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.

 

Squadron Of UFOs ! awesome video 2009 USA

page: 10
89
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
OK, can we get back to the real topic?

One question, am I the only person that thinks the faster movement is only caused by the movement of the person with the camera?




posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Brainiac
 


You're hilarious. Are you kidding??? The reason why our shuttle makes such an awesome display and gratuitous amount of sound is because we're burning jet fuel which is one of the most inefficient ways of travel. LOL!!!

I would be damned disappointed if some UFO came into our atmosphere, destroying our ozone, just so that you could be impressed.

And since I doubt the extra-terrestrials are building their crafts based on the constructive imaginations of HOLLYWOOD...(I can't even believe you used that in a serious discussion) then, honestly, I think you're always going to be disappointed. Go back to sleep or watch ET some more. It's pleasant there for you.

WEAK!!!



[edit on 18-11-2009 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaPOne question, am I the only person that thinks the faster movement is only caused by the movement of the person with the camera?
Yeah, I thought that the first time I saw it. I still think they're Chinese lanterns, and they even look EXACTLY like the lanterns in this video posted by Unicorn1. Hell, they even flicker just like this video.


Originally posted by unicorn1
Relax peeps
We have had exactly the same at a friends birthday party. Yes they ARE lanterns.
Here is a footage of some in the UK.
www.uk-ufo.co.uk...



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
It was kind of funny how when the rain started, the show was over. But they couldn't have been lanterns. Just alien space ships that are afraid of rain.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   
Chinese lanterns, end of.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
One question, am I the only person that thinks the faster movement is only caused by the movement of the person with the camera?


No I think so too. It was Loy Krathong here a couple of weeks back and I recorded loads of these guys flying over my house. Camera movement plays deceptive tricks on home movie video cameras in the evening when recording candles. It does look convincing enough to doubt though eh?

I must say when I say the first one here I wasn't expecting it and I did get a thrill for about half a second, then I identified it, and was amused at myself for being thrilled. All in all a good feeling.

Would love to see something I couldn't identify though. That thrill has a real good rush to it.

-m0r



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   
It’s funny to read the responses to some of these UFO threads. There are people who just cling to the belief that every light in the sky is of extraterrestrial origin, and do not put any critical thinking into the event. What you have a video of here, is lights in the sky, that is all it is, and scientifically that is all you can call it. Can this be a Hoax? You bet it can. Can this be real? Possibly, but its not as likely as it being a hoax.

One member pointed out that in the remarks of the crowd, there was one stating that there was a UFO convention of some type going on there at the time. Well, there is your motive for hoaxing such an event. First, cities/event organizers often want to use paranormal events to bring in tourists, and the influx of cash that comes with them. They will frequently hype such events to help draw bigger crowds of people. I am sure that some of them would go as far as to “put on a show” for the attendees, thus guaranteeing larger crowds due to word of mouth, and the leak of a Youtube video. Then you have the second type of hoax, the guys who know there is a UFO convention in town, and want to hoax the people because they get off on making fools of them. They are probably sitting out there in the bushes rolling on the ground in laughter.

Again, can this video be a hoax? You bet, and there is motive for it to be a hoax in this instance.

Every single one of these “lights in the skies” videos can be recreated/hoaxed using various ingenious systems of lights/pyrotechnics attached to balloons, hot air balloons (lanterns), kites, R/C aircraft, and R/C Airships. Don’t let your desire for extraterrestrial contact overshadow your critical thinking and objectivity.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
It was kind of funny how when the rain started, the show was over. But they couldn't have been lanterns. Just alien space ships that are afraid of rain.


It was already raining genius!!! I think you need to watch the video a few more times to clear out the baby batter in your brain.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 

Although I truly have no idea about what these lights were since I was not THERE, jumping to conclusions either way is rather preemptive. And maybe that it something that YOU (Mr. Superior, king of intellectual thought) should keep in mind.

And to me, its also equally as funny watching the debunkers run in in massive droves so that they can "save the day" by offering every "plausible" explanation as to limit the number of people that may adopt a different belief system than their own.

Sorry my man, but there were several people who came in here offering some highly moronic explanations (one of them actually being flashlights) in an attempt to pass these explanations off as the "far more likely scenario" than "alien ships." When people do that, it makes the debunkers look as ridiculous as you claim the believers look. In other words, "your people" desperately cling to the idea that it has to be conventional because if it isn't, then "your people's" worlds are no longer safely shut in a tight little box that is void of "possibilities."

So buddy, you can adopt your narrow little view in an attempt to make believers look silly, but, you merely put a sign on your own forehead when you typed up this miniature manifesto against those who look to alternate viewpoints for explanations. Keep on spilling your garbage everywhere. Eventually if you spill enough of it, your viewpoints will be littered everywhere and then you alone can be responsible for saving the human race against the ideas that aliens may exists in the infinite reaches of the Universe.

