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.

 

Has anyone else noticed the quality of U.F.O. shows has gone up?

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
Here's a question.

Why haven't we just caught one and said here, it's just [fill any any explanation]?
You didn't really answer my question though, on whether or not you think the pilot was mistaken when he said "it's rotating". So again I ask you again, do you think the UFO was actually rotating? Or was that a misperception by the pilot? It's a simple question.

To answer your question, one of the best UFO cases ever was identified. It was a mass sighting of a UFO mothership, with multiple credible witnesses, and that's why it made at least one list of the "top 10 UFO sightings of all time", this one:


Yukon UFO "Mothership" Incident: December 11th, 1996

Hynek Classification: CE1


This is a great case I want to present to everyone. This case involves over 30 eyewitnesses and plenty of documentation of what appears to be a massive UFO that appeared over the Klondike Highway in the Yukon Territory of Canada on December 11th, 1996.


It turns out that it wasn't an alien mothership after all as the witnesses described, so yes lots of witnesses in a mass sighting can be wrong. You should have heard about that already but if not I can provide more details.




posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I did answer it. I said I accept the account of the Pilots over the pseudoskeptic that made the video. First, let me post the video, without his commentary. People can hear a first hand account of what the Pilots saw.



The Pilots start talking around the 1:13 mark.

There's huge flaws in the video you posted.

First, he says the Pilots are seeing the engines of a Jet. He says it's a two engine jet but it's at a distance where it's blurred and the Pilots are seeing it as singular. For this to be the case, there has to be a fleet of jets that are invisible to the Pilot at just the right distance where the two engine jets appear as a fleet of singular objects. That strains credulity. As you hear in the audio, they saw a fleet of them. This is just ad hoc speculation after the fact.

Secondly, his whole theory is debunked because I saw on a program about this where they checked the radar data for like 200-300 miles and also checked with any Military installations in the vicinity. If this was a fleet of invisible Jets that the Pilots couldn't see, these Jets would have been picked up on radar somewhere after they moved out of site of the Pilots.

This would be the first thing you would do. Did anyone pick up any Jets or birds like 5, 10 or 15 minutes after the Pilots sighting. Where did these Jets go? Did they just vanish after the Pilots saw them? It makes no sense. Like I said, if they were a fleet of Jets that just happened to be at the exact distance where their dual engines were blurred into one engine, then why didn't any radar data pick up anything after the Pilots saw this ghost fleet?

Also, you didn't answer the question. You gave the patented pseudoskeptic answer.

I asked you if there was an example of a sighting that's compelling and unexplained. You gave me a case that was unidentified then identified. All that does is bolster a blind belief. I already stipulated that misidentifications can occur.

Again, out of all the close encounters, abduction cases, trace evidence cases and eyewitness accounts from Pilots, Police Officers, High Ranking Govt. Officials and more, is there 1, 2 or 3 cases that you find compelling and are UNIDENTIFIED? Not were unidentified then identified.

This will show if your a pseudoskeptic. If you can't admit that there's compelling unidentified cases out there, then you're blinded by belief.

I have debated skeptics that admit that there's compelling, unexplained cases but they just think that an explanation will be found that doesn't involve extraterrestrials.

A pseudoskeptics can't bring themselves to admit that there's cases that are compelling and can't be explained because they're blinded by belief.

You answered like a pseudoskeptic in your first response, but here's another try.

Out of all the close encounters, abduction cases, trace evidence cases and eyewitness accounts from Pilots, Police Officers, High Ranking Govt. Officials and more, is there 1, 2 or 3 cases that you find compelling and are UNIDENTIFIED? Not were unidentified then identified.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
As you hear in the audio, they saw a fleet of them.


Since you seem to trust those pilots, do you also trust this one who appears to have some insider knowledge of that said fleet:


Graves: Yup. So there wasn’t a whole fleet of these (larger craft) there was just all these little guys. And then there was the one object which we had never seen before that was significantly larger.

silvarecord.com...

Before that, there was apparently some talk of such targets flying in v-formations, like birds.
edit on 10-8-2019 by Nickless because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I did answer it.
No, you really still said nothing about the rotation which is what I was asking about.


The Pilots start talking around the 1:13 mark.

There's huge flaws in the video you posted.

First, he says the Pilots are seeing the engines of a Jet. He says it's a two engine jet but it's at a distance where it's blurred and the Pilots are seeing it as singular. For this to be the case, there has to be a fleet of jets that are invisible to the Pilot at just the right distance where the two engine jets appear as a fleet of singular objects. That strains credulity. As you hear in the audio, they saw a fleet of them. This is just ad hoc speculation after the fact.

