Are They Mechanical or Do They Just Imitate Nuts-and-Bolts?

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: standingwave

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: standingwave

I vote for (a) 98% misidentification (b) an occasional physical object with unusual optical properties, including fuzzy borders/cloud/light effects, as a result of consequences of its engineering such as 1) optical stealth 2) plasma 3) cerenkov radiation

atoms + radiation, not woo.

The only option of yours I may be able to consider ( at least in regards to my experience and the late professors), is ( B ). Only then you will have to explain how such an object can be engineered to split itself into two distinct objects, fly along a considerable distance from each other, then once again merge, with the only by product of changing in brightness and timing of pulsations.

The most economical explanation is that the objects didn't actually do that, it was either two objects all along which were not always visible or alterations of appearance, intentional or not or alterations of properties of the atmosphere to make it seem like more than one.

Human perception is also not as reliable as people believe. Modern neuroscience & cognitive experiments show a very substantial internal 'painting' of perceived scenes not from observed photons but interpolated from low-level neurological expectations & structures. Furthermore, experience and evolution is designed for daytime ground level scenes of ordinary nature and astrophysical objects are pretty different.

So, having brain fill in moving dots from here to there and appearance of motion where there is none is quite possible.

Going on to more exotic physics, if one supposes a kind of "warp drive" dealing with alterations of inertia/gravity not known to conventional technology, then such a thing would inevitably have unusual optical properties as well thanks to general relativistic principles: e.g. engineered gravitational lensing. It is now standard astrophysical analysis to find multiple images of the same galaxy as a result of perturbation from gravitational fields, and these are used quantitatively in various ways.


Substantial photographic evidence from a telescope would be more convincing to me. There are telescopes which can image satellites in orbit. Have we ever seen one for these UFO's?

There is scientific analysis ongoing at Hessdalen, I believe they have done this with magnification and spectrum analysis. Rutledge had some earlier experience with this and time exposure pictures.

originally posted by: standingwave

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: standingwave
3: They are one in the same, but can morph into the physical or somewhere in between.

If we can pin this thing down to one of these three scenarios, I think it would advance our understanding quite a bit.

This one starts out looking alike a plasma craft, and "morphs" into an airplane, except that's a poor description of what really happens, it's only what appears to happen and we are easily deceived by appearance.

By the way I saw one like this last year, and never would have realized it was a plane if it hadn't been flying toward me. It was just hovering, completely silent, and as in the beginning of this video, looked nothing like a plane.

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
shapeshift into what appeared to be a small single engine aircraft complete with obnoxious engine sounds and running lights where none had previously been observable.

Yes they appear to "morph" or "shapeshift", however that's not what really happens in the case of the above video, I'm pretty sure. It only looks that way.

That is a very strange video, indeed. I have never seen this occur in daylight, however, night time observations have been along these lines.

This is a classic example and anyone can film this type of activity repeatedly. Sadly some people use this type of footage to deceive and mislead. Some people do it on purpose and others are simply fooling themselves.

The shape of the aircraft lights are simply due to camera artifacts. The type of camera used will depend what shape is generated.



Also people are easily deceived by aircraft flying towards them and especially with lights on them. They simply can't or don't want to understand the distance that they can be observed. The result is that they are deceived into believing that the light/object is hovering and silent. Combine that with poor focus and camera artifacts and it is easy for people to fool themselves or as I stated earlier purposely deceive with their footage.

The following footage is timelapse showing airliners stacked for landing. Imagine that at night filmed in real time from a distance? Add in some poor focus, camera artifacts and you can have a whole fleet of "diamond-shaped" or "orb" UFOs. Sadly some people are completely unaware that it is the camera/lens producing the shape and that is why you see so many videos of "plasma/orb/diamond shaped UFOs"



For a classic example of people being deceived by aircraft at night and heading towards them see following thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

ATS poster purposely filmed the following footage to show how easy it is for people to be deceived by aircraft.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

See following at 2:22 for original footage from O'Hare Chicago, 2011. The first part is another ATS poster who tried to deceive by filming the O'Hare approach from his house.

a reply to: tommyjo

Yes there are videos out there that are not the "real deal". But, this does not mean that the phenomena does not exist, it does!

