280 Drawings of unidentified flying objects investigated by MUFON-CES , page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 26 times

reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 02:19 AM by LateApexer313

reply to post by violet

I think that it's pretty obvious, that all of these drawings were sketched by the MUFON official who posted them...their validity, wasn't in question, nor was the fact that it was the same person sketching the descriptions of all the sightings?
I could be wrong but I think everyone would agree the same person, sketched each and every drawing Sherpa?

Just another case of people, perhaps, not reading the whole thread, and tossing off a 1 or 2 liner as they browsed.

reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 02:40 AM by projectvxn

My girlfriend and I were most stricken by how consistent they are. Even when you come to different shapes of UFO, that can only mean a difference in manufacturers. But the over all sightings are remarkably consistent.

Great post.

reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 03:12 AM by GeeGee

After watching shows like Star Trek or movies like Star Wars, you feel kind of lucked out that aliens don't use craft that look as unique and aggressive.

One thing's for sure though, what UFO's lack in appearance they compensate in performance. The Enterprise could only dream of doing the maneuvers these UFO's do.

[edit on 26-3-2008 by GeeGee]

reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 10:18 AM by merryxmas

I recognize number 1.2 from last week's episode of UFO Hunters. It was infrared footage from a police helicopter that had that distinct dumbell shape with reverse rotating rotors. Never seen any footage of that shape anywhere else from what I can recall.

reply posted on 31-3-2008 @ 11:53 AM by sherpa

reply to post by LateApexer313

Is MUFON solely interested in just collecting data or do they display the data, summarized like you have it, with maps etc? I realize that the site in Germany you took all of this info from, did at least graphs, but what about here in the US? Am I blind or can you point me to the "finished product" of all of this MUFON data? Thanks in advance if you know the answer!

Sorry for taking so long to respond to your post LateApexer313 I have not had the time in recent weeks to follow up any posts I have made.

Personally I have had no direct contact with Mufon or any other UFO reporting organisation, any information I post is the direct result of many many hours on the web and do not know their work objectives.

I think it is worth bearing in mind that all these organisations have very low funding and most of the staff are voluntary so focused data sifting may be difficult for them.

That being said some figures are published, the reports here are a case in point and I could also point you to a similiar study devoted entirely to flying triangles they were included in this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And here is the web address for the original NIDS report

[edit on 31-3-2008 by sherpa]

reply posted on 31-3-2008 @ 11:57 AM by sherpa

Originally posted by 2timesOO
reply to post by sherpa

Hello sherpa,
9.12 looks like this one:

i282.photobucket.com...

It isn't as cool as triangular ufos .... But maybe more "out of this world".
By the way, this is the famous portuguese Alfena OVNI.
Best regards

Hi 2timesOO,

Another odd looking one.

Do you have a link to the original report ?

[edit on 31-3-2008 by sherpa]

reply posted on 31-3-2008 @ 12:08 PM by sherpa

Originally posted by violet
They appear to be drawn by the same person. using the same set of pencil crayons. The scale and style is all too similar. They don't appear to be original submissions from various sources.

I would say that was a possibility and would hope that the artist had at least direct contact with the witness for accuracy sake.

I am very much aware that not everybody has reasonable artistic skills when making sketches and drawings and would hope that like the police Mufon have people available to make representations for witnesses very much like identikit pictures, this is of course only speculation at this point though.

reply posted on 12-1-2009 @ 02:51 PM by Kat77

I saw one of those. Unfortunately, I was alone. It hovered in front of my field of vision for a bit until I noticed it, then it slowly started to fly over the western part of the city. I didn't hear of anyone else noticing anything unusual. I live near offutt afb.

don't let them scare you with aliens. it's probably man-made technology. Let 'em show us what they got.

reply posted on 12-1-2009 @ 03:34 PM by Kandinsky

reply to post by sherpa

Nice post

When I saw the maps of world-wide sightings, I wondered if they'd correlate to the worldwide distribution of US Military Bases. I couldn't find a detailed pin-point map (cursory search:duh

. I found this one and it indicates a general correlation. I'll try a little harder to find an accurate map. It's no 'State Secret' where the majority of bases are!

