Popular Mechanics Down Plays UFO Subject In The Latest March Issue

I can't believe these effing people...

Link to the article

Quote:
"Flares have a long association with UFO sightings. One night in late February 1942, the sky over Southern California lit up with strange blinking lights near various defense plants. In what has become known as the Battle of Los Angeles, the Navy unloaded four batteries of antiaircraft artillery at what turned out to be a balloon carrying a red flare. A decade ago, mysterious lights seen by thousands of Phoenix residents were actually leftover flares dumped by A-10 pilots with the Maryland Air National Guard."

What about the front page picture on the Los Angeles Times?

What about the original CBS recording that stated the path of travel of the object?

Why would the US State Department waste resources and fire anti-aircraft guns into the air at a "balloon carrying a flare".

Come on Popular Mechanics, do your research or don't get into the subject.

I bet these guys haven't even looked through the MUFON database of sighting submissions.

This article probably exists as part of a government controlled media network designed to control your thoughts and knowledge on the existance of ETs.

Since a lot of smart people buy Popular Mechanics, the powers that be would prefer if these smart people (who could be smart enough to prove the existance of ETs) do not press on their research or study.

reply to post by Nick_X


No, but this article was probably written by someone whose beliefs are totally cemented and who could explain a 30 minute sighting by a jet pilot with swamp gas.

"In extreme examples, called ducting, the temperature inversion can bend the beam all the way back to the Earth’s surface, so a surprising radar blip turns out to be a hill or a building. With the introduction of more advanced filtering software over the past decade, the number of UFOs attributed to false returns has decreased significantly.

Former Air Force pilot, astronomer and longtime UFO skeptic James McGaha believes that some such form of radar scatter was responsible for the returns that MUFON interpreted as a solid object."

The article forgot to mention, that "ducting" happens only in some strange weather conditions. Someone who has the weather data and who is experienced with radars, can easily distinguish a ducting from a real signal.


source is here: Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, former head of the United States Air Force Project Blue Book.

www.ufologie.net...

Pure bunk/trash IMO.

The last time I checked the SR-71, F-117, and U-2 all made a loud engine noise and don't hover or make 90 degree turns like UFOs have been doing since the 1940's, nor do they take up the entire sky as you walk underneath them (IE Ricky Sorrells sighting)

[edit on 20-2-2009 by ufo reality]

These are the same people who"debunked" the 9/11 truth search. Nothing but propaganda

20 years ago Popular Mechanics was a great magazine. It was thick with real content.

Today it's an anemic, silly little joke of a magazine, with nothing but advertising for the latest expensive little gadgets... and then, when you actually do find an article or two buried among the ads, the articles themselves work just like an advertising billboard for even more products the modern man "can't live without."

Now, rather than being a source of information and ideas, it's a long-winded commercial in print.

I used to love that magazine.

Insults to the tens of thousands of real eye witness's. They must take the 'common folk' as utter morons. Withing SECONDS of seeing a terrestrial craft 99% of the population could identify it as something normal.
When I was at an airshow last year some 'soccer mom' next to me was spotting the jets like 10 miles off in the distance before I even saw them, and she had no problem knowing what a jet fighter looks, sounds & behaves like. And I thought I was the 'expert' compared to her!

reply to post by weknowyouknow


Popular Mechanics and Popular Science have had many articles debunking UFOs. This is nothing new, and the explanation they give is laughable. I noticed they did not show the famous picture of the Battle of Los Angeles, which does show a saucer shaped craft.

reply to post by kidflash2008


no it doesnt show it you merely see what you want to see in that picture. The newspaper never claimed it captured anything in that image other than search lights. Nor did the photographer and they had access to the original negatives and 1st generation prints.

40 years later after evryone is dead some guy claims there is an object in the image. Beleivers are so desperate to believe they follow that line of thought like sheep.



