It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Phoenix Lights --- My Story.....

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 02:23 PM
reply to post by rickyrrr

Evidence should never be ignored, and I never suggested it should be. Occam's Razor would suggest a secret military aircraft, and they knew if it was sighted people would call it a UFO. That is a great cover story, although I do agree it is not smart to fly it over a populated area. That is a good question to raise about the sightings and does give the event its staying power.

As with the flares, too many people think that is the UFO, and even some who filmed the flares still think they are. Until that is cleared up, this case will be ignored. (Maybe the Air Force deliberately used flares to confuse people. That would cover up the earlier top secret craft that flew earlier in the day. Or they used the flares to cover up a possible extraterrestrial craft.)

I am open to the idea the first sighting was extraterrestrial, however, that step does require more evidence. The many eyewitnesses help keep this one open for me.

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:12 PM
Very interesting supporting information. If you ever had a chance to talk to anyone here in Phoenix that saw the "Lights" you'd be amazed at how serious they are. I know a couple of people who saw them and they are more than credible.

Anyway...I guess I just wanted to clarify that there where 2 "public" events that night. One earlier at 7pm-8pm and another at around 9:30-10pm. The first one was the real deal: The "craft" with balls or orbs of light. The second was the military flares to give credit to their cover story. A lot of people think it was just one event. By the time the military had the flares going...they would of been in "pursuit" of the object SE of Phoenix. This makes sense.

I just keep going back to why anyone would believe it was a secret military craft? Why on Earth would they fly a "secret, black-ops, experimental..." craft over a city with a metro population of over 3 million? Just doesn't make sense.

If any of you ever do get to talk to someone from Phoenix who was here I highly suggest you do it. Was a big eye opener for me. Are they aliens? Who knows....but if I were a betting man, I'd say most likely.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 02:21 PM
reply to post by PhoenixOnFIre

While I do agree with most of your post, I will offer an explanation as to why it still could be a secret military craft: Pilots do make errors, and it could of been an error to fly it over the city. To be honest, it is highly unlikely a pilot would make such an error, and they would be fired and/or disciplined for the incident.

Then again, their flight path may have been the Phoenix area, so the Air Force would see how many people would notice. The "UFO" explanation (which has been used numerous times for other top secret aircraft) would be used for this one. It is not to say it was not an extraterrestrial craft making a flyover, it is just that this one case may have such a down to earth explanation.

There is also the possibility this is the triangle that was seen in Belgium. The main problem is there are no photos or video of the first craft. That would be very helpful in this case.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:02 PM

Originally posted by kidflash2008
Then again, their flight path may have been the Phoenix area, so the Air Force would see how many people would notice. The "UFO" explanation (which has been used numerous times for other top secret aircraft) would be used for this one.

Care to share with us what information you have that the Military or Air Force 'used' the UFO explanation?

It seems to me that they actively denied any explanations whatsoever other than A-10s releasing flares, and the UFO 'explanation' came from people who saw the craft at the first event.

Curiously enough it's similar to the Stephenville incident. The people say they saw something strange, the Air Force first said they had no planes, then changed it to 10 F-16s conducting training missions.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:14 PM
There was a Marine stationed in Yuma, AZ that reported this "large triangle" to one of the UFO reporting agency the same night this incedent took place.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:00 PM
reply to post by converge

The military itself does not use UFOs as an explanation, but they let the populace do it for them. There are many CIA documents out there supporting the fact that they like the UFO stories to cover for highly classified aircraft.

It would then make sense that the Air Force would let the people report they saw a UFO. That would be the cover for a large top secret boomerang shaped craft.

It worked very well when the Air Force did not acknowledge Area 51, and would still work for other test flights of top secret craft. With so many people convinced it was an alien craft, the idea must still work quite well.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:23 PM
The last poster is correct. There are some documents in the FOIA archives which show the CIA and other government agencies were more than willing to allow sightings of top secret craft to remain as UFO stories...especially during testing periods involving stealth aircraft.

What, you mean like a huge flying triangle witnessed by probably hundreds, that blocked out the stars and move silently. I guess they all had a mass delusion and cant tell the difference between a jet and something else which even a 5 yo child can do.

Well, you do have to ask yourself, why do we have so many great videos of the 10pm flare event, and almost none of the 8pm alleged triangle event? It's a very valid question...

