It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Mexican millitary backs UFO sighting!

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:01 PM
Sorry if this has already been posted but i couldn't find any post referring to this.

The mexican millitary have footage of UFO's in their airspace, they have released this footage and for the first time ever a millitary force has backed a UFO sighting.

Haven't seen the video myself but the BBC is a good source of credible news anyone know where i can see the video?

Also the link to the report or video on the bbc website doesn't work anymore and i have heard nothing about this on the news.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:25 PM
Sadly, the most likely explanation is oil platforms in the Gulf.
Daytime footage showing the fire plumes pretty much match up to whats on the infrared footage taken by the planes.

Have to side with the skeptics on this one, much as I hate to...
The evidence is simply strongly in favor of the oil platform explanation...

Something I loathe even more, hehe....linking to csicop.....but it does have a pretty lengthy explanation....

[edit on 16-8-2006 by Gazrok]

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 08:32 PM
Oh well thanks for the info. Got any links so i can see for myself its just that the info given on BBC doesn't match upto oil rigs being the true source.

And if the pilots saw moving objects behind, to the left and infront of him then surely he must be lying but as said i havent seen the video - know a link to it?

Thanks Argos

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 09:05 PM
Sure, here you go...

You'll have to go through an ad first, then the video.

Though it looks as if they are moving, it is due to the fact that the planes filming are moving. Notice, the lights do not move in relation to each other, further strengthening the oil rig explanation.

Also, the common assumption to make is that the background is sky, when it is water, so seeing the lights on the water (and under the clouds from their vantage point) also strengthens the explanation.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 09:36 PM
Thanks for the link - well i've had a little read of the website (only just realised this happened in 2004... doh!) seems like he rounds things up pretty nicely, just one question though that wasnt answered why did the lights all suddenly disappear?

Do all the oil rigs stop their flames at the same time?

Also this skeptic doesn't account for why a supposedly experienced captain thought he was chasing a stationary object, or why these flames couldn't be seen with the human eye when i read somewhere these flames can be seen from 90km away on the mainland or why this hadn't happened before on similar flights over the region i mean detecting lorries on a highway and thinking they are ufo's with there infra red technology why hadnt this happened before was the infra red tachnology new to the plane and captain.

Maybe its nothing but i haven't been convinced by reading that skeptics report completely but yet i havent seen the video every link i try doesn't work i'll keep looking.

Does the evidence the skeptic put forward really convince you? I just find this interesting sorry if you've been over this before but ive only just come across this and im not convinced a millitary pilot would think this for it to be dismissed because some oil rigs during daytime look to be in the same position as the video.

Are the daytime shots of the oil rigs from the same altitude as the plane was and has any other flights seem the same in that area since to back up the fact it was the oil rigs. This would surely be the definitive proof that it was the oil rigs but i havent heard anything about evidence like this being put forward to debunk the claim.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 09:49 PM
Ok just saw the video link you provided. It is strange they all appear to be still, but the footage i saw only showed brief clips from the video, which is apparently some 29 mins long. Media dissinformation perhaps, the pilot did say he was chasing them.

How could he be chasing stationary objects, and again how did they all disappear at the same time? maybe its nothing but i think its worth looking up i'll do some more research.

Do you know of any other UFOlogists who didn't believe the skeptics answer? who have reports online.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 10:34 PM
Yes, and I've seen some other critics (and UFOlogists) doing further analysis on the oil rig explanation. Hopefully, I'll be able to find time to dig them up for you (there are some right here on ATS, search on "Mexican Air Force UFO").

Some UFOlogists defend the Air Force account also.

In the end, it's just a matter of evaluating the evidence, and seeing where you fall.

Sure, the naked eye can see the flames on the rigs from the water, but this was from an altitude, and while maybe not visible at first, to the infrared, they would appear larger as a large heat source....

By far the best response I got back was "Mexico has an Air Force


[edit on 16-8-2006 by Gazrok]

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 10:55 PM
Well apparently the pilots were only two miles away from the objects they saw at one point. Surely they would of seen flames even from that altitude.

If you can see them 90 miles away, then in the night sky background from two miles away surely they would be visible to the human eye?? Even from a higher altitude.

And do you know whether there has been an explanation why all the objects disappeared at the same time because i thought oil rigs worked out the pressure independently not all at the same time and supposedly most of the oil rigs pump out flames all the time all year why would they all suddenly stop at the same time?

[edit on 16-8-2006 by Argos]

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 11:40 PM
i saw the footage that showed the flames to match but im not sure if that's the whole thing or even from the same occurance. i just watched a video of a ufo conference with that mexican reporter guy jamie something or other (someone help me out) and he had more footage. there were a bunch of other objects appearing later on too allegedly surrounding the aircraft.

not to mention he did also bring up a valid point. those guys supposedly fly through there every day so couldnt they tell the difference? and wouldnt there be radar confirmation? i guess thats depending on wether the ufos have stealth technology.

posted on Aug, 16 2006 @ 11:53 PM

Originally posted by Gazrok
(By far the best response I got back was "Mexico has an Air Force?)


Must say that secretary of defense is an idiot cause he gave the video first to a ufo investigator instead of real researchers.

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 01:29 AM

Originally posted by Gazrok
Sadly, the most likely explanation is oil platforms in the Gulf.
Daytime footage showing the fire plumes pretty much match up to whats on the infrared footage taken by the planes.

Can fire plumes reach 1000m into the air?

external link -
The objects were reported to be invisible to the eye - the pilots turned on the infrared camera to track them after three of them were picked up by the radar.

Can fire plumes be seen on radar? And if this is a regular patrol area, wouldn't they have recognised them if they were plumes?

Also the report says that at one point the objects are surrounding the aircraft.

