Insulting UFO article on Yahoo! News

news.yahoo.com...

They seem to think these sprites can form into solid metal spheres and triangles..maybe not. What a joke.

reply to post by atsbeliever


I wouldn't worry about it, these more popular type websites, always publish garbage when it comes to the UFO subject.

Funny that today they say "natural explanations".

The other day, I was reading another article on 'Yahoo' that said that UFOs were actually b-2's and other "secret military craft".

So two different debunking attempts in one week alone.

Originally posted by atsbeliever What a joke.

[edit on 23-2-2009 by ufo reality]

I have seen red sprites during a particularly strong August T-storm in upstate NY probably around 12-15 years ago.

While it was unbelievably fascinating to watch, and very beautiful, I don't think it matched what most people state they have seen when discussing UFOs.

The lights I saw during the storm were like red balls that would appear intermittently and were pretty clearly part of the weather system. They didn't "fly around" or move but rather flashed in and out.

I don't think they're a valid explanation for the phenomena people see in the sky at all. They are their own phenomenon,yes, but quite different from what people report at UFO sightings.

Apples and oranges imo.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

To use this as an explanation for UFO's still doesnt account for the hundreds and hundreds of sightings that have occured whenever thunderstorms conditions dont play a role.

I know disinformation when I see it.

Its just Yadalahoohoo's attempt to rekindle old outdated swamp gas and Venus theories. The sprite theory is nothing new and just as old.

YAHOOOOHOOOO!!!


Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by Bunch
I know disinformation when I see it.

I wouldn't go as far as to call it 'disinformation'. But no doubt, it's a very unfair assessment of the UFO phenomenon.

Whether there is actually an insidious agenda behind the publishing of these particular articles, I don't know.

reply to post by atsbeliever


This unfounded short essay will never work for those who are too intelligent to have a fraud perpertrated upon them. This essay can not explain the truth about ufo's and only helps to insight the uneducated to continue to aggravate me. I have a great looking trash can this essay would look nice in.

reply to post by Majorion


It is a classic tactic. Use a very popular medium, such as a magazine, tv show or website. Word it up with some fancy theories by some unknown but reputable phd and your set to slam and bam the gullable into believing an elephant can hang by holding a daisy by its trunk off a cliff.


Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by RFBurns
Use a very popular medium,Word it up with some fancy theories by some unknown but reputable phd and your set to slam and bam the gullable into believing an elephant can hang by holding a daisy by its trunk off a cliff.

Exactly,

Yes, this would definitely pose a big problem to anybody whom hasn't researched the subject, in-depth before, for themselves.

Whom would NOT trust the publishing's of a reputable website like Yahoo?

yea exactly and who the hell would mistake one for an Alien Spaceship if they ever saw one. And I have never ever heard of or met someone who has actually witnessed a 'sprite' don't you have to be up at like 20,000 feet?!
Utter poppycock!

Originally posted by Djarums
I have seen red sprites during a particularly strong August T-storm in upstate NY probably around 12-15 years ago.

While it was unbelievably fascinating to watch, and very beautiful, I don't think it matched what most people state they have seen when discussing UFOs.

The lights I saw during the storm were like red balls that would appear intermittently and were pretty clearly part of the weather system. They didn't "fly around" or move but rather flashed in and out.

I don't think they're a valid explanation for the phenomena people see in the sky at all. They are their own phenomenon,yes, but quite different from what people report at UFO sightings.

Apples and oranges imo.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

reply to post by Majorion


I will call it disinformation when scientist try to explain things that professional train pilots has witness first hand, they are trying to say that this "dumb" pilots dont know "sprites" from objects that behave out of the ordinary.

After reading many of the comments, I have serious doubts that most here have bothered reading the article. If you actually read the article, you will see it explicit in stating that this does not explain all UFO sightings. It says "some."

Originally posted by Bunch
I will call it disinformation when scientist try to explain things that professional train pilots has witness first hand, they are trying to say that this "dumb" pilots dont know "sprites" from objects that behave out of the ordinary.

How is this disinformation? Disinformation implies the information is false and being passed as truth. Do you have any information that suggests the findings of Dr. Price are wrong or that he is somehow lying?

This is less a case of disinformation and more a case of bad-headline writing by a sensation-seeking editor who knows it will hook people like us. The article is careful to point out that this does not explain all UFO sightings...

The cause or function of the flashes remains murky, but Price suggested that they could explain some of the UFO reports which have cropped up over the years.

Which may be correct. It may explain some UFO sightings; no one can, nor should, deny that.

A much better headline for this article would be "A Natural Explanation Found For Some UFOs." Clunky, but it far more accurate. In truth, this article has little to do with UFOs, other than the spin put on it by the writer and editor to sensationalize it and draw in readers.

The problem with this to me is that a lot of people who read it academics or not will get the idea that some ufo sightings can be explained so all ufo sightings can be explained. They write these articles in such a way as to make it seem as if all ufo sightings are nothing but lights in the night sky. They tell nothing of sightings under different circumstances.
Of course we need skepticism. But it is not science to explain a phenomenon in such a way: "some ufo sightings might fit into this category and we might have found an explanation for those few. All the while we are ignoring the many other circumstances that these objects are seen under.
It gives uninformed readers the impression that the case is closed and no ufo reports are better than this.

Originally posted by Bunch
To use this as an explanation for UFO's still doesnt account for the hundreds and hundreds of sightings that have occured whenever thunderstorms conditions dont play a role.

Nor does it attempt to, outside of a poor headline.

Of course, you would know that if you had bothered to read the article.

Originally posted by RFBurns
Its just Yadalahoohoo's attempt to rekindle old outdated swamp gas and Venus theories. The sprite theory is nothing new and just as old.

You're so right, RFBurns. There has never been a single misidentification of natural phenomenon. Every UFO sightings is on a genuine alien craft.

reply to post by SaviorComplex


We going in circles here posting the same in two threads!!

I agree with your assessment about the editing. But I still would take the account of a well trained pilot over any studies about sprites any day of the week.

Originally posted by Jizmak
some ufo sightings might fit into this category and we might have found an explanation for those few. All the while we are ignoring the many other circumstances that these objects are seen under.

Is that what Dr. Price said, or even imply?

Sweet Zombie Jesus. Am I the only one who bothered reading the article?

Originally posted by Bunch
But I still would take the account of a well trained pilot over any studies about sprites any day of the week.

Dr. Price did not say this explained every UFO sightings by pilots. The fact you think he did shows that either you did not bother reading the article or you are having trouble comprehending it.

Once again, I have to ask...am I the only one who bothered reading it?

reply to post by SaviorComplex


I read the article Saviour...

Is the appereance that the article gives that I dont like. I dont have a problem with the study and the results of it. Like you said is a sensationalist headline.

A weak article with an eye catching headline or just a blatant disinformation attempt by Yahoo news...take your pick.



[edit on 23-2-2009 by Bunch]

The general response to this feeds one's skepticism of UFO investigators, or at least those around here.

If this was a new thread reporting an alien conversation on somebody's camping trip, with a message that 2012 was going to be the big arrival - people would be all over it for details.

In fact it's scientific report that says an under-reported natural phenomena
may account for some sightings of UFOs. But there's no fantasy element, no melodramatics, no hint of a cover-up by governments. So it's just dismissed out of hand.

Missed so far was the opportunity, given that geophysicist, Colin Price, is at Tel-Aviv University, in Israel - to have this labeled as Zionist Mossad disinformation.

To me it just indicates UFO hunters are interested more in Science Fiction than science.


Mike F