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.

 

Phoenix UFO mystery Solved

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
I like to create hoaxes.


Interesting confession. Admitting that you intentionally distract and toy with those who are searching for more info regarding UFO's certainly doesn't add much to your credibility as far as your argument on this thread.


It gives me a different perspective on events rather than wetting myself over an illuminted balloon



Originally posted by 27jd

Nothing has happened to the guy.



Lucky him!



Originally posted by 27jd
Oh, okay. Sending flammable substances into the air over dry brush in the DIRECT flight path of a few airports is something they have to weigh whether to charge or not, huh? I HIGHLY doubt that. And yes, airliners come south directly over the area of this event at very low altitudes to land at Sky Harbor.


You're right. Perhaps they should be knocking on your door asking for advice as they're so inept. You can look after the prosecution, teach the police how to do their job, rewrite the FAA regs...

If you think he should be prosecuted you're barking at the wrong person. Phone the police in Phoenix and let them know


Originally posted by 27jd


If as I stated, the flare is one that can be held in the hand, then it wont burn through


You know what flare was used? Please explain how you know that, and show us what flare besides, the LED ones that you can hold. Again, a BURNING flare, would BURN through fishing line, no matter where you tied it.


Regular road flares have been known to burn the uniform pants of deputies placing them on the roadway. Also the smoke generated from the conventional road flares on occasion has created a hazard by limiting the visibility of approaching drivers. Also the conventional road flares are made of sulfur, magnesium and other harmful chemicals that may cause health problems to some personnel.
emergencyroadflares.com...

[edit on 29-4-2008 by 27jd]


I think you've missed off the all important opening word on the sentence,
'IF'. As in "if you had read it properly, you wouldnt be foaming at the mouth"
Again, IF you had read my previous posts, road flares are not available in the UK so I can't recreate the incident, but, I can look at google for various flares that can be used and for various ways to deploy them.
There are a lot of flares which can be held which could be used
Ones that cannot be hand held, do come with a wire stand. Try making a small holder out of the wire stand and you could attach that to the balloon line

Tell, you what. You can't figure it out, here's a picture for you I've knocked up in my office (Obviously not to scale). To save you from taxing what little imagination you have, I've been nice and labelled the points for you...


Look! I've even drawn a balloon on the tether.
The flare is represented by the bulldog clip

This still won't make you happy will it? That can't be helped.
I can only tell you so many times before I get bored of repeating myself

Why dont you, tell everyone what you believe the lights were

and just like you have asked me, why dont you show us the research




posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos
It's strange that it got unnoticed, but ive posted an update on April 26,
Here

UFO Alert: FAA Silences Air Traffic Controllers and Hoax Theory has Problems
by Bill Knell
April 26, 2008 at 06:44:46



I work at a communications electronics plant. One of the clients is the army. I have signed a document stating I am not to discuss the electronics that are being made. So I will not. I don’t know anything to discuss about it either though. I am working on internet providing. I do not know the least bit about the military stuff. Still I was pushed to sign such a legal document. It is mere standard policy for employees to sign a document stating not to discuss the communication array of the CV9035 (alarm bells ringing somewhere now.)

Please give a warm welcome to D.I.G.*

I think the air traffic controllers have been compelled to a similar document stating not to discuss anything in or out of the ordinary. It does not proof or disprove anything nor does it shed a new light on the case of the 2008 phoenix UFO(s).

As for the alleged hoaxer not answering his door; I wouldn’t answer too if I weren’t already taken into custody. My case is severe as it is, not wanting it to escalate even more. If the hoax story turns out to be a hoax I still see a hoax. The question of why remains but I don’t think of that as the main issue. It has been a to big a story already. There are more interesting cases to explore to divert energy into something that is unlikely to be proven anything but a deception.



Originally posted by mrbooms
it doesnt matter, if you believe the bs balloon story your dumb, plain and simple...it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.


Please try to put some founding effort into your statements in favour of some Jerry-Springer-booing. FE: What doesn’t make sense, what is so simple or even what doesn’t matter? Give me something to tackle, other than this boring talkshow name calling game. I like discussions to be bit more challenging, thank you.

