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: 7
99
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Did anyone notice that the story has disappeared from the headlines on cnn.com, the most popular stories list, as well as from the U.S. sub-header all within the last few hours?

I don't know if that's standard par for stories of this nature (I don't go crazy with checking cnn.com every 15 min) but I found it kinda wierd.

Actually just checked msnbc.com and couldn't find it, and it's the last article on foxnews.com under U.S. news.

I guess it's not really that big of news huh?




posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Before you guys jump to any conclusions about this case here’s some stuff to think about based on the comments I’ve been reading…

DISCLOSURE IS IMMINENT

Why? Because a few presumably credible and qualified people reported seeing a UFO? This is not the first time and it won’t be the last. That’s what everybody said in 2004 when news of the Mexican Air Force video broke too.

THE CIA CONTROLS THE MEDIA

Well obviously they don’t or else you wouldn’t see the Chicago newspaper article about this “amazing” sighting being picked up by all the major news outlets now. The “time delay” is no doubt due to the fact that this wasn’t reported to the media first and it wasn’t that big of a deal at the time or the witnesses were reluctant to the become the focus of the inevitable media circus.

IT’S DISINFORMATION

Well if it is, and the goal is to ridicule the subject, then judging by how quickly some people participating in this thread are willing to jump to the conclusion that it must an alien spacecraft and/or it must be a conspiracy to suppress the “truth”, I’d have to say it was a success. Besides, I don’t think you’ll find many who deny UFOs are real so what would be the point? The problem for many is there’s no reason to believe they’re from outer space over any other possibility.

THE FAA IS IRRESPONSBLE BY NOT INVESTIGATING THIS

What’s the point and what’s there to investigate? UFOs have been investigated by various government agencies and the one conclusion that has been reached by all of them is that UFOs pose no threat. Now why is that? If you really want to know read the UK MoD report for example. The only danger they found was in pilots trying to chase them and getting disoriented or making some other error so they’ve been told not to. Problem solved. The truth is there’s no evidence to suggest these objects, whatever they are, have any significant mass, so there’s no danger of collision.

IT’S AN ALIEN SPACECRAFT

What part exactly about this sighting says “alien spacecraft” to you? Shouldn’t all the other possibilities be ruled out first? How much information do you really have to base your opinion on at this point?

Anyway, if you still have open mind and are interested in a more skeptical viewpoint on this case, this is a pretty good one…

UFOS IN THE CLOUDS
cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real
DISCLOSURE IS IMMINENT

Why? Because a few presumably credible and qualified people reported seeing a UFO? This is not the first time and it won’t be the last.


Agreed! ( Not about disclosure!)

This is just one of many UFO reports over the years and it's typical and to be expected. It certainly is no sign of Disclosure or anything else for that matter other than to say typical UFO reports are still typical.







Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real
THE CIA CONTROLS THE MEDIA


See the Church Committee Reports and make up your own mind.



Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real
IT’S DISINFORMATION


No! Lights were reflecting off the Clouds at 4:30 pm!

Didn't you get the Memo???


Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real
THE FAA IS IRRESPONSBLE BY NOT INVESTIGATING THIS


Wrong Again!

The FAA "spokesperson" offered 'their' "Theory". Remember , lights on the Clouds can do "funny things".



Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real
Shouldn’t all the other possibilities be ruled out first? How much information do you really have to base your opinion on at this point?


I say we start with "lights reflecting off the clouds" at 4:30pm near Chicago.





[edit on 3-1-2007 by lost_shaman]



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman
I say we start with "lights reflecting off the clouds" at 4:30pm near Chicago.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"
-- R.A. Heinlien

And you think this person is in a position to be qualified to comment because?

(I agree that's a new one to me LOL)

[fixed typos]

[edit on 3-1-2007 by Saviour Of The Real]



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 01:55 AM
link   
I'm sorry, but if a few pilots say they saw a "Flying Saucer" UFO, then they saw a UFO. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

As someone who has seen the light, literally, I think as our world gets smaller through technology we're going to see, or be made aware of, more and more instances like this. Who said "You can run, but you can't hide" was very right. The people that control the UFO information are on their last lap around the track, and more and more of society are hot on their tales, waiting, watching, ready to pounce on every little piece of info, and mis-info that pops up, and call them on it.