The only vid I could ever find of the first event is here (pics only, but I did see the vid)...but the film has no reference points, so could easily be the A-16s in formation...

As for the scrambling of the F-16s though, this can be supported by at least one eye-witness other than the original poster. Truck driver Bill Greiner, witnessed this, and the air force did later admit to sending up 2 F-16s, though they claimed they were on a routine training mission, and were not connected to the lights. (as revealed by a FOIA doc)

While there is evidence (at least) 2 F-16s were sent up, it still doesn't mean there was an alien craft over the city at 8PM. Of course, one can't disprove the witness testimony either...however, that's really all we have for the alleged first not much to go on.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:52 PM
reply to post by kidflash2008

Kidflash2008, I believe I have very similar opinions to yours. I think it is the perfect cover story, allowing the population to cry UFO (meaning not of this world) when a test aircraft is spotted.

No doubt there is life out there somewhere. To deny this would be denying our own existence.

I don't have any evidence, but to me a secret military aircraft is always more plausible.

On the other hand though, these black triangles keep showing up over populated areas & at least once that I know of very, very close to public airports. Are they really that unreliable or are they specifically testing them in these areas?

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 04:12 PM
Thank you for posting the story, and good luck in your quest for unravelling the truth Topol-M. Have you thought about lodging some FOIA requests since you know some of the things to ask for? Obama's changes to teh FOIA policy might mean you could net some really useful information and put together an impressive case for this incident!

I hate when people bring up the amount of footage of the first to second incident as a reason for not believing the first. The initial craft was travelling at speed - one witness in that video Easynow posted said it was travelling at 300-400 knots - most people don't have video cameras so would not be able to film it. Some calls were made to radio stations and people got their cameras incase it came back, hence way more footage of the flares.

Even being aware of UFO's I doubt I could catch one on film unless it hovered for an extended period, I would be too intent on watching it to run inside and grab a video camera.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 07:15 PM
Well, to be the fair, the flares were dropped (probably quite purposely) directly over a major city. Sort of convenient if you ask me. Even more convenient that it was dropped in a triangular formation. So no huge surprise that someone out of 4 million residents managed to get a video.

Secret military jet? Ludicrous imo. Not only are they not that stupid, the sightings occurred over a period of time from 6:55 to 10:30. Over a range of 300 miles, from the Nevada state line, past Phoenix, all the way to Tuscon. Are you seriously suggesting they flew a SECRET jet over that much populated territory, over that long a period of time? Heck, probably would have had to refuel! Occam's razor would suggest imo, that it is NOT a 'secret' military aircraft.

The flares were dropped imo, in that pattern, to give them a convenient excuse in an attempt to dismiss and confuse the sightings.

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 04:07 AM
reply to post by kidflash2008

Seems to me your research is grossly flawed.

I forget the name of the Real Estate fellow who's researched it for 10 years in Phoenix . . . and even the MD who's written a book . . .

there are videos of the craft's lights. They are NO WAY FLARES.

Flares are not equidistant and do not maintain a stable position at all.

The light colors are different in the flares as well.

An MD had a 35 mm movie camera and shot some good video which has been analyzed. There were obviously flares and craft--two different sets of things.

And, the airline pilot piloting his private plane ABOVE but not directly above the large craft insisted that he could LAND HIS AIRLINER ON THE CRAFT, THE CRAFT WAS SO BIG.

Researching better before pontificating can result in less embarrassment.

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 05:17 AM
I agree that they are probably flares, but one little thing niggles me. If you look at the screen & assume that a plane flying from right to left is dropping the flares, that explains why they light up in a right to left sequence, which you'd expect. But if you look to the far left then you'll see that there is already a light there.

So were there 2 planes flying at the same altitude in the dark, both with flares on board & dropping them at the same time?

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 07:00 AM
1) Why dont we see planes? They drop flares and forgive me if I am mistaken but do flares have individual timers?

Why do they light up one by one in perfect uniformed pattern and where is the aircraft that dropped them, we see the sky before they light up and no aircraft or lights for planes which are standard.

2) Why no smoke? There was a pic I cant find right now of flares dropped in sequence from A10 and you see the light illuminating the smoke clearly.