*Dutch Intelligence Guys.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by D.Wolf
 

Thanks, D.Wolf: it does make completely sense to me.
The only part of Bill Knell's article i'd be still interested to is the one in which he reports:



In fact, people living two houses down from Mailo say that they know Lino's next store neighbor and he was not home on Monday night. They claim they were out in their own backyard that evening and would have seen balloons with flares being launched. They also agreed to ask him about the flare story when they next see or speak with him.

www.opednews.com...

Besides, i wonder why Mr. Mailo would lie, moreover providing First and last name, showing his face on tv and blaming so openly his neighbor: it does not make sense, to me, unless there's something i'm missing or we aren't aware of



[edit on 30/4/2008 by internos]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Well there looks to be a gap but something looking a gap can easily be a shadow. There is the source that could be discussed unreliable but that is not something I like to do without providing proof of that. I can speculate though, putting myself in the situation of for example a neighbours two doors down.

If one of my close neighbours got him or herself into trouble I can imagine me not wanting to grass on this person by getting them into more trouble than heshe is already into.

I can imagine me being fed up with nosy people asking around for me just plain lie to them to get them of my back. nope seen nothing out of the ordinary. yeah I will speak to him about it, bye.

Or I can imagine that they are telling the truth, sure I can.

It’s a maybe this or maybe that.

Changing little on the fact that the footage leans heavily towards the balloon scam theory. (lights drifting in a straight line from west to east (as the breeze does) shape shifting formation, flickering out of existence one after the other.) From where they are originated or what the purpose of the scam is, I think is of minor concern. It does not change my view on other past or future sightings. If for some reason it is an effort to invalidate the prior phoenix lights, let them. If one falls for that, one wasn’t a critique in the first place. No loss there.

The one thing of interest there is that if it is set up to do the discredit thing, it would speak out for the other phoenix lights being genuine would it not? Looks to me as not a smart hoax to be doing when covering up something.

But I am afraid that too won’t be proven beyond the point of speculation.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
It gives me a different perspective on events rather than wetting myself over an illuminted balloon


The perspective of an admitted liar and fraud. Not a perspective I'm very interested in personally. And you should get that urinary incontinence problem of yours looked at, you have universal healthcare in the UK.





Lucky him!


Probably not so much luck, more like not having done it in the first place.




You're right. Perhaps they should be knocking on your door asking for advice as they're so inept. You can look after the prosecution, teach the police how to do their job, rewrite the FAA regs...

If you think he should be prosecuted you're barking at the wrong person. Phone the police in Phoenix and let them know


Was I "barking" at you? Woof woof? Anyway, they are far from inept when there is actually somebody to charge who admits to commiting a serious crime on NATIONAL TV, they usually get right to work, and sometimes go way overboard over far less. This (if true) actually endangered lives. But I have no idea why I'm even debating this with an admitted liar.



Tell, you what. You can't figure it out, here's a picture for you I've knocked up in my office (Obviously not to scale). To save you from taxing what little imagination you have, I've been nice and labelled the points for you...


Wow, you went through all that trouble to come up with what (in your mind) must be most amusing, yet completely pointless, and most likely to anybody other than yourself, quite retarded. Congratulations. You really have no idea what you're saying, you have no clue about the fire danger here obviously, and you seem to have no clue how seriously the government here takes wreckless stunts that endanger lives.



This still won't make you happy will it? That can't be helped.
I can only tell you so many times before I get bored of repeating myself


I didn't know you were out to make me happy. I appreciate your concern about my well being, but unfortunately, no it didn't make me happy. Again, it was a rather sad attempt at sarcastic humor. You brits should stick to zany slapstick comedy like Mr. Bean.




Why dont you, tell everyone what you believe the lights were

and just like you have asked me, why dont you show us the research


I've already stated I don't have a particular belief as to what they were. I do believe there are more advanced beings than ourselves in the universe, and I also believe that there are secret government aircraft as well. As for you mocking the government flying their craft over cities, your imagination seems lacking as well. What better way to test an aircrafts detectability than fly it over your own population centers? That way, it gets tested in real time and doesn't get shot down. On the other hand, who's to say it has to be OUR government? Either way, I DO believe this flare story has WAY to many holes, and is very unlikely, and since I've actually lived HERE all my life, I believe my knowledge of what somebody can and cannot get away with HERE, is greater than yours from across the pond.




