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: 85
99
<< 82  83  84    86  87  88 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 07:40 AM
link   
fiverz, you might want to carry the number for a good attorney when you go snooping around the airport.

or buy a ticket and get into the terminal. of course, when you don't board the plane you will be held and questioned for god knows how long.




posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by violet
Sorry if these have been posted.

Two More Possible Photos


C'mon, these were debunked again just on top of this page. Put some effort in.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 09:17 AM
link   
YES the ATC I know works in the tower at ORD Even though I know this person (although its through a friend of mine) this person has made it clear that "it's not worth a discussion" I can't even establish if this person was on the job at the time. BUT this persons response to any questions about this sighting is deliberately to get off the topic. Will we ever know the truth???


AS



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Just to be clear, these 2 NEW photos just posted on UFO Casebook YESTERDAY are real or fake?


www.ufocasebook.com...

I am hearing fake, what page were these debunked on please?

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Miah]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miah
Just to be clear, these 2 NEW photos just posted on UFO Casebook YESTERDAY are real or fake?


www.ufocasebook.com...


These two are fake, they have been altered from the original photo which is reverse of the orientation in the fake ufo photos



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
I began by talking to 4 people at a UAL ticket counter. Only one of them said that they heard of the story, and they said that they saw it on the news. I then moved on to another group of employees loitering about nearby. Shortly after some airport security came and started asking me if I had a flight and to show them the ticket. I didn't and they showed me the door. They were really polite about it and said that the airport doesn't allow people loitering around if they are not there to pick someone up or get on or off a flight themselves.
[edit on 31-1-2007 by Fiverz]


So folks, let's look at this.

Someone "loitering" in a terminal at O'Hare shortly elicits an "interception" from airport security and an escort off the premises.

On the Other hand,

SomeThing loitering above the airport, apparently near the runway/terminal complex, for upwards of 15 minutes elicits NO effective response from security, or anyone else for that matter, beyond delaying flights for 30-60 minutes.

Incredible! "Ignore it, and it'll will just go away".

OK, enough ranting.

I have a kernal of an idea to coax out a bit more info, or at least an "on record" response from the airline(s), but I need a bit of info help to make it work.

We are dealing with businesses which must, especially in a field as competetive as the airline industry, be forever cognizent of, and responsive to, customer satisfaction. Incidents like the DELAY(s) caused by the object over O'Hare in November, and verified by people like Eyewitness, are a routine source of air customer dissatisfaction.

To deal with dis-satisfied customers, airlines generally have "customer service" departments. Often, if enough irate customers complain long enough and/or Loudly enough (that is, complain to, or threaten to complain to the Right people, usually various elecled officials), the company takes remedial action. Or at least issues a statement concerning the offense in question.

Such a statement could, in this instance be the "key" to unlocking the door to an official investigation, perhaps at levels higher than O'Hare's administration; perhaps even higher than the local FAA office.

All we would need is for someone on one of those delayed flights, Or someone "representing" that person (or persons) interests to file an inquiry with the various airlines involved.

It might play something like this:


UAL: "United Airlines Customer Service, how can I help you?"

Caller: "Yes, on Novemeber 07, 2006 United flight XXX from X was delayed from landing at O'Hare International for more than X minutes, resulting in an unacceptable inconvenience to (passenger's name would be ideal, but could be left as a simple, generic "the passengers on board").

Does the airline have an explaination for this delay incident, as there are certain rumors that an unauthorized airspce incursion occured at the airport that day, necessitating the delay of all in and out bound flights.

If that was the case, I'm sure that UAL recognizes the threat such an incursion represents to its passengers.

Can UAL confirm that such a potentially dangerous situation did, in fact occur? And if it did, what action(s) has the airline taken with respect to airport, and government authorities to report and protest this serious and potentially catastrophic lapse in security?

Is the airline prepared to make an official statement regarding this troubling incident and the threat posed by lax airspace security to its passengers?"


Calls like this, to each of the airlines with flights delayed delayed by this object, might ellicite an interesting response from the airlines; a reponse that might just force a re-evalution from the officials in charge.

Then we compare their observations to those of the actual witnesses.

That's when the Fun begins!



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Here's the summary as I see it so far:

1. We have no pictures (real ones that is).

2. We have an alleged eyewitness, and I do mean alleged, who's recount of the occurence seemed to fit perfectly with the first fake photo we received. This should set off alarm bells as to the validity of all of eyewitness' statements.

3. We have a reporter on vacation.

4. The few members who have tried to get testimony from workers have gotten nothing but kicked out of the airport, which is more a result of the current security state of any airport you go to rather than any cover-up.

