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.

 

1997 Phoenix Lights UFO - Solved - Day & Night Videos Superimposed - Ergo: FLARES!

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: fromtheskydown

Are suggesting the sense of seing with the visible light spectrum is the only way life can successfully operate?
When we have plenty of living specimens that go about doing exactyl that, two off the top of my head are moles, and fish at deepest parts of our oceans that hunt in absolute darkness.
Life has many diverse ways of seing an environment other than needing bright light.
My bad, your comment reads differently when read twice lol, we lose the nuance of speach when we type. Good point they may just need light like we do, or maybe not in some cases.
edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Military flares gradually fall to the ground. The phoenix lights were stationary the entire time..



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:58 AM
link   
what's this? that one person started a thread with a low quality, low evidence post attacking The Lights, then promptly took off, never to return?
i'm shocked, shocked to my core.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: fromtheskydown
a reply to: havok

Seeing as how light is prevalent throughout the universe, I have no issue with UFOs also being lit in some kind of fashion. What are the occupants supposed to do, operate in total darkness??


I think he means on the outside


So advanced they can travel many light years but not advanced enough for basic stealth



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Phoenix Lights debunked by this thread?
Lmao!



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: CreationBro




What about the thousands of other UFO sightings via video, picture, or word of mouth, spanning thousands of years?


1997 by my calculations is not anywhere near 1000s of years ago.




a reply to: nOraKat




There were flares and then there was also a triangular UFO the size of almost a football field. There was both. The triangular craft had lights on each corner and also a red glow in the middle. It flew over several military bases and I think flew over 2 states. There were thousands of witnesses and it was even chased down by police officers who have their account.



Why not also mention that the first sighting of the alleged massive ufo was also viewed to be planes flying in formation, viewed through equipment by some witnesses?





The triangular craft with the lights is speculated to be a govt craft.



It was also witnessed to be A12s If memory serves me right and they were flying in formation.




originally posted by: tjocksteffe
Phoenix Lights debunked by this thread?
Lmao!




debunked a while back.

2 links in this thread to others that have extensive research to show how some just handle the truth and need fantasy.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale

Maybe debunked for you, most certainly not debunked for me. Not even close.

But we both have our view points dont we, great to have our own oppinions, some of us will never see eye to eye on this subject.


edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Rhombus101




Maybe debunked for you, most certainly not debunked for me. Not even close.


Why not research it then, try and find relevant things that may influence a large population into a certain mindset like a year before.





im not even gona waste my time going into more detail the case is common knowledge, some people have blinkers on, no amount of evidence will take their thought process from what they have been told is possible in thier lifetime.





Like I said research it, its not common knowledge, the incident might be known about but everything surrounding it is certainly not.

The evidence is there and explains both events that night, sifting through it is what many don't do and just follow what another UFO researchers tell them using the tactics like only showing witness testimony that say they saw a large V shaped craft and leave out other witness testimony that say its something mundane like planes and make sure to keep clear of those testimonies because they are concluded to be such because those witnesses were using equipment to view the sky.

2 links in this thread that allow you to follow the trails of evidence and make your own conclusions based of the evidence not what a YouTube video or some other UFOlogist has concluded.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 08:36 AM
link   
The giant V-shaped object was being "shown off".
The flares were simply a distraction to deflect attention away from the V.

The did drop as a flare should. Have you seen the video that highlighted the profile of the mountain range and how the flares falling behind the range would explain them "blinking out" ?



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 08:56 AM
link   
I think it's quite possible, if not probable, that the military would use flares to see what's there...or if they wanted to, they could use them in an attempt to misdirect/redirect...and ofc 'muddy the water' no matter what was or wasn't there.
edit on 1 15 2018 by KenTodd because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale

The incident is common knowledge to the kind of people that are pro ufo and frequent the ufo forum here on ats, it is one of the biggest high profile casses in ufology.
I have very good knowledge of the ufo phenomena including this case and am convinced it wasnt flares.
Ufo does not neccesarily mean alien as we know, the usa government may have very large black project aircraft.
There is a company in the usa that has patents and is working on huge V shaped lifting body craft that go into the upper atmosphere, to be used as transporters, that could be one explanation.
edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale

I also dont need your links to to investigate the case, and to not simply take the work of some ufologist as incorrect.
Some of these guys are very well respected and serious researchers, such as Richard Dolan.
I will take his oppinion and research and the witness testimony of police officers on duty that night over an attempt to debunk it as flares.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Rhombus101




The incident is common knowledge to the kind of people that are pro ufo and frequent the ufo forum here on ats, it is one of the biggest high profile casses in ufology.


