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.

 

1,000 foot UFO surrounded by aircraft (?)

page: 5
28
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by bastion
Hi, I'm from Preston. There's millitary exercises going on this month.

This is the second sighting, last one is here with video: www.lep.co.uk...

Saw similar myself earlier in the year, thought it was a helicopter until it turned to the side and I could see two lights underneath what looked like a curved wing, sounded like a hover mower rather than helicopter though.

Not a believer in aliens really, there's a British Aerospace nearby in Warton that has a shed for research craft which could be behind it?


I concur. I lived in Preston for a few years and there was often a lot of aerial activity both civilian and military.

I'll reserve judgement for 48 hrs, if pics or video haven't surfaced by then...




posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jimbowsk
Actually thinking about the whole "no video = didn't happen" thing, does that mean that nothing ever existed before the invention of the video camera?



Nearly but not quite, nothing existed before there was an observer to see it


haven't you done your physics homework?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
So if a tree falls in a forest and there is no-one there to see it, does it make a sound ? Or a video, or a camera, or You-tube. The tree has still fallen and is on the ground, or is it ? Only the ATS squad can decide if it is so ( well if you don`t have a photo or video, it didn`t even happen ), point made ?

Well perhaps the following members can back me up !

PRAXIS...SOLOMONS...JKOG08...CHOVY...MATIFIKATION...and the others who previously edited their posts to curry favour with the others !

Whoops sorry, most of these have edited their posts to remove the moronic statement that " No video evidence = it didn`t happen " .

So now they are still serious investigators, not cretins as some of us had already deduced ! Mud sticks ! We know who you are ! You`re credibiliy is now in tatters !

[edit on 16-10-2009 by Qwenn]



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jackphotohobby
 
This is the thread I was thinking of and still active in the grey area,
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Qwenn
 


The saying pics or it didn't happen is not meant literally. It just means that without pics or video the story from a research standpoint is pointless and is no more valid than people syaing that they have 1/2 breed GFL children in space.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by Qwenn
 


The saying pics or it didn't happen is not meant literally. It just means that without pics or video the story from a research standpoint is pointless and is no more valid than people syaing that they have 1/2 breed GFL children in space.


No it isn't and you know it is not. if you actually think it is, you seriously need to get a grip.

Is there a place called Preston where people do, indeed, live?

Answer Yes

Is it possibles that a Person from Preston was looking at the sky and saw something anomalous?

Answer Yes and there is plenty of evidence to give both hypotheses credibility.

Have people frequently traveled in Space with Aliens and do with have evidence to support that from an independent verifiable source?

Errr no we don't..


Vastly different propositions, to suggest they are same is ridiculous and you are, in effect cosigning, virtually, the whole of written, pre cameras history, to the bin.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by Qwenn
 


The saying pics or it didn't happen is not meant literally. It just means that without pics or video the story from a research standpoint is pointless and is no more valid than people syaing that they have 1/2 breed GFL children in space.


I still don`t think you understand the meaning of research, research has been around long before there were cameras etc, that research is as valid now as it was then. In fact a true researcher would still include this very same information if it were relevent to his investigation. RE= Search to search through information past and present to reach a truthful conclusion, not sitting at a computer flicking through past information on ATS and Wikki.
Was it a photograph or video that led to the discovery that the earth was round, NO, Or that the Planets revolve round the sun, NO. Observation, logic and research proved this, but by your terms, both of these facts are worthless. Resaearch is spending your life in persuit of facts in order to reach reliable conclusions, not reading one post and thinking that is reasearch, no that is just reading and reacting, the brain has to be involved too. You did`nt happen to remove the term " No pictures = no proof " from your post on page one of this thread, did you ? Hums expectantly ? Naughty, Naughty ! Research is asking questions, not giving answers, before you have had time to process them. Perhaps you should be researching what this story is about and helping to find an answer, instead of wasting your investigating time posting " is it isn`t its " here. I am only observing this not investigating it.

[edit on 17-10-2009 by Qwenn]

[edit on 17-10-2009 by Qwenn]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   
I guess this is the video in question?

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Barcelona
I guess this is the video in question?

www.youtube.com...



