It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: yuppa
If you want to see a Black Triangle with engines. Its been flying in your direction around 5:15AM. It has no set pattern or day, week or month. Loudest jet engines I have ever heard as it will wake you up at night. I just blew it off since we moved here [Columbia] in June 2017 as I thought its was just a military cargo Plane or FEDEX or UPS. No. I finally got me arse out of bed to look at what it was last week and it was a true triangle. Each tip [corner] on the Triangle has a white strobe that slowly flashes along with a red light on top in the middle. Military [assuming it is such] didn't even attempt to cover up its silhouette.
I see most stuff from 5:00AM - 6:00AM. All dependent on location of Moon and clear sky.
Yehudi lights[a] are lamps of automatically-controlled brightness placed on the front and leading edges of an aircraft to raise the aircraft's luminance to the average brightness of the sky, a form of active camouflage using counter-illumination. They were designed to camouflage the aircraft by preventing it from appearing as a dark object against the sky. The technology was developed by the US Navy from 1943 onwards, to enable a sea-search aircraft to approach a surfaced submarine to "within 30 seconds of flying time" before becoming visible to the submarine's crew. This in turn enabled the aircraft to engage the submarine with depth charges before it could dive, to counter the threat from German submarines to allied shipping. The concept was based on earlier research by the Royal Canadian Navy in its diffused lighting camouflage project. Yehudi lights did not come into operational usage and were considered obsolete with postwar advances in radar. With more recent improvements in stealth technology, Yehudi lights have again attracted interest.
There are varying opinions on the radar data and the retraction
There seems to be no dispute over this point about the radar data, nothing was seen, so there was no visual confirmation that anything was actually there (from your link):
Here's a weather radar showing a lot of rain that isn't happening, in a similar type of false signal. Radar experts know these things happen sometimes, but some people don't seem to be aware of it:
Perhaps the technology of the UFO also interfered with the radar in some way, who knows what gravity propulsion would do to radar?
You may as well ask what fairie dust would do to radar since we have as much evidence for that as whatever you're talking about which sounds just as made up. Any known effects of gravity on radar are minimal. If you're talking about unknown effects, I put faerie dust in that category, I don't know what effect it would have.
If it was just a blimp of sorts, why would any other country risk flying a slow moving object like that in someone elses territory? The US flew the SR-71 over the USSR because they knew it wouldnt be shot down, not the case with a blimp. The mostly likely culprit would be the Belgium military, yet we find them asking the US if it was them.
Or, maybe if some jets did a flyby and saw it was a blimp they might not shoot it down.
The officer sightings that Unsolved Mysteries covers in the Eupen video follows the path of one of the objects as it intersects 3 different sets of officers. Like good little skeptics, we find the officers are making light of the others till they wind up seeing it for themselves. At the last stop at La Calamine, the officers report the object seems to fold up and shoot off at high speeds, no ordinary blimp.
The shoot off at high speeds I would suppose is maybe an exaggeration similar to the "no noise" exaggeration
Then another object was leaving the main object. It was a red light, pulsating and descending vertically from the object. It moved around the building." Then, incredibly, "the three lights at the corner of the platform shrank inwards so that the whole thing became a single circle of light and shot off into the distance faster than the eye could follow."
originally posted by: NightFlight
a reply to: RUokayHun
There is only one part of a cow the ETs like and its the filet. There just wasn't enough filet in an earth cow to have the cost of the life of one cow to just obtain the filet. Over the years cattle mutilations occurred to obtain DNA of the cows identified to have the largest filet. Such that, their science has produced an animal that is almost entirely filet mignon!
These cows were bred and raised on an ideal planet in the Antares system called Antares C, B-13. It is a smaller hilly planet with nothing but green GM grass pastures (the Antareans know how to do GM), clear nutritious running streams and a year round climate of 55 to 60 degrees F. Since the gravity is slightly less than earth's, the Antarean cows grow to an unbelievable average of 5 thousand earth pounds and more than 2/3 of the weight is filet. The taste of these filet are nothing short of god-like!
With older typical cameras that's true, but I think the cover that night used to provide for UFOs can be a thing of the past. If people are serious about trying to photograph UFOs at night they might want to consider using an ultra low light camera. The moon can provide a fair amount of light and with these ultra low light cameras, you don't need much light. Instead of old cameras which see less than your eyes at night, this camera can see more than your eyes can, at night.
originally posted by: penroc3
i kind of see what your talking about but pics at night are hard under the best circumstances
It always seems to work that way, they will get more affordable. I wouldn't get one just yet, but maybe after the prices drop...
originally posted by: penroc3
but with time and demand the price will drop.
That seems to make the night vision setups I've seen seem obsolete. At least the ones using infrared, which gives a somewhat distorted heat signature view, whereas the Sony ultra low light cam doesn't seem to be infrared based.
i would rather buy that camera then drop some serious coin on a gen II or III night vision setup.