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.

 

O'Hare Airport UFO Sighting -- UPDATE: Photos & Analysis

page: 102
99
<< 99  100  101    103  104  105 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Perhaps I am being lazy and do not want to read thru about 100 threads. But I have been following the story since this thread was posted on ATS and have not been looking at updated posts. So I am wondering....
has there been any updates on this situation? Because for some reason I am sure we are still going in circles on this debate...
Any info would help..thank you.




posted on Apr, 4 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   

A United employee I spoke to, "edwin" a flight attendant, said he regularly comes to chicago and in fact lives there. I asked him what the latest news was on the event from November 2006 and he was quite puzzled.

I said you know the ufo over C7 gate that was spotted by United staff in November. He said never heard anything about it, said wow for about 1 second then proceeded to have a conversation with an off duty flight attendant who happened to be on our plane about their training classes etc


My band played a private party about a month ago, and one of the gentlemen there was a retired United pilot (30 something years) So I asked him if he'd been keeping up with the O'hare thing, and he similarly brushed it off, saying it was probably, in fact, "space junk burning up in the atmosphere." He said in his 30 some-odd years of flying, he's "never seen anything up there", which is fine-the sky's a big place-but it was funny how quickly he brushed off O'hare; perhaps he wasn't up to speed on the eyewitness descriptions of the event, as I've never heard that burning "space junk" can hover in the air for fairly extended periods of time!



posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 01:18 PM
link   
right I found it odd considering he stated he lives in Chicago and it was all over the paper, was the number one news story viewed on the CT website. And that I am sure I could not be the first time he heard of the incident since last November yet he reacted in almost blank fashion as if I asked him for ice cream or something similarly odd.



posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Pilots talk to a lot of people. His reaction tells me that he's tired of people bringing up the subject at every Chicago social event he attends. Everyone here knows about the Ohare "incident" and if you see an active or retired United pilot (United's world headquarters is near Ohare airport) your first inclination would be to ask about it. I bet he can't wait for this story to go away permanently.



posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I got the EXACT SAME REACTION form a bartender in "F" terminal while I was waiting for my (4 freakin hour) delayed flight home after shooting the Discovery documentary.

The guy looked at me like I was asking him for a loan or something and denied ANY knowledge or even hearing about it. I have been a "people person" my whole life and I KNOW he was lying through his teeth.

Naturally I didn't bring it up again (I wanted good service on those Makers Marks!
) and neither did he.

The guy sitting next to me lives in Downtown Chicago and he was as confused as I was about the Bartender's feigned ignorance of the event and commented about it.

The whole issue has had the Kai-Bosh put on it by the management at O'Hare probably due to pressure form United, who is their biggest tenant by a HUGE margin.


Edit to add: My sister's ex-husband was an Airforce pilot for 20 yrs and has had the "BIg Seat" on a 747 for American for the last 19 years or so doing the trans Atlantic to London. He has, without fail, raised his eyebrows and smirked everytime she's asked him about what he has seen in his several thousand hours of flying. The ONLY thing he has EVER shared with anyone is that "once you've endured reporting your first UFO as a pilot you realize you will NEVER REPORT ANOTHER ONE.


Springer...


[edit on 4-6-2007 by Springer]



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
The whole issue has had the Kai-Bosh put on it by the management at O'Hare probably due to pressure form United, who is their biggest tenant by a HUGE margin.


Springer...


[edit on 4-6-2007 by Springer]



I'm sorry, I simply cannot understand the logic (if any!) the "officials" are attempting to employ in this matter.

Thanks to a plethora of "Intelligence" agancies, US airports are supposed to be on the look-out for any "Suspicious" and/or possibly "terrorist-related" activities. Everyone, including civilian travelers is encouraged by various gov't big-wigs to report such activity, immediately, to the responsible authorities.

And yet, unannounced and, apparently unobserved, an airborn object appears, in broad daylight over one of the busiest airports in the world, makes no attempt to communicate its presence or intent; is observed by trained, experienced personnel, who dutifully report the potentially catastrophic public hazard to their superiors and airport officials.

But no attempt is made to intercept or even investigate the intruder; and the authorities in charge appear to have employed coercion against their own employees to cover-up and even deny the event took place?

This, when just recently, a flight was postponed at another airport simply because a pilot was overheard to have been having a heated , private, telephone conversation in which he employed several expletives?

Officials felt he might have been too emotional to safely conduct his duties as the flight's pilot!

An airline essentially grounds a flight because its pilot cusses on the phone, while another airline enforces a gag order over an incident which might have actually resulted in a tragedy?!

Perhaps there's more to United than we are aware of? Afterall, United was one of the two airlines involved in the 9/11 disaster.

And finally, a question for our resident legal minds:

Isn't it a crime to knowingly suppress, or cause to be suppressed through threat or intimidation, information which endangers the public's welfare?



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
Isn't it a crime to knowingly suppress, or cause to be suppressed through threat or intimidation, information which endangers the public's welfare?

It seems that in this case it doesn't matter if supression is a crime or not. They've done it, and it works.

Unless you can enforce a law, it's basically worthless, right?



posted on Apr, 23 2007 @ 10:11 PM
link   
I have an update as far as my understanding goes....

The air on the bottom of this beast was rippling as if it was heated by touching the surface. It punched a hole through the clouds when it took off.

Well, when you apply heat to water vapor, it becomes invisible, no?

Theoretically, if the longitudinal component of high voltage and high frequency radio waves were used to vibrate matter, it would give off heat.

