posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 06:37 PM
Hi, folks, will get to the questions now... again, if I miss your question, just repost it and I'll get to it... thanks :-)
air5five, you're ever so polite, and I'm here precisely to answer questions and clarify whatever I can. There wasn't much talking, although five
people ended up joining us to watch, and there were others farther away watching. I pointed it out to some people, because it was from our position
low and a bit distant, but since I'd already seen it from the roads (and definitely wanted to see more of it) I knew where to look. Those who saw it
only with the naked eye could still discern that it was something unusual. Those who had magnifying devices (we used my friend's reading glasses
held out at various distances) were the most focused and quietest. Almost everyone at least gasped when it took off, and some squealed.
I'm trying to persuade the friend who was with me to give her account, but she's a college professor and fears negative publicity reaching her
I have seen other UFOs --- many likely had reasonable terrestrial explanations, but they appeared odd or had unusual flight properties under my
observation. One, though, was surely something "other" --- stereotypical disk, four lights, approx. 50-70 feet in diameter, thinner than this one,
and about 2/3 to 1 mile away. I do believe that there are craft in our skies that humans... at least present-day humans --- aren't piloting.
JTF2-CANADA, lol, I know, I do listen once in a great while... but alas, I missed the two crazies.
Nightowl, yes, and whatever space-, dimension-, or time-warping technology is in use probably explains the distortion surrounding it/them. And thanks
for the book suggestion... sounds highly interesting.
ORB, I may have been too far away to see any smaller orbs near the object, but I could see distortion.
Cybernative, I completely agree, and I think "they" do have that technology (more EM or even EGeoM than AG, though, I suspect, just from what I know
so far about physics)... I just don't think "we" have that technology.
AgainstSecrecy, the problem is that the "object" in your hoaxed pics simply doesn't have the solidity and light-shadow clarity of what I saw. The
hoaxed "object" looks way too diffuse, and is still obviously a light source rather than a solid object reflecting ambient light and ground
27jd, I think the clouds weren't thick that day, just low... if they'd been very thick at all, at that time of year the skies and ground areas would
have been nearly dark by that time of day.
sergejsh, if I could shade that a bit differently and slightly change the overall color (and remove the seam --- I didn't see any seams), that would
be really close, including the slant. And it did seem darker gray, when viewed from more of an underside position --- not as though it was made from
two different metals or materials, but as though it was fairly reflective. It did appear to be rotating counterclockwise. But it was proportionately
thicker than a Frisbee, and the edges were more rounded.