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.

 

On to something huge here! (UFO HOAX)

page: 13
9
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by lagos
Thanks for everyone's input in this thread - very interesting and entertaining - its pretty apparent that most people involved just want to know the truth.

Frozenthought - can I asked you why the video ends so abruptly; I know you kinda addressed that before. It would seem, however, that if this indeed was such a "strange" occurence and you were luckily able to film it, that you would have left your camera running for as long as possible.

Personally, I think there is def. a human-related explanation for what you captured on film - thanks for sharing though.


Sure, I stopped filming beause object #1 had left my field of site over my left shoulder when it crossed the shoreline, but it seemed to be dissapearing as well. and Object #2 seemed to either take off at a fast rate or disappear while I was filming it which you can see in the film.

To be blunt, there was nothing left to film at that time.




posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 02:53 AM
link   
ok, planes dont take nearly 3 min to fly by, land, refuel, or anything thing like that. I live near an international airport and ive seen nothing like that for that long. not to mention are the lights really red?, how many planes fly with dominatly red lights that arn't the flashing ones.

I showed my wife a short clip of it and she said, "over lake erie right? ive seen that before." problably on a show i forgot to ask, but the point is, this is obviously a previously discussed phenomenon isn't it? or maybe she was brushin me off to go hang with the baby? hmm



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 03:05 AM
link   
@ Frozenthought

You should definitely upload some of your other videos; I'm sure many gravitating around the site would be interested to see / discuss them.

Sorry to hear about the assault incident - are you ok now?

Thanks in Advance.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 04:19 AM
link   
What do you think about this video (Video Clip (2.42 MB)) on www.orbwatch.com? It is the same event as Frozenthoughts.
I really want to visit this Lake, it seems so mysterious



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Frozenthought, no disrespect but having viewed the video and read the posts my opinion is that what we are seeing is aircraft approaching an airport. The video clearly shows this, particularly when the night shot reveals the runway lights to which one aircraft is obviously descending. I also believe that you know this to be the case. You know the exact location from which you were filming and could pinpoint it on Google Earth so we can determine the proximity of the airports and maybe other people in the area could duplicate the filming. Like many who post ‘evidence’ of the real thing you claim to have even better evidence – close-up footage of house-sized orbs of light entering the lake – but this definitive material isn’t made available and we only see the ambiguous footage. Also the story is later backed up with further mystery – such as an implied attack by ‘Men in Black’ – (I know you didn’t use the term MIB, but that is how I infer your curiously unreported violent assault claim). You seem to be suggesting some attempt was being made to prevent the video from being seen. Add to that the fact that you admit to providing footage for commercial dvds, so keeping up a pretence is financially beneficial (I’m sure no mystery assaults will be made to prevent any future dvd sales). Can you tell us why you chose to upload the inconclusive video and not the ‘mind-blowing’ footage you claim to have? Further can you explain why you think that points of light in the sky that look exactly like aircraft and are moving like aircraft in an airspace frequented by aircraft are not conventional aircraft but ET spaceships? To quote you 'I am trying to help people become aware that there are ETs here and I truly believe that.' Thanks...

Occam’s razor is a very useful tool!

All credit to Defcon's expert analysis at the begining of the post.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
but but I was reffering to final approach.


Again, you were the only person to bring up final approach, not me. If your intent is to try prove something I said is in error by showing that commercial aircraft only turn on their landing lights during final approach, then you need to go back to playing your flight simulator, because you're wasting your time.


Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
Hint-Final approach is when the plane is being lined up with the runway and ready to land! Do you see the difference?


Besides having supervised an airline ramp, I have also taken some flying lessons, so save your sarcasm for someone you can intimidate. Again you were the person that brought up final approach in errantly trying to say that aircraft only turn on their landing lights during final approach.


Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
I did not say final approach is the only area of the landing pattern. In fact it is the last part of landing procedure. Anyone with fundamental flying knowledge aleady knows that!


Which I have, and thus I know, you’re still incorrect in your original post, so what’s your point? Is it just to keep arguing a loosing point after already having shown it to be wrong?


Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
Your last sentence is very silly! Unless the plane is flying into a severe .wind it will not appear to hover. By severe I mean 30-40 knots for a cessna and 80-100 knots for commercial jets. Under these conditions I am not sure you would be able to controll your plane anyway so what exactly are you trying to prove?


