Are allnewsweb.com hurting the credibility of ufology?

reply to post by internos


...and one more thing. you are concerned with your nephews finding ANW........not child-porn, terrorist sites or self-harm sites. That makes you either sick and in need of help or a liar.

Moderator: this Chadwickus set the trap to get me drawn into this stupid thread. I have experienced considerable damage, spam, hatemail, abuse, attempts to harm my website and most of it seems to come from a small, very nasty bunch organising on this website....the ringleaders being some of the above. Believe me...it all comes back to ATS.

Idon't want your hits, I don't want your stories. I would rather this debate ends and I have as much right to be on the internet as anyone....again the thing that disgusts me most is this idea that certain elements of the 'ufo community' think they have the right to dictate what gets written about the topic...they DO NOT.

reply to post by Chadwickus


All of your and your allies posts are exactly the same. Ignore any possible valid point and keep repeating the same accusations. The troll is you (albeit a cunning one)

And your true colours are sadly very obvious. Let me guess, you are involved in some extreme-right wing para-political group in Perth.

As I say 'when you are done hating yellows and browns its time to move on to greens and greys. Let me guess your allies here are all of a similar stripe. I wonder if I am right???

[edit on 25-7-2009 by mikecohen2]

Originally posted by mikecohen2


And Internos: the one trolling here is you. Your last post contributed nothing and showed the chip on your shoulder very clearly.

'He had a chance to explain why he lied' what the hell is that supposed to mean. What is this a court of law.

ok, let's make a quick recaps for the benefit of those who still don't know you:
YOU published on allnewscrock a story regarding an alleged ufo sighting occurred in Lahore, pakistan, OK?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
it took to me ONE MINUTE to expose you, because the video was actually a CGI recreation made by a german guy who wanted to show that a video showing some alleged ufos coul be re-created.
It was a CGI made in Germany, and its purpose was to re-create another video, allegedly taken in Phoenix, Arizona (this one)

See article Amazing Phoenix UFO Footage


German Attempt To Recreate UFO Video

Stills from video: cmath.free.fr...
Movie by Warheit

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/a68c7973edec678c.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/00280d722da1b991.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/7202475252345bb2.jpg[/atsimg]

This footage is being passed around the net as proof that Brian's UFO footage could have been faked. Sure -- it's possible. But is it true? When examining this clever recreation, one should note that it is actually nothing like Brian's video.

First, Brian's video footage is in the pitch black of night using NightVision on his camcorder. This recreation/fake is shot at what looks like dusk when there is still light available and not with NightVision at all.

Second, the UFO in the recreation/fake appears almost translucent, ghostly, like a projection or overlayed image. Brian's object is significantly more substantial.

Third, notice the difference in brilliance, not merely in contrast, but actual luminescence being produced by these lights/objects in Brians video vs the dull, washed out lights in the recreation. This is largely a result of Brian's use of NightVision which will cause any really intense light to bloom and appear extremely strong compared to surrounding object or lights (if any are visible, in this case, only some shrubby trees in the foreground are visible). The sheer intensity of the lights in Brians video suggests that the UFO is not a product of post-production digitial manipulation, but a real reaction in the camcorder to extremely powerful lights effecting the NightVision's imaging process.

Finally, the ability to recreate a UFO sighting on film or video does not mean the original was indeed fake.

www.rense.com...
www.ufoinfo.com...



Then
YOU
edited the OP
edited the article on allnewscrock
removed the video from YouTube
replaced everything with another RANDOM video
there's not even way to ask you to prove me wrong because it is all there.
Maybe you have chosen the wrong guy to challenge today.

OK?

Then.
You crossed your way with free_spirit, who is known to be a guy who KNOWS what he does, regardless you agrree or disagree, he is a REASEARCHER and EXPOSED you, TWO TIMES if memory serves. Now, what are you trying to say? That we are the bad guys trying to obfuscate the reality?
You are a CONFIRMED HOAXER and should not be allowed to post here in my opinion, i even don't care to get banned for talking to you this way but YOU, Mr Cohen, are a SHAME for ufology.
Nuff said.


Now, do you think to be so smartass to fool a whole community like this one?

Originally posted by mikecohen2

All of your and your allies posts are exactly the same. Ignore any possible valid point and keep repeating the same accusations. The troll is you (albeit a cunning one)

As you should know, there are many, many charlatans in the UFO community, people like Stan Romanek is an example of this. These leaches disgust me, they prey on the gullibility of people to make a quick buck.