I'm not sure yet if this is the same video as mentioned in the OP. (I've asked a local UFO investigator to call the witness mentioned in the OP on a telephone number supplied by the relevant reporter, with the permission of the witness, and ask about his footage).

Anyway, I've embedded below the video at the link you gave:


To give a firm view, it would be necessary to have more details (e.g. precise time and date, location, directions etc etc) and have a closer look at the footage, but my first impression is that the triangle of lights is probably too stable for this particular formation to be caused by the most common modern source of reports of formations of UFOs, i.e. Chinese lanterns.

Instead (subject to obtaining the time and location etc) my money would currently be on satellites. Some reports of triangular formations of UFOs in recent years have been explained by checking the visibility of the US Navy's Noss Satellites.

Compare the video of the "UFOs" above with the video of NOSS satellites below.



For further links, do a Google search on "noss satellites ufo" -there are quite a few relevant pages, e.g. THIS ONE and this webpage on the BBC website.

The latter link includes lots of information on the NOSS satellite formations, including the following:



NOSS is a group of satellites that travel as a group of three in orbit around the Earth and sighting of this trio has given rise to many UFO reports in the UK
...
A solution for some UFO sightings?

The interest in the field of UFOs entails the identification of satellites as the origin of many UFO sightings. It is known that from the equipment on board surveillance satellites, and from their appearance, they will emit a bright white colour with a blue tinge, and may be accompanied with smaller lights about their body, the light may also appear to flicker possibly due to the reflector radar antenna as they turn in orbit. The formation of lights will also vary from being triangular to a straight line to even appear out of nowhere, intercept one another and then disappear out of view. This description is not at all definitive but reflects what satellite observers have reported seeing.

Also certain suspect NASA film footage, such as STS-80 and STS-48, has to be questioned as these purport to show intelligently controlled objects that orbit the Earth. These have been interpreted by some to represent footage of visiting extra-terrestrial craft. However, a more plausible explanation seems to involve a classified military project to test the possibility of destroying satellites using ground based weapons. It makes sense that footage of unusual and intelligently controlled craft in space could act as a genuine cover for important satellite security operations by encouraging observers to believe that what they are seeing is indeed alien craft.


All the best,

Isaac


[edit on 17-10-2009 by IsaacKoi]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Barcelona
 


Thanks for posting those, Barcelona.


If that's the video in question then I'm underwhelmed. The first video was interesting, I've seen something similar myself on numerous occasions. Once I witnessed three star-like points of light similar in brightness to Sirius travelling in an L formation. I'm unaware of satellites travelling in formation so this is intriguing.
I live in the country and enjoy crystal clear night skies, excellent for stargazing.

The quality of the second video, whilst showing what appears to be the same object/s, if of such poor quality as to render it of little use to investigators. They may be able to glean some valuable information from this video, but surely nothing conclusive.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


Thanks for that information. That does appear to be a likely explaination. I wasn't aware that satellites travelled in formation, so thanks again for clearing that up.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   
If this video is the one which has been spoken of, then it differs from his description in many ways. Firstly three and not four objects, unless you count the light which appears near the end, which seems different, secondly they are not clearly saucer shaped, which he claimed. So either this is not the right video, or he is not a very reliable witness. It sounds like the same guys voice as well.

It is from a Monday sighting so it seems like it could be the one, taking in the other factors. It also claims Giant UFO ( in the singular ), so it seems that he is imagining that the space in between the lights, is the actual ufo and that they are not independent lights. His account is also registered as " Ufocoast ", so he is not a casual member of the public as has been implied. We all know that sometimes people see what they expect to see and are perhaps less critical of the facts. The two clips of film seem to be the same event as well, although Monday was the 12th and the second video seems to be of the 13th.
[edit on 17-10-2009 by Qwenn]

[edit on 17-10-2009 by Qwenn]

[edit on 17-10-2009 by Qwenn]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


I'm not sure either. I'm not brilliant with accents, but not awful either, and those accents sound south of the Midlands. (not to say they couldn't of originally come from the south and moved). I also suspect that it's a video recorder larger than a phone - probably a digital compact camera or even SD camcorder, because the quality is a notch or two higher. But I agree with your conclusions about satellites.

