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.

 

The "Phoenix Lights" from 1997??

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 01:16 AM
link   
Lately, I have been abscessing over the Phoenix Lights of 1997 big time and been doing some big research on it for informational purposes. BUT, I did come across something very unusual.

When you watch the Full version of the 97 amateur video for the Phoenix lights www.youtube.com... you can tell easily that the lights do resemble what could be a TRIANGULAR craft, which was witnessed by many.

But, I was reading on Wikipedia about the Phoenix lights - en.wikipedia.org... - they mention that that USAF (US AIR FORCE) says they were flares dropped by A-10 Warthog in training. Now, I am completely dumb when it comes to flares so do please correct me if I am wrong. I thought flares when released don't light up that long. Where as the Phoenix lights were operating for quite sometime. But then I watch the video closely and closely and you could tell near the end that the lights start to go out one by one in no particular order.

So here are the questions.

Why would the craft turn it's lights off? Could it possibly mean that these really are aliencrafts who on that night communicated with the US government and the US government quickly came up with this whole conspiracy about the lights being flares? What I mean to say, is it possible that the government communicated with them and told them to turn off the lights during the hover over Phoenix because of the amount of exposure that craft was getting. So, the aliens DID cooperate and did as they were told? Or could it be just possible that ALL of these lights were just in fact flares? But, what about the hundreds of witnesses that did say that they did infact see a triangular craft. Also, why would the government dump flares over the city of Phoenix? What purpose? Also, if you look closely you can tell the lights stay at the same altitude for quite some time before giving out. Flares don't do that. Do they?

Please, if you have any comments to my theories do let me know. The real question is:

Was the "craft" really a triangular shaped aliencraft or just flares?

[edit on 23-8-2006 by porsche2006]

[edit on 8-23-2006 by Springer]




posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 02:07 AM
link   
The flares dropped behind the mountain range, they didnt go "off". There's 2 separate incidents, the flare drop, and the sighting of structured craft earlier.

There's way more threads on here then needed really.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 03:06 AM
link   
i believe it was a craft to many eyewitness saw the samething and like you said why would they drop flares on the city
i think this is one of the best cases



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Flares lol.. that has to be the worst UFO cover story in the history of UFO cover storys. Flares are usually red, small, and they drop like a rock when deployed. In the video of the phoenix lights, those lights were hovering in one spot for 2 or 3 minutes or longer. At that distance, flares would look really really small, and would have a really noticeable constant decrease in altitude.

Go to this link, and download the video "Fighter Pilot".

You will see a great example of flares in action, in high definition.

Also, I think those might be seperate UFO's and not one big one. But that is just my opinion, and I wasn't in the area at the time.

[edit on 23-8-2006 by LAES YVAN]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Hi there. Sorry, there is no way I can accept your writ on an explanation of the Mar/97 Phoenix Lights.

Happened on three nights, the last being the one which received most attention, including Air force. Including 50 Miles away test Arc Lights. And then everything falls to pieces. Truck driver who's seen three interceptors out of an AF base claimed to be closed to lights which "shot straight up"at time of one of the interceptions.. and on and on and on. Including one footage shot from a man in Kingsman AZ (have footage). To the City Councillor......

Something happened there I feel.

Dallas



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 05:14 AM
link   
I know that this subject has been covered extensively on ATS...

But for what it's worth, there's very little doubt in my mind that the "Phoenix Lights" were something OTHER than the military's flare-explanation. I've heard and/or read the testimony of many different witnesses and most of them describe something that completely goes beyond anything the flare-scenario could cover... something HUGE flew over the area, that's for sure.

Although the thought has crossed my mind before that it was A)A government test-run of some sort or B)A holographic projection meant to test and monitor civilian reactions to this event.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Not sure what to make of this video. I can see where there could be flares for two reasons. 1.) The arc of it could be explained by the first to last dropped. 2.) They appear to disappear in order they appeared. Except for one thing that is glaring at me... They don't seem to change altitude, which, IMO, is not reminiscent of something dropped out of an airplane. So, I'm keeping an open mind.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ecidemon
Except for one thing that is glaring at me... They don't seem to change altitude, which, IMO, is not reminiscent of something dropped out of an airplane. So, I'm keeping an open mind.


I haven't watched the video but I think you'll find that they are supposed to be "parachute" flares which will descend very slowly and stay aloft for quite a while, usually longer than it takes to burn out.

For the original poster of this thread, where is the FINALLY EXPLAINED part? I realize most of the thread titles here are misleading, but I don't even see an attempt to explain anything in your post. You're just asking someone else to explain it?