Now I don't know if you're another Stan Romanek but some of your articles and content has been extremely questionable.

This sets off alarm bells for myself and clearly many others.

If you're genuine and truthful, you should have nothing to worry about.

And your true colours are sadly very obvious. Let me guess, you are involved in some extreme-right wing para-political group in Perth.

As I say 'when you are done hating yellows and browns its time to move on to greens and greys. Let me guess your allies here are all of a similar stripe. I wonder if I am right???

I don't see what my political views have to do with this thread but I have to ask, where the hell did you get an extreme-right wing para-political group from? Did you just make that up?

Also, your accusations of me being involved in some ANW hate group are baseless unless you can provide some sort of evidence.

Can you do that? No, because I am involved with no such thing, why would I waste my time on such a pointless endeavor?

reply to post by Chadwickus


If you can't answer this point DIRECTLY really I see no point debating with you.

The above videos posted by internos are ALL HOAXES and WERE ALL PUBLISHED ON MY WEBSITE. (Did Romanek ever make a statement like that?)

I admit and have freely admitted I got all of those stories wrong and could easily explain why. They are only a fraction of the UFO events I have published.

Surely you must realise that NO UFO PUBLICATION ON THE PLANET CAN HAVE ALL THEIR STORIES CONFIRMED AS TRUE. That makes Internos's last post a moot point.

Paderborn was a hoax, Lahore was a hoax. If internos expects 100% accuracy in the field of UFOs he not me is in fantasy land (and I think you must know that)

On the other hand some stories I have published have been confirmed as genuine. i really did get Governments and aerospace agencies emailing me on the North East Brazil sightings for example and the Greek Incident was confrimed by Olympus Airways and the Greek Airforce.






[edit on 25-7-2009 by mikecohen2]

reply to post by Chadwickus


...and if you don't get this point well just forget it.

I am like anyone else. See a seemingly good UFO video (say like the somewhat dubious Brazil Octopus) get all excited...and rush to be the first to publish the story in the event it is the real deal.

Then get peeved when it is discovered that it is just another let down.

I believe, really, that the day is approaching when the real deal is filmed and confirmed to be an actual alien sapceship. My dream is to be the one that gets the story first.....and I am prepared to brave your criticisms in the meanwhile. I realise my chances arent great....but I will keep trying.....the downside is getting it wrong.

Internos...you are not as smart as you seem to think

'Then
YOU
edited the OP
edited the article on allnewscrock
removed the video from YouTube
replaced everything with another RANDOM video
there's not even way to ask you to prove me wrong because it is all there.
Maybe you have chosen the wrong guy to challenge today. '


What is also 'all there' is that others were claiming both videos as from Lahore...I wasnt the hoaxer I was conned by the hoaxers. When a reader told me the first video was wrong I replaced it on the basis that there were multiple people claiming the second video as from Lahore as well. I merely 'corrected the story' (would not you?) ...when it was confirmed that both were false I openly conceded the story was a hoax entirely or at least the notion that video of the event existed.




[edit on 25-7-2009 by mikecohen2]

Originally posted by mikecohen2
Paderborn was a hoax, Lahore was a hoax. If internos expects 100% accuracy in the field of UFOs he not me is in fantasy land (and I think you must know that)

No i don't
I know that it's HARD, but not impossible. To run a website, Mike implies responsabilities:
there are even KIDS watching and reading you
would you be available to start a new story and reset all the crap that you have posted so far? I would have no problems in debating new stories, all i ask you is to apologize for your mistakes made so far: hey i made many more mistakes than you, but i know when it comes time to stop.
ATS, can give MUCH to you, and you have something to share with us, no one told you that you are an idiot, no one offended you: but you are the one who has to move the first step: tell us that you wanna start a new era and we will support you. Keeep on your toes, and we will keep hating you.
Deal?

Originally posted by mikecohen2
reply to post by Chadwickus

 

...and if you don't get this point well just forget it.

I am like anyone else. See a seemingly good UFO video (say like the somewhat dubious Brazil Octopus) get all excited...and rush to be the first to publish the story in the event it is the real deal.

I get that point, but here lies the crux of the matter, I think I already mentioned this earlier in this thread: Quality over quantity.

Even die hard believers have said they take your site with a grain of salt, it's currently on par with pravdu.ru and youtube due to your willingness to post just about anything without checking on credibility.

reply to post by internos


I am actually neither a hoaxer nor a gullible idiot. I full realise that all footage might be mis-identification.