[edit on 20-2-2009 by yeti101]

reply to post by yeti101


First, I am not a blind believer. (There are some here who have called me a disinformation agent because I do not believe every thing here.) Second, I have seen the photograph and it does appear to be a disc or saucer type craft in the middle.

I am not saying it was extraterrestrial, but I am saying something was there that caused the military to shoot at it for that time.

BTW, Frank Warren's blog has a person who did witness the incident as stated here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by kidflash2008


there are many many witnesses but pro ufo websites only give you the descriptions that fit the alien spaceship theory.

Is it sensible or objective to ignore all the other witnesses who claim to have seen something else in favour of your preferred hypothesis?

what about the witness who saw 25 planes in a v shape formation? you probably didnt know about that becuase no ufo website will quote him. i'm interested to know how you deal with such conflicts


[edit on 20-2-2009 by yeti101]

reply to post by yeti101


Can you put in a link to the witness? I read all the details about UFO incidents. One of the best things going for the UFO over Los Angeles was it was reported before the flying saucer mania swept the nation. The actual report that was broadcast on radio is good too.

As I have stated before, I am not saying it was an alien craft. It is just an excellent case of an unknown object over Los Angeles during wartime.

Flares have a long association with UFO sightings. One night in late February 1942, the sky over Southern California lit up with strange blinking lights near various defense plants. In what has become known as the Battle of Los Angeles, the Navy unloaded four batteries of antiaircraft artillery at what turned out to be a balloon carrying a red flare. A decade ago, mysterious lights seen by thousands of Phoenix residents were actually leftover flares dumped by A-10 pilots with the Maryland Air National Guard

Wow, that's some balloon, as it took a pounding from anti-aircraft fire for almost an hour... Not to mention, flares don't burn long at all...you think these guys were firing rounds up into the sky that long for nothing?

Yes, the Phoenix Lights (10pm) event was shown conclusively to be flares (but not the mysterious 8pm event)...but I've seen NO conclusive evidence (nor does common sense or photo evidence) support a balloon carrying a flare.

[edit on 20-2-2009 by Gazrok]

Originally posted by weknowyouknow
I can't believe these effing people...

Link to the article

That kind of smug obtuseness is infuriating in any arena. I can't even read it, it galls me so much.

Popular Mechanics is great if your into DIY outhouses, bird baths and don't have access to a computer to view all the gadgets the profile. Other than that, it may be useful as substitute toilet paper; although I can't confirm that...yet

yeti101: Out of 25 planes, at least a few would have been shot down, so that can't be what they were targeting, could it? Radar data also proves that there was something there. Maybe it wasn't alien, but how many planes at the time could have avoided all that flak?
There's a recently active topic about the Battle of LA here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And on topic, of course. It's always acceptable to downplay the UFO subject. I think people are just threatened by the idea of aliens. They think aliens would somehow make them less special, so they treat the subject as a joke. We are the almighty humans! There couldn't possibly be another intelligent race among the billions of galaxies in the universe!

[edit on 20-2-2009 by GrayFox]

popular mechanics should change it's name to popular skeptic. disinformation is the name of their game

It's Popular Mechanics.... what did you expect?

Who cares what they have to say about UFOs?

wrote a post on their board. cliff notes version...popular mechanics is owned by Hearst Publications. Hearst has been dishing lies and disinfo to the public literally since the sinking of the Maine and the Spanish American War. It's disgusting

This kind of Occam's Razor mistake has gone on for ages...sadly PM has fallen for it again. They ignore other observations in order to fulfill their anti-Sherlockian thinking of wanting to fit their pre-conceived answer to the crime instead of exploring the crime to come up with an answer.

Flat-Earth thinking at its worst...hopefully they can give up worshiping McGaha and Shermer's belief systems to give them comfort. Sure most UFO reports are not aliens, but come on...these UFOs have been around for longer than those aircraft, plus we still have reports that don't fit technology we have. The "military" catch-all excuse is pretty lame.