Again, I refer you to my own experiences, and also with what Rutledge and his scientific team had witnessed.

en.wikipedia.org...


Also, would like to point out that many of these sightings are not in the city or near any airport. They are out in rural areas, often 100 miles or more from any runway with any decent activity. You may be able to convince a city dweller that what they have seen is normal air traffic, but to those of us who live out here where there are no city lights, you are not going to be able to tell us that red ball that just came down out of the sky and followed the tree line in the back of the house is an airplane.

originally posted by: standingwave
a reply to: tommyjo

Yes there are videos out there that are not the "real deal". But, this does not mean that the phenomena does not exist, it does!

Again, I refer you to my own experiences, and also with what Rutledge and his scientific team had witnessed.

en.wikipedia.org...


Also, would like to point out that many of these sightings are not in the city or near any airport. They are out in rural areas, often 100 miles or more from any runway with any decent activity. You may be able to convince a city dweller that what they have seen is normal air traffic, but to those of us who live out here where there are no city lights, you are not going to be able to tell us that red ball that just came down out of the sky and followed the tree line in the back of the house is an airplane.

Does it really exist? It is amazing how many people are deceived by perfectly normal air traffic at distance.

I don't know if she is still going but Alison Kruse in Pennsylvania springs to mind. The woman was completely clueless in regards to the aviation that could be seen in her region. She built up a large following but was simply deceiving herself and others. You could take her anywhere in the world and position her in a similar set up and she would be recording "orbs" and "blinkies" continuously.

www.youtube.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Another person was JSB007 in the UK. He has recently set up a new YT Channel and is uploading some of his old videos.

www.youtube.com...

I live some 50 kms to the west of him and all he is doing is exploiting the commercial upper air routes to the north of him and the military training airspace region that he lives in. In both cases they fail to understand just how far away aircraft/lights can be seen at night and delude themselves and others with their footage.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I've lived near 2 airports and that's exactly what the planes look like when flying in at dusk, night, or dawn. They appear to be hovering for most of the time because they're flying towards your general direction at a constant speed. And their bright lights seem to drown out their other features.

It's the same effect as if you stood on a flat and non-winding road, and watched a car drive towards you from a long distance away. It would appear to be sitting still for much of the time. And this effect would be exaggerated at night since their lights would be on (and human vision isn't that good at extreme distances).

originally posted by: standingwave
Also, would like to point out that many of these sightings are not in the city or near any airport. They are out in rural areas, often 100 miles or more from any runway with any decent activity. You may be able to convince a city dweller that what they have seen is normal air traffic, but to those of us who live out here where there are no city lights, you are not going to be able to tell us that red ball that just came down out of the sky and followed the tree line in the back of the house is an airplane.

Who says a runway has to have "decent activity"? If just one plane lands there and that one plane is mistaken for a UFO then there goes your "rural area" objection. In North Carolina there are two major airports, but there are many, many smaller airports and it's almost impossible to find rural areas anywhere in that state where you are over 100 miles from the nearest airport:

flightaware.com...

Maybe if you're in Northern Alaska you can be over 100 miles from an airport but I don't see a lot of UFO reports from there, probably because it's sparsely populated.

Anyway Rutledge apparently thought the lights were some sort of plasma, is that also what you think?

a reply to: tommyjo
a reply to: enlightenedservant
Yes there's no doubt aircraft are mistaken as UFOs all the time, though of course there are many sightings that are certainly not aircraft. But there's no doubt that people dismiss aircraft "because it hovered and was completely silent" thinking airplanes don't do that, when that's exactly what they sometimes appear to do.

originally posted by: skunkape23

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
standingwave

Personally, and I don't like talking about this but what the hell, I have witnessed unidentified flying lights that were utterly silent suddenly (for lack of a more academic vernacular) shapeshift into what appeared to be a small single engine aircraft complete with obnoxious engine sounds and running lights where none had previously been observable.