I probably dislike hoaxers as much if not more than you as they massively clutter up the playing field and provide more chaff to separate. Another nuisance are the obvious or highly likely misidentifications and how so many ufo fans actually fall for them. And of course how so many fall for obvious professional hoaxers doing the rounds.

If you could eliminate all of this it would make the job of identifying good sightings that much easier. I do believe if not know we are being visited. The 'core story' I talk of is basically correct and what irritates me is people that call me a liar because it contradicts self-evidenent nonsense about reptilians and Roswell (Ufology's greatest hoax). I could expalin why Roswell is hoax and must be a hoax and I am happy to do so.

A news service by definition brings news quickly and as soon as possible, No time to wait for analysis...the story is old by then.



[edit on 25-7-2009 by mikecohen2]

Originally posted by mikecohen2


A news servicve by definition brings news quickly and as soon as possible, No time to wait for analysis...the story is old by then.

I do know that you dont know me but: please READ.

The JAL Flight 1628 UFO incident

In November, 1986, a Japanese crew of a jumbo freighter aircraft witnessed three unidentified objects while flying over Alaska, USA. This sighting gained international attention when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced that it was going to officially investigate this sighting because the Air Route Traffic Control Center in Anchorage, Alaska, had reported that the UFO had been detected on radar. Captain Terauchi was featured on numerous radio and TV programs and in People Magazine. Within a few months of these events he was grounded, apparently for his indiscretion of reporting a UFO, even though he was a senior captain with an excellent flying record. Several years later he was reinstated. The UFOs in this case were tracked on both ground and airborne radar, witnessed by experienced airline pilots, and confirmed by a FAA Division Chief.

According to Captain Kenju Terauchi, First Officer Takanori Tamefuji and Flight Engineer Yoshio Tsukuda, two small lights and one huge lighted object were in sight on their radar for more than a half hour.
They watched as they flew 350 miles (550 km.) southward across Alaska
from Ft. Yukon toward Anchorage.
Captain Terauchi, a veteran of 29 years flying, said "It was a very big one or two times bigger than an aircraft carrier." He changed altitude and made turns, with FAA permission, in an effort to identify the objects which continued to follow him. He said the objects moved quickly and stopped suddenly. At one time, the light from the large object was so bright that it lit the airplane's cockpit and Captain Terauchi said he could feel heat from it on his face. He added that he had been watching the UFO for six minutes before notifying anyone on the ground; this would make the start of the sighting about 6:13 p.m.
The FAA at first confirmed the claims that several of its radar traffic controllers tracked the 747 and the large object, and that U.S. Air Force radar did as well. Later official statements hedged on this, and tried to attribute the radar targets to weather effects. At the end, however, an FAA spokesman stated, "We are accepting the descriptions of the crew, but are unable to support what they saw."

Drawings by Captain Terauchi and the crew of JAL flight 1628 of the UFOs they observed over Alaska in November 1986. Courtesy of FAA.

The summary of the communication between JAL Captain Terauchi and ground controllers was published by the Federal Aviation Administration:



6:19 PM local time: The pilot of JL1628 requested traffic information from the ZAN (FAA Air Route Traffic Control Center, Anchorage) Sector 15 controller.

6:26 PM: ZAN contacted the Military Regional Operations Control Center (ROCC), and asked if they were receiving any radar returns near the position of JL1628. The ROCC advised that they were receiving a primary radar return in JL1628's 10 o'clock (left-front) position at 8 miles.

6:27 PM: The ROCC contacted ZAN to advise they were no longer receiving any radar returns in the vicinity of JL1628.

6:31 PM: JL1628 advised that the 'plane' was 'quite big,' at which time the ZAN controller approved any course deviations needed to avoid the traffic.

6:32 PM: JL1628 requested and received a descent from FL350 to FL310 (flight level 350 and 310, meaning altitude of 35,000 and 31,000 feet, or 10,500 m. and 9,500 m.). When asked if the traffic was descending also, the pilot stated it was descending 'in formation.'

6:35 PM: JL1628 requested and received a heading change to two one zero (210 degrees, or southwest). The aircraft was now in the vicinity of Fairbanks and ZAN contacted Fairbanks Approach Control asking if they had any radar returns near JL1628's position. The Fairbanks Controller advised they did not.