Secondly, his whole theory is debunked because I saw on a program about this where they checked the radar data for like 200-300 miles and also checked with any Military installations in the vicinity. If this was a fleet of invisible Jets that the Pilots couldn't see, these Jets would have been picked up on radar somewhere after they moved out of site of the Pilots.

This would be the first thing you would do. Did anyone pick up any Jets or birds like 5, 10 or 15 minutes after the Pilots sighting. Where did these Jets go? Did they just vanish after the Pilots saw them? It makes no sense. Like I said, if they were a fleet of Jets that just happened to be at the exact distance where their dual engines were blurred into one engine, then why didn't any radar data pick up anything after the Pilots saw this ghost fleet?
In all that no mention of rotation, that the pilots mention. In a related question, did you ever figure out why the name of the video is "Gimbal"?

You think the pilots "saw" something or some things, but as far as I can tell, they didn't see anything visually. They are looking at displays inside the aircraft.


I asked you if there was an example of a sighting that's compelling and unexplained. You gave me a case that was unidentified then identified. All that does is bolster a blind belief. I already stipulated that misidentifications can occur.
I think you're missing the point. That case WAS compelling and unexplained at one point! The only thing that changed it was time and more information, so how do we know that couldn't happen to any unexplained case?

I used to think the Tehran Iran UFO case was compelling, for a number of reasons. There was some official documentation, and I heard the pilot speak about it and he seems very credible so I have no doubts he saw something he didn't understand. But what exactly does "compelling" mean? Because like the Yukon case, with more information, that case which was one of my favorites, became a little less compelling.

One of the interesting claims in that case is that the electronics in the aircraft went out, in the vicinity of the UFO, thus making it seemingly a case involving some kind of electromagnetic interference, which is a popular theme for UFOs. But eventually, I learned that the electronics going out in the aircraft was not such an unusual occurrence due to the poor maintenance going on at that facility.

I still think the case is unexplained, but I don't find it as compelling as I used to since I learned about the poor maintenence of those aircraft, so the electromagnetic interference claim seems dubious at best because of that.

And many other favorite UFO cases I had also seemed less mysterious after I started researching them and digging through some of the cloak of misinformation promoted by the UFOtainment industry.

So probably the most compelling UFO case left on my list is the January 2000 UFO sighting in Illinois, which was seen by multiple police officers as it flew across the airea, and one of them even managed to take an extremely low quality photo of the UFO, which doesn't help to identify it exactly, but it does rule out some possible explanations which don't match the photo.

Even though the photo is low quality, it still carries more weight than just an eyewitness sighting by itself, and if you watch the recreations of what the eyewitnesses saw, they are all different, even though there is little doubt they all saw the same object. It's not because there's anything wrong with the witnesses that isn't wrong with all of us, we just don't record things as well as cameras or camcorders with our eyes/brains even though we would like to think we do and seem sure of what we saw. anyway, here's a link to the ATS thread about that case:

The Edge of Reality - Updated Report on the Illinois Police UFO case, January 5th, 2000.

I have some ideas on what they might have seen, but I can't prove any of them, so it's still a genuine UFO case.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

First, you barely responded to how I debunked your pseudoskeptic video. Which tells me you can't refute anything that was said and the video is still compelling and unidentified.

Unless you have evidence that this fleet of ghost jets popped on radar at anytime after the Pilots sighting, where did they go? Did this ghost fleet vanish?

Again, this is the video you posted. You must have radar data that shows this fleet of jets was captured on radar 10 or 15 minutes after the Pilots sighting.

I'm sure you wouldn't post evidence to debunk this sighting without checking for the first obvious question which is did anyone pick up this fleet of flying jets after the Pilots sighting to support the hypothesis put for in the pseudoskeptics video.

If the idiot Pilots were mistaken and they really saw a fleet of blurred engines from a distance but couldn't see the jets, why didn't any radar 5, 10, 15, 20 minutes after the Pilots sighting simply say, what you saw was a fleet of jets, they entered into our Airspace at 14:20 hours. Case Closed!

You said:

And many other favorite UFO cases I had also seemed less mysterious after I started researching them and digging through some of the cloak of misinformation promoted by the UFOtainment industry.

Another red herring put forth by pseudoskeptics. Less mysterious? Why didn't the Government just call you instead of spending 22 million dollars?