Frankly, I don't care what anyone thinks I grew up around an airport and while I may not have the expertise posessed by others, I am not a slouch and I know what I saw.

Strange things.

I have seen the exact same thing...with witnesses.
To make things even more odd, the plane appeared to have Christmas lights draped around it.

I have also witnessed the same thing.

It was dusk on the Western Australian coast, at a small rural "resort", where I had been many times previously and experienced a couple of in-explainable events. Bearing in mind this is an area with no flight activity I first saw a reddish purple light rise from behind the distant treeline which was around a mile away. Totally silent it rose in the sky till it was around 20 degrees height - it was self-illuminated and not lit by the sun which had set some time earlier.

At this point it could have been a flare as it had risen from my point of view pretty much straight up however it now started to move towards me and parallel to the coast, which was a couple of hundred yards in front of me. It's motion wasn't erratic, fairly slow and in a straight line but still silent and at this point I knew I was seeing something unusual so called out to the family who were inside our accommodation.

I looked away for just a second as my son and others came outside, when I looked back the light was in the process of morphing into a small single engined plane, complete now with standard running lights and engine noise, which faded in. The plane was at less than 50m height and closer than the coastline but there was something wrong with the engine noise and it didn't look "right". Within a few seconds it was lost to view over a ridge line and the noise immediately ceased, my family only having seen just a plane.

However it wasn't a plane, even when first seen it was close enough that I would have been able to make out detail and heard it. It wasn't just a case of a plane having a reddish purple light that was pointing in my direction, once it started to travel towards and across me the light would pointed elsewhere. To appear as it did a plane would have to be enveloped in some kind of plasma cloud which then suddenly dissipated.

I have never subsequently seen any aircraft around that area and, whilst I am no expert, I would have thought that it would be dangerous to be flying at that kind of height at what was, in effect, nighttime.

a reply to: tommyjo

You bet, it exists! You might be able to discredit some of these shady Youtube videos, but if you begin to try and discredit the late Mr. Rutledge, I think you might have some work to do.

In the Ozarks, you would be lucky if your line of sight is over a mile when it comes to low horizon events. Its just the terrain. Not like the flat or desert where you can see things for miles. Not everyone has a runway in their backyard.

Many of my experiences were within an estimated 500-1000 ft, just because of the size of the field, and the fact it was in a valley and the actual lights were below the hills and treeline. And I think if a plane or jet were landing in a field behind my parents farm, there might be something like......um....the sound aircraft make?

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: standingwave
Also, would like to point out that many of these sightings are not in the city or near any airport. They are out in rural areas, often 100 miles or more from any runway with any decent activity. You may be able to convince a city dweller that what they have seen is normal air traffic, but to those of us who live out here where there are no city lights, you are not going to be able to tell us that red ball that just came down out of the sky and followed the tree line in the back of the house is an airplane.

Who says a runway has to have "decent activity"? If just one plane lands there and that one plane is mistaken for a UFO then there goes your "rural area" objection. In North Carolina there are two major airports, but there are many, many smaller airports and it's almost impossible to find rural areas anywhere in that state where you are over 100 miles from the nearest airport:

flightaware.com...

Maybe if you're in Northern Alaska you can be over 100 miles from an airport but I don't see a lot of UFO reports from there, probably because it's sparsely populated.

Anyway Rutledge apparently thought the lights were some sort of plasma, is that also what you think?

a reply to: tommyjo
a reply to: enlightenedservant
Yes there's no doubt aircraft are mistaken as UFOs all the time, though of course there are many sightings that are certainly not aircraft. But there's no doubt that people dismiss aircraft "because it hovered and was completely silent" thinking airplanes don't do that, when that's exactly what they sometimes appear to do.

