It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

MUFON interviews UFO encounter family

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   


The light moved to the west across the highway in front of them and then back again twice. He brought his father’s attention to the zigzagging light and the father witnessed it as well. As the red, pulsating light approached their position, it flashed into a solid, brilliant while light. As the object passed over their vehicle, they could see it was a silent, triangular-shaped craft with three bright, white lights on the bottom. They were able to distinguish two sharp corners and one rounded corner on the triangle.


Link to Source

I am convinced that these FT'S (flying triangles) are man/ebe made with back engineered bolt on technology from crashed/shot down ebe craft, but what I can't figure out is what are they being used for? why all these late night/early morning jaunts out and about? what can they be doing?

Are the occupants of these craft the same non terrestrial officers that Gary Mckinnon saw when he tried to hack in to pentagon files?





[edit on 15-7-2009 by franspeakfree]

[edit on 15-7-2009 by franspeakfree]




posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
The triangles are hiding saucers inside.
Why give up the 90 degree turns in an effort to make people
think they see a delta type aircraft.



posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 06:25 PM
link   
The picture below shows stages of how the eyewitnesses saw there event. Of course this is approximation and do note there are some minor discrepancies in the last report made by the investigator compared to the original report made by the eyewitnesses; which I shall point out soon.

LEGEND- Middle of the target: Eyewitness // #1 - #4: Reported Movements of Object //
Blake Circle w/Ques.Mark: No description of object at that point.



Comments on Discrepancies: (3 reports; Eyewitness, Investigator, 2nd Investigator paraphrasing eyewitness)

1. The last report made by the investigator states “they could see it was silent”. How do you see something silent? The eyewitness states he did role down the window.

2. The reports together state the craft was going east, west, left, and then shot off. The reports after the eyewitness one gets confusing as it contradicts if it was on either side of the street. Sifting out what I believed to be the problem, turning around to see it behind them, then it kind of makes since; shown in picture above.

3. Eyewitness report states “it was not blinking”. The last report, paraphrased by investigator, states “as the red, pulsating light approached their position”. Did the eyewitness change his mind about the pulsating (it does seem the father was confident it was not blinking since he plainly stated it) or did the investigator mess up?

4. Now this isn’t really a contradiction, but the eyewitness report stopped when the object went over head. The last investigator report stopped at it taking off and gone in 2 seconds. I assume the father’s original statement is structured around his personal experience on what happened out in the sky through his angle in the car. He states his son’s saw the object first but does not mention the whole family saw it at the end. Why? He did not want his wife and mother involved due to ridicule?

Conclusion:

Despite the discrepancies above, which I feel does not draw any credibility away from the eyewitness, I find this sighting very interesting none-the-less because… well just read the incident report! At the speed at which the family was moving (70mph), they had to travel approx. 1 mile per min. There needs be more info on how big the object was relative to the street, car, or any other reference, as it went above their vehicle. There is a reference to the size when the father compared it to the tree line and going at those speeds, the object had to be pretty darn high in altitude, assuming the object looked stable in the sky (accept the part where it appeared to get brighter and/or bigger). It’s obvious this craft(s)? was interacting with them for 5 minutes , and its also obvious they don’t know what they saw. They/father seem to find the best ways in describing their incident, which the fathers description of the incident seems to hit all points necessary to get a clear picture.


edit on 15-9-2010 by scar7 because: punctuation & sp



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
They didn't see any craft only lights.
They did better sightings years ago:

And did graphics and air time.
But without at least some drawings and artwork
to look at there is not much to thousands of
sightings that are reported.
At least we now know there are ship that are awesome.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
They didn't see any craft only lights.
They did better sightings years ago:
And did graphics and air time.
But without at least some drawings and artwork
to look at there is not much to thousands of
sightings that are reported.
At least we now know there are ship that are awesome.


You know, I saw cgi on the url of the incident report (the fathers ufo statement) and I thought your youtube videos were of it. Yeah, thousands of ufo reports and no cgi and air time to back it up; even though I would not associate the two to state there is nothing behind the sightings, but it would be oook to have cgi. Cgi is an approximation and it does not seem to really define all events perfectly, creating confusion, (one mistaken description can change the painting; it’s like running a pen across Mona Lisa), which definitely takes away from the sighting.

I believe events surrounding this phenomenon seem to be about personal experience, since ufo's have not landed at the White House, but once everyone shares the same personal experience, it pronounces itself as much more. Since I don’t share the same experience as the people on the video, the likelihood of it being real for me is less probable, but not impossible. Those cgi ships were awesome, but boring for me since I have seen them on tv since I can remember. In regards to this thread, I can relate to the father/eyewitness seeing those "lights". It's like that old saying, “I’ll believe it when I see it". Even though now, relating to this phenomenon, its "I'll believe it when I have DNA or a piece of the ship"; which I disagree it's going to be the case.


edit on 16-9-2010 by scar7 because: stuff



new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join