[edit on 30-4-2008 by 27jd]



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


So you dont have a belief. Well done. If you dont have a belief, why even post in this thread? Surely you 'believe' it wasnt flares?

If you want to know why the police have not arrested a guy who admitted on public television to the prank, ask the police, or phone them up to tell them of your concerns. You live there. You have access to answer your own question, but you refuse to do such a thing about it. Why?

If you want to prove my flare theory wrong, provide your reason as to why it does not work. Since you wont phone the police as to have this guy arrested, I wont expect you to provide a demonstration, although that would be nice.


As for my admission of being a hoaxer, that does not make me a liar. I suggest you do research on the word. I have not published my hoaxes or even commented on what they are, or the nature of previous hoaxes, or even if they are on here or looked to see if they are here.
That does not make me a liar.
Also have a look at the word 'libel' and the phrase 'Defamation of character'

Please consider this as a warning from me

Tread carefully

[edit on 1-5-2008 by Mark Roazhar]



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
So you dont have a belief. Well done. If you dont have a belief, why even post in this thread? Surely you 'believe' it wasnt flares?


Well, I'm not one for belief really. According to the evidence it doesn't look like it was a flare tied to a balloon to me. A flare would burn through your tie line. You are neglecting physics with your theory that the flare wouldn't burn through. The proximity of the balloon to the flare means nothing. It's about the support tie line. You are making two mistakes with your explanation.

1) That the flare will remain horizontal and perpendicular to the tie line. We're talking about a string and a flare and a balloon in the wind, you're not looking at a clean room condition experiment without a moving atmosphere to factor in.

2) You are assuming that this guy tied these balloons to the ground (in your picture), holding them in a relative formation throughout the shot. That's not what the person who claims to have done this said he did. He says he released a cluster of balloons from his back yard.


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
If you want to know why the police have not arrested a guy who admitted on public television to the prank, ask the police, or phone them up to tell them of your concerns. You live there. You have access to answer your own question, but you refuse to do such a thing about it. Why?


You must surely be kidding. The differences between the Police Departments in America and Britain cannot be that great. You're assuming that citizens here have some of automatic accountability button they can push at a Police station, that makes the officers come out and explain themselves to us?

This is a matter that the State should be prosecuting, and it's the job of the media to report it if they don't. All citizens can actually do to get charges filed is to raise a ruckus with the media outlets, and keep their attention focused on the crime and lack of enforcement. What exactly are you proposing he do? Find the guy and place him under Citizen's Arrest? If the police decide not to arrest someone, there really isn't much a citizen can do about it. Citizens cannot file charges against someone unless you can prove that their actions directly affected you. Police however can arrest on intent.


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
If you want to prove my flare theory wrong, provide your reason as to why it does not work. Since you wont phone the police as to have this guy arrested, I wont expect you to provide a demonstration, although that would be nice.


Well the biggest problem is the lit flare and the tie line, combined with the weight of both and the near impossibility of a helium balloon supplying enough lift for the apparatus. But honestly, I can't get past the tie line burning.

Why don't you try at home in a safe controlled environment, to tie a candle with a string like you did in your picture. Suspend it from a light fixture or something above. I'm willing to bet you that your candle burns through your string, and doesn't stay perpendicular to the string. That is a testable, repeatable experiment (that I've now done myself and know the answer to). So there is your reason.


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
As for my admission of being a hoaxer, that does not make me a liar. I suggest you do research on the word.


Actually you're wrong there. Simply because you haven't (that we know of) lied directly to us in this thread about something pertaining directly to this thread, doesn't mean that you aren't a liar, or that you haven't admitted to being a liar.

