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 reported by workers on Off Shore Oil Rig Supply Vessel in the Gulf of Mexico 21 March, 2017

page: 3
125
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:38 AM
link   
So what will happen now ? people are still their prove/debunk cycle , Science doesn't investigate and media is in denial mode.Some hoaxers will come along that make a show of the event and finally some guy says it's ALL a hoax....

4 years ago some guy found a disc in the North Sea and then nothing...

Now nothing again.... just some entertainment...

Question how is the race of the 'tall whites' called in the ru version of MIB ?
edit on 3262017 by frenchfries because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries




So what will happen now ?

Since there is nothing but an eyewitness account (which are not known for their reliability), nothing much.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 02:54 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 03:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Springer

It was a delivery of bricks going to the Trump Wall more chance of that than what has been claimed.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 03:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Well indeed...

Nothing new there. So what's the point the whole UFO 'business' is an endless tug of war. After decades of ' researching' still nothing. There is no officials scientific (Western) approach whatsoever when it comes to UFO's.
Which is very very wierd because if there is an 'alien' army in the sky isn't it the duty of a government to protect their people ?

I remember that in my early years (80's)a official of the BND told me they had no interest in UFO's whatsoever. Kinda wierd because there were sightings. Wether it was the russians or not 'UFO's' would be a big deal along the border ? But according the offical not ?! Not interested in Unidentified objects hovering along the iron curtain ?! I find that very hard to believe although it wasnt that difficult to land a cessna on the red square in those days


Fazit : officials lie government lie and media is covering it up. At the same eyewitnesses start more and more confabulate stories. Eventually they turn into hoaxers. Skeptics often act like jerks discrediting eyewitness accounts calling for proof without explaining what they consider irrefutable proof.

But that doesn't mean there is nothing out there , it just means the existence of UFOS is denied and ridiculed on so many levels that ufology has become obsolete.


edit on 3262017 by frenchfries because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 03:35 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries




But that doesn't mean there is nothing out there , it just means the existence of UFOS is denied and ridiculed on so many levels that ufology has become obsolete.

Denial of the existence of unidentified flying objects would be, to be blunt, stupid.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 03:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




Denial of the existence of unidentified flying objects would be, to be blunt, stupid.


Well that exactly is the official point of view is right now. Ask the military , ask an politician , ask an scientist (in general).

It's my opinion that the whole thing comes down to that in some way or another they (acting officials) don't want to admit that humans arent the top of the food chain. So in my opinion they have to play stupid to protect their own superiority. At the highest levels ufo's are a non topic because well it's already known what it...



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 03:47 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries




Well that exactly is the official point of view is right now. Ask the military , ask an politician , ask an scientist (in general).
I think you are mistaken. I think any thinking person would understand that people see things in the sky which they cannot identify.


It's my opinion that the whole thing comes down to that in some way or another they (acting officials) don't want to admit that humans arent the top of the food chain.
What does the fact that someone may not be able to identify something they see in the sky have to do with a "food chain?"

edit on 3/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spacespider
80% of all people have phones with cameras...

And a estimate of 50 people saw this incident...

and not one single picture or movie clip.

Having a hard time believing this story until some footage shows up


People working off shore aint allowed cellphones on the Vessel.
edit on 3/26/2017 by ypperst because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: ypperst




People working off shore aint allowed cellphones on the Vessel.

What? Why not?


edit on 3/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




I think you are mistaken. I think any thinking person would understand that people see things in the sky which they cannot identify.


Well maybe I'm mistaken.And you're completely right when you talking about the personal level. On a personal level many people are willing to accept the fact that there is 'more between heaven and earth'. But ask yourself is ufology the best thing humanity can do in explaining the phenomenon. Why isn't there any 'real' scientific investigation going on (know by the public) ? Well I think it's because it's kind a scary to admit that humans arent the top of the food chain... but hey I can be wrong...



What does the fact that someone may not be able to identify something they see in the sky have to do with a "food chain?"


'food chain' is an expression in my native language (saw it on ATS thought is was english expression too )... And it means (I meant to imply) something like there is an higher developed spieces than humanity in existence/on the planet...



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:30 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

You seem to be conflating the term "UFO" (unidentified flying object) with something else.

edit on 3/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Yea, we have Navy reports the same....from 1969 and 1971



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Indeed you're right but the mere existance of UFO's (being in this context crafts made by non-humans) implies that the world view of humanity is wrong.

But you have a very good point here because the word ufo is a very fuzzy one. Like alien
Isn't it time for humanity to invent a better terminology ?



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:59 AM
link   
a reply to: frenchfries

UAP

Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: missed_gear
a reply to: Thorneblood

Fata Morgana (among other names) is a common mirage at sea...and can happen on land as well.

One's own ship can be seen floating above the surface, distorted and/or enlarged at a distance or close. Depends on the westher.

I would not rule that out as a possibilty.

Mg



But does such a mirage actually appear to be animated, moving? The description of the craft rising up out of the water is very specific. I've seen mirages in the desert myself, numerous times, but they simply appeared...sort of shimmering into view. But you can tell they're not real...they don't solidify or become more detailed as you walk toward the area. This description here sounds like they perceived it to be a solid object, rising up out of the water. I would think that seasoned sailors would know the difference, as mirages are also common at sea.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thorsen
My first thought is, why would the craft need to slowly rise out of the sea, to then speed off to wherever it was going? Why not speed off right out of the water?


A craft that size could probably displace a dangerous amount of water if it rose up at speed...perhaps it's protocol to prevent capsizing any nearby vessels? A sighting can be dismissed as a figment of the imagination, but it's a different story if it causes physical, verifiable effects on the immediate environment.

What I'm curious about is...if it's an intelligently operated craft, why show itself at all?? Whomever was piloting it would surely have known that people were going to see the damned thing, right?? Do they just count on the claim being dismissed outright then? They know most people won't believe it? That really irks me...always has.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thorsen
My first thought is, why would the craft need to slowly rise out of the sea, to then speed off to wherever it was going? Why not speed off right out of the water?


Perhaps because it was aware of the rigs, ships and people within the local area, and was being considerate by not creating a shock wave which could have swamped them?

Or maybe it was just going slowly, and then decided to speed up?



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:19 AM
link   
If there where 40 something witnesses then surely someone must have pulled out their phone and filmed it. If it was a car crash and someone was splattered all over the road at least 30 would have had it on video and it would be on liveleak by now.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Springer

www.nuforc.org...


NUFORC Note: We spoke via telephone with this witness, and he seemed to us to be unusually sober-minded. We suspect that he is a very capable, and very reliable, witness.


It must have taken great courage to report it. Presumably he was thinking about the greater importance of the reported facts. He must have known his own reputation would be shredded by many.



new topics

top topics



 
125
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join