My point, that seems to elude you, is that groundspeed cannot only cause an aircraft to hover over a point on the ground, but even cause it to fly backwards. It would have no effect on the aircraft whatsoever, the aircraft would be safe, fine, and in control (if you were really the expert you claim to be, you should know this. You should also know that a 100knt .wind is not really severe for an aircraft designed to fly hundreds of knots an hour, and they frequently fly through the Jetstream which can reach 250mph/217knts). It has to do with airspeed relative to the aircraft as opposed to speed of the aircraft in relation to the ground. You made some remark initially that I "should be ashamed of myself" about guessing the landing speed of the aircraft, because you felt that according to MicroSoft Flight Simulator, the airspeed I listed was a few knots too slow. Now you have been shown to be wrong, why not just accept that and let it be.

If you still do not understand the concept of airspeed, Wiki up Indicated Airspeed, True Airspeed, and Groundspeed. Maybe they can explain it to you.


Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
Besides, I don't remeber Frozenthought mentioning that while he was filming his ufo's there was any gale force storms, tornados or hurricanes in the immediate area!


Yeah but you were mentioning that the airspeed I listed was too low, as aircraft land into the wind, any wind would add to the airspeed relative to the aircraft and subtract from the groundspeed relative to the camera, making the aircraft appear to fly slower from his perspective.


Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
Why is it so hard for people to comprehend or believe him


Because most folks know what an aircraft looks like when its landing, and see the same motion in the bank of the second aircraft of the video.


Originally posted by SkepticGreek74
Debunking can be good and serves a purpose but debunking everything with complete disregard to the evidence only serves one purpose!!!


I don’t debunk everything, but this one was obvious right off the bat.
Add to everything else here, the fact that we now know that this was being filmed for a money making venture, where they HAD to come up with unique UFO footage, and it casts even more of a doubt on the validity of film. I mean think about it, if you were making a documentary of a UFO sighting for a scientific film, would you really be standing there yelling “Dude” very unprofessionally every five seconds, or would you be trying to give an accurate scientific account of what was occurring? The yelling is meant to incite emotion in the viewer that he is seeing something more spectacular then what he is actually seeing.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I am one of the people who think that Frozenthought's video shows only airplanes, but since we cannot know the distance the objects were or their size and the only witness is Frozenthought, I think that we really should stop trying to reach a conclusion when we do not have any means to have more information that the one we already have.

Maybe if we apply the same processes used to try to find what Frozenthought's video was showing to the other videos we may reach a conclusion, pro or against their being airplanes.

Frozenthought, I know it is hard, but try not to get too upset with us sceptics, after all we want to know the truth as much as you, we just have different ways of doing things.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by torsion
Frozenthought, no disrespect but having viewed the video and read the posts my opinion is that what we are seeing is aircraft approaching an airport. The video clearly shows this, particularly when the night shot reveals the runway lights to which one aircraft is obviously descending. I also believe that you know this to be the case. You know the exact location from which you were filming and could pinpoint it on Google Earth so we can determine the proximity of the airports and maybe other people in the area could duplicate the filming. Like many who post ‘evidence’ of the real thing you claim to have even better evidence – close-up footage of house-sized orbs of light entering the lake – but this definitive material isn’t made available and we only see the ambiguous footage. Also the story is later backed up with further mystery – such as an implied attack by ‘Men in Black’ – (I know you didn’t use the term MIB, but that is how I infer your curiously unreported violent assault claim). You seem to be suggesting some attempt was being made to prevent the video from being seen. Add to that the fact that you admit to providing footage for commercial dvds, so keeping up a pretence is financially beneficial (I’m sure no mystery assaults will be made to prevent any future dvd sales). Can you tell us why you chose to upload the inconclusive video and not the ‘mind-blowing’ footage you claim to have? Further can you explain why you think that points of light in the sky that look exactly like aircraft and are moving like aircraft in an airspace frequented by aircraft are not conventional aircraft but ET spaceships? To quote you 'I am trying to help people become aware that there are ETs here and I truly believe that.' Thanks...

Occam’s razor is a very useful tool!

All credit to Defcon's expert analysis at the begining of the post.

"particularly when the night shot reveals the runway lights to which one aircraft is obviously descending. I also believe that you know this to be the case.""

Have you not read anyhting on this thread? I have given Google map info, And it is clear there is no Airport where these craft are, and they are .ing away from Burke which we have found out only handles small craft anyhow, and has very little night time activity, & Hopkins is very far away and anyhow I am sure they are not sending commercial aircraft flying 50 feet off the lake and then sending another commercial aircraft dangerously close to the first craft anyhow, I have also explained why I uploaded this clip onto youtube 1st. There are high rise apartments all along the lake, these are tons of lights along the lake, it's not a airport you are seeing when I go into nightshot.