5. We have an incredible amount of new members entering the O'Hare thread keeping it going. They could be new members or they could be sock puppets. History shows this kind of activity to be indicative of a hoax.



Is it possible that nothing happened at all and that a network of people are perpetrating a hoax just to see if they can or for some monetary reason?

Peace



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz

For my next trip I plan on doing a little more research, and maybe you guys can help. For instance, where to go to get the best view of the runway where this UFO was sited, coming up with a reason for being there, etc. Maybe you can help me out some Eyewitness.

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Fiverz]


Might I suggest that Eyewitness and amongus share their media experience to help find a way to legitimately enter the airport as media to question some employees (in their break time perhaps). Having a press badge might make a difference.

Also I would suggest you first go the proper areas of the airport that would have been able to see the object from the windows. For example, if this hotel lobby area has a window that would be able to see the object, ask the employees who worked when it happened what they know. This would not be in the airport really, so the hotel may be more willing to allow it. You could even start by asking for a job application to make yourself less conspicuous.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
3. We have a reporter on vacation.


this, to me, is the strangest aspect of this entire story. I've said it enough but let me repeat it as it is truly baffling.

the reporter who broke the story took off for a vacation right as the story picked up international (per the reporter) interest. The possibility that the single biggest scoop in the history of the world wasn't enough to keep this guy working? That is beyond strange.


Originally posted by Dr Love
5. We have an incredible amount of new members entering the O'Hare thread keeping it going. They could be new members or they could be sock puppets. History shows this kind of activity to be indicative of a hoax.


I've noticed the serpo-esque way the thread has been moving at times as well. I actually thought it would be somewhat possible that the same clowns that can't let that dog sleep are now trying to take this thing and turn it into a means of garnering more attention or traffic for their dead end story. There has not yet been any connection to indicate that but for some reason I half expect to start seeing posts discussing new pics at another site.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
the reporter who broke the story took off for a vacation right as the story picked up international (per the reporter) interest. The possibility that the single biggest scoop in the history of the world wasn't enough to keep this guy working? That is beyond strange.


A quick question: When did his vacation begin? At least he has written a column on January 22 and that's about a couple of weeks after his last column about this incident: www.chicagotribune.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
Here's the summary as I see it so far:

1. We have no pictures (real ones that is).

2. We have an alleged eyewitness, and I do mean alleged, who's recount of the occurence seemed to fit perfectly with the first fake photo we received. This should set off alarm bells as to the validity of all of eyewitness' statements.

3. We have a reporter on vacation.

4. The few members who have tried to get testimony from workers have gotten nothing but kicked out of the airport, which is more a result of the current security state of any airport you go to rather than any cover-up.

5. We have an incredible amount of new members entering the O'Hare thread keeping it going. They could be new members or they could be sock puppets. History shows this kind of activity to be indicative of a hoax.



Is it possible that nothing happened at all and that a network of people are perpetrating a hoax just to see if they can or for some monetary reason?

Peace


1. Who said it was a hoax? I think thats more a point of view to some people.
2. I've spoken with the eyewitness personally, and I have absolutely no reason to doubt them. They had no idea of the photo's location, nor where the UFO would have been in it. However theyre location and viewpoint coinsides with the photo.
3. I dont think there's anything wierd about that. Probably a scheduled vacation.
4. I cant see why anyone would get kicked out for asking around...if thats what happened it's a bit over the top.
5. I'd think if we had sockpuppets running around in the thread Springer would have latched onto them. New members wouldnt be so strange with the media attention this has gotten (i.e. C2C etc)

If there was a monetary reason then why post a photo for free. I dont think anyone's gonna get rich being interviewed or posting pics on the net. If they sold the photos to the media, maybe, and we dont know that that kind of thing isnt going on. Either way I doubt seriously whether the whole event is a hoax.

I have to say speaking with Eyewitness drove alot home for me, and I know not everyone has that to refer to. I still find Zero's photo highly interesting, but David and I stand on his last post about it. I like many others will wait for more.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miah
Just to be clear, these 2 NEW photos just posted on UFO Casebook YESTERDAY are real or fake?


www.ufocasebook.com...

I am hearing fake, what page were these debunked on please?

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Miah]

Why don't you folks put some effort in this thread and go and check the pics before you post them over and over again? These two come up over and over again. They're already debunked. They're hoaxed as many others.

How often do we have to post the link to the debunk posts again?

We should stay at the facts.

Read here
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
Is it possible that nothing happened at all and that a network of people are perpetrating a hoax just to see if they can or for some monetary reason?

Peace


Wow, yeah the TV news guy, Anderson Cooper, CNN, Fox News and the Chicago Tribune are all playing with us.


