belief at all. Your belief just isn't important in any way shape or form.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Just because you or anyone else has claimed to see one up close is no reason for me to believe you.

I discovered unicorns that poop Osmium. Why would you believe me if i said that if i offered zero proof, Its hilarious, you guys get so touchy...all i want it some hard proof of your incredible claims. As if that's in any way unreasonable.


That is just it though. I am not asking for your belief at all. Your belief just isn't important in any way shape or form.


Jesus christ, i KNEW you were going to say this. Yes i know you don't care. Good for you. Why are you talking to me then?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Its funny...the only people who are making blanket statements that leprechauns dont exist are those who have never spoken to one or had a beer with one.

You would probably laugh i said that seriously right? Get my point?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Just because you or anyone else has claimed to see one up close is no reason for me to believe you.

I discovered unicorns that poop Osmium. Why would you believe me if i said that if i offered zero proof, Its hilarious, you guys get so touchy...all i want it some hard proof of your incredible claims. As if that's in any way unreasonable.


That is just it though. I am not asking for your belief at all. Your belief just isn't important in any way shape or form.


Jesus christ, i KNEW you were going to say this. Yes i know you don't care. Good for you. Why are you talking to me then?



Because you are doing the very thing you are mad about not having proof, and boldly mocking others saying there is no proof, so they don't exist. But not proving that claim yourself, that they don't. Or should I just believe you when you say it?

It is a two way street.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Just because you or anyone else has claimed to see one up close is no reason for me to believe you.

I discovered unicorns that poop Osmium. Why would you believe me if i said that if i offered zero proof, Its hilarious, you guys get so touchy...all i want it some hard proof of your incredible claims. As if that's in any way unreasonable.


That is just it though. I am not asking for your belief at all. Your belief just isn't important in any way shape or form.


Jesus christ, i KNEW you were going to say this. Yes i know you don't care. Good for you. Why are you talking to me then?



Because you are doing the very thing you are mad about not having proof, and boldly mocking others saying there is no proof, so they don't exist. But not proving that claim yourself, that they don't. Or should I just believe you when you say it?

It is a two way street.


First off, i'm not mocking anyone. And i don't have to prove anything, i'm not making the extraordinary claim. How do you not know how this works by now?

You make the amazing claim, YOU provide the proof. Its not up to me to prove you wrong.

This is basic stuff mate. Its in no way a two way street.

Ok, i submit to you that unicorns exist...prove me wrong please.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Its funny...the only people who are making blanket statements that leprechauns dont exist are those who have never spoken to one or had a beer with one.

You would probably laugh i said that seriously right? Get my point?


I get the point, but it isn't relevant, because no one has ever taken a picture or even seen a real leprechaun, but people have seen and taken pictures of disks and saucers. Even though that still doesn't prove anything. But the leprechaun/unicorn argument is just crap on stick.

There is SO much evidence now, and so many released documents, that to say they don't exist now becomes the extraordinary claim. Not the claim that they are real. That is how reality works. Your about 2 decades behind in this debate. Better start doing some fresh research.
edit on 21-3-2016 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: DebtSlave
a reply to: 3danimator2014


I don't see any wings. That, and they do look like balls of light. Just sayin.


If you're looking at infrared, that's what you expect. Their bodies are warm and have blood. The feathers---they're very stiff hair. think of a chicken in the rotisserie. That part of them is what emits thermal radiation.
edit on 21-3-2016 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

Thats cool. I would disagree too if there was even a minute shred of proof, but there isnt.
...but to each their own.

We know that birds are part of the sky's architecture all the time, same for aircraft, satellites, lanterns and bugs whatever.
Night time just brings it's own problems in viewing, what the video guy is saying in effect. What I see is wrong, or perhaps not wrong in his discourse, is his talking about night vision cameras versus this camera he now uses that utilises any available light in a very superior way, and enables to see the objects clearly as being birds.
Thing is, he used night vision extensively before that, and he must have known just how the night vision cameras address what they see, which is very singular. Any light source that night vision sees in the IR spectrum is a point of light, a round ball, it doesn't matter if the actual shape is the sliver of a crescent moon, it will appear as a round ball and very bright, that brightness just washes out any features at distance, at close range there may be some features.
Right now, for instance, I'm am looking at my car parked outside about ten yards away, it has an orange reflector on it's rear wing at the bumper level, i'ts highly reflective as it's meant to be. In the IR outside camera's eye it's super bright, it has the shape of an ellipse, and the light seen is about six hundred % bigger than the actual reflector, which is about four inches long by an inch wide and the result visually is that the light takes up about a quarter of the rear wing, that's how anomalous things can look, however I fail to see why this guy, using IR all the time would not have taken these kind of anomalies into account.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Its funny...the only people who are making blanket statements that leprechauns dont exist are those who have never spoken to one or had a beer with one.

