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.

 

Dozens in Texas town report seeing UFO

page: 6
67
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Are you sure it was an actual photo from the event, or a recreation / stock photo?

This is what CNN is reporting:

www.cnn.com...

Ill have to check out the TV for a bit...




posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
I just watched headline news and they did not show any image. They did talk about the incident, but there is no photo.

They did mention that if a photo turns up, they will air it.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I don't know if this is related but I just saw a weird emergency broadcast ticker on the tv... nbc. It said it was a test for the dfw area. I have NEVER seen this before.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial

To taint credibility is to propose that someone's account is not reliable. It does in any way require anyone to claim anyone is lying.

The old technique of putting an old lady witness on the stand and saying "so old lady, are you SURE you vision was good and you were awake when you saw my client?" line is a typical way to discredit a witness without claiming they are lying.

From what I understood of your post, you were claiming that the eye witnesses could not give a ballpark estimate of size because they are laypeople who get the size of the moon wrong.

I think that without knowing exactly what they saw, when and where, we cannot reach your conclusion.

Do we know that what they saw was a small object on the horizon? Or was it something large that passed near by? Because I would have trouble judging the size of something that passed along a flat horizon. But I would not have trouble measuring the minimum possible size of some new truck that flew overhead.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by Ectoterrestrial]


To me credibility means more than just "reliability," but I'll just agree to disagree with you on that point.

People's attempts to estimate the size of an object in the sky without a constant frame of reference are just plain terrible, the moon is just an example of that, not the point in itself. Without knowing for sure that they used an adequate reference frame, such as their fist, finger, or whatever at arm's length, I think we cannot reach the conclusion that their estimation is in any way reliable.

If the object was completely unfamiliar, unlike a truck, which they claim it was, then I would say their estimations of its size are unreliable, whether it was fairly close or not. If they give me a measurement rather than a size then I'm much more inclined to believe it. If I had never seen a plane before and a B52 flew low over my head at a high rate of speed (and supposing it was somehow silent) then I might come to the conclusion that it was gigantic, a mile wide perhaps, because I had no frame of reference, and no way to know exactly how close or how far it really was. If it was only seen on the horizon then the problem of estimating its size is even worse. But if I were to measure it by trying to cover it with my fist at arms length and get a rough measurement of what angle it was at when my fist could first start to cover it completely, then I'm well on my way to at least getting an accurate estimation of its minimum size. The only variable that I have left to guess at is distance. Without a known frame of reference I have two variables to guess at, each equally important, and it's very unlikely that I'm going to be adequately close on either, let alone both, especially if I'm just coming to an answer subconsciously.

You seem to take my criticism as if I'm attacking the witness personally, but please don't take it that way. The way the mind interprets the sky incorrectly is unavoidable, I suffer from the same problem as they do. The only question is whether they were aware of the deficiency and took active steps to compensate for it by giving themselves a frame of reference. It's not an insult for them to be "lay" in this matter, most people are. It's why I think it's very important to educate the public about the way people's minds work when viewing things in the sky. If more people knew to measure the angular size of objects rather than trust what they think their eyes are seeing then witness reports of sightings would contain much more useful information.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
I think I saw what you guys did on CNN. I found a video through that blogsearch from the AP and I'm almost certain that what we are seeing is the top of a street lamp that juts out.

It's so brief it looks like something metallic sitting in the sky.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
To those folks that hope something will come of this:

There's a report like this multiple times a year, this isn't the first time there's media coverage on a UFO event. There was one last year, the year before, the year before that, etc. The odd thing is, with those reports there are usually videos or pictures that are available. Many times those videos/pictures have already been debunked here before they're aired, though. So I wouldn't be all too glad to see something like that on CNN.

Is it just me or is anyone else getting sick and tired of these flimsy (at best) reports? It's either there's a bunch of people who say they see the same thing, or, there's a single person with video or pictures of something that could be anything. What makes it worse is that there are folks here who are so vehement against skepticism that they'd go so far as to ignore reason.

Not to mention the rampant and completely grotesque speculation some people put forward as their own personal truth. Secret military blimps a mile long and wide? Excuse me? That's a pretty big claim you've got there, I'd go so far as to say that it's even less likely than an extraterrestrial craft. What's the point of a spy vehicle that's dreadfully slow and so large that anyone for miles can spot it? What's so stealthy and secretive about that? Especially if it's your run of the mill blimp, little Timothy could take the craft down with his home made pea shooter. Darwin awards anyone?