From the video on the BBC website (which IS still active) they appear to be moving in the opposite direction to the clouds, and perpendicular with the flight path of the aircraft.

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 02:19 AM
this was explained by oil well flames. if you do any serious investigation at all you'll realize this is probably correct. it matches up very well with what the crew described when the airplane was surrounded.

radar but no visual with objects ahead and behind, visual but no radar with objects to the side. in other words radar tracking vehicles on the ground and camera tracking fires buring to the side.

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 02:30 PM
The oil well flames theory was a hoax invented by a mexican excentric skeptic
named Alejandro Franz who also failed to debunk all the mexican ufo sightings
to date, the mexican airline pilots ufo reports, the crop circles phenomena, and most of the classic ufo cases.

He also declared that all the mexican military, the Air Force and the Secretary of
Defense are dumb and naive. Franz failed to prove his oil well flames theory on national television during the National Geographic tv show UFOs exposing himself
as a hoaxer pretending to debunk the ufo phenomenon.

Do I need to say more ? It's incredible that some persons still belive this oil well flames crap without making a proper research on the facts surrounding this major case.

The oil well flames hoax has been exposed many times since 2004. It's useless
some people still insist in this charade. The mexican Air Force UFO encounter has proved to be legitimate, with solid evidences and provided by the Secretary of Defense himself.

Just take a look how the oil flames hoax was debunked.

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 03:07 PM
"On March 5th 2004, squadron 501 of the Mexican Air Force was on duty flying 8,200 feet above sea level over the Campeche area to check for potential drug smugglers. The crew was flying in a Merlin C26A plane equipped with a Flir Star Zapphir camera and a AN/PS 143 Bravo Victor 3 Radar. The Flir is a camera with an infrared optic device for observation capable of reaching a target up to 80 miles away"

"Well, according to the reports the oil wells not remotely in the range of the Flir camera. The camera was set up in a horizontal position not in a vertical one. This is the most important reason why the crew was able to record the images. The UFO’s were flying in parallel to the plane, to their surprise!"

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 03:23 PM
Not impressed.

Please note also, that the first link I provided contains independent corraboration by other researchers, and only a footnote mention to Franz.

You can even see the reflection on the water for Pete's sake.... This is NOT the one to make the case for UFOs...imho...and sure, I'm not happy about it, but the evidence leads in another direction. I mean confirmation from official military? It's great! I HATED seeing this one shot down, but that's where the evidence be it (imho)...

This is another one I hope to do an epic post on though, just finding the time.

Granted, I've only done some preliminary research on this, but the oil rig explanation makes the most sense on the outset. You have to look at the scientific evidence here, such as headings, azimuth readings, way the cameras diffuse the infrared signature, etc. and most of all, the location, and the rigs being there. Who knows, deeper investigation may reveal something else, but so far, the scales are tipped to the rigs.

As an aside, if you're talking about the Mexican "fleet" UFOs (aka helium balloons), I can see why one would jump on debunking those....Franz or not.

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 03:48 PM
Oil well fires do not circle a plane for TWO HOURS

at 8200 ft and a camera angle of -5deg (Acording to the skeptics article liked to by Gazrok) the TEN objects would be so far apart as to not possibly be oil wells.

Do the math......

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 04:02 PM

Originally posted by thepresidentsbrain
Oil well fires do not circle a plane for TWO HOURS

A plane doesn't stay in one place for two hours unless it's circling...

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 04:09 PM

A plane doesn't stay in one place for two hours unless it's circling...

Who said the plane stayed in one place?

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 04:16 PM
17:04:10 V3: Let's see radar, what have we got?
17:04:12 V2: Nothing sir, let me look for it
17:04:16 V1: Commander what's that?
17:04:18 V2: At what distance did you have it Téllez?
17:04:19 V1: Uh?
17:04:23 V3: Hey, watch out, it's like...
17:04:24 V1: There go more of them, there are more behind,
they are ten...eleven objects
17:04:30 V2: There are a lot of objects
17:04:33 V2: Let's see
17:04:35 V1: Now it must be at 9 o'clock of our position
17:04:36 V2: At 9 o'clock, let me see
17:04:37 V1: At 9 o'clock, at the same height almost, almost
17:04:39 V2: Ok, let me see
17:04:40 V1: Afirmative, here they come
17:04:44 V1: Those who knows, here they go
17:04:59 V3: What do we have radar?
17:05:00 V2: Nothing sir
17:05:02 V1: But there a lot of them, they are like ten
17:05:03 V2: I'm checking them out, but... no, I have some little spots
but they don't give me any indicatons or speed or nothing


7:07:14 V2: Ok, we don't know what we are looking at, they are only some
luminous objects that are at the same height we are.
We can't know at what distance


7:14:58 V3: Why does it keep following us?
17:15:01 V3: Keep that one
17:15:02 V2: He said it's at twelve
17:15:03 V3: No, almost at one
17:15:05 V2: Well that's one, but we have another one here at nine
17:15:07 V1: We have another one at nine
17:15:08 V3: Here goes one, let's see let me check the one at nine
17:15:11 V1: And ahead there go other two
17:15:13 V And they are the same ones uh?
17:15:15 V1: We have, we have them in front, in the middle and at eight
17:15:19 V3: Wow!
17:15:20 V2: Oh #!

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 11:26 PM
These are the real official C26A Crew conversations recorded by the FLIR System
during the March 5, 2004 ufo incident. This is the only authentic transcrip
translated to english, not the faked ones by mexican hoaxer Alejandro Franz.

Also important the official statements by the FLIR representative regarding the
March 5, 2006 FLIR footage by the Mexican Air Force C26A.

The real story as it happened.

These are facts with evidences not fiction. Caution with forgery.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in