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.

 

UFO Triangle Formation Gilliland Ranch 01-09-08

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


They may be satellites, they may be ufo orbs. I hope you are going to try contacting them with a communicator (remember the sequence) as I tried to do what you asked of me.




posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ufoorbhunter
 


I will. My daughter and I do some stargazing every weekend. We can add something to it. Is there a better time of evening to try it?



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
So easily identified as a formation of military helicopters. Nothing special in the least. Could get in trouble if the pilots complain about the laser if it's one of those long range ones.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Contacting the ufo orbs is an any time activity, even in the light. to be honest it's more important to concentrate on accepting their reality of existence and by being positive and mentally stating that "I love you, I am your friend, I would like to meet you" then you may well make contact. Btw, many folk go on about spirit orbs taken by digi cameras etc, the ufo orb is something different and is like a probe connected to motherships. Very real and usually teavel in similar coloured pairs, white or amber/orange the majority seen, occasionally red (with laser beam), green, blue, yellow. Best of luck with the sky watch btw.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Hmmmm....I'm not so convinced that satellites are that luminous. I'm going with UFO. I could be wrong, but I've never seen satellites with uniform luminosity like that.

I do think Nasa's Jmapping is a good idea though. Good catch johnny.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyAnonymous
I'm really disturbed on a number of levels here...

But suffice it to say that it was very easy to find that these are (in my humble opinion) three Iridium satellites following the same trajectory.


I don't think those are what the video shows. Iridiums do not orbit in formation like that.

Just look at the time of the passes for Iridium 38 and 44 that you posted. Iridium 38 rose at 9:32:58 while Iridium 44 rose at 9:21:47; 11 minutes earlier! 38 was half way across the sky before 44 even rose. Iridium 44 was nearly set (at 9:37) before Iridium 81 rose at 9:35.

I'm still banking on a NOSS formation. There were several passes visible from Trout Lake on 9/1pm-9/2am. Can't nail the exact pass without the time.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
taking a closer look at jonny anonymous's radar post, the final radar pic actually looks blurred so how can i be sure the three layered radar reads are accurate?



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAttackPeople

Just look at the time of the passes for Iridium 38 and 44 that you posted. Iridium 38 rose at 9:32:58 while Iridium 44 rose at 9:21:47; 11 minutes earlier! 38 was half way across the sky before 44 even rose. Iridium 44 was nearly set (at 9:37) before Iridium 81 rose at 9:35.

I'm still banking on a NOSS formation. There were several passes visible from Trout Lake on 9/1pm-9/2am. Can't nail the exact pass without the time.


Agreed. I'm glad you caught that detail. Its a bit presumptuous on Johnny's part to be deeply disturbed whilst missing those crucial details.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 05:46 PM
link   
From a big picture perspective ... surely they wouldn't have hundreds of millions of dollars worth of satellites that close together , if / when they do start to drift slightly they run the risk of a collision or damaging one another.

Good pick up "I Attack People"



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision
Hmmmm....I'm not so convinced that satellites are that luminous. I'm going with UFO. I could be wrong, but I've never seen satellites with uniform luminosity like that.

I do think Nasa's Jmapping is a good idea though. Good catch johnny.


You definitely get satellites that have a uniform luminosity. I saw many of them tonight in a few hours of stargazing.

Surprisingly I saw the exact same formation tonight but there is no doubt in my mind they are satellites. The explanation submitted by a previous post that they are in fact the lacrosse trio of sat`s fits my sighting and the video perfectly.

For those interested I live in Lincoln UK and the formation of satellites did not change and looked exactly like that on the video. I saw it between 10pm and 11pm. I cannot give a exact time.

I hear it is quite rare to see this formation of satellites so I think its very cool I did see it let alone the fact I came across the OP's post a few hours earlier.

Unless they appear to move in the formation or show any drastic movements I don't see how anyone can jump to the conclusion that they are UFO's/alien spacecraft.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by nomadrush
Could this not be one craft with three corner lights rather than three craft?

Funny how it disappears at the end, as there seems to be no cloud and it almost as if it has gone through some kind of "gateway". Probably just my mad imagination, but who knows lol!

Ross


If it was one craft then why can you clearly see stars in between the lights ?

Satellites do appear to fade off in the exact same way as they do on the video. As the satellites enter the shadow of the Earth their magnitude decreases very rapidly. A gateway is a bit of a jump.

It seems to be the general consensus that around 95% of sightings have a terrestrial origin, so why do some people assume every sighting is a real alien craft ?



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by bloodsearch
You definitely get satellites that have a uniform luminosity. I saw many of them tonight in a few hours of stargazing.

I hear it is quite rare to see this formation of satellites so I think its very cool I did see it let alone the fact I came across the OP's post a few hours earlier.


I'm not saying 100% that they are UFO's, I'm just saying there are some gaps in your argument that they are 100% satellites. Perhaps a little homework into this event could be useful on your part.

1)Formation in a triangular shape. NOSS formation is a more probable explanation.

2)Given NASA's reputation, it would be unsafe to orbit 3 satellites that close together.

3) NASA's JMapping info. reveals the rising and setting of satellites in the area does not match the time/space coordinates of filmed objects.





[edit on 4-9-2008 by NightVision]



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision

1)Formation in a triangular shape. NOSS formation is a more probable explanation.

