NBC Dateline and UFO's, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 06:55 PM by LateApexer313
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



reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 06:55 PM 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]


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 07:32 PM by hinky
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 posted on 18-5-2008 @ 07:33 PM by Monsterenergy791
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)


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 07:52 PM by JeepGal
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 posted on 18-5-2008 @ 08:38 PM 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?


reply posted on 19-5-2008 @ 07:54 AM by starwatcher1
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


reply posted on 19-5-2008 @ 08:22 AM by spikedmilk
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...
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Aliens Among Us ...Video
  Posted 7 days ago with 65 member flags
Moon: inexplicable phenomena. Luna Cognita video.
  Posted 15 days ago with 60 member flags
UFOs \'Escort\' Mexican Aircraft - Radar Confirmed.
  Posted 10 days ago with 31 member flags
The Dyatlov Pass Incident--Russia\'s Mountain of Death
  Posted 17 days ago with 28 member flags
The Aurora, Texas UFO Incident (1897)
  Posted 1 days ago with 25 member flags