Yes, That is what I said, the incident is very well known about but all the details surrounding it are not especially if you rely on info gained from a YouTube video or another ufologist writing an article or research paper on it.




I have very good knowledge of the ufo phenomena including this case and am convinced it wasnt flares.


Which event wasn't flares in your opinion, the first or second?






Ufo does not neccesarily mean alien as we know, the usa government may have very large black project aircraft.


The US Gov. does have large black project aircraft, that is no secret.

The details of capabilities and design specs are secret but its a fact that black projects exist, no one denies this.

UFO never means alien craft in my opinion and when I use it, if the term is used for the meanings of the words used in the term then its just what it says it is an Unidentified flying object.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale

Which event wasnt flares in your oppinion? How about the two cops in the car who reported a massive black delta shaped craft with lights on it pass over them, which they then proceeded to follow in their car.
Im not getting into a spitting match with you exhale, you have your view and i have mine, you have researched and come to an informed oppinion and so have i.
You cant force people to accept your view.
edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Rhombus101




I also dont need your links to to investigate the case


you are the second person today to say something along these lines.

I didn't post any links.

You might be confused with another poster.


There are 2 links in this thread to other ATS threads that can help you get more informed, in those threads there are more links to follow like any researcher does.






I will take his oppinion and research and the witness testimony of police officers on duty that night over an attempt to debunk it as flares.



You seriously haven't researched this.

Flares were dropped that night.

That is proven, that was the second event.


The first event is what is interesting because of all the witness statements.

The interesting part of it if you research is that the witness testimony is so different,

some say for the first incident that it was a triangle craft, others a V shaped craft.

Some said it blocked the stars others said it didn't.

Some said it was planes flying in formation, some identified what planes they were.




Some of these guys are very well respected and serious researchers, such as Richard Dolan.


OK,


accept what other tell you instead of finding your own conclusion.

You could research it and do what Richard Dolan has done, no need to do actual interviews but you can simply read through whats available online, quite a bit.

Hence why I suggest following the links in this thread to see what other ATS member's have provided.

I have found that 2 threads linked to in this thread allow one to delve into more info and look over it themselves than one could if they followed the info provided by a youtube video, even if its 3 hours long or what any one researcher provides their readers.

Like I said, each and every Ufologist in the field that are making a living of ufology will leave things out to suit their conclusions.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Rhombus101




You cant force people to accept your view.



Sorry I will take the gun away from your head


Please don't deflect


I asked a simple question based on you saying you have good knowledge of this incident.

I asked in your opinion which event wasn't flares that you said you were convinced they weren't , the first or second?






Im not getting into a spitting match with you exhale, you have your view and i have mine, you have researched and come to an informed oppinion and so have i.



there is no spitting match.

You indirectly said you haven't researched it but followed Richard Dolans research.

hence why I have posted all I have and asked the question I did.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: InhaleExhale

Then move on, discuss the lights, instead of focussing on my research skills lol.


Your kinda not getting the point are you, im not interested in arguing semantics with you, and dont need to win this discussion
with you to feel secure in my outcome.

Basically your borring me bud.
edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-1-2018 by Rhombus101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kromlech
Military flares gradually fall to the ground. The phoenix lights were stationary the entire time..
You really embarrass yourself by saying this when the video in the opening post clearly demonstrates the flares were not stationary (Neither was the earlier triangle). You could have at least watched the video before replying, or offered some rebuttal if you don't find the analysis convincing.


originally posted by: Rhombus101
I also dont need your links to to investigate the case, and to not simply take the work of some ufologist as incorrect.
Some of these guys are very well respected and serious researchers, such as Richard Dolan.
I will take his oppinion and research and the witness testimony of police officers on duty that night over an attempt to debunk it as flares.
Richard Dolan isn't a respected researcher anymore according to Robert Schaeffer, so of all the irrelevant arguments to bring up in this case you picked a really bad source:


The ‘Phoenix Lights’ Become an ‘Incident’

In other news, UFOlogist Richard Dolan recently declared his belief in chemtrail conspiracies. On March 30, he wrote on his Facebook page:

"All day long, I have been watching the aircraft stream across Rochester’s skies. Most of them have been leaving behind trails that do not go away, simply spreading across the sky. For those who do not pay attention, these look like ordinary clouds that have come in. But most of this is not natural. . . . I believe that geo-engineering is real. When I grew up in the 1970s, this type of nonsense did not occur. And I lived just outside New York City, watching major airline traffic every day go over my house. Such artificial clouds never existed back then. This phenomenon is real."