Next...

Springer...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur

Originally posted by Dr Love
3. We have a reporter on vacation.


this, to me, is the strangest aspect of this entire story. I've said it enough but let me repeat it as it is truly baffling.

the reporter who broke the story took off for a vacation right as the story picked up international (per the reporter) interest. The possibility that the single biggest scoop in the history of the world wasn't enough to keep this guy working? That is beyond strange.



Is that really all that strange? I can think of many non-strange explanations for this, and no one has surfaced any strange facts about it. For example, perhaps he had been planning his vacation for a long time, and already had tickets/reservations, etc., and stood to forfeit money if he didn't proceed as planned. Perhaps he also stood to forfeit a spouse's good will if he changed his plans...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Wow, yeah the TV news guy, Anderson Cooper, CNN, Fox News and the Chicago Tribune are all playing with us.



I KNEW Anderson Cooper was up to no good, maybe he's been hit in the head by too many flying Holiday Inn signs during hurrican season....

Anyway, eyewitness, I found a pic that seems pretty close to what you described, did it look like this?



Guess it was taken in Argentina in 2006...



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy

Originally posted by Miah
Just to be clear, these 2 NEW photos just posted on UFO Casebook YESTERDAY are real or fake?


www.ufocasebook.com...

I am hearing fake, what page were these debunked on please?

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Miah]

Why don't you folks put some effort in this thread and go and check the pics before you post them over and over again? These two come up over and over again. They're already debunked. They're hoaxed as many others.

How often do we have to post the link to the debunk posts again?

We should stay at the facts.

Read here
www.abovetopsecret.com...


I see nothing there on it, and thanks for being an azz about it. Did you happen to notice this thread is 80+ pages long? And yet since those 2 pics arrived on UFO Casebook only yesterday, they have not been discussed here since.


Debunked here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Someone should let UFO Casebook know he is posting fakes there.

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Miah]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miah

I see nothing there on it, and thanks for being an azz about it. Did you happen to notice this thread is 80+ pages long? And yet since those 2 pics arrived on UFO Casebook only yesterday, they have not been discussed here since.

you know name calling is not welcomed here? we're not at some junkboard

This is meant to be a credible and serious board and not some junkboard.

anyhow. your posting is complete nonsense. the pics have been discussed and debunked. the link to it was posted by me and others.

[edit on 31-1-2007 by AgainstSecrecy]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
For my next trip I plan on doing a little more research, and maybe you guys can help.
For instance, where to go to get the best view of the runway where this UFO was sited...

Way to 'walk the walk ', Fiverz.

(I guess you have something for your blog, now, eh?)

I suggest asking jritzmann for his latest map ,

and maybe try to find the best location to duplicate

our supposed ufo/heavy congestion photos.

I think some have suggested the Ohare Hilton.
map

And from the translated blog with 'congestion' photo.

Some vague clues-

Because there is only a hotel and a convention center in neighborhood of the hotel, by any means it becomes such choices...As expected after by the fact that, the food to eat too much is, walking outside the hotel.
Because the number of arrivals and departures in the vicinity of the [ohea] airport of the United States one, photographing the photograph of the airplane. As for the photograph, the line of the airplane of the waiting of landing which is connected to the sky


Rosemont Convention Center is in the center of this same map, with the Hilton on the left side.

Some pics of other locations of interest, Eyewitness' parking lot, perhaps, would be interesting.

In fact , Hey Eyewitness, couldn't you post some pics

with your new camera, of the area of your sighting.

I think it would be helpful in getting a general 'feel' for your experience.
Just some thoughts.

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Jbird]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I dont see the reporter as being on vacation as strange at all. yes he broke a big story that was the most widely read story on the Tribs website, ever. And wrote one follow up article a week later. Yes the major media made mention of the sighting (I dont see the sighting as a hoax BTW) for a day.
But other than those few details the story dies relatively quickly in the manstream media. His January 22 article made no mention of the alleged sighting (which would indicate further interest from the mainstream media) but no it was about toll lanes in Chicago. I personally think, yes he broke a big (albeit brief) story about something he was more or less ordered to cover. And yes he was in the media spotlite briefly but my perception is it was just another story to him and those here are making mountains out of molehills!

[edit on 31-1-2007 by TheShadow to correct spelling]

[edit on 31-1-2007 by TheShadow]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Fiverz, I highly respect you for your effort to get more information -- good job! Unfortunately I don't think there's a way for you to delve deeper without lying/crafting some cover story. If you need help, I'm sure the fine people reading this thread would be happy to assist.



new topics

top topics



 
99
<< 82  83  84    86  87  88 >>

log in

join