So according to my theory, this was one of ours. I have no theory as to motives, but as far as the physics it looks like one of ours.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
So according to my theory, this was one of ours. I have no theory as to motives, but as far as the physics it looks like one of ours.

What you have stated does NOT prove it was one of ours. Quite to the contrary, the fact that the thing was hovering in the middle of one of the busiest airports in the world leads anybody with any common sense to conclude it was of ET origin.

10538



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by 10538
the fact that the thing was hovering in the middle of one of the busiest airports in the world leads anybody with any common sense to conclude it was of ET origin.


Well...no. It hasn't been proven to be "one of ours", but to conclude by assumption that it was of ET origin doesn't indicate any kind of common sense I'm aware of.

We KNOW there are things flying around that are not identified by the public yet are of terrestrial origin. There is no PROOF of ET visitation. Evidence, yes. Proof, no.

So, common sense (as I define it) would first point to a terrestrial origin of unknown identification. Until it's proven otherwise.

You don't assume a unicorn left hoofprints in the cheesecake in the fridge when it's more likely Dad stuck his meaty fist in there, even though he won't 'fess up.

[Edit for typo]

[edit on 4/24/2007 by yeahright]



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Oh my freakin' gorde. This is so simple, people. Think for a moment. Consider the motive. How can it be that a secret black ops aircraft is purposely hovering over O'Hare? Can it really be possible that whoever is piloting this thing was given orders to hover over O'Hare? Or maybe no orders were given but the pilot is merely a prankster?

No, skunkworks aircraft do not hover over busy airports. Not purposely or accidentally. This had to be someone who was A) curious and B) not aware of the inherent danger or indifferent to it.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by 10538
Oh my freakin' gorde. This is so simple, people. Think for a moment. Consider the motive. How can it be that a secret black ops aircraft is purposely hovering over O'Hare?

I have no idea. Which proves nothing, other than I don't know. You don't either.



Can it really be possible that whoever is piloting this thing was given orders to hover over O'Hare? Or maybe no orders were given but the pilot is merely a prankster?

One conjecture is as good as another. As long as it doesn't introduce things into the explanation that have never been proven to exist. Then one isn't as good as the other.



No, skunkworks aircraft do not hover over busy airports. Not purposely or accidentally. This had to be someone who was A) curious and B) not aware of the inherent danger or indifferent to it.

Proven how? Common sense conjecture?

I'm not trying to be obnoxious here. I'm just trying to make a point. It doesn't have to be either A or B. it could be D, E, and J. We don't know. And "common sense" doesn't help much, especially if common sense leads to an unreasonable conclusion, sans proof.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I had a very enjoyable and informative conversation with Dr. Richard Haines of NARCAP fame www.narcap.org yesterday. He asked me a few questions and shared some pretty fascinating information with me which you can read in "Technical Report #5" on their site.

There is a cultural bias against the idea of "unknown objects in our airspace" even being discussed in the aviation industry that many credentialed, scientific experts believe is leading us into a danger zone with the huge increases of traffic in our airspace.

The NARCAP report on O'Hare will be, IMHO, the definitive work on the incident. It is already over 130 pages long and is nothing but the facts and testimony of the eye witnesses combined with brilliant expert analysis from aviation specialists.

I am looking forward to its release with much anticipation.


Springer...



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer

I am looking forward to its release with much anticipation.


Springer...


I am too, now. Very encouraging especially after reading their news page for Feb 7th & 16th. i like the way these people think.




posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by 10538What you have stated does NOT prove it was one of ours.


The probability is much higher it is ours when the tech used was discovered over a hundred years ago.

That would be Tesla's work.

Sometimes Occam's razor is good, sometimes bad, but in this case I think it works.

So the rest is speculation, as to the motives. But the tech is real.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I, for one, am glad that the investigations have gotten quiet.

But, has anyone had a chance to listen voice tapes posted by UFO Northwest?

[edit on 6-5-2007 by disownedsky]

[edit on 6-5-2007 by disownedsky]



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Hmm, this is very intersting. I couldn't make out some of the stuff they said, but am I correct in assuming they're actually re-routing traffic because of the UFO in the last MP3? Time for sleep now, "I'll be back!".



posted on May, 9 2007 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Drexon
Hmm, this is very intersting. I couldn't make out some of the stuff they said, but am I correct in assuming they're actually re-routing traffic because of the UFO in the last MP3? Time for sleep now, "I'll be back!".


I didn't get that impression. It sound to me like the ground controller was half joking, but then someone from United Maintenance cuts in to say they've seen it.

the most interesting is when "Sue" calls back. She's angry that she wasn't taken seriously. She says, "there was a disc out there flying around...I'm not high and I'm not drinking...somebody took a picture of it...."



[edit on 9-5-2007 by disownedsky]



posted on May, 9 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Where are the voice tapes?? I went to that site and can't find them.

Peace



posted on May, 9 2007 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
Where are the voice tapes?? I went to that site and can't find them.

Peace


The seem to have taken them off their home page, and now I can't find them at all on that site. I get 404 errors on the original URLs for the downloads:
ufosnw.com...
ufosnw.com... lip2.mp3
ufosnw.com...
ufosnw.com...

Perhaps inquire with the webmaster?

If that fails, send me a U2U and I'll e-mail them out (about 12 MBytes total).



new topics

top topics



 
99
<< 99  100  101    103  104  105 >>

log in

join