The Battle of L.A in 1942 was a Nazi Haunebu III UFO? New Enchanced Photos.

I do not believe the puff of smoke explanation makes much sense and I do not see how Arbitrageur's argument has improved over the discussion in the other BOLA thread.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

First, there's no clear evidence of any UFO. All I see in that picture are clouds of smoke. Like I said the picture is a Rorschach test, you see what you want to see.

Second, I did provide evidence, that the balloons were launched, were tracked by the people that launched them, that they identified and reported that it was the balloon being shot at.

I am not sure where your going with this but (tongue in cheek) that was my attempt of humour, a UFO is an acronym for Unidentified Flying Object, the army aren't going to fire shell after shell at a cloud of smoke, that would be foolish. I believe this even was witnessed by many people and everyone thought that it was advanced NAZI technology including the army, am I wrong?

reply to post by loner007


That happened a bit later in the war, early 1944 or thereabouts I think...

Battle of L.A. was much earlier.
****

My question for the premise of this conversation, and I am as many of you know, am more than slightly skeptical of U.F.O.'s in general... If Nazi Germany had contact with aliens, or reverse engineered their own spacecraft from sources unknown, why only one, and why were they not used later in the war to at the very least stave off defeat long enough to work out a deal with the western allies?

This episode, along with the later Foofighter sightings/encounters later on do say something strange was going on...but high tech Nazi flying saucers? If they had them, why so little impact?

reply to post by TimothyMartin


There is No "New Enchanced Photos". thanks for wasting my time!

Your link to Rense is OLD dated: 8-31-5

and the video is dated December 17, 2006.
and as for cyraxandflyrax's rubbish is just that, Rubbish.


Zelong.

reply to post by seagull


I agree, if Germany had advanced technology why not put all its resources in to developing it quickly to win the war. Moore like that a UFO crashed, ET's were retrieved (something made Hitler fascinated about 'life' outside the box.) and that the nazi scientists tried to back engineer the technology.

Why else would the USA government take back and employ a large number of them after the war?

Originally posted by loner007
hmm i was under the impression they was shooting at paper balloons releaed by Japan to drop bombs on America using the jet stream....They did release thousands of them....

yeah, but that was hush-hush, public did not know about this.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I think the photo enhancements are a bit of a Rorschach test, you see what you want to see in them.

Before the enhancement, I see puffs of smoke. After the enhancements, I see puffs of smoke. If I was looking for something else, I might be able to see something else, kind of like looking up at clouds on a lazy Sunday afternoon trying to see what shapes I can spot in them.

They had a case of war nerves, and they initially started firing at a balloon, but after that most of the shells were being fired at puffs of smoke from the previous rounds detonating in the sky. I know many people don't want to believe that, but I think that's what happened and the evidence supports it.

But even without any aliens or UFOs, it's still a fascinating case. How can people get so jittery that they would fire so many rounds of shells just because a balloon was launched and they had seen some earlier radar blips over the ocean? And how can so many eyewitness accounts be so hopelessly divergent? Some people saw a few planes, some people saw over 100 planes, some people saw the light (the balloon) that started it all, and many of the eyewitness accounts are mutually exclusive, that is they can't all be right. Therefore, many of the eyewitness accounts MUST be wrong, regardless of what you believe actually happened that night. That in itself is fascinating.

guy, you arent being intellectual, rational, scientific, or reasonable... you are being in denial.

puffs of smoke? really? and 'they initially started firing at a balloon, but after that most of the shells were being fired at puffs of smoke from the previous rounds detonating in the sky.' i am fairly certain a balloon cant withstand 1 hit, let alone the multiple hits that should, nay MUST have occured after firing 1400 shells. the evidence does not support anything youi just said. there are multiple lights trained on an OBJECT, which i assume is stationary at least for a moment, and definitely not smoke.

and then to attempt to sound intellectual by commenting on what a fascinating event it is that so many people could be so worked up over... blah blah blah

like i said, you arent being rational, Occams razor is a principle, not to be used all the time, because sometimes you end up going away from what you are trying to uncover... the truth.