When objects fly below the tree line, or in heavily wooded valleys, in complete silence, within 1000 ft, it is kinda obvious they are not flying in to land on a runway....unless its in your backyard....and they are coasting in.

You are treating all reports like they are some distant event several miles off. I can assure you they are not. Not everyone lives in the desert where distance can be deceiving. Some of us live in valleys and are surrounded by heavy forest.

originally posted by: standingwave
a reply to: tommyjo

You bet, it exists! You might be able to discredit some of these shady Youtube videos, but if you begin to try and discredit the late Mr. Rutledge, I think you might have some work to do.

In the Ozarks, you would be lucky if your line of sight is over a mile when it comes to low horizon events. Its just the terrain. Not like the flat or desert where you can see things for miles. Not everyone has a runway in their backyard.

Many of my experiences were within an estimated 500-1000 ft, just because of the size of the field, and the fact it was in a valley and the actual lights were below the hills and treeline. And I think if a plane or jet were landing in a field behind my parents farm, there might be something like......um....the sound aircraft make?

But does it really exist? It is amazing how people can be deceived by light at night. Alison Kruze does the same thing. She believes that the orbs that she is seeing/filming are within close proximity and hovering over the trees to the back of her property. The same goes for the guy in the UK (JSB007). He believes that they are hovering over the woodlands near to his house. Sadly it is a mindset. Some people need this in their lives and subsequently nothing will persuade them that there could be a perfectly rational explination.

originally posted by: standingwave

When objects fly below the tree line, or in heavily wooded valleys, in complete silence, within 1000 ft, it is kinda obvious they are not flying in to land on a runway....unless its in your backyard....and they are coasting in.

You are treating all reports like they are some distant event several miles off. I can assure you they are not. Not everyone lives in the desert where distance can be deceiving. Some of us live in valleys and are surrounded by heavy forest.

The question arises is do you really know the aviation in your region? If you question the likes of Alison Kruze and JSB007 they will also claim that they know the air picture. Simple research of their videos proves that they really don't. So the question arises do you truly know the aviation picture in your region? What about military aviation? Next time you see a light moving in the mountains that isn't a strobe light have you ever considered that is a night vision mil flight? The military often train with crews running on minimal lighting.

originally posted by: standingwave
Not everyone lives in the desert where distance can be deceiving. Some of us live in valleys and are surrounded by heavy forest.

That doesn't mean distance can't be deceiving in your area also. Unless the object is 30 meters or less away, it's very difficult to determine the distance of an unknown or unidentified object in the night sky, often impossible. People only think they know how far away it is, but they often don't.

Psychology of UFOs

Knowing how far away something is helps us determine its size and speed; that's why we know that moving cars seen at a distance aren't really smaller, nor are they moving slowly; it's simply an optical illusion. If the eyewitness doesn't know the distance, then he or she cannot determine the size. Is that thing or light in the sky twenty feet long and 200 yards away, or is it 200 feet long and a mile away? It's impossible to know, and this makes estimates of size, distance and speed of UFOs very unreliable.

a reply to: tommyjo

You can ask the question, but it really has no bearing on what is happening here.

We are not talking about Alison Kruze and JSB007.

We are talking about what I have personally witnessed and the fact that someone much smarter than me has witnessed and studied the exact same peculiar lights, took photographic time lapse evidence, and came away with the same observation that whatever they are, respond to the observers and also appear to be telepathic.

Military crews training at night on private property in the middle of a cow pasture with absolutely zero sound? I have described the lay of the land where this is occurring, I suppose you just dont understand. We are talking about heavily wooded areas, with small fields which are situated in the valleys of large hills. If this were conventional aircraft, they would be crashing into trees and hills. Add the fact there is no sound, and not a reasonable person in the world would try and convince me otherwise.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: standingwave
Not everyone lives in the desert where distance can be deceiving. Some of us live in valleys and are surrounded by heavy forest.