You make me laugh.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Originally posted by groingrinder
It was kind of funny how when the rain started, the show was over. But they couldn't have been lanterns. Just alien space ships that are afraid of rain.


It was already raining genius!!! I think you need to watch the video a few more times to clear out the baby batter in your brain.
I live in an ATL skyrise condo. I'm on the 15th floor, and when it rains, you can see it come from miles away, or it can hit my building before it hits my adjacent building. Just because it was raining where he was filming, doesn't mean it hit the objects. It doesn't just rain everywhere at once, it comes in patches.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Sorry my man, but there were several people who came in here offering some highly moronic explanations (one of them actually being flashlights) in an attempt to pass these explanations off as the "far more likely scenario" than "alien ships."


Couldn't agree more. It's amazing some of the theories people put forth here. I mean, yeah, okay, I get it, you don't think its a UFO. Fine. But please, come up with something better than 'flashlights' for this video, and provide an explanation of why u think so...

This goes back to my earlier point about the overwhelming inability for most ATS members to find a middle ground when viewing videos like these. You have the New-Age Nutters on one side, and the Noisy-Know-It-All-Disbelievers on the other.

Sooner or later, you have to ask why either of them are really here. They make a mockery of free speech.

[edit on 19-11-2009 by NightVision]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision
Couldn't agree more. It's amazing some of the theories people put forth here. I mean, yeah, okay, I get it, you don't think its a UFO. Fine. But please, come up with something better than 'flashlights' for this video, and provide an explanation of why u think so...

This goes back to my earlier point about the overwhelming inability for most ATS members to find a middle ground when viewing videos like these. You have the New-Age Nutters on one side, and the Noisy-Know-It-All-Disbelievers on the other.
Well, I'm sorry, but where is even one of your theories about the video in here? It seems you just come in here and yell at "debunkers", then allude to me "derailing the thread", but then continue to talk about a video from an entirely different thread. I suggest you put up or shut up. If you think it's real, then say why, if you think it's fake, then say why. Don't just come in here, without a single opinion on this video, other then bashing peoples comments you think are unlikely, and act like we are "making a mockery of free speech".


Sooner or later, you have to ask why either of them are really here. They make a mockery of free speech.
How is what your doing any better? The point to these threads, is to analyze and hypothesize what is going on in the video, but you haven't done this at all. May I ask why you're even in this thread, if you haven't even contributed at all?



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Originally posted by groingrinder
It was kind of funny how when the rain started, the show was over. But they couldn't have been lanterns. Just alien space ships that are afraid of rain.


It was already raining genius!!! I think you need to watch the video a few more times to clear out the baby batter in your brain.
I live in an ATL skyrise condo. I'm on the 15th floor, and when it rains, you can see it come from miles away, or it can hit my building before it hits my adjacent building. Just because it was raining where he was filming, doesn't mean it hit the objects. It doesn't just rain everywhere at once, it comes in patches.


Hmmm...what an excellent way to cover your tracks. That may work with someone who has no critical thinking ability, but, it isn't going to work here. Those supposed "lanters" were spread out in several different areas. Those rain "patches" that you speak of could have been hitting anywhere. How clever of the rain to ignore 5 different "lanterns" all at once and just rain on the camera, the people, and the area that they were sitting. NOPE. FAIL.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by NightVision
 


Indeed. After awhile, I really start to lose faith in humanity with the blatant attempts for people to insult their own intelligences while at the same time, lowering the general IQ of the forum as a whole. Some of the more "plausible" explanations for a phenomenon that they cannot explain just appeal to the lowest common denominator. As long as their explanations fall in line with the predispositions of others, they can pass of the things that make them 'uncomfortable' as anything that their limited memories can immediately associate with normality. Its getting old.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TravisT
 


Maybe what we are doing is called "DAMAGE CONTROL." Without people like us, nutballs like yourselves will completely take over a thread without any checks and balances.

Although we have offered no insight as to what these lights are, (We weren't there and neither were you), at least we aren't making any definitive statements and attempting to downgrade those who tend to believe other explanations rather than the one's that you propose as "FACT."

As long as you guys have your elite little club of "nonbelievers" stamping out the hopes of others, there will be people like us stamping out the mass stupidity that you guys tend to spread. Get used to it.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Originally posted by TravisT

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Originally posted by groingrinder
It was kind of funny how when the rain started, the show was over. But they couldn't have been lanterns. Just alien space ships that are afraid of rain.


It was already raining genius!!! I think you need to watch the video a few more times to clear out the baby batter in your brain.
I live in an ATL skyrise condo. I'm on the 15th floor, and when it rains, you can see it come from miles away, or it can hit my building before it hits my adjacent building. Just because it was raining where he was filming, doesn't mean it hit the objects. It doesn't just rain everywhere at once, it comes in patches.