UFO buffs sometimes describe Dolan as “cautious” and “thoughtful,” even though he has long been promoting loopy stuff such as the “secret space program.” Last year, he took a big hit from his participation in promoting the “Roswell slides” (see this column, September/October, 2015). I don’t think we’ll be hearing that kind of talk about Dolan any longer.


I guess Robert Schaeffer didn't figure on you, Rhombus101.

In general though, anybody who makes rounds on the UFO talk circuit will tend to be biased to keep mysteries "unsolved", because if the mystery gets solved then they have nothing to talk about. Something to consider if you listen to any regular speaker on the UFO talk circuit. The former head of MUFON, Mr. Carrion, also noted this was a concern.

edit on 2018115 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Kromlech
Military flares gradually fall to the ground. The phoenix lights were stationary the entire time..
You really embarass yourself by saying this when the video in the opening post clearly demonstrates this statement isn't true. You could have at least watched the video before replying, or offered some rebuttal if you don't find the analysis convincing.


originally posted by: Rhombus101
I also dont need your links to to investigate the case, and to not simply take the work of some ufologist as incorrect.
Some of these guys are very well respected and serious researchers, such as Richard Dolan.
I will take his oppinion and research and the witness testimony of police officers on duty that night over an attempt to debunk it as flares.
Richard Dolan isn't a respected researcher anymore according to Robert Schaeffer, so of all the irrelevant arguments to bring up in this case you picked a really bad source:


The ‘Phoenix Lights’ Become an ‘Incident’

In other news, UFOlogist Richard Dolan recently declared his belief in chemtrail conspiracies. On March 30, he wrote on his Facebook page:

"All day long, I have been watching the aircraft stream across Rochester’s skies. Most of them have been leaving behind trails that do not go away, simply spreading across the sky. For those who do not pay attention, these look like ordinary clouds that have come in. But most of this is not natural. . . . I believe that geo-engineering is real. When I grew up in the 1970s, this type of nonsense did not occur. And I lived just outside New York City, watching major airline traffic every day go over my house. Such artificial clouds never existed back then. This phenomenon is real."

UFO buffs sometimes describe Dolan as “cautious” and “thoughtful,” even though he has long been promoting loopy stuff such as the “secret space program.” Last year, he took a big hit from his participation in promoting the “Roswell slides” (see this column, September/October, 2015). I don’t think we’ll be hearing that kind of talk about Dolan any longer.


I guess Robert Schaeffer didn't figure on you, Rhombus101.

In general though, anybody who makes rounds on the UFO talk circuit will tend to be biased to keep mysteries "unsolved", because if the mystery gets solved then they have nothing to talk about. Something to consider if you listen to any regular speaker on the UFO talk circuit. The former head of MUFON, Mr. Carrion, also noted this was a concern.


To say that his dubious position on chemtrails cancels out reliability in UFO research is absurd. His research comes footnoted with citations. If one wants to check the citation or the interview transcript and take issue with the conclusion, fine, but it's still responsible research.

I also find the notion that the secret space program is a crackpot idea to be laughable. The fact that the U.S. has a secret space program is damn near proven fact, and not only that, it makes complete intuitive sense. When one thinks about the money spent on "black" projects, the importance of space, and the secrecy of the security state, it would be odd if the U.S. didn't have a secret space program. Bigelow says there is a secret program, of all people, he would definitely know, Knapp believes it, same can be said there.

Some weird folks posing as "responsible" people in the UFO community.

Not a doubt in my mind that something big, black, and secret tech glided over Phoenix, and the military responded by launching fighters to drop flares in order to write the whole thing off. That, too, makes total intuitive sense.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Scrubdog
You're entitled to a different opinion than Robert Schaeffer of course, but I noticed you didn't even address the "Big hit" Schaeffer mentioned, the Roswell slides. And yes someone who thinks contrails are chemtrails does have credibility issues whether you recognize it or not. If someone can't rationally analyze phenomena which CAN be well analyzed like contrails, how does this not reflect on their ability to analyze on other phenomena which are more difficult to analyze, like UFOs?


edit on 2018115 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join