You would probably laugh i said that seriously right? Get my point?


I get the point, but it isn't relevant, because no one has ever taken a picture or even seen a real leprechaun, but people have seen and taken pictures of disks and saucers. Even though that still doesn't prove anything. But the leprechaun/unicorn argument is just crap on stick.


All the pictures of actual saucers are faked. That's been proven. Those are relics of the 70s and 80s hoaxes. Lights in the sky...that is not a picture of alien craft any more than a blurry picture of a badger at night is a picture of a leprechaun.

And if you are going to accet the images of saucers then you have to accept the (also faked) images of leprechauns or demons or whatever has been taken.

So, yes, my point it is relevant.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: DebtSlave
a reply to: 3danimator2014


I don't see any wings. That, and they do look like balls of light. Just sayin.


If you're looking at infrared, that's what you expect. Their bodies are warm and have blood. The feathers---they're very stiff hair. think of a chicken in the rotisserie. That part of them is what emits thermal radiation.


I don't mean to correct you, but night vision sees infrared light, whereas thermal sees heat. Big difference.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

Thats cool. I would disagree too if there was even a minute shred of proof, but there isnt.
...but to each their own.

We know that birds are part of the sky's architecture all the time, same for aircraft, satellites, lanterns and bugs whatever.
Night time just brings it's own problems in viewing, what the video guy is saying in effect. What I see is wrong, or perhaps not wrong in his discourse, is his talking about night vision cameras versus this camera he now uses that utilises any available light in a very superior way, and enables to see the objects clearly as being birds.
Thing is, he used night vision extensively before that, and he must have known just how the night vision cameras address what they see, which is very singular. Any light source that night vision sees in the IR spectrum is a point of light, a round ball, it doesn't matter if the actual shape is the sliver of a crescent moon, it will appear as a round ball and very bright, that brightness just washes out any features at distance, at close range there may be some features.
Right now, for instance, I'm am looking at my car parked outside about ten yards away, it has an orange reflector on it's rear wing at the bumper level, i'ts highly reflective as it's meant to be. In the IR outside camera's eye it's super bright, it has the shape of an ellipse, and the light seen is about six hundred % bigger than the actual reflector, which is about four inches long by an inch wide and the result visually is that the light takes up about a quarter of the rear wing, that's how anomalous things can look, however I fail to see why this guy, using IR all the time would not have taken these kind of anomalies into account.


Yes, i understand what you are saying but im missing your point? Sorry mate.

That the guy should have known even they were birds long before now?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: DebtSlave
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Define, "hard proof." If you have a personal experience, such as witnessing a UFO in the sky, or a ghost manifesting in your bedroom, would that be proof? And if so, why are others personal experiences not taken into account with your reasoning that the paranormal is BS?


Hard proof would be undeniable video or photographic evidence and/or MASS experience (i.e: whole cities) and/or serious news coverage.

If YOU experienced a UFO or a ghost..good for you, but its not going to convince me. The mind and the eyes are very very well known to play tricks on people.


So, of all the UFO videos, none are considered compelling evidence to you? You think they are ALL faked?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: 3danimator2014

What is most funny about that is that the only ones making blanket statements that UFO's aren't real, are those that have never seen one up close, or even far away. So actually there is onlhy conjecture in your view, than someone who has actually seen an alien spacecraft.
Having cleared that up, you and anyone so inclined, can still freely declare they don't exist, but that doesn't make it true.


Its funny...the only people who are making blanket statements that leprechauns dont exist are those who have never spoken to one or had a beer with one.

You would probably laugh i said that seriously right? Get my point?


I get the point, but it isn't relevant, because no one has ever taken a picture or even seen a real leprechaun, but people have seen and taken pictures of disks and saucers. Even though that still doesn't prove anything. But the leprechaun/unicorn argument is just crap on stick.


Sorry, i forgot to address your last line. There is no debate mate, just (and excuse my term, i dont mean it as an insult), a circlejerk of UFO believers all validating their own stories without providing a single shred of proof to those outside this circle. And getting mad cuz we don't believe that someone says they saw a glowing saucer.

There is no debate. If there was, we would ALL be having it, and seriously talking about alien UFOs.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join