Yukon UFO "Mothership" Incident: December 11th, 1996

reply to post by Strype


I would assume that ships that large are much rarer than smaller scout ships, if they are indeed alien. Also the number of UFO sightings (real ones, not hoaxes or mundane) are much less in ratio than the number of people with cameras. So there obviously won't be as many pics.


reply to post by franspeakfree

See above post.


reply to post by mblahnikluver

Thanks! I am glad you liked it.

reply to post by jkrog08


Tossing new life back into this great thread, hopefully, fresh eyes look at it and have something new too add. But I do have a question: were their any reports after this sighting in the area again? or was that the only?

reply to post by TheMythLives

were their any reports after this sighting in the area again? or was that the only?

There have been many similar reports before and after, check out the following link for more information:

www.ufobc.ca...

Thanks for the bump.

reply to post by jkrog08


Its not a problem, I think that great threads should be continuelly bumped to the top to spread awareness and bring fresh new ides into the mix. or a thank you here and their..lol

Thanks for the link, definately interesting.

Anyone else notice that this one picture from this Yukon incident here:
i782.photobucket.com...

It looks like this screen shot from the Robert Dean video which was claimed to have been taken on the moon!
i782.photobucket.com...

I'm thinking those lights coming off the sides towards the back look similar, along with the general shape of the craft.
What do you think?

reply to post by Tech-Savvy


Yea, it looks similar, although that picture is still highly debated as I am sure you know. Also the craft in that picture would be much smaller than the one in Yukon, but to answer your question, yea it looks somewhat like witness descriptions.

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by TheMythLives

 

were their any reports after this sighting in the area again? or was that the only?

There have been many similar reports before and after, check out the following link for more information:

www.ufobc.ca...

Thanks for the bump.

Well, If my post wasn't completely ignored (as is so often the case on this site) you people would've noticed that I listed similar cases i.e. cases that involved UFO's over lakes in Canada for that year prior to, and after this sighting. They can be found easily by going to UFO Roundup Volume 1 1996.
The site you mentioned is another source and I'm sure there are many others.

I feel that looking at similar cases over the same timeframe is very important, not just this case, as we may be able to establish some sort of connection here.

reply to post by StevesResearch


Well I did not forget, thanks for the contribution!

Here it is again for anyone else:

1996 was one hell of a year for UFO sightings over lakes in Canada.

Other reports, in chronological order:

Beaulieu Videotape of UFO Over Frozen Lake - January 5 1996

West Channel of the Hay River - January 17 1996

Trout Lake - February 24 - 25 1996

Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories of Canada - March 3 to 17 1996

UFOs ROAM UP AND DOWN THE ST. LAWRENCE RIVER - October 6 1996 and October 19 1996
(seeing as we're covering large bodies of water I found this to be relevant).

Lake St. Martin, Gypsumville - October 25 and 27 1996

Gypsumville, Manitoba "a hexagon-shaped object" heading for Lake
Winnipeg. Gypsumville - November 5 1996

GLOWING UFO FLIES OVER SUDBURY, ONTARIO - "...ing for Georgian Bay and Lake Huron." - November 23 1996

LONE UFO PROWLS SKIES OF NORTHERN ONTARIO - "...the object "flew off to the west, apparently heading for Lake Huron." - November 29 1996


Source - UFO Roundup Volume 1 1996

Thanks buddy.

The fact that the question was asked made me think no one had noticed it. I'm surprised not many people saw any significance there.

Another interesting sub-arctic region "mothership" case is the JAL 1628 incident over Alaska. It was expertly covered by internos HERE.

Something is surely going on up north.

Also if anyone happens to see this thread that was a witness (either interviewed or not) do not hesitate to u2u me or email me (see profile for email address).

Originally posted by Chovy
great thread. but there will always be skeptics untill they land and shake hands with the president.

Even then they will be skeptic

Lots of little drawings and diagrams, lots of great stories, but not 1 shred of evidence. 30 witness's and not 1 picture, nothing but more great stories and drawings a 1rst grader could have made (I was being generous, i thought my pre-schooler had them beat) Seriously folks, is this all it takes, some drawings, diagrams, and a great story, I swear if I really wanted too I could have done made millions off some of you believers.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by Mr_skepticc]

Originally posted by Mr_skepticc
Lots of little drawings and diagrams, lots of great stories, but not 1 shred of evidence. 30 witness's and not 1 picture, nothing but more great stories and drawings a 1rst grader could have made (I was being generous, i thought my pre-schooler had them beat) Seriously folks, is this all it takes, some drawings, diagrams, and a great story, I swear if I really wanted too I could have done made millions off some of you believers.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by Mr_skepticc]

You really think you could "make millions" off the believers, then you are pretty deluded.

