UFO sighting Finland,12.5.2008 broke to news

How do you determine the speed of it? If it moves away or towards the camera there is no way of estimating it's speed. Besides the quality of the camera can also alter the lights alot.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
How do you determine the speed of it? If it moves away or towards the camera there is no way of estimating it's speed. Besides the quality of the camera can also alter the lights alot.

True! but if its moving away you would not see the landing lights under the nose, it seems to be moving right to left with a very slight decent at one point.

OK we all know the quality is not that good. I will state now that I work at a domestic and international airport. Being the person that I am I always look skywards due to the aircraft we work with and trails that we have to do with them. This is not anytype of aircraft lights that I have seen before.

We here at my workplace see strange lights near aircrafts that are landing normally early mornings and evenings but have spotted a few during the day. This has nothing to do with the sun light hitting them as the Pilots have shown us and pointed this out to us before so we can see the difference. This is most likely the real deal.

I do respect all post and I'm not having a go at anybody.

Maybe we need to get experts on to this. I will show this to the pilots and ask them what they think? Will keep you posted on the answers that I get back from them.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


When you say, "The energy must be in the ether...", do you mean the ionosphere?

Well, we know Tesla had the technology or theory at least 100 years ago.

I saw many silver orbs last summer, so far this year nothing.

I believe a lot of what we're seeing is man made, they could not ever let us know about such technology.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


LOL. Hi people! So the Finnish ufo investigators in SUT made complete idiots out of them self stating in a Finnish newspaper that, yes this was the real deal UFO? And now, a little preasure comes on, and no...there was no UFO. Dont get fooled you guys!
I know what i saw, and i STAND BY IT TO THE END! NON OF THESE PEOPLE WERE THERE! They are all speculating. I will NEVER back down from my claim that i saw unindentified flying object , that looked almost "alive". Nothing i ever seen before and maybe ever will. And ive seen many planes allright. This was no where close to it. These guys in "Finnish ufo investigators" are simply in this for the fame... I experienced this and NO ONE can shout from his livingroom this wasnt the real deal, because they werent there. By the way..i couldnt care less how this thread goes.. I have seen what i is going on, and thats it. Im just so glad its out in the media now. And no one can control the truth..

Forell

reply to post by Forell


Mr. Forell,

You should keep an eye out for more sightings, I think the chances are good you will see it again.

Did you say it did something to your zoom mechanism on your camera? Keep a compass near you next time it flies by.


Did it fly near trees? I wonder if those trees have been affected by the thing.
Is it possible to find out?

[edit on 23-5-2008 by Electro38]

reply to post by hande


Hande registered just to debunk me.. ? I just died from laughter... Sorry, its out in the media already. You cant stop the truth from spreading. Hande was not there. Hande hopes he was there. But he wasnt. I know what i saw and so does the majority in here.

Ive been mailing with Nick Pope, whos the former ufo investigator at British Ministry of defense. And even HE finds my case very intresting and is asking for updates about this. He has seen the video. So have many other aviation experts who knows how planes look like. Those of you, who have seen this phonomena, you know how it is. So the the people who werent there, can go on debunking this from their livingroom couch. I was there.

Forell

It's already been pretty much established that this was a Ryan Air 737 from London, landing at precisely the time the video was shot. The object was moving fairly horizontantally, so it must have been almost if not actually touching the runway.

The runway at Tampere Airport is made of asphalt. Even in Finland, if the sun is shining, asphalt will absorb a certain amount of heat throughout the day. You are seeing these lights through trees, towards dusk, through low level atmosphere and heat haze at a distance with a low resolution camera. As I've already said many times on this thread, you will get false colour and image distortion.

I think the argument that Forell had only been there three months and probably didn't know there was an airport across the lake, is a bit lame. The aircraft flying out of that airport would probably continue over the town at a relatively low altitude. Apart from that, we now know that Bjorn Borg who is a well known Finnish author, told him he was pointing his camera at the airport. Though he continued the charade with us afterwards. Any anomalous small lights accompanying the aircraft upon landing would not be visible at that range.

Again, as I've said many times, he was pointing his camera directly towards that little gap in the trees - exactly where he knew the aircraft lights would appear - because that's where they always appear whenever a 737 lands with its external lights on.

I was angry with him because he was making a fool out of all those who were kind enough to accept his story. It was a prank - a hoax.

I've been battling this out on two forums, contacted Nick Pope and the Aamulehti Newspaper - believe me, he's made fools of a great many other people too. What really annoys me is that those who do persevere and expose these prangsters, are labelled as skeptics whilst doing so. I passionately believe in the reality of advanced aerial craft, but this kind of immature activity effectively overshadows rare and real events. It also innevitably leads to a 'Cry Wolf' situation.