You seem to be suggesting some attempt was being made to prevent the video from being seen. Add to that the fact that you admit to providing footage for commercial dvds

Yes, I said I sent everything I had to David Sereda because I was beginning to get a little fearful of recent events in my life at that time, David was blown away by my footage and he chose to use some of it in his Akroyd movie, Your damned if you do & damned if you don't with you people, You say I sould be releasing my footage but then when I do you say I'm just trying to release footage to be in DVD's? I didn't send it to David thinking he was making a movie, i didn't even know he was working on a movie, I just respected him and wanted to get all of my footage into safe hands.

curiously unreported violent assault claim

Again what business is this of yours? but I will answer you anyhow. I will file a police report when I feel Damn ready to, what the hell was i gonna say anyhow, Ya know mr. police officer my Jaw is broken and I have no idea what happened? what good would that have done? And what don't you get about "I was knocked out", I have no memory of what happeneded that night from the time i got home. There is nothing to report.

I’m sure no mystery assaults will be made to prevent any future dvd sales

What exactly are you saying? Sounds like you are saying I am lying? I wish I was. Again when people are so not trusting in there fellow man, it is sad, has to suck going through life thinking that way.

Can you tell us why you chose to upload the inconclusive video and not the ‘mind-blowing’ footage you claim to have?

Perhaps you can't read that well so I will answer that question again, David Sereda was invited to go on FOX news, and David choose this clip, we wanted Fox to show it. Fox News took out everything interesting and only showed the Nightshot Infra-red part, and a little bit of of the beginning, they did not show object #2 come in above object #1.

I didn't think that was fair to keep saying for 45 minutes they had exclusive new UFO footage and then only show what they did, I thought they should have at least given it a fair handshake and that is why I then uploaded the full clip onto youtube.

You know, Everything works out though because if they would have shown my footage properly, I would not have uploaded it onto youtube, and right now that clip has had 66,905 views! That is incredible.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

I don’t debunk everything, but this one was obvious right off the bat. Add to everything else here, the fact that we now know that this was being filmed for a money making venture, where they HAD to come up with unique UFO footage, and it casts even more of a doubt on the validity of film.

I have been filming this activity over lake Erie now for 4 years, years before any of my footage ever made it into the media, I actually really enjoy going down to the lake and watching the sunset and then just hanging out, I have my camera there with me sitting on a tri-pod, if something strange shows up, i film it. I enjoy it. There was no motive for trying to make $$$$$$ Sad how some people think.



I mean think about it, if you were making a documentary of a UFO sighting for a scientific film, would you really be standing there yelling “Dude” very unprofessionally every five seconds, or would you be trying to give an accurate scientific account of what was occurring? The yelling is meant to incite emotion in the viewer that he is seeing something more spectacular then what he is actually seeing.


You are right, If I thought I was making a documentary of a UFO sighting for a scientific film, I would have spoken differently, but guess what, I was shooting the footage because it just happened to show up that night, I wasn't thinking about "this is a UFO sighting for a scientific film" I was down at the lake with a buddy and we were having a good time, You should try it sometime, and That is how I talk, get over it. Who are you to tell me what I should or shouldn't be saying? Piss Off.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Frozenthought, I know it is hard, but try not to get too upset with us sceptics, after all we want to know the truth as much as you, we just have different ways of doing things.


I have no problem with anybody thinking these are boats, Planes, Police cars, Car Headlights, I have heard every single one of those explanations, But, If you attack me personally by saying I am being untruthfull or have ulterior motives, And this is not directed at you, you seem to be a very decent person.

But when others say I am being untruthfull or have ulterior motives, Then you are just a very negitive person and you should stop and take note of how you are feeling so in the future when you feel that same feeling again, you will know "Hey, This is what it feels like when I am wrong"



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frozenthought
I have been filming this activity over lake Erie now for 4 years, years before any of my footage ever made it into the media


If the “activity” is visible with that frequency, wouldn’t that possibly tell you that its most likely something more mundane? Wouldn’t you think that with the amount of air traffic in the area, there would be countless reports from the aviation personnel that frequently fly through the area? Wouldn’t you conclude that if the airline personnel are not reporting this activity then they are most likely aware that the lights are other aircraft?