That doesn't mean distance can't be deceiving in your area also. Unless the object is 30 meters or less away, it's very difficult to determine the distance of an unknown or unidentified object in the night sky, often impossible. People only think they know how far away it is, but they often don't.

Psychology of UFOs

Knowing how far away something is helps us determine its size and speed; that's why we know that moving cars seen at a distance aren't really smaller, nor are they moving slowly; it's simply an optical illusion. If the eyewitness doesn't know the distance, then he or she cannot determine the size. Is that thing or light in the sky twenty feet long and 200 yards away, or is it 200 feet long and a mile away? It's impossible to know, and this makes estimates of size, distance and speed of UFOs very unreliable.

Doesnt matter, when you grew up on a farm and worked it on a daily basis, you kinda know how long the field is, how far away and tall the hills are, ect. Any reasonable person should understand what I am saying. You act like it is impossible to know when something is literally in your back yard.

originally posted by: chunder

originally posted by: skunkape23

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
standingwave

Personally, and I don't like talking about this but what the hell, I have witnessed unidentified flying lights that were utterly silent suddenly (for lack of a more academic vernacular) shapeshift into what appeared to be a small single engine aircraft complete with obnoxious engine sounds and running lights where none had previously been observable.

Frankly, I don't care what anyone thinks I grew up around an airport and while I may not have the expertise posessed by others, I am not a slouch and I know what I saw.

Strange things.

I have seen the exact same thing...with witnesses.
To make things even more odd, the plane appeared to have Christmas lights draped around it.

I have also witnessed the same thing.

It was dusk on the Western Australian coast, at a small rural "resort", where I had been many times previously and experienced a couple of in-explainable events. Bearing in mind this is an area with no flight activity I first saw a reddish purple light rise from behind the distant treeline which was around a mile away. Totally silent it rose in the sky till it was around 20 degrees height - it was self-illuminated and not lit by the sun which had set some time earlier.

At this point it could have been a flare as it had risen from my point of view pretty much straight up however it now started to move towards me and parallel to the coast, which was a couple of hundred yards in front of me. It's motion wasn't erratic, fairly slow and in a straight line but still silent and at this point I knew I was seeing something unusual so called out to the family who were inside our accommodation.

I looked away for just a second as my son and others came outside, when I looked back the light was in the process of morphing into a small single engined plane, complete now with standard running lights and engine noise, which faded in. The plane was at less than 50m height and closer than the coastline but there was something wrong with the engine noise and it didn't look "right". Within a few seconds it was lost to view over a ridge line and the noise immediately ceased, my family only having seen just a plane.

However it wasn't a plane, even when first seen it was close enough that I would have been able to make out detail and heard it. It wasn't just a case of a plane having a reddish purple light that was pointing in my direction, once it started to travel towards and across me the light would pointed elsewhere. To appear as it did a plane would have to be enveloped in some kind of plasma cloud which then suddenly dissipated.

I have never subsequently seen any aircraft around that area and, whilst I am no expert, I would have thought that it would be dangerous to be flying at that kind of height at what was, in effect, nighttime.

I do not doubt your story. If possible, acquire the book I have mentioned in this thread, Project Identification. The professor which studied these things also witnessed some of the same type of aircraft imitation.

originally posted by: standingwave
a reply to: tommyjo

You can ask the question, but it really has no bearing on what is happening here.

We are not talking about Alison Kruze and JSB007.

We are talking about what I have personally witnessed and the fact that someone much smarter than me has witnessed and studied the exact same peculiar lights, took photographic time lapse evidence, and came away with the same observation that whatever they are, respond to the observers and also appear to be telepathic.