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 06:00 AM
link   
Indeed the flares they are speaking of are illumination flares. The flares LAES YVAN are talking about and show a video of are SIGNAL and DECOY flares, completely different than what was used that night. Illumination flares come in basically 2 sizes ; handheld or 203 fired, and aircraft "launched". Both of these flares emit a VERY bright light, light enough to illuminate the battlefeild or whatever your trying to light up.
The handheld flares only go about 500 feet(generous) and burn out after about 30 seconds to a minute. The aircraft based ones can burn 10 minutes or more and are on a chute to slow their decent. The chute is designed to act kind of like a hot air baloon, catching the hot exauhst gasses of the flare and using them to slow the decent even more. If you need a large area searched quick in the dark, you launch many flares....

TO EVERYONE WHO SAYS THEYARE NOT MOVING.........

Yes they are , its just to slow for you to see. All you have to do is watch the video at 10x speed and you'll see clear as a bell that they decend at a constant and even rate.... Just cause you cant see the minute hand moving, does that mean its sitting still?

I always thought that this was one of the sughtings that got blown way out of porportion(misidentified flares) , but now I hear that there were fighter planes and sightings of a structured triangle craft there too? Now I think the military was using those flares to search for something that was not on the famous video....

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Tiloke]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
I haven't watched the video but I think you'll find that they are supposed to be "parachute" flares which will descend very slowly and stay aloft for quite a while, usually longer than it takes to burn out.


Thanks for the information, mythatsabigprobe and Tiloke. I'm not up on my "Flare Design". When I think of a flare, I think of a road flare. I guess that's what I get for posting without researching the subject first.


The sightings besides the "flares" are still interesting though...

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Ecidemon]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   
The falre explaination was one of the first cover stories to come out to explain the lights. However, there seems to be ample evidence that the Air Force deployed jets and dropped flares after the lights were first sighted to distract attention from the original sighting and provide a false explaination.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 06:22 AM
link   
About 20 friends of mine, in Phoenix, including my brother saw this happening. All of them, mostly skeptics, say it was a craft.
They all say it certainly was not flares. That's what the government wants you to believe.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 06:37 AM
link   
I am not doubting that people saw some sort of uncoventional craft that night.
In my not so humble opinion, the famous video of the row of lights appearing are definatly aircraft illum flares. I have seen them MANY MANY times while i was trining at FT Campbell, FT Leanord Wood, Ft. Bragg, Ft. Polk, Korea and Germany. I have seen them used operationally in the Balkans, Afganistan and the North\South Korean border. I am 100% positive that that video is of illuination flares.
Also, the witnesses all describe a trianguler or "V" shaped craft , not the round one that the flares apear to be.

I also saw somewhere that if you take a picture of those mountains during the day from the same spot the vid was taken, and overlay the daytime horizon over the video of the lights than its even easier tho see the flares dissapear behind the mountains.

Now, is there a military training ground on the other side ot those mountains? Any announced training cycles or events that were sceduled to happen that night? The only way to verify is to find an announcment about the manuvers from the days or weeks before as its to easy to say "training" to cover something up.

P.S. LAES YVAN, I think the worst cover story of all time was the ufo over LA that took thousands of artillary hits, was seen by thousands of people, icluding pilots, was accompanied by many smaller "drones" was self illuminated. ......Oh wait that was a blimp........lol , yeah right, a picture of the thing in the middle of MANY converging searchlights with about a dozen airbust artillary exploding right next to it was put in the paper

[EDIT]----------------------------------------------------
Now that I think about it we only used 203 launched flares at the Korean border, sorry.

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Tiloke]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 06:45 AM
link   
A LUU-2 aircraft deployed illumination flare from a A-10 drops faster than that...

The parachutes are designed so the flares drop at 30 feet per second. I timed one of the flares, and it was up for 2 minutes or more, and that would mean it should have fell 3600 feet. You would notice a 3600 foot difference in the video, but you don't.

Also, LUU-2 ADIF's are supposed to burn for 5 minutes while suspended in air. Some of these flares were burning out in 2 and 3 minutes or less. On top of that, these flares dimmed out. LUU-2 flares are designed to explode at the end of its burn, to disable the parachute, and you would notice a final instant flash.

Even then, LUU-2 ADIF's are pretty much useless above 2000 feet. According to sources, with the introduction of A-10 Warthog Night Vision capability, such flares are not used as frequently as in the past as they provide too much light for the very sensitive goggles.


So we have, ADIF's that don't fall as fast as they should. Burn out, and dim, faster than they should. And they are being used at a higher altitude than they should.