As far as video and such, I highly doubt the airport uses "vhs" as it went out some time ago. It's all done on hard disc now, and I would be highly surprised if they didn't have months of back ups since 911, if not years. If this really happened, and it sounds like it did, give it some time. I'll bet someone somewhere may just pop up with somthing now that it's made the main stream news, if only for a few seconds before being filed in the "swamp gas" files. However, and you have to reason this to be very possible, they've had what, two months to go over video, look at everyone that looked like they saw something on the video, contact them, take whatever may have existed in the form of cameras, phones, etc., and make this completely go away. What puzzles me really is why it made it to the news at all after two months. The only logical thing is there is a loose piece of info out there that they could not secure for whatever reason, and now you can't go back and say they were "hiding" it because now it's been on the news.

Heck, I'm still waiting for someone to come clean on the Apollo missions! I may not even be around anymore when the truth comes out about this incident ;-)



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:10 AM
link   


The truth is there’s no evidence to suggest these objects, whatever they are, have any significant mass, so there’s no danger of collision.


*buzzer sounds*
Hmm not quite. There are documented UFO cases where an object has landed on railroad ties. The crumbling strength of various woods is well known. Using this and an estimate of the objects physical dimensions combined with a little math, has determined that UFOs have a lot of mass and are nearly the density of a submarine.




I'm sorry, but if a few pilots say they saw a "Flying Saucer" UFO, then they saw a UFO. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose.


This is very true and so often overlooked. A commercial pilot who flies big commercial jets is a pretty lofty position in society. Even if they don't like their job (yeah right!) they still have the $150,000+ rolling in per year. Unless they have some serious other hobbies/skills how else are they going to earn that kind of living!

Shoot I'm no pilot and I don't really talk about UFOs at my work except as maybe a joke here and there. It's really a topic that can be religious in nature (to some) so I think its a bit on the voodoo side for many work environments.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:11 AM
link   
This is a fascinating story.

I only wish that it had come out sooner... all we have now is hearsay. Multiple confirming reports are all well and good, but in the end they're just words... and I'm afraid any hard evidence that may have existed has had more than enough time to find its way into hands that have no plans for releasing it.

What we need is information regarding the federal response to the incident; what agencies were involved, and how quickly did they respond?

If only we had an eyewitness of our own on ATS... damn, this kind of thing always bothers me. We may never know the truth now... even once we've hammered away long enough with FOIA requests and general public clamoring for the government to address this scenario, we'll come away with a distorted version of events rife with misinformation added by the enemies of truth and hyperbole inserted by overenthusiastic researchers. And this is how conspiracy theories are born, I suppose.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real

And you think this person is in a position to be qualified to comment because?



Hey SOTR,

I'm glad you asked.

I was wondering why the FAA is allowed to say "anything" and no-one else is willing to admit "skepticism" towards the FAA's "Theory"/explanation?

I think that's a wonderful question someone should answer.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scramjet76



The truth is there’s no evidence to suggest these objects, whatever they are, have any significant mass, so there’s no danger of collision.


*buzzer sounds*
Hmm not quite. There are documented UFO cases where an object has landed on railroad ties. The crumbling strength of various woods is well known. Using this and an estimate of the objects physical dimensions combined with a little math, has determined that UFOs have a lot of mass and are nearly the density of a submarine.

You've been reading Hill's book haven't you?


The only criticism I have of his book is the sources and credibility of some of the cases he looked at. In that case the witness also saw 3-1/2 foot tall humanoids with shiny helmets.




I'm sorry, but if a few pilots say they saw a "Flying Saucer" UFO, then they saw a UFO. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

So they saw a UFO, doesn't mean it was an alien spaceship does it?



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 02:59 AM
link   
The people that control the UFO information are on their last lap around the track, and more and more of society are hot on their tales, waiting, watching, ready to pounce on every little piece of info, and mis-info that pops up, and call them on it.

The people that control the UFO information are the ones flying in them.

Never forget that.

Apparenty some people saw something fly into O'Hare. It didn't follow any flight path, didn't have a transponder and didn't communicate with ground control.

If this is an intelligent ET they pretty damn well know what the purpose of O'hare airport is and could guess at what humans do and what would be nice and what would be not nice (i.e. flying into a busy airport without any regard to flight procedures or tracking).

The UFO pilots just didn't give a crap. That should bother people much more than the FAA's lack of desire to investigate.

Think what might be the positive product of such an investigation? "UFO flew around here. No tail number. We can do nothing about it."

Investigation would be pointless without a useful consequence.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real

What part exactly about this sighting says “alien spacecraft” to you? Shouldn’t all the other possibilities be ruled out first? How much information do you really have to base your opinion on at this point?


Exactly. It could be an alien spacecraft. But ball lightning also explains every aspect of the case ....