Why didn't the Pentagon just call you to brief the Senate on U.F.O.'s?

If U.F.O.'s are so easy to explain, why are we still chasing them in 2019? Why haven't we just caught a U.F.O. and said here, these things can be easily explained. We have all of this modern technology yet we can't catch a U.F.O.?

Why do we have these sightings of U.F.O.'s that's captured on radar one minute and then they drop of radar the next? If these U.F.O.'s are "less mysterious" and have a mundane explanation, we can just say after the sighting, a flock of birds, a group of weather balloons or a fleet of jets were caught on radar 10 minutes after the sighting?

Every U.F.O. should be easily explained because they should be picked up on radar after these sightings and we can simply identify what it is but these U.F.O.'s vanish after many of these sightings and can't be picked up on radar.

Again, why spend 22 million dollars and brief Senators if everything has a mundane explanation as you and your pseudoskeptic friends claim?



There's a pattern here. Everybody that wants to look at and study U.F.O.' s without blind pseudoskepticism is labeled a fraud that just wants to make money but professional pseudoskeptics from James Randi to Michael Shermer have made a lot of money feeding the belief of pseudoskeptics over the years.

I remember when Edgar Mitchell came out saying based on his knowledge and the people he has talked to, he thinks we've been visited. He was instantly called a kook and a senile old man on this message board. So one minute he's a hero whose well connected, the next minute he's a kook because he dared to think differently than the pseudoskeptics.

Why are these U.F.O.'s malfunctioning Nukes? Why can't we just catch what has been doing this?



On March 24, 1967, men see an unidentified object hovering over Montana’s Malmstrom Air Force Base, home to nuclear weapons, which are all disabled simultaneously.

Is everyone in this video just an idiot? Should we say, don't listen to these men, listen to the pseudoskeptic who was nowhere near this event?



Again, our we to believe the blind pseudoskeptic over these men who saw and experienced these things? Here's more from Robert Hasting's book U.F.O.'s and Nukes.


Although most people are completely unaware of its existence, the UFO-Nukes Connection is now remarkably well-documented. U.S. Air Force, FBI, and CIA files declassified via the Freedom of Information Act establish a convincing, ongoing pattern of UFO activity at American nuclear weapons sites extending back to December 1948.

Moreover, these mysterious incursions are not ancient history, so to speak, occurring only during the Cold War era. Indeed, evidence suggests that multiple, ongoing incidents have taken place near ICBM sites operated by Malmstrom AFB, Montana, as recently as October 2012.

To date, Hastings has interviewed more than 150 military veterans who were involved in various UFO-related incidents at U.S. missile sites, weapons storage facilities, and nuclear bomb test ranges. The events described by these individuals leave little doubt that the U.S. nuclear weapons program is an ongoing source of interest to someone possessing vastly superior technology.


www.ufohastings.com...

Are the 150 Military Veterans he interviewed all idiots? Should we just blindly discard what they experienced to placate the pseudoskeptics belief?
edit on 11-8-2019 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 02:06 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




Every U.F.O. should be easily explained because they should be picked up on radar after these sightings and we can simply identify what it is but these U.F.O.'s vanish after many of these sightings and can't be picked up on radar.

So, perhaps they were optical effects rather than physical objects?



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 02:08 AM
link   
The whole UFO alien thing is brainwashing.

They want you to believe in it, be amazed by it, and give up when the UFO arrives. Mind control pure and simple. Cold war mind control.

Think about the whole thing for a moment and realize how silly it is.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
So probably the most compelling UFO case left on my list is the January 2000 UFO sighting in Illinois


You mean this advertisement blimp?


Those have caused a number of other UFO reports as well.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 05:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
Unless you have evidence that this fleet of ghost jets popped on radar at anytime after the Pilots sighting, where did they go? Did this ghost fleet vanish?


So does that mean you just choose to ignore that other pilot, who said those were much smaller targets? Which easily explains why they weren't for example observed visually, and were likely just birds.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




Wow, these shows have increased the production value and more importantly the information being discussed is amazing.


Well the more money in the production of TV shows, the better it will seem to be.

Information concerning the subject has to be presented as amazing otherwise the shows will have crap ratings and wont go on or be extended.

Some shows have planned to show a certain amount of episodes but due to ratings the shows got canceled and something else replaces it that is watched by more people.

On TV, ratings is dictates how long or how short TV shows will last




Has anyone else noticed the quality of U.F.O. shows has gone up?


depends on what you mean by quality,

as in the picture being better, higher definition broadcasting and 4K TVs then yes, the quality is better.