Great.... something doesn't seem correct here.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 07:01 AM
link   
As much as I was a Phoenix believer the flare story is legit. Recently there was a documentary on that did an in depth analysis of the video. If you saw the conclusion it left little doubt. The flares shot were matched with daytime shots overlapped. The results were incredible. As the lights started to fade the timing with the backend mountain ranges coincided perfectly. I was stunned. I'll be damed if I can remember the show title I'll try to find it.

As for the larger object that witnesses saw, very difficult to explain but I expect the military was involved here again to coincide with these flare releases. And for those who state the flare drop speed is inaccurate, they are wrong. Additional footage showed clearly flares descending at a very slow rate matching the images we've all seen in Phoenix.

brill



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
A LUU-2 aircraft deployed illumination flare from a A-10 drops faster than that...
The parachutes are designed so the flares drop at 30 feet per second.


According to this page they drop at 8.3 ft/sec. Though I guess they could be wrong, or maybe it's not the same flare.

Not saying the flare thing is wrong but I just wanted to point out that discrepancy.

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Ecidemon]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 07:28 AM
link   
They didnt burnout after 2 or 3 minutes, they decnded behind the mountain range.... I am searching now but i saw on UFO files, (i think) that when you overlay the mountain range on the nightime video , ALL of the flares dissapear when the get to the top horizenline of the mountains. Since they are behind the mountains , we can use them to get a general hight assumption. I do not know how high those mauntains were , but ill bet about 3000ish feet, just a guess dont yell at me. When the flares start they are alittle more than double the hight of the mountains so 6000ish feet. that means that they could indeed have been that high.

It hard to tell movement with out a point of reference , in the video its to dark to see anything else really.


originally posted be LAES YVAN
A LUU-2 aircraft deployed illumination flare from a A-10 drops faster than that...

The parachutes are designed so the flares drop at 30 feet per second. I timed one of the flares, and it was up for 2 minutes or more, and that would mean it should have fell 3600 feet. You would notice a 3600 foot difference in the video, but you don't.

Also, LUU-2 ADIF's are supposed to burn for 5 minutes while suspended in air. Some of these flares were burning out in 2 and 3 minutes or less. On top of that, these flares dimmed out. LUU-2 flares are designed to explode at the end of its burn, to disable the parachute, and you would notice a final instant flash.

Even then, LUU-2 ADIF's are pretty much useless above 2000 feet. According to sources, with the introduction of A-10 Warthog Night Vision capability, such flares are not used as frequently as in the past as they provide too much light for the very sensitive goggles.


So we have, ADIF's that don't fall as fast as they should. Burn out, and dim, faster than they should. And they are being used at a higher altitude than they should.

Great.... something doesn't seem correct here.


I think its your numbers..


Using your number A flare would have to be dropped at 9000 feet to blow up before it hit the ground, but that cant be right because they are no good above 2000, right? You know theres are more than one kind of aircraft illumflare, right?

If they had 2 or 300 men out searching for something they might not have NVGs on anyways. I assume you were a real seal, so you know as well as me that its pretty hard to get nvg issued if your not deployed.....

What about the witness description not even coming close to matching the video?

I am not saying thatthere wasnt a UFO there that night , Im sayint the famous video is just flares.



[EDIT]-------------------------------Brill,do you know the name of that show we saw I cant find it anywhere.......

[edit on 23-8-2006 by Tiloke]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
For the original poster of this thread, where is the FINALLY EXPLAINED part? I realize most of the thread titles here are misleading, but I don't even see an attempt to explain anything in your post. You're just asking someone else to explain it?


I second this completely. You ask in your original post if there's any comments to your theories; all I see in your post is a bunch of questions that might allude to theories, but no statement saying what you really think it was. Even that wouldn't serve as much of an explanation, but it would be a step in the right direction at least.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Oh and to the OP, The aircraft dropping the flares had its lights off because thats what military planes do in training and for real.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ecidemon

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
A LUU-2 aircraft deployed illumination flare from a A-10 drops faster than that...
The parachutes are designed so the flares drop at 30 feet per second.


According to this page they drop at 8.3 ft/sec. Though I guess they could be wrong, or maybe it's not the same flare.

Not saying the flare thing is wrong but I just wanted to point out that discrepancy.



Well, I used this unclassified procurement of ammunition from the Air Force, which states an LUU-1 had a decent rate of 30 feet per second. I figured the LUU-2 had the same rate, but I could be wrong. We need a third official opinion.

www.globalsecurity.org...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join