Hmmm...what an excellent way to cover your tracks. That may work with someone who has no critical thinking ability, but, it isn't going to work here. Those supposed "lanters" were spread out in several different areas. Those rain "patches" that you speak of could have been hitting anywhere. How clever of the rain to ignore 5 different "lanterns" all at once and just rain on the camera, the people, and the area that they were sitting. NOPE. FAIL.
Like I already said, the rain could have been coming towards the people first, before it hit the lights in the distance. It doesn't just rain in one spot, and then automatically stop. If the rain cloud hit the people first, it could have also been going towards the lights, or it could have been in patches, still resulting in hitting the people first, and then another patch of rain hitting the lights. How is this hard to understand? I find it funny that you're getting mad at people "debunking" this UFO video, and you're here debunking rain patterns. LOL!



Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by TravisT
 

ered no insight as to what these lights are, (We weren't there and neither were you), at least we aren't making any definitive statements and attempting to downgrade those who tend to believe other explanations rather than the one's that you propose as "FACT."
By all means, where do I say anything is fact? If I do recall, you just told me you weren't there, and you are telling me for a fact that the rain couldn't be hitting the people before hitting the lights in the air. You basically just told me that it was an unreasonable idea to think that lights far in the distance couldn't be hit by rain. I was giving hypothesis to your question, you're the one making up "facts".

As for the "downgrade" comment: What are you talking about? Who am I making fun of, and even so, you just called me a "nutball". Good god, man, get it together.



As long as you guys have your elite little club of "nonbelievers" stamping out the hopes of others, there will be people like us stamping out the mass stupidity that you guys tend to spread. Get used to it.
I do believe in ET's, but like I've already said in this thread, I don't believe every internet video, that has lights in the sky, to be of extraterrestrial origin. Are you telling me that this video is *gasp* genuine, or should I say, "fact".


[edit on 19-11-2009 by TravisT]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT
Well, I'm sorry, but where is even one of your theories about the video in here? It seems you just come in here and yell at "debunkers", then allude to me "derailing the thread", but then continue to talk about a video from an entirely different thread. I suggest you put up or shut up.


For a guy who boasts across the web that he makes 100k/yr and lives in a posh ATL condo, reading comprehension is clearly not your strong suit.

May I suggest u read my earlier posts...again.

No gold star for Travis today. Try again tomorrow.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision

Originally posted by TravisT
Well, I'm sorry, but where is even one of your theories about the video in here? It seems you just come in here and yell at "debunkers", then allude to me "derailing the thread", but then continue to talk about a video from an entirely different thread. I suggest you put up or shut up.


For a guy who boasts across the web that he makes 100k/yr and lives in a posh ATL condo, reading comprehension is clearly not your strong suit.

May I suggest u read my earlier posts...again.

No gold star for Travis today. Try again tomorrow.

No, I would love for you to show me. I see where you said there is no definitive proof, but other then that, you haven't made any comment on what is in the video. I just saw you attack me out of nowhere, and then you were talking about some guys name Mike and his video on UFO Hunters. Again, why are you in this thread if you're not going to contribute?

[edit on 19-11-2009 by TravisT]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT

No, I would love for you to show me. I see where you said there is no definitive proof, but other then that, you haven't made any comment on what is in the video. I just saw you attack me out of nowhere, and then you were talking about some guys name Mike and his video on UFO Hunters. Again, why are you in this thread if you're not going to contribute?


Oh Great Thread-Derailer. A request for his highness:

A) Please show 'definitive proof' of where I 'attacked' you.

B) Definition: inconclusive - Adj -not conclusive; not putting an end to doubt or question.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightVision

A) Please show 'definitive proof' of where I 'attacked' you.
First post that I made, page 8. Then you tried to say, "I wasn't just directed [that statement] towards you"(pg.9). Meaning: Your insults were still directed towards me, and anybody else who shared a similar opinion on these videos.


B) Definition: inconclusive - Adj -not conclusive; not putting an end to doubt or question.
Oh, so by not contributing to this thread, you feel you have the right to try and belittle the ones who are? The fact remains, you haven't contributed to this thread in the slightest. And it's hard to say that you are even inconclusive about the video, because you haven't even shared your doubts or opinions on anything. Saying something is "inconclusive", without putting out your own opinions, isn't a contribution, it's a cop-out. If you have nothing to contribute, or think that this video shouldn't be hypothesized, due to "lack of visual evidence", then why are you here? It just sounds like you enjoy getting a rouse out of the "New-Age Nutters" and the "Noisy-Know-It-All-Disbelievers", which would seem like a troll, and ironically, is someone who doesn't contribute directly to threads, and whose goal is to make fun of other members. Again, put up or shut up. Either share your opinions on the video, or leave with no real opinion. Because, if you can't come up with your own opinion on the matter, then I don't think you need to comment on other peoples ideas, without backing them up with your own. So far, you haven't done this at all.......

[edit on 19-11-2009 by TravisT]



new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join