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.

 

BREAKING NEWS: Military Offers Explanation For Stephenville UFO Reports

page: 4
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
I know alot of others have stated how I feal however I feal the need to vent a little. This is disturbing, how can these witnesses confuse 1,2, 3, 10 whatever amount of planes the air force says were in the air, these jets are LOUD.... 1 can be heard from a long distance away. This also brings me to the O'reilly interview where he say's well sir the government denies we had jets in the air at the time, are you sure they were military jets, the man calmly says yes. Then the other man says he saw NO jets in the area at the time just the UFO, which was silent. I don't know what happened in Texas but I sure don't believe the bs the government is telling us. Something big happened in texas and it sure as hell was not a bunch of f-16's. Sad thing is as long as the military/industrial complexe is in control of this country we will never know the truth.

One more thing, the man I have been seeing on tv as the pilot witness seems to me to be honest,sincere and very intelligent. I think he would be able to tell what a f-16 jet looks like, come on smell the coffee sheeple, there is more than meets the eye.




posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
At least in the case of the Phoenix lights, the original governor at the time who dismissed it, actually came forward 10 years later to say it was a spacecraft

But, IF there was a huge ufo, I have to ask, why aren't there any videos of it?
Granted it's at night (....like all supposed large ufo sightings), but still.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
I think this has to be the first UFO thread ive seen where the debunkers have for the most part stayed away, every single post ive seen here is saying bs to the government story (unless ive missed one?) this is a first isnt it? its got to be bad if the debunkers cant think of anything to say.

And IMO that is pretty cool.

This is a first dont you all agree?



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
An FOIA request in the making? Perhaps our good officers could explain exactly where the aircraft were (logs etc.), and why they were not traceable before.

Like the NICAP stuff, we should hit these people where it hurts - make a security issue out of it, until someone weasels out with the right info to save his/her @$$!



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by 2believeor0
 


An FOIA request in the making, it'll take them years upon years before they would release information or 'declassify' it i would thing though.

It's just another attempt of playing down the UFO phenomenon by the government and/or military, and taking the people who witnessed it first hand as inexperienced idiots, which some of them might be, but not all of them!!

And like previous posters have commented on, it's getting increasingly obvious that the government and/ or military are starting to get a little loose wit their lying techniques and whatever 'says' 'goes' without question, and if you do question you will be ridiculed or debunked by 'experts', 'experts' like that guy on the Larry King special, who's explanation about the rendelsham incident was probably more unbelievable than an extra terrestrial visitation itself!!

phew, rant over.



[edit on 23-1-2008 by Smugallo]



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:28 PM
link   
The explanation given seems so deliberately implausible, its as if they want people to believe that it was an alien spaceship



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavel chekov
I wonder if we’re overlooking the principle of Occam’s razor in this matter.

After all, Stephenville is the seat of a Texas county named Erath. Isn’t it possible that some interstellar navigator made a simple typographical error and brought this spacecraft to Erath in particular as opposed to Earth in general?

Wouldn’t that explain why a ship capable of light speed was puttering across Texas at minimal velocity? In galactic terms you might say the captain and navigator had "pulled over to the curb" while arguing about that left-hand turn they made back in Albuquerque.


LMAO! That's the funniest thing I've read all day!


Thanks for the laffs, pavel chekov!

And lest I be remiss, Welcome to ATS!!



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Hence the conspiracy theories continue and thrive on a daily basis.


Well if there were no conspiracies, this site wouldn't exist.
All we would have are boring truth forums.
And where's the fun in that?


[edit on 1/23/2008 by pjslug]



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
pavel, I rarely laugh while reading. But that was funny.

Let me play devil's advocate here. And before you all jump on me - just remember that the best way to come to the truth is to look at all sides.

Maybe the government is saying something by not saying something here. Put yourself in their shoes. Let's say you were attempting a test run with this infamous stealth blimp (and stealth blimp bashers who say "how is it stealth if it's a mile long!" - I think "stealth" refers to you not being able to see it on radar) that, from what we know, has a pretty high possibility of existing.

Now let's say something went wrong. It drifted into a place (Stephensville) where a lot of people saw it. Now you, as the military, cannot under any circumstances allow this to get out because then your enemies might get information about your secret technology. But people saw it. So what do you do? You send out THIS press release, saying you had 10 F-16s in the area. But that's ridiculous, people say. How can they expect us to be dumb enough to believe that. Well maybe it's the opposite. Maybe they're assuming we're smart enough to *get* that what they're really saying is "We had something top secret in that area that *required* us to have 10 F-16s there". I mean, that's how I read the report. This way you let people know the truth and also protect the identity of your secret military project.


Another possibility for this UFO that I'm surprised people haven't brought up is holographic technology. What an obvious advantage this would have in a war scenario. If you could project in the sky a huge fighter plane, or 500 smaller planes, maybe mixed in with some real ones, you would confuse the sh*t out of your enemy. And to me, this technology seems a lot more plausible than building a "mile long spaceship/plane" that can hover in place than shoot out at 5000 mph. Holographic technology would explain any speed it could reach along with its complete silence. Thoughts?



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Very interesting angle to take the story from, and for that i applaud you.

I do have questions about 'holographic' theory though, i mean, how the hell do you go about projecting something like that anywhere in the country..or world for that matter, and in three dimensions? Surely they would have to have a projector of some kind. I can John Lear talking about the possibility of a 9/11 hologram but i'm not entirely sure the the technology could exist to project detailed 3D images anywhere on Earth.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by PokeyJoe
 


I will vouch for you PJ.....I live on an F16 base...and I live very near to the flightline.