Hoaxer actually does mean liar. See here:
dictionary.reference.com...

hoax Audio Help /hoʊks/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[hohks] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1) something intended to deceive or defraud: The Piltdown man was a scientific hoax.
–verb (used with object)
2) to deceive by a hoax; hoodwink.

and here:
dictionary.reference.com...

lie 2 Audio Help (lī) Pronunciation Key
n.
1) A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2) Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
I have not published my hoaxes or even commented on what they are, or the nature of previous hoaxes, or even if they are on here or looked to see if they are here.
That does not make me a liar.


Actually it does. It's the part where you say 'my hoaxes' this equates to the phrase 'my lies', and it's an admission of guilt. Admission of Guilt is a term perhaps you should look up before making vague references to charges you cannot prove against a person you cannot physically identify (27id in this case).

Publishing your hoaxes (here at ATS or anywhere else) doesn't have any bearing on whether or not you perpetrated them. Obviously from your admission you perpetrated them.


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
Also have a look at the word 'libel' and the phrase 'Defamation of character'

Please consider this as a warning from me

Tread carefully

[edit on 1-5-2008 by Mark Roazhar]


Tread carefully yourself Mark. Threatening people with law suits sounds awfully harsh in reaction to being 'called out' for something you've admitted doing. It's a defensive reaction that shows your true concern.

There was a time I respected your contributions here. I must say that after reading your work in this thread, the only reason I can think of that someone like you would come to ATS is to mislead. If you are not here to mislead, but to impart 'the wisdom of the experienced hoaxer' I'm finding your 'wisdom' sadly lacking in the face of known physics. And I find it offensive that you demand of 27id to conduct an experiment you yourself could have done in your own garage with a candle and a piece of string.

I'm no mod here, and I'm not really clear on how ATS will view the fact that you're an admitted hoaxer participating in their UFO/Aliens forum. But since you're handing out warnings to others, know this, I'm pushing that rarely used alert button today.

-WFA



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   
let's stop with the personal attacks and the personal threats and get back to the topic at hand - the Phoenix UFO mystery being solved.

thanks and carry on.



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   
So check this out...
lets forget all the previous posts about how this can be done and all the silly photoshopped pictures with paperclips and lantern videos; and lets take what the GUY actually said in his interview.

He stated that he did it, and that he tied flares to balloons and released them a minute apart.
He didn't state that he made special holders which would prevent the flares from burning through the string. Also, his neighbor chuckled that he watched him TIE flares to balloons. Nothing was said that this guy made up special contraptions to tie flares to the balloons, nothing was said that he used special flares that can be hand held without burning through anything, and nothing was said that he tied a string line to all the balloons he released. Now, you try tying balloons together and releasing them into the air. They will not stay in formation, nor will they be neatly flying around in the atmosphere. AnnDD before you start saying he used a special weather balloon of some sort, NOTHING was SAID that he used special balloons. I've tied many balloons to signs with long strings holding them for events and they do not stay in any regular formation, plus they get all tangled. He said that he released them a minute apart, ONE MINUTE APART. If you release any balloon one minute apart from each other the wind direction will be slightly different for the next balloon and they will scatter. No one did any follow up with him, nor did they question him. I live in the southwest and we have huge forest fires here all the time and the FIRE DEPT takes things like this very serious. No one was held accountable for such a dangerous act. That is very suspicious.

NOW pay attention to what I said because it is not speculating aliens and intergalatic federations but it is about some kind of COVER UP here and everyone is believing such a story with many loop holes that fail to be recognized.


[edit on 1-5-2008 by snookhums]



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   
The flares tied to balloons will work. Been there done that many years ago. No I'm not going to tell ya how because it's so easy. Don't believe me I don't care for 5000$ I'll prove it. Some people need to get out in the real world more often i think.

mikell



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by snookhums
 


That was an excellent review Snookhums. And this is why I have a really hard time believing this guy's story. Add to your list the fact that helium balloons don't generate a whole lot of lift, and the story gets even more questionable.

"helium has a lifting force of 1 gram per liter. So if you have a balloon that contains 5 liters of helium, the balloon can lift 5 grams."
Source: www.howstuffworks.com...

The weight of an average flare (I'll estimate on the light side) is about a half a pound (.45833333333333, when 5.5 is divided by 12)
www.orionsignals.com...