Thank-you for asking the all important what/where/whens on YouTube. Like you I'll await anything further from Mr Robinson in the original article. Even with a crappy camera phone it'd be interesting to see if there were aircraft in the vicinity of the 'objects'.

[edit on 17-10-2009 by jackphotohobby]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by sharps
 


He he he, touche


I don't suppose anyone saw the several chinese lanterns that were in the skies of the fylde coast last night did they? I wish people would stop using them, they get my hopes up for a split second every time I see them!



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I'm hopeful, but not holding my breath. I've lost count of the times we've heard amazing sightings with video proof, and instead of ever getting posted, it's constantly changing hands, being reviewed, lost, etc... and then nothing ever comes of it. It's the longer version of "Omg I caught something on camera amazing just now! But I'm too tired to post it.. will get to it tomorrow."

Except the vid being reviewed by scientists in China.. that was has my interest piqued.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


Great post!

I have to admit that through the first video i was like 'wow' there really is something big flying through the sky's' but then after viewing the second one and reading the discription of the movement of satellites i was like 'o, well.... that puts the UFO theory to bed'

Star for you




posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
The Satellite theory is fine as far as it goes. Only there is a slight problem with it.,..

www.satobs.org...

The latest launches are in pairs, not triples, and the older triple formation launches are now, pretty much, totally out of whack with each other when it comes to travelling in a triangular formation.

Quoting from the link about the current NOSS launches.

The first 3rd generation NOSS were launched on September 8, 2001, aboard an Atlas 2AS rocket. Satellite observers were surprised to find only two satellites, instead of three, leading to speculation that a third satellite had failed to separate from the Centaur upper stage. The question was settled a few hours after the second launch, on December 2, 2003, when observers again saw only two satellites, as first reported by Jean-Paul Cornec, confirming that the new NOSS employ only two satellites.


And from the same site about the older triple launches..

Early in 2006, the NOSS 2-2 formation's C and D objects began to fall behind E, and by early 2007, they trailed it by more than 2 minutes

Plus

More recently, the NOSS 2-3 formation's D object began to fall behind C and E, which by mid-2007, led by about 45 seconds.

That means only one triple formation is left. its' usual brightness is magnitude +5-+6, that's right on the edge of human capability and pretty much, invisible if the moon is anywhere larger, than half full.

On rare occasion the brighten to a maximum of +2 , which would be easily visible

This gives you the tracking for NOSS 2-1C

www.heavens-above.com...

This for NOSS 2=1D

www.heavens-above.com...

As far as i can see it wans;t visible from Preston on Monday night..

Ergo, if that video is from Preston on Monday night, i don;t think there is any evidence to suggest it is one of the NOSS formations



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by chunder
 



sigh


has logic died ??

why are you demanding that i furnish " evidence " of a negative ????????????????

if you ACTUALLY believe his claim - why dont you provide some evidence for it

there is no where at fulwood barracks sutible for storing nuclear munitions - non of the units based there are trained for the task etc etc

but if you have any evicence for the positive clkam - spitt it out

because so far your opinion that my statement is twaddle is just worthless trolling



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon
Ergo, if that video is from Preston on Monday night, i don;t think there is any evidence to suggest it is one of the NOSS formations


Interesting (and thanks for doing that work) but, as I mentioned when I put foward the satellite theory, I am not sure that the video put foward above by "Barcelona" is the video mentioned in the OP as being filmed in Preson on Monday night.

Until we have more details of the video mentioend by "Barcelona" (particularly of the time and location), I would not spend too much time checking visibility of any satellites.

Indeed, I have just had an email that purports to be relaying a message from the witness in the OP that states that he has seen the first video mentioned by "Barcelona" and that video is NOT his footage. I hope to hear fairly soon from a local UFO investigator that I have put in touch with the witness in the OP (and/or hope to have a response from the person that posted the video on Youtube mentioned by "Barcelona"), so things may become clearer in the next few days.

Of course, it would not be unknown in the history of ufology for things to remain confused and become even more unclear with the passage of time...

All the best,

Isaac



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   
nice no pics or video as usual



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join