I think there needs to be a pivotal moment where speculation in Ufology gets strangled and there's room given for folks that aren't just here because they believe. If you already believe in the phenomena, what's the point of preaching to folks who don't and follow the creed of empiricism? I do, yet, I also have had my own anecdotal sighting that I've been trying to convince myself for years that it was my childish imagination at the time, yet, I know it wasn't.

I don't know, but, proof requires skepticism to the utmost degree and that's why a lot of us are here. Data.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
This is likely a good solid set of sightings. With officials and pilot and many other corroborating times and dates we can see some reality here.

Also the fact this is in a population who would normally dismiss such events as un-Christian and evil, likely most not even talking for fear of reprisals from their bible belt community and neighbors, makes this especially noteworthy.

Too bad most there would not make an official report. I hope the local MUFON/investigators people are getting statements and more accounts, photos and video.

NUFORC has reports, but don't usually post complete listings until after the month is over. Worth checking Feb 1st. Also MUFON has a reporting site to check.

CNN broadcast the report, so this is getting fairly good coverage for such a story. Good sign.

I think they saw what they saw. Who knows what it is exactly, but if not ours (doubtful) it was "someone else's".

San Diego also had a rash of UFOs reported by many these last few weeks since the first part of December. I wonder how many other such mass sightings are occurring world wide? People are just waking up to UFOs and critical mass is building so people won't feel so exposed reporting their experience.

This might be the beginning of a systematic acclimation program by one or several visiting-managing species that will happen with more frequency in many places planet wide. Keep your ears and eyes open. Keep the cameras handy.



ZG



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   
This morning I was making breakfast and heard on Fox News a discussion about the UFO in Texas. Some bimbo says some people in texas saw a ufo. A disc that was unexplained. She asked the co-host what he thought. He said: "They saw lights in the sky. Don't we usually call that an airplane ? How come it's only hicks in small towns that see UFOs ?" Ok back to you Kelly.


I can't believe Fox was given a broadcast license.

edit: just saw your locked thread. I saw it too.



Originally posted by sean
FOX News Texas report

I just saw a report about the Texas sightings. As we all know, Fox News very rarely covers anything like this. When they do report the story what is the highlight of it all? Shoot the story down make it a big laugh about it all and discredit all the witnesses who saw it. No interview of the witnesses the entire depth of the report was to burn it down completely. I guess it's more important to report that Britney shaved her head, Britney got a tatoo, Britney got pregnant, Britney ran over some idiot camera mans foot that was blocking her car. Anyone else feel like FOX News is a puppet? What I mean by that, I mean a government controlled news source? I am seriously beginning to wonder.



[edit on 15-1-2008 by Schaden]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroGhost
 


Here's an idea. The ecomony of our small town is on the ropes.
We need more visitors to fill up our restaurants and hotels.
What could we do? Hmmmm...........
I know! A huge UFO flew over our town. Come down and maybe
see one yourself. Bring your binoculars and cameras.
Good luck.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Now that you've all watched the AP video off YAHOO I need to share with you
that the Jason Leigh is the same character how drove his jeep wagoneer through the front doors of the Waco VA/federal building on March 8, 1998.
He was released from prison in August of 1998.

The old news archives differ on his mental state at the time, some say he was cold sober others read he was an alcoholic.

Back in 1997 Jason was blogging under the Roswell Musuem site that he held a PhD ... creating a mischief of huge proportion over on C2C website.
Ultimately being denied access after all his attacks.

Personally I often wonder if he isn't being used as a guinea pig under mind control.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
not likely I think you skeptics are really just scratching for ANYTHING to make yourselves feel safer. Your paradigm is ending Im affraid..




Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by ZeroGhost
 


Here's an idea. The ecomony of our small town is on the ropes.
We need more visitors to fill up our restaurants and hotels.
What could we do? Hmmmm...........
I know! A huge UFO flew over our town. Come down and maybe
see one yourself. Bring your binoculars and cameras.
Good luck.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter


I think your points are reasonable, ngchunter. I don't question people's propensity for inaccuracy.

In fact, I've often pondered how expensive it would be to build or buy a LIDAR to try to personally capture the kind of observations you are talking about. When it comes to scientific accuracy, you and I are probably on the same page.

My only concern at this point is that the stories of the witnesses are recorded accurately, and as soon as possible, to avoid contamination, and then made public and thoroughly examined.