However what presented is just gift wrapped differently the last time it was presented.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 08:20 AM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom




Though, I wouldn't say that they've really done anything to enhance the quality of UFOlogy beyond cranking up the limelight that's already being shined upon it. It's the kind of limelight that's all luff and no stuff. They lack substance yet appear to be bursting with a sort of gimmicky entertainment value.


Agreed.


More shows will come and its due to the increase in popularity.

A while ago, it was Vampires, many shows sprung up due to their popularity in entertainment, then Zombies, same thing.

Medieval shows just recently.

Creators of TV shows look at what has huge ratings and then find the scripts and ideas that were once presented but not accepted as being popular at that point in time or have writers write new ones to make shows in the same genre.



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 04:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nickless

originally posted by: neoholographic
Unless you have evidence that this fleet of ghost jets popped on radar at anytime after the Pilots sighting, where did they go? Did this ghost fleet vanish?


So does that mean you just choose to ignore that other pilot, who said those were much smaller targets? Which easily explains why they weren't for example observed visually, and were likely just birds.


Birds?

This shows the level pseudoskeptics will go because of belief.

In the first pseudoskeptic video he correctly points out the enormous heat signature given off by the object that was very noticeable in infrared. If you would have just taken the time to watch the video instead of blindly saying it's birds, you would have never made such an asinine statement.

This is one of the main reasons the pseudoskeptic tries to say it's blurred engines from a distance, because in infrared you can see the enormous heat signature. This means these objects would have to be superbirds from Krypton to withstand the heat.


So the pseudoskeptic on the video said they're these invisible planes seen by idiot Pilots that nobody else picked up on radar. They just vanished after the idiot Pilots saw them.

This is the twisted logic of pseudoskeptics.
edit on 12-8-2019 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
In the first pseudoskeptic video he correctly points out the enormous heat signature given off by the object that was very noticeable in infrared. If you would have just taken the time to watch the video instead of blindly saying it's birds, you would have never made such an asinine statement.


Do you even read what others are writing to you? Again, according to Graves, there was only one larger craft, which is what the FLIR video shows, and a fleet of other significantly smaller targets, which are not shown in FLIR, hence we don't know anything about their heat signatures.

That large target was most likely another plane, the smaller ones were birds. Understood?

That means there's no point for you to keep repeating your ideas of "invisible planes", since there's no reason to believe those other targets were big enough to be any kind of planes.



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nickless

originally posted by: neoholographic
In the first pseudoskeptic video he correctly points out the enormous heat signature given off by the object that was very noticeable in infrared. If you would have just taken the time to watch the video instead of blindly saying it's birds, you would have never made such an asinine statement.


Do you even read what others are writing to you? Again, according to Graves, there was only one larger craft, which is what the FLIR video shows, and a fleet of other significantly smaller targets, which are not shown in FLIR, hence we don't know anything about their heat signatures.

That large target was most likely another plane, the smaller ones were birds. Understood?

That means there's no point for you to keep repeating your ideas of "invisible planes", since there's no reason to believe those other targets were big enough to be any kind of planes.


Why should I give any weight to your asinine comment that they were birds? Where is there a shred of evidence that they were birds?

The Pilot said they look like drones.

Am I to believe that the pilots are idiots that don't know what birds look like on radar but you can somehow discern that it's just birds? This is pseudoskeptic twisted logic.

If this was a fleet of birds or of invisible jets as the other pseudoskeptic said, it could be easily verified by looking at data 5, 10, 15 minutes after the Pilots sighting and saying okay this fleet of birds or fleet of jets flew into our airspace at 14:30 hours which is 12 minutes after the Pilots sighting.

Are these vanishing birds or vanishing jets?




posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
The Pilot said they look like drones.


He believed the large one on FLIR was a drone, before that fleet comment:


At 0:03, in the first radio transmission, we hear one of the pilots state that it is “a [expletive] drone” aircraft. At 0:06, upon further observation, a different observer calmly states, “There is a whole fleet of them. Look on the ASA (radar display).”

thevault.tothestarsacademy.com...

So again, do you believe Graves, who said on Unidentified, episode four, that the fleet were significantly smaller objects?


Graves: Yup. So there wasn’t a whole fleet of these (larger craft) there was just all these little guys. And then there was the one object which we had never seen before that was significantly larger.



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 07:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nickless

originally posted by: neoholographic
The Pilot said they look like drones.