3) Why would the military do this and take months to come out with the story and why when everyone was panicking didnt they repeat it to shut them up, after all it was simple right?

4)How come the lights were in a formation of a triangle? The plane that dropped the flare would have hhad to make 2 passes and drop them perfectly to achieve the same effect, the planes would have been spotted by everyone looking for the Hailbob comet.

5) How do they keep their position so well if they are free floating and at mercy to the wind?

Sorry but this is crap, I could be wrong but there are too many things that tell me this wasnt something as simple as flares.

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 11:51 AM
I am not sure where the confusion is coming from: The most popular video taken from a hillside of the lights over Phoenix proper, ARE flares. There is no doubt. They took daytime video of the same spot. Overlayed the lights, and yes, they all disappeared as each went BEHIND the mountain range in the distance. Those were absolutely flares.

Other pictures or videos that were taken are not explained. Nor all the eyewitness testimony. See.. and this is WHY they dropped those flares imo. If this much confusion happens on a site that actually studies this stuff, how confused must Joe Public be? "OH.. it's flares? ok... (dismisses from his mind forever)." Guess the flare thing worked pretty good for them.

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by BO XIAN

Other researchers have proved that the 10pm lights are flares. As noted by other posters, the video of the flares has been applied over daytime video of the same area where the mountains are in view. The flares disappear behind the mountains. One reason planes may not have been seen is that the flares were dropped several miles away from the person taking the video.

Until the flares and the actual boomerang craft sighting gets sorted out, there will be much confusion. As one poster stated, perhaps this is exactly what the government/military want.

posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 12:17 AM
reply to post by kidflash2008

There has been expert analysis of the flares coloration and the lights of the craft's coloration

--particularly using the MD's 35mm movie film.

Also, the flares


On that score alone, there is NO COMPARISON between the flare lights and the lights of the massive craft.

posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 01:39 AM
Before the stealth bomber was revealed to the public, there were overflights at night above the length of the San Joaquin Valley (300 miles one way?), where police on patrols and citizens sitting at drive in movies saw lights moving fast, reporting ufo's.
Also, I believe it was a stealth fighter (if memory serves me correctly) that crashed at night near a campground in the Kern Canyon. The military quickly came on scene, evicting the campers, and spent days combing the closed area for every piece of the "secret" debris.

The first I recall of a triangle that night (before I heard of the Phoenix Lights) was reading a newspaper account of a family driving in northern Arizona who witnessed something they called a ufo. It wasn't till some time later that that sighting was put together as the same craft that flew over Phoenix.

Another hypothesis I have read deals with the possibility that a secret craft developed trouble and had to land at Monthan AFB, flying above the highways to do so.

It would be fun to someday find out exactly what happened.

posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 12:41 PM
Thanks for your post Topol-M, this is an important case and it has been good to hear your take on it. To me your evidence only confirms what I already suspected to be the case; the second event was a deliberate smoke screen to divert attention from the unknown craft and provide a convient cover story for any awkward questions which may have arisen from the sightings. The question now of course is what was the origin of the first craft?

Originally posted by kidflash2008
The main problem is there are no photos or video of the first craft. That would be very helpful in this case.

You have stated this several times however easynow has already posted what I believe is the only footage captured of the first craft.

posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 01:49 PM
reply to post by sonicology

I stand corrected, there is video (although hard to make out any kind of form) of the first incident. The problem now is to distinguish that with the flares of 10pm. Many disagree that the 10pm sightings were flares, but the evidence I have seen points to that. There are others who have watched the videos and come to other conclusions, but the flares is the best one (IMHO).

Thank you for correcting me, sonicology.

posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 03:41 PM

Originally posted by Aliensun
Somebody questioned why flares would be dropped while an actual "experience" was happening. The simple answer is that there are contingency plans for about every UFO event. If the flares were out of synch with where they were usually dropped, then that tells us they were ordered to drop where they did. That sorta proves the case.

It does not prove anything.

The military (of any country) is not perfect, and they make mistakes. For all we know, something could have gone wrong, and the flares were delayed fro a few seconds... enough to put them over another area all together.

I'm not saying that's what happened, because it could be due to any number of scenarios, but either way, it certainly is not proof that those flares were were they were supposed to be.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in