6:36 PM: JL1628 was issued a 360 degree turn and asked to inform ZAN if the traffic stayed with them.

6:38 PM: The ROCC called ZAN advising they had confirmed a 'flight of two' in JL1628's position. They advised they had some 'other equipment watching this,' and one was a primary target only.

6:39 PM: JL1628 told ZAN they no longer had the traffic in sight.

6:42 PM: The ROCC advised it looked as though the traffic had dropped back and to the right of JL1628, however, they were no longer tracking it.

6:44 PM: JL1628 advised the traffic was now at 9 o'clock (left).

6:45 PM: ZAN issued a 10 degree turn to a northbound United Airlines flight, after pilot concurrence, in an attempt to confirm the traffic.

6:48 PM: JL1628 told ZAN the traffic was now at 7 o'clock (left rear), 8 miles.

6:50 PM: The northbound United flight advised they had the Japan Airlines flight in sight, against a light background, and could not see any other traffic.

6:53 PM: JL1628 advised that they no longer had contact with the traffic

www.ufologie.net...

AFTER the plane levelled out he observed "lights that looked like aircraft lights, 30 degrees left front, 2,000 feet below us, moving exactly in the same direction and with the same
speed we were." At that time the airplane was flying at about 525 kts (nautical miles per hour) ground speed (972 km/hr or 605 mph) according to the tracking data (3). Subsequently the speed decreased to about 500 kts.

brumac.8k.com...


Alaska's 1986 UFO sighting still rouses curiosity
KTUU Channel 2 News (Alaska), November 8, 2002

Disclosure Project: Testimony of John Callahan, Former FAA Division Chief
Disclosure Project Briefing Document - Executive Summary

FAA investigates JAL Flight 1628 UFO Sighting
Associated Press, 1986

Statement of Captain Terauchi, Pilot of JAL Flight 1628

UFO FILES: Black Box UFO Secrets (.PDF)
Wednesday, 11th August, 2006

Video: John Callahan, Former FAA Division Chief, dicusses JAL Flight 1628
UFO Symposium at The George Washington University, 2002

This is a rendering from the description that Capt. Terauchi gave to the FAA. It was first published by the International UFO Reporter in the March/April 1987 issue Volume 12, number 12. The relative size of Capt. Terauchi's Boeing 747 can be seen at the bottom right of the satellite

Courtesy: John Lear

Here is Capt. Terauchi's actual drawing showing the shape of the craft and the relative size of his Boeing 747

Courtesy: John Lear









Courtesy: Bruce Maccabee



Courtesy: JeromeProphet


UFO Files: Black Box UFO Secrets Revealed ( part 1 of 5 )

The relevant part starts at min. 2:00


UFO Files: Black Box UFO Secrets Revealed ( part 2 of 5 )

UFO Files: Black Box UFO Secrets Revealed ( part 3 of 5 )

UFO Files: Black Box UFO Secrets Revealed ( part 4 of 5 )

UFO Files: Black Box UFO Secrets Revealed ( part 5 of 5 )


THE FANTASTIC FLIGHT OF JAL1628
Complete report by Bruce Maccabee


Sources:

www.ufodata.co.uk...
brumac.8k.com...
jeromeprophet.blogspot.com...
www.ufoevidence.org...
www.ufocasebook.com...
www.ufocasebook.com...

reply to post by internos


Hold on, I regard the JAL incident as the most credible sighting ever with multiple verifications, radar images, recordings ...... (Japanese!) pilots with years of experience .... in a nutshell everything. I believe this was an actual spaceship. It also conforms to many historical descriptions of spaceships (even Ezekiel).

But ANW has nothing to offer that event....nothing to add, no new information..thats all. Thats what I am looking for however.

reply to post by mikecohen2


'Here is Capt. Terauchi's actual drawing showing the shape of the craft and the relative size of his Boeing 747':

When Ezekiel stated "As for their rims they were lofty and awesome" this is what he meant BTW.

Originally posted by mikecohen2

Mike that is a work that required months: it is different from grabbing news left and right.
That is NOT copy & paste.
Check wiki page about it and you will find a heck of nothing.
THIS is research.
Every one of those who attacked you have their own reason to attack you.
>This forume has been litterally TROLLED with your stuff:
Now please promise: you won't post garbage anymore, and i promise you that you will always be welcome here.
Deal?

I am closing this thread, it seems to be an irresistible magnet for a certain spammer we have had to ban over and over again.

Enough said.

Springer...