Military crews training at night on private property in the middle of a cow pasture with absolutely zero sound? I have described the lay of the land where this is occurring, I suppose you just dont understand. We are talking about heavily wooded areas, with small fields which are situated in the valleys of large hills. If this were conventional aircraft, they would be crashing into trees and hills. Add the fact there is no sound, and not a reasonable person in the world would try and convince me otherwise.

Really? So why are you not documenting it with video? Why haven't you set up cameras say on your roof top to record what you are claiming to see? Alison Kruze and JSB007 just like Rutledge also claim that what they are seeing also communicate/respond with them. Sadly it is just non-sense. Like I said before it is a mindset. Again do you really know the air picture in your region? Why are you not filming them and documenting the exact location/times, etc. Your case just smacks of someone deceiving themselves over something that is easily explained. The two people I referenced also claim that their videos show UFOs up close and above woodland in close proximity to them. Unless you provide video footage or a layout of your location so that people can double check and research then you just come across as someone who is deluding themselves and being fooled by perfectly explainable lights at night.

originally posted by: standingwave

The professor which studied these things also witnessed some of the same type of aircraft imitation.

Sadly this is a very common get out clause for such sightings and footage. Many UFO filmers use this claim and sadly it doesn't wash. Alison Kruze used it repeatedly and so does JSB007. It appears that Rutledge was doing the same thing simply to justify his sightings. Like I said it is a mindset. You need to believe. It is no different to the "fake plane/hologram" filmers on You Tube. They will film and aircraft at distance and claim that it is an orb producing a contrail. The "orb" is simply light reflecting off the aircraft. As the aircraft comes into view they will claim that the orb has morphed into an aircraft. Some of them will then continue to claim that the "morphing" hasn't quite worked out and the aliens haven't got it correct. Like I said before it is a mindset.

I seem to be surrounded by the orbs seeing people in the East Midlands of the UK!



www.youtube.com...

a reply to: tommyjo

I have some video from the early 90's, it is on VHS. I could give you "video proof" but you would only see lights moving around over a field and in the tree line. You would not see "flying saucers".

You demand all this proof from me, which the only thing I could give you would be poor "lights in the night sky" footage. I dont have all the instrumentation which was used by Rutledge, and even with his documentation, you are trying to discredit his work.

You sure are trying awfully hard to debunk something which you have no personal experience of. And I sure the heck am not going to give you GPS coordinates to my parents farm. Are you crazy or something? You are coming across as rather rabid.

I will tell you this, the area all this happened is in the same area Project Identification took place. Have you even read the book?

originally posted by: tommyjo

originally posted by: standingwave

The professor which studied these things also witnessed some of the same type of aircraft imitation.

Sadly this is a very common get out clause for such sightings and footage. Many UFO filmers use this claim and sadly it doesn't wash. Alison Kruze used it repeatedly and so does JSB007. It appears that Rutledge was doing the same thing simply to justify his sightings. Like I said it is a mindset. You need to believe. It is no different to the "fake plane/hologram" filmers on You Tube. They will film and aircraft at distance and claim that it is an orb producing a contrail. The "orb" is simply light reflecting off the aircraft. As the aircraft comes into view they will claim that the orb has morphed into an aircraft. Some of them will then continue to claim that the "morphing" hasn't quite worked out and the aliens haven't got it correct. Like I said before it is a mindset.

I seem to be surrounded by the orbs seeing people in the East Midlands of the UK!

www.youtube.com...

Hate to break it to you, but the professor was not using just "video". He was using time lapse photography which shows much more than a "video". The reason is because these types of "lights" dont show a straight line arc like a star would, but rather amount to "squiggly marks". You can actually pick up on this with just your eyes, especially when referenced against something.

You keep trying to roll in Rutledge with these "youtube" people when one was an actual scientific study, and the others are just video makers. This makes me wonder if you actually know what you are talking about, and at present I fail to take your opinions seriously.

a reply to: standingwave

I've noticed this an awful lot too.
The biggest and loudest debunkers are those who have never seen anything themselves, and even if they did, would be too dumb to understand what they saw.