(sorry its only one line....just wanted to vouch for him)



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:01 PM
link   
We are being seriously manipulated.
I don`t trust anything they say or show us anymore


www.truinsight.com...

www.iahushua.com...
www.geocities.com...



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   


Or the Military really may have had a top secret new aircraft test going on that they were hesitant to own up to until there was so much buzz about it.


It will be this one possibility that will allow the government to maintain plausible deniability. And the reason why some people who may have been wavering toward the red pill will say, "oh yeah, that makes sense."

reply to post by SimonSays
 



the gubment stating on the record that it was planes also
halts MUFON's investigation as it no longer becomes a
UFO incident. It's a way out for the gubment to stop any
official investigation.


Seriously? Wow, I didn't realize that MUFON would just drop an investigation because the government says, "Oh, my bad. I forgot Maverick, Goose, and the boys were doing some dog-fighting that day."

Is MUFON a government organization or something? I was always under the impression that it was a private organization. Admittedly I don't know a whole lot about it.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   
This case totally sucks. We need to let it go and wait for the next sighting. Witnesses in this case have described all sorts of different objects, ranging from flying saucers to cigars to fireballs. All these witnesses and no clear video or photos? That Ricky guy saw a UFO 3 separate times, and yet still no video? What a bunch of crap. No one will ever be able to prove anything from this case... for all we know the people really were just confused and didn't understand what they were looking at.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Just for an example to those who dont know. Here is a video (of sound) of what I hear every day - day and night. LOL This is taken near my house on base.

This is how flippn loud it is when F16s are around:

f16


Oh, and here is a B1 (just because
)

B1





[edit on 23-1-2008 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Well I would assume that they would have someting on the ground to project the object, or mabye it could be projected through one of the other planes. Again, don't know much about the techology, but it seems a lot more plausible than a technology that accounts for a vehicle going from 0-8000 in 2 seconds (unless indeed, we're talking about alien spacecraft here). The thing that makes me pause

I remember that holographic projection of that jazz player in Jerry McGuire 12 years ago. That was 12 years ago! And that was a public version of a holograph. Surely they've learned to take care of the "see-through" problem by now and have learned to project over large distances. And you think we can't trust what we see now!

And I agree with an earlier poster about aliens. I'm leaning towards the idea that we wouldn't be able to see them. We're only 5-10 years from making our own cloaked plane (thousands of mini-cameras on top of plane projecting onto little screens on the bottom of the aircraft what they see above the aircraft). I'm fairly certain aliens that are technologically thousands of years a. of us have perfected a cloaking device.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I am offended that the military thinks I am actually stupid enough to believe this. Seriously, this excuse should make you think harder about what really happened. I'm convinced there was a mile long craft out there not. I wouldn't be if the military had put out this awful excuse!



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
OOOPS! SORRY, THIS IS A DOUBLE POST.

Well I would assume that they would have someting on the ground to project the object, or mabye it could be projected through one of the other planes. Again, don't know much about the techology, but it seems a lot more plausible than a technology that accounts for a vehicle going from 0-8000 in 2 seconds (unless indeed, we're talking about alien spacecraft here - and not a military craft).

I remember the holographic projection of that jazz player in Jerry McGuire 12 years ago. That was 12 years ago! And that was a public version of a holograph. Surely they've learned to take care of the "see-through" problem by now and have learned to project over large distances.

And I agree with an earlier poster about aliens. I'm leaning towards the idea that we wouldn't be able to see them. We're only 5-10 years from making our own cloaked plane (thousands of mini-cameras on top of plane projecting onto little screens on the bottom of the plane what they see above the aircraft). I'm fairly certain aliens that are technologically thousands of years a. of us have perfected a cloaking device.

[edit on 23-1-2008 by CaptnCrunch]



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Streaming audio of the witness:

www.ufocasebook.com...

Contact info for the Naval base saying what they saw were F-16s:

www.ufocasebook.com...

www.cnn.com...

UFOs? Nope. Air Force Jets.

How lame can it get. Down with main stream media!!!!!


Why can't CNN call the Air Force out and point out that it's not hard to hear and see fighter jets and there's a big difference between fighter jets and a mile long UFO.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonSays
 


SimonSays said it very well.

As an Ex-Navy Air Intercept Controller, I can state without a doubt, this is absolute hog wash! Fighters on training missions usually travel at 350-450 knots to conserve fuel, any faster and they run out of jet fuel to quickly, and need to be refueled in flight. So, where were all the tankers? MIA too?

It must have been the Thunderbirds, 'cause 10 plane formations just aren't a tactical advantage. Fighters usually fly in sections of two. The only time you ever see something like that is an airshow. Why put your aircrews at risk like that? 10 planes makes for a huge radar return, and one enemy weapon takes out muliple players. There is no reason to even practice something like that.

Where were all the AWACS? They missing as well? 10 planes don't go anywhere without someone helping them with other air traffic, and target vectors. There is always some one with a God's eye view of the theater.

Obviously, they know we are not that stupid, but the majority of people will accept what they say without question if it's on the major media, so why not.

It had to be something secret that was conducted by the military, and they can't say, or it was a mile long UFO that scared the daylights out of them.

Nothing classifed here, this is just common sense.




top topics



 
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join