Even after all this we will still hear those claiming he was sharing a beautiful experience - He was there - He winessed it. It would be unkind of me to suggest some people are just occasionally a little too naive and deserve to be sucked into these hoaxes, so I won't.

When all said and done - everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I suppose we should be philosophical about it and mark it down to experience. I would be very interested to find out what his local paper publishes over the next few days though.

You have my full support Forell , i believe your video is true , and i know how do you feel , just ignore stupid people who think we are all stupids , and just let them work

If it was indeed a plane, then he should be able to see this same thing again, perhaps often.

Since it has been said that there is a busy airport there, then if he keeps watch in the same area he should be able to see a plane create the same effects.

(I don't think it was a plane, but if it was then this strange optical illusion should occur again when another plane begins its descent in the same area over the lake and behind the trees.)

reply to post by Myrdyn


This was a hoax?

Are we absolutely sure?

Someone would have to be a borderline sociopath to actually contact a newspaper with a hoax.

[edit on 23-5-2008 by Electro38]

reply to post by Electro38


I'm absolutely sure - I've no idea how you feel about it.

Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, he 'tested the water' here first.


[edit on 23/5/08 by Myrdyn]

Originally posted by Electro38
reply to post by Myrdyn

 

This was a hoax?

Are we absolutely sure?

Someone would have to be a borderline sociopath to actually contact a newspaper with a hoax.

[edit on 23-5-2008 by Electro38]

Are we?

I can't rank these people out and lower than their desperate exclamations
remind us on Project Blue book trainees.

My last purchase of government lies.

Now we get them free with a sprinkling of zero intellectual objectivity.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


I totally agree with you Tes - Project Bluebook was a 'sham' too.

[edit on 23/5/08 by Myrdyn]

reply to post by Myrdyn


Yikes...

Well, I agree with what you say about the general perception of skepticism in the forum. Too many people don't understand that skepticism is essential when trying to discover the truth. I believe in ufo's, etc. However I also proceed in my beliefs with a certain amount skepticism. This prevents me from automatically "buying into" anything that I wish to be true.

We shouldn't equate skepticism with being "dismissive". It's the people who are automatically "dismissive" who are to be chastised, not skeptics.

I think this ambiguity is occurring because the true definition of skepticism is being misunderstood.

alright so if its a plane, then a damn plane is ganna land there again, at some point in time, when it is fairly dark out... all you do is get a picture of the plane landing, same camera, and see how it goes... if its the same then, boom, its a plane. If its different, then whammy its something else...

for the record, I don't think its a plane but you never know. I myself have never seen a UFO in person, and I actually try and go outside and find em, but they're not around this part, or theyre avoiding me! Hell, I only see a plane fly by 3 times a month out here.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne



A little off topic but since you're here I thought I'd ask here.

You mentioned previously, concerning gravity, that "the energy must be in the ether..."

I was just wondering if by "ether", do you mean the ionosphere?

Excellent presentation (physics) on your youtube page, enjoyed it.


[edit on 23-5-2008 by Electro38]

Originally posted by Electro38
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

 

When you say, "The energy must be in the ether...", do you mean the ionosphere?

Well, we know Tesla had the technology or theory at least 100 years ago.

I saw many silver orbs last summer, so far this year nothing.

I believe a lot of what we're seeing is man made, they could not ever let us know about such technology.

Like the so called electron gas around the nucleus.

What else is in the air besides what has been removed scientifically
and documented.

Tesla said gaseous ether of coupled charges and mag lines from
circulating currents.

An example, approximate numbers:

The Hydrogen molecule, H2, will dis associate to two Hydrogen atoms, 2H,
when 100 cal/ gram mole heat is applied.
When the atoms combine to the molecule 1000 times more heat is
GIVEN OFF.

Where did the energy come from.

Relativism says equal energy to separate and to combine.

I mean this is the simplest of atoms and never explained except
by a theory they will not teach us.

ED:

A little off topic but since you're here I thought I'd ask here.

You mentioned previously, concerning gravity, that "the energy must be in the ether..."

I was just wondering if you meant the ionosphere?

Caught you.. hope is explains ether energy.
See some of my posts on other threads for an ether theory link.
See my profile for sort of classical physics that produces a
Billion Billion tons of force electrically, and the associated
acceleration.





[edit on 5/23/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

reply to post by Electro38


There is a world of difference between a 'skeptic' and someone who is skeptical of something. The skeptic will deny any evidence, the person who is skeptical is looking for evidence.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne



Interesting point. When you say "electron gas", do you mean electron cloud?

(I'm just trying to understand. If the two are the same, electron gas & electron cloud, I think I see what you're saying.)