just for the record here i am not normally the type to debunk and throw the chinese lanterns into the mix. however the actual raw video has not been posted in this thread for anyone to examine.

correct me if i am wrong

also the ufo hunters are not the end all discussion Gods imo and the only thing i have seen in the Op video is three lights in the sky that MAY or MAYNOT be chinese lanterns.

so far the witness testimony is the strongest evidence in this video posted in the Op and to rule that out would not be smart





[edit on 2-11-2008 by easynow]

Originally posted by mikesingh
I've seen with the exact same triangular formation of three strange lights. So it couldn't be just coincidence.

Couldn't it?

Any 3 of something, whatever they be, lights, objects, etc will form a triangular formation like that (or a line), as has been pointed out on this thread numerous times.

Try arranging 3 coins on a flat surface in random ways... see how they happen to fall into a triangle - uncanny, isn't it?

I just finished watching this on the UFO Hunters. I lived, literally, blocks away from the one of the witnesses on that night 8-21-04. Unfortunately I didn't see these lights. However, just to give you a small insight on the area... you could not look in the night sky for 5 min. without seeing flashing lights from aircraft flying into or out of Midway or O'hare Airports. It would really take something odd to catch the eye of someone living there.

I get a great laugh out of reading how sightings are "explained" by sceptics as natural or man made phenomena.

This does not mean the sighting IS explained, it only means people can provide a number of possible other explanations.

I also love the way sceptics work, using generalisations to cover the specific.

Don't get me wrong, I think we all need a healthy scepticism in life so not to be sucked-in to various scams etc, but the Sceptics seem to take great delight in keeping an unblanced scepticism based solely on their NEED to insure their own beliefs are see as the right ones.

Too bad for anyone else's beliefs or experiences that do not agree.... you are WRONG apparently.

Wonder if the Sceptics ever give themselves a Reality Check?

Do they ever consider they might be wrong?

Or are they so sure of Reality, by knowing it for themselvs as Fact, that they can force their small-minded beliefs on everyone else?

No point debating with an unbalanced sceptic, you will always be wrong to them anyway.

So, who cares what some self-proclaimed sceptic has to say about anything?

The self appointed description proves one thing: That they will refuse, in the face of any proof, to accept the possibility of anything existing outside of their own belief-structures.

Therefore they will always perceive with a closed mind!!

Not being open to other possibilities would make for such a sad state of reality and life that they might as well just end themselves now since nothing exists after that, apparently.

ATTENTION: UFO HUNTERS TINLEY PARK REBROADCAST TONIGHT

Just a heads up to let everyone know the episode about the Tinley Park UFO sightings will be on in a few minutes. Everyone who can should record it to be accurate when posting to this thread.

I will now have the program to refer to and will post my summarized thoughts about it in the next few days.

A couple of points that have been mentioned that I will comment on:

1) Regarding the Helicopter passing in front of the lights. I still have the episode Tivo'd and I have rewatched it multiple times. The footage with the Helicopter shows the lights as they appear more vertically, still in a triangle, but one above another. The lights are still quite a distance apart, and the Helicopter passes between the middle and the bottom light, but never in front of either. You cannot make a judgement as to whether the Helicopter is in fron of the lights, or behind them. One poster mentioned that the Helicopter definitively passed behind the lights because the lights never disppeared. That is not correct, the Helicopter definitively passed between the middle and bottom light, but never in front of or behind either.

2) Trying to figure out what the lights "were" seems backwards, shouldnt we try and eliminate what the lights "were not", and then see what is still possible?

For example, the UFO Hunters captured video from 4 or 5 seperate vantage points, miles apart in all directions, and yet exactly at the same times. They were able to see multiple perspectives of the same event, which is not often the case in these situations. Therefore, 3 stationary points of light, maintaining a fixed distance from one another for 30 minutes, clearly visible from multiple vantage points, really does eliminate a number of potential explanations.

-airplanes: unlikely to remain at fixed distances for that period of time. Also the 3 lights together never blinked. Airplane lights blink, especially over a 30 minute timeframe. Even planes flying in formation would either move away or come closer, these lights appeared to remain in the same general area.

-lanterns: again, because of videos from varying vantage points, natural drifting would be easy to detect from at least one of the videos. Perhaps it is, and they didnt show that particular video, but from the number of different videos I saw, there was no drifting whatsoever.

