NBC Dateline and UFO's

Can't wait for the Phoenix lights, I'm sure they skeptics will throw out the "flares" explanation.


Got to go, it's on now!!

What a load of bunk. Little green men drawings superimposed over every thing. Mocking the entire subject. I'm sorry I watched. It just ticked me off!!

Oh and Michaell Sheaffer... good God man.... cut your hair!

[edit on 5/18/2008 by JeepGal to correct the spelling of the skeptic's name.]

[edit on 5/18/2008 by JeepGal]

reply to post by Monsterenergy791


Squid boats Flares from oil wells that show up on radar thousands of feet up in the sky Balloons with flares A group of private pilots flying in formation, shutting off their lights to "hoax" a UFO for many years, over 3 states

If you don't laugh you'll

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Click on each of the sightings on the left hand side and "vote" will pop up underneath.

I voted. So should you.

I also sent a message to Dateline MSNBC and told them how much I thought the show stunk. I told them how they could have made it better and all the stuff they "left out".

You can't cram 10 UFO sightings into a 1 hour show. It just doesn't work!

[edit on 18-5-2008 by ufo reality]

And they could have had some of the Belgium military officials from that time talk on the show. They're rather open about talking about it and admit they were solid real aircraft they couldn't keep up with. This show was a joke!

The Phoenix Lights of 1997. Military flares, I KNEW that explanation by the skeptics was coming!


Even the governor isn't a skeptic of this event and many, many other people of Arizona. That tells you something...

wouldnt the flares illuminate the balloons or the parachutes if thats what it was? I would think that of the many "flares" atleast one of the baloons or whatever would have reflected some light which could have been seen?

Originally posted by Fibonacci11235
wouldnt the flares illuminate the balloons or the parachutes if thats what it was? I would think that of the many "flares" atleast one of the baloons or whatever would have reflected some light which could have been seen?

Flares wouldn't just sit still in the sky and then all of the sudden start moving forward keeping the same altitude. If they were dropped off by airplanes as they demonstrated, the lights would've appeared much faster. I don't buy that explanation.

I voted on Dateline's site and noticed that so far, with exception of the Gulf Breeze sightings, there were more voters who voted that each case was a true UFO as opposed to something man-made or that each of them were hoaxes.

I'm surprised that the Chicago O'Hare UFO sighting was not one of the 10 considering that it's so recent and that it was a mass sighting. Why didn't they include it?

A couple of explanations were reasonable. Several were just stupid.

I really enjoyed the professional debunker, he's the perfect example of American education at it's finest.

Phoenix flares are a joke. Maybe they have newer and improved flares, from the 70's to 90's when I saw flares in just about every condition except snow. They just aren't flares. That one is a UFO.

They must have god awful high gas burning stacks in Latin America. So high that they are at altitude, but low enough not to require aviation lights. This goes back to the education system and now including critical thinking.

The Australia - New Zealand film is old. Have heard all the theories over the years. The boats mentioned do put out lots of light. Problem with that debunking was not aired, but left out to maker it sound better than it is. The lights are directed at the surface of the water, not just out lighting up the boat or shining at the sky, it is a waste of light used as bait. The other lights on these craft light up the boat. These are normal floods and running lights. Also, a person that can perform a little math can figure out how long it takes for an airplane to lose sight of an object on the water surface, just from the natural curvature of the Earth. BTW: it's shorter than what the video shows when all the goes into's are done. That part was figured out back in the 80's.

All in all, it was nothing more than I would expect from a network starving for ratings and reaching for an audience.

At least the debunker didn't use swamp gas. He produced his own methane with some of his exhaustive research.

reply to post by wang_ke_~



They should of included the Chicago O'Hare UFO in my mind, but IMHO, I think they could of done a much better job in making this. definitly in the Stephensville case, they could of elaborated much more on it--but the program is only an hour long--one of the reasons why i was amazed in the show (2 hours would of been better)

These skeptics that they have on here tonight are driving me nuts They remind me of Monday afternoon "arm chair quarterbacks" They can always figure plays after everything is said and done. Wonder how much they get paid to spred dis-info

Originally posted by ufo reality
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Click on each of the sightings on the left hand side and "vote" will pop up underneath.

I voted. So should you.

I also sent a message to Dateline MSNBC and told them how much I thought the show stunk. I told them how they could have made it better and all the stuff they "left out".

You can't cram 10 UFO sightings into a 1 hour show. It just doesn't work!

[edit on 18-5-2008 by ufo reality]

I'm actually rather annoyed even with the voting. Your choices:

* Alien Spacecraft
* Misidentification of man-made object
* Hoax

How about the possibility of a man-made object not previously known? You can't exactly misidentify something if it has never been made known to the public.

The entire show was a huge disappointment. The Phoenix lights incident for example. They failed to mention that the lights that were video-taped that night was only half of the sighting. There was a V-shaped craft that was seen by many witnesses over the area that had nothing to do with the lights.

They made light of the whole subject. As I expected they would. But it was still disappointing to see.

reply to post by spikedmilk


Hi spikedmilk! I was wondering,what do mean by the Vaticans new look/perspective on things?What are you talking about? What is the Vaticans new look/perspective on things?

Originally posted by gauncents

Originally posted by starwatcher1
Can't believe there isn't more interest in this... just a bump to give people "heads up"

There isn't anymore interest because we all know what 3 things will happen.

1. They will take a bunch of videos that have either been debunked here or somewhere else.
2. They will have some video expert show everyone how they were hoaxed.
3. They will all have a good laugh at our expense.

Damn I'm good! I must be clayvoiant!

What a piss poor show. Piss poor produced as well.

Also, whoever hosted the show, had on a really, and I mean really piss poor outfit!

reply to post by Monsterenergy791

reply to post by Monsterenergy791

Whats Santa bringing this year stupid lib?

I'll take what I can get, and add it to the whole.

The Vatican, UK information release, CNN, and Dateline. All giving attention to this subject within days of each other.

The skeptics always drive us nuts, but getting the message out even with the constant little green men references is better than nothing.

This vote on Dateline could be a trial balloon so to speak. It could be giving the Government an indication where the average person is right now on this subject.

As an ATS member, you are in a different league than the average Joe. My gut tells me there is a little CYA going on here, and we could be getting this now for a reason.

Vote on Dateline!

reply to post by seawolf197


I agree. Could be the media is trying to bring all these sightings to main stream. I wonder myself why so much attention is being given to the UFO subject

Originally posted by truthfreedomjustice
reply to post by spikedmilk

 

Hi spikedmilk! I was wondering,what do mean by the Vaticans new look/perspective on things?What are you talking about? What is the Vaticans new look/perspective on things?

Hello there truthfreedomjustice, by that I was referring to the recent approval from the Pope saying it was okay for Catholics to believe in extraterrestrial life.

www.abovetopsecret.com...