2)Given NASA's reputation, it would be unsafe to orbit 3 satellites that close together.

3) NASA's JMapping info. reveals the rising and setting of satellites in the area does not match the time/space coordinates of filmed objects.





[edit on 4-9-2008 by NightVision]



1) NOSS formations are satellite formations. The formation is triangular because, well, any three points form a triangle.

2) Close orbits are probably less dangerous than widely differing orbits. In either case collisions are extremely unlikely.

3) I'm not familiar with JMapping but it is unlikely that it can be used to track every satellite in orbit.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision

Originally posted by IAttackPeople

Just look at the time of the passes for Iridium 38 and 44 that you posted. Iridium 38 rose at 9:32:58 while Iridium 44 rose at 9:21:47; 11 minutes earlier! 38 was half way across the sky before 44 even rose. Iridium 44 was nearly set (at 9:37) before Iridium 81 rose at 9:35.

I'm still banking on a NOSS formation. There were several passes visible from Trout Lake on 9/1pm-9/2am. Can't nail the exact pass without the time.


Agreed. I'm glad you caught that detail. Its a bit presumptuous on Johnny's part to be deeply disturbed whilst missing those crucial details.


The photos clearly show the times of the rise and setting of the satellites.. duh.. Johnny didn't miss anything here..

All of you are missing a vital point here.. watch the video again.. Does one light appear to travel slower than the other two? And the timing is actually correct for several minutes of viewing with all three being in a triangular formation and staying so for several minutes. And if it were a "real" luminous object, would they not be limited to just the Sun's reflection for luminosity? Why do they all fade out in the same area as the Earth's shadow..?

James is now using the same NightVision device as I was using when I was visiting. He was so impressed by it that he bought one the next day.. So lets cut him some slack.. I've taped many an object that turned out to be satellites, and probably will again and again.. And if I had been there, I'd probably would've taped it myself because how often does one get to shoot such an event? Besides.. I've taped many a satellite that then stopped, and changed direction.. so one never knows..

Again my 2 cents... I could be a little off base here becaus of lack of sleep.. so while your at it.. cut me some slack too


Johnny



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I'd just like to suggest....the satellite hypothesis is intriguing. Formation flying in night 'refueling' operations? Sounds very dangerous, but likely to be practiced.

I've flown formation (light airplanes, daylight VFR, of course) and I was ALWAYS the following airplane, based on my experience. Not comparing myself to an airshow group like the Red Birds or the Blue Angels, of course...in those cases the LEAD MUST be the leader!

Back on point....the triangular 'formation' seemed to change shape, slightly. AND, I noticed that none of the stars were blocked out, which seems to rule out a solid triangular craft, with a light at each point.

Just my observations.


EDIT...spelling....old keyboard!


[edit on 9/4/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision

2)Given NASA's reputation, it would be unsafe to orbit 3 satellites that close together.


Apparently, NOSS satellites are separated by dozens of kilometers, at least. They appear closer together than they really are. They also orbit at different altitudes. And NOSS isn't NASA, it's military; if that makes any difference to you.


Originally posted by NightVision
3) NASA's JMapping info. reveals the rising and setting of satellites in the area does not match the time/space coordinates of filmed objects.


We don't know what time these objects were observed. All we have is a date of 9/1/2008 and who knows if that's even correct, really.

Also, J-PASS does not appear to give information for NOSS satellites. Heavens Above has some of them. Maybe J-PASS just doesn't list military sats or maybe it doesn't list them because they are supposed to be classified.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by IAttackPeople
 


Hey, IAttack....

Good info!

Regarding satellites, in formation. You are absolutely correct.

As observed from the surface of the Earth, the satellites in question would (mostly) have to be illuminated by the Sun in order to be seen, right?

And secondly, if they were at variously different 'heights' in their respective orbits, their speeds would obviously vary. Not that it would be obvious to the casual observer, in the course of a few minutes, as they happen to pass overhead.

To clarify.....three objects, deployed in an orbital path, at the same 'height' above the surface...and assuming no relative motion between the three....would, assuming no interference, stay in relative position for a very long time. Of course, after many, many years, there might be a gravitational attraction to each other, and they will tend to creep towards each other....but not in a human's lifetime, if they are far enough apart to begin with.

But....as think as Earth's atmosphere may be at those heights...it is still, while thin, they're in LEO (Low Earth Orbit). So, eventually over time, anything in LEO will find its orbit degrade to the point that it will decelerate, and eventually re-enter. To burn up.

edit... Adult ADD in punctuation and spelling....





[edit on 9/4/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyAnonymous

All of you are missing a vital point here.. watch the video again.. Does one light appear to travel slower than the other two?


That's a good point, JA.

I've seen it noted in my reading on these satellite groups that the geometry does appear to change as they make their way across the sky. I suppose that since the individual satellites are at different altitudes they will appear to move in relation to one another simply due to parallax and perspective as they move toward, over, and away from the observer.



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Video seems to be gone, does anyone have another link? I'd like to see this one.

er no single-liner

[edit on 9/4/2008 by eNumbra]



posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by eNumbra
 


HEY! YOU'RE RIGHT! The user took the video down!

What the... I wonder why they did that? It was a really nice video even if it wasn't E.T.

That's a shame. Did anybody cap it?




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join