He believed the large one on FLIR was a drone, before that fleet comment:


At 0:03, in the first radio transmission, we hear one of the pilots state that it is “a [expletive] drone” aircraft. At 0:06, upon further observation, a different observer calmly states, “There is a whole fleet of them. Look on the ASA (radar display).”

thevault.tothestarsacademy.com...

So again, do you believe Graves, who said on Unidentified, episode four, that the fleet were significantly smaller objects?


Graves: Yup. So there wasn’t a whole fleet of these (larger craft) there was just all these little guys. And then there was the one object which we had never seen before that was significantly larger.



So you make the leap that their birds? Based on what?

Are the Pilots too dumb to recognize birds on a radar but you have the power to discern this without seeing any footage?



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
So you make the leap that their birds? Based on what?


Was that a yes? You believe Graves? Is it that hard to give a straight answer to a straight question?



Are the Pilots too dumb to recognize birds on a radar but you have the power to discern this without seeing any footage?


As I said above, they were "likely just birds". It's a pretty reasonable guess for something small that flies in (V-)formation, isn't it?

Do I need to remind you that you are the one constantly indicating those pilots have to be idiots if they can't identify blobs on FLIR and blips on radar, in real-time, while flying? If they could, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And with your logic, they are also idiots if they can't tell a drone from an alien spacecraft or something, since, as quoted above, one of them seemed to initially believe it was a drone.



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 08:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nickless

originally posted by: neoholographic
So you make the leap that their birds? Based on what?


Was that a yes? You believe Graves? Is it that hard to give a straight answer to a straight question?



Are the Pilots too dumb to recognize birds on a radar but you have the power to discern this without seeing any footage?


As I said above, they were "likely just birds". It's a pretty reasonable guess for something small that flies in (V-)formation, isn't it?

Do I need to remind you that you are the one constantly indicating those pilots have to be idiots if they can't identify blobs on FLIR and blips on radar, in real-time, while flying? If they could, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And with your logic, they are also idiots if they can't tell a drone from an alien spacecraft or something, since, as quoted above, one of them seemed to initially believe it was a drone.


Again, this makes no sense according to the link you posted.

With the chain-of-custody documentation, GIMBAL can officially be designated as credible, authentic “evidence” of a UAP. Evidence of a flying vehicle with a shape normally associated with something out of science fiction. Currently there are no other known technologies that we can compare to what is being observed in both performance and design, which means there’s a craft that demonstrates flight characteristics unlike anything we know, understand, or can duplicate. Because we cannot duplicate these flight characteristics, we can conclude that the object is employing technologies that are more advanced than our own.
thevault.tothestarsacademy.com...

Again, saying it's birds is just asanine.
edit on 12-8-2019 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
Again, this makes no sense according to the link you posted.


Most of what the TTSA has claimed doesn't make any sense, and isn't supported by their lame videos. Now you apparently decided to place your blind faith in their hollow words.

Just try to focus for just this brief moment, so that we can make some real progress here, and give me a straight yes or no answer to the question I have been repeating. Do you believe that "the fleet" were much smaller objects than the one on FLIR, as Graves has said?



posted on Aug, 12 2019 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nickless

originally posted by: neoholographic
Again, this makes no sense according to the link you posted.


Most of what the TTSA has claimed doesn't make any sense, and isn't supported by their lame videos. Now you apparently decided to place your blind faith in their hollow words.

Just try to focus for just this brief moment, so that we can make some real progress here, and give me a straight yes or no answer to the question I have been repeating. Do you believe that "the fleet" were much smaller objects than the one on FLIR, as Graves has said?


Again, this is from the link you posted.

With the chain-of-custody documentation, GIMBAL can officially be designated as credible, authentic “evidence” of a UAP. Evidence of a flying vehicle with a shape normally associated with something out of science fiction. Currently there are no other known technologies that we can compare to what is being observed in both performance and design, which means there’s a craft that demonstrates flight characteristics unlike anything we know, understand, or can duplicate. Because we cannot duplicate these flight characteristics, we can conclude that the object is employing technologies that are more advanced than our own. 

Maybe you should try reading links before you post them.

Secondly, there's no bird evidence. The Pilots never mentioned Birds. You say it's birds without a shred of evidence.

Why weren't these magical birds picked up on radar 5, 10, 15 minutes after the sighting? Why do these U.F.O.'s vanish? After these sightings we should be able to easily detect what it is if there's a mundane explanation. Saying it's birds is asinine.




top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join