So where does that leave us? I dont know. Satellites? Maybe, but if so, wouldnt that be an easy debunking to prove. If the object is in fact 1500 feet across, where would that leave us? What could be that large in the sky? Dont know. If its not 1500 feet, how large was it? Given that so many people captured it from great distances apart, could it really be much smaller than the hypothesized 1500 feet? Could something 100 feet across create these images or sightings?

Thats where Im at, not wondering what it was, but what it wasnt. Once you figure out what it wasnt, and the explanations run out, then we cn see where we are. I dont know if it was extraterrestrial or not, but I am always intrigued by mass sightings where so many people are compelled to be alarmed and excited about an object, especially when these people are so different, and in this case, in so many different places.

No offense to anyone, but I believe I've said this a few times. The wind speed was about 12 mph on the night of the sighting. The wind speed on the night of the experiment was 30 mph because of a storm. I'm not sure this really has much of an impact on anything though.

Originally posted by C.H.U.D.


And Dan Aykroyed is qualified exactly how? Does having the lead role in "My Step Mother is an Alien" somehow qualify him as an expert?

If anyone with half a brain can jump to the conclusion that we are being visited, what does this say about the countless people with "whole brains" that keep misidentifying the moon, planets, stars, meteors, etc ? ATS is full of such mis identifications, and many of these people are not stupid - They simply don't have the experience to say for sure what they saw.

Dan aykroyd is a certified field investigator for mufon, and im assuming this means nothing to you at all. but there is recognition involved with dan.
i may have misquoted him on the other part but i came close enough to get my point across.

having no actuall evidence of the size of the object i would like to reference a ufo case which was recently posted by internos about flight JAL 1642? back in 1984.. the pilots discription easily puts its at about 1500 ft.

but of course its tinley park which gathers plenty of attention since we have a nice dark backdrop for lights in the sky..which gives everybody the right to speak their opinion.. but when its JAL flight 1642 or dorothy izatt..things tend to be a little hush hush when the "evidence" beams.

Originally posted by LordThumbs
Dan aykroyd is a certified field investigator for mufon, and im assuming this means nothing to you at all. but there is recognition involved with dan.

I'm sure he went through a rigorous selection and training process... the latter probably lasting many long minutes!

I'll bet hes also a competent astronomer, and has at least has some experience of scientific method... yeah right... I might believe it if I saw some evidence of it

You called, Sir! ATS chief debunker at your desposal, although I prefer the term skeptic myself....

No. I'm afraid what you have are three points of light which appear to be shifting independantly (they are clearly not one big object) in a black sky with no frame of reference. It is very hard to gauge distance or size when you have three bright points in the dark, I can demonstrate this thus. Imagine we are in a dark field. If you have a camera and point a small pocket torch you can also recreate a light of similar brightness by a huge lamp some distance away, but unless you knew that lamp was much more powerful, you would have no idea the lamps were not equal.

Earlier this year, I managed to create a UFO flap here in Britain by releasing five or six Chinese lanterns (no, I'm not say that's what these are!). Now these things were very bright- you lit some parafin soaked material and they filled with air and rose into the sky- there was no smoke from them. Once they were up there it was impossible to gauge distance or velocity- they appeared to hang still in the night sky then tear off for miles in one direction before becoming to an abrupt halt. What was actually happening of course was thay were not that high up and the wind would blow taking them a distance beofre changing direction.

This is why three bright lights in a dark sky are not conclusive- I have pictures of a plane passing near one of my lanterns- because they were som bright and much closer, they made the plane look tiny- in fact the plane was much further away but it was impossible to tell that in the dark night sky.

Now my lanterns also flared up, very brightly, this was due to the winds that were higher up, in fact we had a wonderful result, the lanterns would hang in the sky, the wind would blow, they would then brighten up and be taken by the wind, the effect of course made it look like some sort of spacecraft was powering up it's engines and moving away at a sharp speed!!! yes, it was most convincing!

So, I'm not sure why you find three lights in the sky as such an astounding piece of hardware. I can't be ceratin as to what these are, but I am pretty certain they are not ETs!

Originally posted by LordThumbs
Dan aykroyd is a certified field investigator for mufon,

How does one become "Certified" in the field of UFOlogy?