Originally posted by Frozenthought
Who are you to tell me what I should or shouldn't be saying? Piss Off.


I am not telling you how to talk, what I am saying is that the way its presented in the video it shows lack of professionalism or objectivity for what your supposedly seeing. If you see the events with the amount of frequency that you say you do, then I would think you would be somewhat used to it by now and speak in a more composed manner about the event. To be a credible investigator in any type of paranormal field the first thing that a person should show is a healthy sense of skepticism and emotional detachment from the situation. When you run on emotion, your liable to perceive things that are mundane as being something more unusual then what it in fact is.

I am sorry if being a skeptic takes the fun out of things, but research is seldom fun, its about stepping back and being an impartial observer so you don’t prejudice your results.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Frozenthought, can you get a screen shot from Google Earth showing where you were standing during filming and also showing what the ground light source is? I can't find anything in the posts that give your exact location.

As for asking me what business is it of mine that you didn't report the assault - it was you who made it the business of ATS members by using it in your posts to add credence to your story. You can't make such claims and expect no one to question them! You are responsible for placing the video and the accompanying story in the public domain. It will naturally come under public scrutiny. To me, a visit by mysterious assailants after filming UFOs seems like cliched UFO folklore.

Surely your 'house-sized orbs entering the lake' footage will convince everyone. Why can't we see it? If it is being held back for the dvd that's fair enough, but you said in an earlier post that you intend to upload it to YouTube.

Finally, I have no objection to the commercial use of legitimate UFO footage. If I ever film a genuine UFO I'd hope to make some cash from it, but I'd never attempt to pass off the known as the unknown.
cheers...



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:10 AM
link   
www.unknowncountry.com...

02-Oct-2004
Unusual Situation Reported in Northern Ohio
printer friendly version send to a friend previous | next
On Wednesday morning, September 22, numerous callers to Cleveland, Ohio radio station 1100 WTAM reported a rainbow-like aerial situation similar to a 'Sundog.' The situation complicates, however, as others begin describing unusual contrails, jet scrambles and other military activity all across northern Ohio.

One caller described an unusual light seen the night before Sept. 22 while driving home from Detroit around 1:00 a.m. while another caller claimed the similar sighting of a 'bluish green light' around 10:35 p.m. on Route 8 near the Stow, Ohio area (north of Akron). At daybreak the morning of Sept. 22, northeastern Ohio skies were allegedly 'ripped' with jet vapor trails.

Another caller, a truck driver with a route between Cleveland and Youngstown, and alleges that his GPS (Global Positioning System) that pinpoints his mapping location on a laptop computer, began malfunctioning between 8 and 9:00 a.m., although working flawlessly beforehand. Stranger still, another caller claimed that Route 12, a south/north road out of Fostoria, Ohio, was blocked by "tons" of army trucks and traffic was being diverted.

This activity was briefly referenced on the Cleveland UFO E-list, but with no new information. Secondly, I did receive three E-mail advisement's regarding this activity from various contacts, along with one copied message from 'June' that states: " I talked with my Mom today, and she told me that on channel 19 at 5 pm, Wed., Sept. 22, the TV news anchor said that there were hundreds of reports of UFO's all over the lakefront area of Ohio. He said that after the commercial breaks he would give the details. My mom was very curious and waited to hear the news. When the news came back on, NOTHING. So the story was squashed. I talked to a few people at work today, and yes, they had heard about the sightings. Everyone was talking about it. So lots of people here in Ohio heard about it before the news was suppressed. According to my Mom, the TV anchor said that people saw what looked like a huge cloud with rainbow colors along with many UFO's that were not disguising themselves as clouds. I also learned that fighter jets were sent out after them." (Note, I do not know June who copied me on her comments to a few other researchers, but she signed her name with the addition of "In The Light," and I cannot vouch for her comments – Kenny Young.)

Further, Mrs. Donnie Blessing, Southern Ohio State Director for MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) spoke with a witness in Cleveland who contacted the Cincinnati UFO Hotline (513 - 588 - 4548) on September 28th to advise of a UFO sighting in Canada on September 21st.

While taking the information, Ken advised that his wife knew of the strange reports on WTAM radio station on September 22, and further informed of UFOs and numerous (presumably) responding military helicopters seen near the Perry Nuclear Power Station. This specific detail has been considered most intriguing. At this time, we know of no substantive information to link this reference of a UFO situation near the Perry Nuclear Power Station to the September 22nd activity reported by WTAM radio.