1 pound = 453.59237 grams
www.google.com...

so 1/2 pound = approximately 226.796185 grams

This means you'd need approximately 226 liters of Helium to lift a standard road flare.

A standard helium balloon only contains about .5 cubic feet of volume, giving it a lifting capacity of only about 14 grams when filled with helium.
science.howstuffworks.com...

So I suppose my question then, if this guy's story is to be believed, is:
What is lifting the other 212 (this number was accidentally entered as 121 when typing the post originally, it should read 212, as corrected upon edit) grams of weight?

This guy's story doesn't hold up to the involved physics on any level.

-WFA

Edited to fix the amount of remaining grams not lifted by 1 balloon.
While thinking about it, I thought I would add that it would take a total of 16 helium balloons (of the standard size shown above) to generate enough lift to carry a road flare.

[edit on 1-5-2008 by WitnessFromAfar]



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Mark Roazhar
 


Not much more I can say that WitnessFromAfar hasn't already.

I stated in my last post, that I believed they were NOT flares tied to balloons. As to what they were, I have no idea.

Hoaxer=Liar

The authorities here will not explain themselves anytime a peon citizen demands it. If they are going through all the trouble to cover something up, they are not magically obligated to tell the truth when you ask them, like some kind of leprechaun who has to give you his gold if you catch him. Doesn't work that way Mark.

And I'm not the least bit concerned about your little threat.


Back on topic, this story is quite simply BS. There are SO many holes, that it amazes me so many here bought it and exhibit faith in our government in this case, but turn around on other topics and proclaim our government to be the most corrupt and dishonest entity on the planet. I guess the government only lies when their agenda doesn't match up with personal opinions.



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
 


Awesome mathematics.

The 2 guys never said that he was using any kind of special balloons either. And the reporter at the end didn't do any kind of research, he just stood there with a regular balloon, string, and a regular flare, claiming most of this can be bought at a local party store. lol
and we're to believe this nonsense? lol total crap



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by snookhums
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
 


Awesome mathematics.


Thanks! I found it awesome that you figured it out intuitively without needing to do the math


To be perfectly honest, the only reason I knew about the lift problem is from personal experience trying to make lighter than air RCs. You need to be working on a much larger scale before helium begins to be able to lift significant weight.

I actually did make a typing error above though. I've corrected it now and added a note for anyone who was confused by it.

-WFA



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
For the dumb people who have trouble with English, a Liar is a person who tells Lies.
I have not told any lies on here, therefore, am not a liar
So simple even 27jd should be able to join those dots up with his crayons

so IF its not flares, AND you don't believe the guy who claimed responsibility, THEN I resort back to my original opinion which is it was lanterns which you can bitch about all you want because I've lost interest in this thread

Fed up now of repeating myself and will now allow 27jd and his friend to diss me now I've left the thread

Thanks, you've been a wonderful audience, goodnight



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mark Roazhar

so IF its not flares, AND you don't believe the guy who claimed responsibility, THEN I resort back to my original opinion which is it was lanterns which you can bitch about all you want because I've lost interest in this thread


so Lanterns would be a good explanation. It's too bad the guy who CLAIMED responsibility didn't use lanterns like you suggest. lol



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
For the dumb people who have trouble with English, a Liar is a person who tells Lies.
I have not told any lies on here, therefore, am not a liar
So simple even 27jd should be able to join those dots up with his crayons


Bold added by me. The bold part is where you throw a personal insult right off the bat. (Note, I'm not dissing you, I'm pointing out your own behavior)

I certainly have no problem with English. The English definitions for Hoax and Lie are posted above from Dictionary.com, with links to the pages.

But just for good measure, I'll cross-index the dictionary with a thesaurus, just to prove completely and without any doubt whatsoever the interconnectedness of the two verbs.

"Entry Word: hoax
Function: verb
Text: to cause to believe what is untrue — see deceive"
Source: www.merriam-webster.com...