If a more detailed map of locations bears a resemblance to the UFO sightings map you posted, it lends credence to the idea of test flights of new-tech. It'd be interesting to overlay the 'sightings map' with an 'airbase/ airport' map. If the majority of sightings are around major airports, at least some of the sightings could be considered as false positives. At first glance, however, the sightings identified in the map miss quite a few major population centers. Intriguing.

Edited again for not paying attention to the dates on threads! Dear me...sigh...

[edit on 12-1-2009 by Kandinsky]

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 05:49 PM by sherpa

reply to post by Kandinsky

Thank you for your contribution Kandinsky, there has always been efforts to link sightings with either military bases or population centres and such efforts are indeed always noteworthy.

In the case of population centres you could always argue that because of the density of people the chances of someone seeing something is more likely so sighting reports would be more common, clearly in more rural locations this is less likely.

Military bases must have the potential of misidentified ufo's especially if reported by civilians who are not familiar with some of the more unusual, albeit conventional, airborn shapes that are deployed.

I guess what I am saying here is data can be interpreted in many different ways and the reliability of that data is just one variable in the mix and is dependent on the rigorousness of each particular investigator at the time.

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 06:52 PM by internos

Originally posted by sherpa

Hi 2timesOO,

Another odd looking one.

Do you have a link to the original report ?

Sherpa, here you go:

Thread:
Case UFO Alfena, Oporto, Portugal 1990

Translation of the article by Picollo30:

"Everything began at 8.30 am on the 10th of September 1990 when a group of kids called the attention for a "baloon" that moved in the skies of Vilar - Alfena.

Soon lots of people were also attracted by the unusual event. The said object with the shape of a "baloon" looked like a turtle with legs because according to a witness, besides the circular shape the object also showed appendices. It had a 1 to 3 meters of diameter and it gave the impression of reflecting sun beams.

The witnesses, a total of 25, positioned in various spots of the local wondered themselves about the real nature of that strange aerial artifact.

Some even tried to hit it with rocks. After travelling in the area for about 50 minutes, the strange ufo flew away in the direction of Santo Tirso - Paços de Ferreira.

Some people alerted Mr. Manuel Gomes, local resident and colaborator of the Jornal de Noticias newspaper, who took his camera and took four photos of the said object. Later he related the whole happening to CNIFO (Comissão Nacional de Investigação do Fenómeno OVNI) "

Source

YouTube Link

According to the sources, the photographer managed to take four photos, one of them would be this one:

ctec.ufp.pt...
gppovnis.tripod.com...
even CNES investigated the photos
www.vigilia.com.br...

Something vaguely similar was photographed in Przemysl, Poland, on 18th February 18th, 2006:

ufo.whipnet.org...

Sources and references:

1 Neves Silval, M. 1993. Alfena, Valongo - Um caso único(1). Anomalia, V1. pp 173 a 178. CNIFO
2 (1) Berenguel, R., 1994. Alfena, comentários às investigações. Anomalia, V2. pp 85 a 95. CNIFO
3 Guérin, P.1996. A medusa voadora de Alfena. Anomalia, V4. pp 127 a 135. CNIFO
4 jn2.sapo.pt...
5 ctec.ufp.pt...
6 ctec.ufp.pt...
7 ctec.ufp.pt...
8 www.vigilia.com.br...
9 www.pufoi.com...

[edit on 19/1/2009 by internos]

reply posted on 20-1-2009 @ 07:35 PM by sherpa

reply to post by internos

Ah, ok that case may illustrate my post above regarding data or information coming from a report.

To all intent and purpose I would say it was a balloon the only detracting point is the mention of the object moving away at enormous speed but what exactly is "enormous speed" and did all the witnesses agree it was indeed enormous speed.

Thanks for the heads up

reply posted on 20-1-2009 @ 08:31 PM by Bakane

A few of those reminded me of that Florida UFO. There was an ATS member who posted it with a long video. I think this is the thread. Here are some of his screen caps.

Note how the two shapes seem to be in the same area of the picture index. Both of these pictures are from the same UFO.