If we can make that happen, then I'm more than happy to entertain all of the legitimate concerns you have raised. Until then, I'm going to make the personal decision to with-hold judging the accuracy and veracity of the witnessed. I'll assume they are doing their sincere best to "call a spade a spade," where the spade, in this case, was a honking big flying thing being trailed by more conventional jets.

By the way, when I was younger, I witnessed a rather odd looking jet (was clearly a US craft) in formation with two wingman conventional jets. I assumed that the leading jete was an experimental craft, as I was an aviation buff at the time, and pretty much knew what was available on the market. The "experimental" even did a roll over my town. That pilot must have been having fun. Is it normal to fly in formation by trailing experimental with more conventional jets?

I hope we find out how far behind the object the trailing jets were.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by Ectoterrestrial]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donoso

Secret military blimps a mile long and wide? Excuse me? That's a pretty big claim you've got there, I'd go so far as to say that it's even less likely than an extraterrestrial craft. What's the point of a spy vehicle that's dreadfully slow and so large that anyone for miles can spot it? What's so stealthy and secretive about that?


People often misjudge the size of an object in the air, they are not primarily for spying, they are not slow or especially vunerable to small arms fire. I have studied the BTs and these are some of my conclusions.
Please don't believe them if you don't want to, they're just my best guess based on the facts. I do believe that time will bear out that I am correct when the government finally cops to them.

The Stevenville UFO may or may not be a covert military craft like I have described. I will at least be open minded about it until such time as we have more evidence.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:44 PM
link   
No photo, no video. Typical UFO stuff.

In this day and age, with every other person sporting a 1+ megapixel camera phone, we got nada? No dark, crappy pic? No overly shaky, crazy people on the audio taping a star with an over exposure setting?

What is the world coming to!

Apparently everything is BIG in Texas, except cameras.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by knows_but_doesnt
 


I've responded to this in the other thread on this topic. Shockingly enough not everyone owns a cell phone with camera capacity, or an ipod with camera or even carries their camera with them. Especially in the south like that, they just aren't as common as everyone thinks. Myself and quite a few others I know don't own cell phones or ipods or even digital cameras, and to assume that everyone else owns or even thinks to use such things has rather higher expectations for the amount of gadgets people own.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Tired of news reports making a big joke about what several people see and discredit them. There is certainly a big difference between a low slow flying object thats a mile wide and a jet airliner that's the width of dime at thousands of feet. News reports burn these stories up fast and attack witnesses saying well it was spotted by people in rural area so they must lack the intellect and common sense to know anything. So lets say it was that gosh darn swamp gas again.



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAvenger
based on the facts.


What are the facts, exactly? That's my strife, that's why people scoff at this whole field. There's no accepted process in Ufology where one can conclude what is and what isn't factual. Every "researcher" has their own system of belief as to what is and what isn't real.

Why not adopt the scientific process? Is it too empirical and are people afraid that their beliefs will be trampled under the search for truth if it is? I think so. It may be hard, but, there truly needs to be steps taken to bring in guidelines and that's the only way there ever will be disclosure if there truly is a conspiracy. Wouldn't everyone want to know the real truth?



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donoso

Why not adopt the scientific process? Is it too empirical and are people afraid that their beliefs will be trampled under the search for truth if it is? I think so. It may be hard, but, there truly needs to be steps taken to bring in guidelines and that's the only way there ever will be disclosure if there truly is a conspiracy. Wouldn't everyone want to know the real truth?


I certainly have no problem using the scientific method, even though most of my global warming opponents do. It should be quite applicable to UFO study, except for a shortage of facts in some areas.



[edit on 1/15/2008 by TheAvenger]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donoso

Originally posted by TheAvenger
based on the facts.

Why not adopt the scientific process? Is it too empirical and are people afraid that their beliefs will be trampled under the search for truth if it is? I think so. It may be hard, but, there truly needs to be steps taken to bring in guidelines and that's the only way there ever will be disclosure if there truly is a conspiracy. Wouldn't everyone want to know the real truth?


Hi everyone,

Here are some "guidelines":
www.belowtopsecret.com...

Science can and will end the UAP & UFO "mystery(ies)" sooner or later.
Well, let's say that I hope so...


Peace,
Europa



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Here's an idea. The ecomony of our small town is on the ropes.
We need more visitors to fill up our restaurants and hotels.
What could we do? Hmmmm...........
I know! A huge UFO flew over our town. Come down and maybe
see one yourself. Bring your binoculars and cameras.
Good luck.


That's a pretty terrible economic plan. I could think of a lot better ways to improve the economy of a town than trying to become the next Roswell.



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join