Oddly, there was previous UFO activity reported 'on the record' by a Lake County law officer referenced in conjunction with the Perry Nuclear Facility in June of 2004, that report is located online at: Fuse.net

So unusual was this September 22nd activity that radio station WTAM created a special web page for the situation. The page contains audio clips of the many callers that are available from the WTAM UFO Page


Afternoon WTAM host Mike Trivisonno was curious and ventured into his backyard to see for himself. Although he did not see the lights he did see something peculiar, jet contrails all over the crystal clear Cleveland sky. The contrails extended in all directions as far as the eyes can see. The contrails formed a checkerboard pattern. In all of Trivisonno's years on this planet he had never seen anything like it. Or maybe it was he just never noticed it. He played the phone calls from that morning and mentioned his observations on his #1 rated afternoon show that day and asked the question "What the heck is going on"

If you have any information regarding a UFO situation taking place near the Perry Nuclear Power Station involving military helicopters or a jet scramble in response to a perceived UFO situation near the Lake County facility, please call at the contact information line given below.


[edit on 11-2-2007 by Frozenthought]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
torison he already posted where he was - see where it says lakeline img255.imageshack.us...

the ground light source could be burke lakefront airport but could also just be buildings.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frozenthought
Have you not read anyhting on this thread? I have given Google map info, And it is clear there is no Airport where these craft are


They are directly in a high density flighpath area of approach towards Cleveland Hopkins and Burke.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
and they are .ing away from Burke


The plane on the left is .ing towards it, or Hopkins. I don't know what the other is doing but I dont think it matters really. There are planes .ing in all kinds of directions all over that lake frequently. Airplanes will often circle untill it is safe to land.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
which we have found out only handles small craft anyhow, and has very little night time activity


Ok, so then it's .ing towards Cleveland Hopkins.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
Hopkins is very far away and anyhow


Um ya, 20 miles give or take, which is far within visibility for aircraft on approach.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
I am sure they are not sending commercial aircraft flying 50 feet off the lake


50 feet? they are at least a mile out over the lake, from what I can see, probably closer to ten.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
and then sending another commercial aircraft dangerously close to the first craft anyhow


I think that your perspective is completeley wrong. The aircraft that you think is "dangerously close" is miles behind the first craft. It looks like they are close because they are .ing in the same direction at one point towards your direction.

No disrespect meant Frozenthought, I was impressed at first and would like this to be a 'genuine' sighting. However have to be true to myself and others.

Just my 2 cents

Xeros



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:28 AM
link   

and they are .ing away from Burke


The plane on the left is .ing towards it, or Hopkins. I don't know what the other is doing but I dont think it matters really. There are planes .ing in all kinds of directions all over that lake frequently. Airplanes will often circle untill it is safe to land.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
which we have found out only handles small craft anyhow, and has very little night time activity


Ok, so then it's .ing towards Cleveland Hopkins.


Originally posted by Frozenthought
Hopkins is very far away and anyhow


Um ya, 20 miles give or take, which is far within visibility for aircraft on approach.

Xeros

I know your perspective is wacked, Um Ya, first off, Hopkins in Total Est. Distance: 30.05 miles, I just mapquested it, it is also west from my location, These objects were travelling east, Why is that so hard to understand?

If you are going to debunk it, at least try using the facts

[edit on 11-2-2007 by Frozenthought]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
torison he already posted where he was - see where it says lakeline img255.imageshack.us...

the ground light source could be burke lakefront airport but could also just be buildings.


You can't see Burke from where i filmed these, I just looked up the following info regarding a Light house that is on a island out in Lake Erie, On a good day the light house can be seen from about 6 miles out. And this is a light house...

en.wikipedia.org...(Lake_Erie)

"Philo Scovile was contracted to build the first lighthouse, which was a 44-foot high structure on the north end of the island with a lamp visible to about six miles distant"

Burke is 20 miles from where this was filmed



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Thanks for that, Yeti. Sure looks like those ground lights are related to Burke airport.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Hi frozenthought

you said this was your rough orientation- look at the compass in the top right hand corner img255.imageshack.us...

orientation can be confusing sometimes with huge landscapes like that lake.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by torsion
Thanks for that, Yeti. Sure looks like those ground lights are related to Burke airport.


Please read the above info, If you can only see a 44 foot Lighthouse from 6 miles or closer, how are you seeing a airport that is 20 miles away if it's burke? and 30 miles away if you are talking about Hopkins?

[edit on 11-2-2007 by Frozenthought]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join