"Entry Word: lie
Function: verb
Text:
1 to make a statement one knows to be untrue
Synonymsfabricate, fib, prevaricate
Related Wordsforswear, perjure; equivocate, fudge, palter; beguile, cozen, deceive"
Source: www.merriam-webster.com...

So obviously your insult was not only unnecessary, it was clearly unfounded.


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
so IF its not flares, AND you don't believe the guy who claimed responsibility, THEN I resort back to my original opinion which is it was lanterns which you can bitch about all you want because I've lost interest in this thread


Okay, I'll note that your now abandoning the flare theory in light of the evidence against it. I'll also note that you cursed in that section of text and it doesn't appear that it's been edited. I'll further note that this theory change is the ONLY part of your last post that was on topic (pertaining to the UFO in question in this thread).


Originally posted by Mark Roazhar
Fed up now of repeating myself and will now allow 27jd and his friend to diss me now I've left the thread


I think anyone reading the thread can see that I haven't 'dissed' you in the slightest. In fact, I stated clearly that before this thread I had a good amount of respect for your opinion. All I've done here is point out what you yourself have said, and put it into context. Other than that all I've done in this thread is provide details about the specifics of the case, and made a valid argument consistent with the facts.

Think what you want, Mark. Nobody was out to get you. Many of us can't respect hoaxers, because we understand the damage they do to the credibility of this field of research in general. But let's not pretend that I've in some way 'dissed' you here. I've shown you the utmost respect, even in disagreement. My pointing out your words is not an attack, it's a review of your argument.

-WFA



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Mark Roazhar
 


Again, WFA beat me to it, and summed up everything I would say nicely. If you go back and read a little, you'll see that you were the first to start mocking people. Odd though, that you would expect people on this forum to recieve an admitted hoaxer with open arms. Hoaxers get banned when they pull their stunts here.

It's funny about the lanterns though, on the other thread regarding this event, in the beginning alot of folks were certain it was lanterns, there was no room for argument in their eyes, then this guy comes out and says it was flares tied to balloons and then that became the obvious answer. If it were lanterns that were released during a wedding or some other kind of celebration, then that info would have come out in the beginning (although I'm sure those are illegal here due to fire danger as well), if it were a hoaxer using the lanterns, I can't imagine him/her allowing the made up flare story to steal their thunder.

Oh yeah, WFA, I think since you can say bitch on TV, it's not censored here, lol. You can say ass too, since both are technically animals...



[edit on 1-5-2008 by 27jd]



posted on May, 2 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
If it were lanterns that were released during a wedding or some other kind of celebration, then that info would have come out in the beginning (although I'm sure those are illegal here due to fire danger as well), if it were a hoaxer using the lanterns, I can't imagine him/her allowing the made up flare story to steal their thunder.


Agreed, and to add a bit of physics to that explanation, the lanterns explanation actually works in physics because the heating of the air is what is causing the lift force. So the lantern doesn't have to carry 'extra' weight like a flare to create the light. However, you get a very different visual effect with a sky lantern. See this post I did from another thread for examples:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In addition, sky lanterns are most definitely illegal in the SouthWest, for certain in California, and have been ever since the last fire season as far as I know.



Originally posted by 27jd
Oh yeah, WFA, I think since you can say bitch on TV, it's not censored here, lol. You can say ass too, since both are technically animals...


LOL good to know I guess. I still think it was a sure sign of Mark's inability to combat our argument with polite wording
But I guess it's good to know that those two words are exempt from censoring.

Just so everyone knows, LateApexer has started a thread about the lack of credibility this guy's balloon/flare story has, check it out here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm not sure what this was, but I don't think that it was balloons with flares, or chinese sky lanterns...

-WFA



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Perhaps the truth behind the craft posted recently on the Kitei YouTube documentary page:

www.youtube.com...


MitchellLeary1
1 month ago

I hate to be the fly in the ointment, but the Phoenix Lights were really a neutral boyancy airship created by two engineers from Intel. I know this because I'm a welder and helped weld the frame together (in three sections). I've tried to come forward and tell my story but I'm constantly turned away. It seems they want to perpetuate this myth as long as possible. I even know where it's being stored and could take a news crew there. But legends must live on.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join