And why would it be in any way unusual for 30 witnesses to not have a photograph? Remember that this sighting was a decade before people started carrying cameras in their cell phones and even now, believe it not, many people do not carry cameras with them.

But if all it took to debunk UFOs was snarky comments, I could have done made millions off you debunkers. Hah, Hah.

Justin, it's been said before but you are sorely missed around these boards, just been reading through your Shag Harbour thread and it's a masterpiece - RIP my friend.

Video about the Yukon UFO incident featuring Stanton Friedman:

The 8th rated best documented UFO observation is a huge glowing "Mother Ship" which drifts down a path paralleling a well traveled highway located in Canada's Yukon Territory in 1996.

Originally posted by jkrog08
Here is a book on Canadian Unknown UFO Cases:

The Canadian UFO Report

Some other great cases in there too.

Two more:

UFOs over Canada: personal accounts of sightings and close encounters

By John Robert Colombo:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cc6bac527d98.jpg[/atsimg]


Link

---

UFO Canada By Yurko Bondarchuk


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8f7a265b0f10.jpg[/atsimg]


link

Has anyone seriously searched for space events such as launchings, rocket firings, explosions, or reentries that might coincide in time, location, and direction with this wide-area family of reports? What sort of evidence would be needed to offer such a prosaic hypothesis for serious consideration?

Surely the possibility suggested itself to somebody involved in the investigation. Did they rule it out -- or never bother to look?

reply to post by JimOberg


Jim,

Very good point.

A short Google search has drawn a complete blank. So I guess Jasek did check out those possibilities.

But you're the resident ATS expert in this field, so I'd much appreciate your thoughts.

Cheers.

Originally posted by Lowneck
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Jim,

Very good point.

A short Google search has drawn a complete blank. So I guess Jasek did check out those possibilities.

But you're the resident ATS expert in this field, so I'd much appreciate your thoughts.

Cheers.

Well, stay tuned -- but in general, it's my view that space/missle events provide us an unequaled opportunity to look into the perceptual process that leads from stimulus to 'UFO report', in a manner that no other known stimulus can. We can get real calibration data. These events are often -- not always -- well documented, wide-area, and visually shocking, and they have created 'U-faux' reports for decades in all corners of the world.

It's a scary thought -- actually TESTING and measuring the degree of misperception-susceptibility of witnesses, including pilots. It might make the general faith in 'trained observers' turn out a lot shakier than true believers would prefer.

Hence, perhaps, the vehemence with which the suggestion is slapped down regularly by the promoters and true believers, whenever I raise it [as in the Kean book review last year].

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Lowneck
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Jim,

Very good point.

A short Google search has drawn a complete blank. So I guess Jasek did check out those possibilities.

But you're the resident ATS expert in this field, so I'd much appreciate your thoughts.

Cheers.

Well, stay tuned -- but in general, it's my view that space/missle events provide us an unequaled opportunity to look into the perceptual process that leads from stimulus to 'UFO report', in a manner that no other known stimulus can. We can get real calibration data. These events are often -- not always -- well documented, wide-area, and visually shocking, and they have created 'U-faux' reports for decades in all corners of the world.

It's a scary thought -- actually TESTING and measuring the degree of misperception-susceptibility of witnesses, including pilots. It might make the general faith in 'trained observers' turn out a lot shakier than true believers would prefer.

Hence, perhaps, the vehemence with which the suggestion is slapped down regularly by the promoters and true believers, whenever I raise it [as in the Kean book review last year].

[size=5Well, stay tuned -- but in general, it's my view that space/missle events provide us an unequaled opportunity to look into the perceptual process that leads from stimulus to 'UFO report




Thats interesting Jim

These aren't deliberate experiments, of course -- but an opportunistic analysis of several dozen famous UFO cases explainable by space/missile events might allow some qualitative insight into the perceptual process that no amount of theorizing, rationalizing, or excuse-making can provide. That insight can then be applied across the board to reports generated by uncertain-source stimuli, to see how reliably -- or not -- the perceptual process results can be 'walked back' to the range of potential stimuli -- including extraordinary stimuli, if required. In mathematical terms, if you define a perceptual process by seeing how 'test inputs' produce perceptions, are you better able to postulate an inverse perceptual process to map the plausible range of stimuli that can generate on-hand witness reports?