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by lost_shaman



Originally posted by Saviour Of The Real
THE FAA IS IRRESPONSBLE BY NOT INVESTIGATING THIS


Wrong Again!

The FAA "spokesperson" offered 'their' "Theory". Remember , lights on the Clouds can do "funny things".


how is offering a theory an official investigation? faa spokespeople have a tendency to not have a clue what they are talking about. take the kentucky plane crash for instance. faa spokesperson laura brown specifically told the media that controllers who are fatigued can simply call in sick. one week later in a facility briefing i asked my chief if fatigue was a reasonable excuse to call in.....he said no. the union as a whole sent a request up the chain of command to headquarters requesting clarification on that point....again, the answer was no. the result is that if a controller is fatigued, he or she had better be sitting on position anyway...regardless of whether or not that's a safety risk.

my point is that faa spokespeople say what they are told to say, and generally they dont have a clue what it is they are talking about. i'm guessing that there was no real investigation because the faa just plain doesnt care about ufos anymore, and it took them all of 15 seconds to come up with this mainstream solution for the incident: weather phenomenon.

you people are giving faa management way too much credit....they simply dont know how to think outside the box.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Seems the FAA has written this of as "weather phenomenon",typical FAA bullcrap.foxnews



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Exactly. It could be an alien spacecraft. But ball lightning also explains every aspect of the case ....


i dont buy that essan.....pilots certainly know ball lightning when they see it, it's part of their training. just about every professional pilot i have ever known has seen it at some point in his or her career.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Exactly. It could be an alien spacecraft. But ball lightning also explains every aspect of the case ....


It couldn't have been ball lightning because the witnesses described it as metallic. It wasn't anymore ball lightning than the planes flying in and out of O'hare airport.

I wonder why these ufo pilots would allow themselves to be seen at this time. They seem to have cloaking ability that renders their craft virtually invisible so why did they not activate it? Maybe there was some breakdown in their system.

One thing is clear. They're here.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay

Originally posted by Essan

Exactly. It could be an alien spacecraft. But ball lightning also explains every aspect of the case ....


It couldn't have been ball lightning because the witnesses described it as metallic. It wasn't anymore ball lightning than the planes flying in and out of O'hare airport.

I wonder why these ufo pilots would allow themselves to be seen at this time. They seem to have cloaking ability that renders their craft virtually invisible so why did they not activate it? Maybe there was some breakdown in their system.

One thing is clear. They're here.
Maybe the radar messes with the cloaking somehow.I believe I've read that radar makes these things crash.Just a thought.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by crowpruitt

Maybe the radar messes with the cloaking somehow.I believe I've read that radar makes these things crash.Just a thought.


If that is the case then they are not invincible. There are vulnerabilities in their gadgets. And radar may be one of the things which reveal one of their weakpoints.

It could also be that whoever is piloting the ufos CHOSE to be seen at that particular time. Why? These guys are very picky about the times when they let people know they are around. One sighting here or there and then nothing more for a long period of time. That doesn't mean they aren't around though. It just means that they only allow themselves to be SEEN rarely. They may, however, be on location frequently, and in numbers, but in an "undetectable" mode.

[edit on 3-1-2007 by SkyWay]



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by crowpruitt
Maybe the radar messes with the cloaking somehow.I believe I've read that radar makes these things crash.Just a thought.


okay, lets think about that statement for a moment (assuming for a minute that it was an alien craft). these beings are smart enough to build a machine that will take them thousands of light years. they would be smart enough to do their homework about a species such as ours before coming down among us, so they would know if radar negatively effected their equipment.

so if radar effects their ship, why in the world would they intentionally fly into an area of heavily concentrated radar?

[edit on 3-1-2007 by snafu7700]



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay

Originally posted by Essan

Exactly. It could be an alien spacecraft. But ball lightning also explains every aspect of the case ....


It couldn't have been ball lightning because the witnesses described it as metallic.


That doesn't necessarily exclude the possibility
Why can't ball lightning have a metallic appearance under some circumstances? We know so little about it ....



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by SkyWay
It couldn't have been ball lightning because the witnesses described it as metallic.


That doesn't necessarily exclude the possibility
Why can't ball lightning have a metallic appearance under some circumstances? We know so little about it ....


Now you're stretching it a bit too much...rasping at straws. You may as well as why can't a lightning bolt have a wood appearance? Why can't a pig look like a horse? Why couldn't a lump of clay appear like a gem? Kind of unreasonable suggestions.




top topics



 
99
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join