Originally posted by TimothyMartin
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Seems like the most logical answer, and until we get any proof otherwise, I think your answer would be the easiest to believe.

We can never find the truth without accepting that we were wrong about somehing.
So I guess I should leave this alone and keep searchng elsewere for the answers.
Thanks.

THAT was logical to you?

no wonder you are so lost.

reply to post by Phoebus


Hardly a secret in the NW (Washington, Oregon, etc.) where these things came down... Started several small fires and killed at least one person. If I remember correctly, and I may not be, this was a long while ago, when I was a kid some folks found the remains of one of them in a forest in Oregon...but I may be mistaken about that.

Not hush-hush at all...depending, of course, where you live.

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by seagull

 

I agree, if Germany had advanced technology why not put all its resources in to developing it quickly to win the war.

I think it's because the Nazi agenda at the time, was not the ultimate agenda of those that this technology really came from.

Beyond that, this is not the kind of technology that you can just whip together quickly.

I've seen that enhanced photo before...

I think there is no way that is a Nazi UFO- that thing survived hundreds of direct hits from anti-aircraft fire. If it could survive that many hits, that early in the war, Germany would have no doubt used that technology for the rest of the war, for which there is no evidence it did.

I think that this is possibly the best UFO case ever- How can people believe it is anything earthly when it can survive hundreds of direct anti-air hits without even showing any signs of impact?

Originally posted by 814ck0u7

guy, you arent being intellectual, rational, scientific, or reasonable... you are being in denial.

In point of fact he is being rational, and reasonable. Maybe he's wrong, if he is, so am I... Doesn't make him any less rational or reasonable. Just wrong.

puffs of smoke? really? and 'they initially started firing at a balloon, but after that most of the shells were being fired at puffs of smoke from the previous rounds detonating in the sky.' i am fairly certain a balloon cant withstand 1 hit, let alone the multiple hits that should, nay MUST have occured after firing 1400 shells. the evidence does not support anything youi just said. there are multiple lights trained on an OBJECT, which i assume is stationary at least for a moment, and definitely not smoke.

Given the near hysteria of the time...remember this was shortly after the Pearl Harbour attack, Japan looked to be sweeping the board at the time, it's not surprising that antiaircraft batteries, manned by inexperianced, illtrained citizen soldiers, would start shooting at anything even vaguely resembling an enemy aircraft. Heck, they shot at friendly aircraft often enough, too... Once one started firing, they all started firing...no real mystery there. The only mystery, and this one'll likely never be solved is just what they were shooting at... I suppose, note my skepticism, it could have been aliens from "out there", seems more likely to have been something much more mundane... But, we'll probably never know...which is why the event is so endlessly fascinating.

and then to attempt to sound intellectual by commenting on what a fascinating event it is that so many people could be so worked up over... blah blah blah

Hysteria will do that. Remember the times...

like i said, you arent being rational, Occams razor is a principle, not to be used all the time, because sometimes you end up going away from what you are trying to uncover... the truth.

Occam's razor is indeed a principle, not an immutable law of nature, as some treat it. That much is true. But it's a principle because more often than not, it's true... It is a tool used in discovering the truth...and was being used as such in this case. Going off half cocked on a theory can also lead away from the truth, too. There is so little evidence in this case that we'll in all liklihood never get to what it was, or wasn't, in reality.

reply to post by seagull


saying something that appears to be a solid, metallic, flying (not floating) object is first a balloon then after being downed by artillery, is just smoke from said artillery is not reasonable or rational.

it would be rational to admit that we have no idea what it is, which i think you, seagull are approaching, instead of listing off all the mundane things it COULD be, while at the same time completely disregarding things we consider irrational. remember, not long ago it was 'rational thought' that planes wouldn't break the sound barrier because 'thats too fast' or they wouldnt fly above a certain height because it was too high.... and lets not forget the commonly accepted fact so long ago that the earth was flat.

associating astounding events with mundane occurrences is just that... and nothing more.

there is however a huge difference between a wild imagination and an open mind. im sure we can agree on this.


and damn your mild-mannered intellect is soothing, i can see why you are a forum moderator.

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by Phoebus

 

Hardly a secret in the NW (Washington, Oregon, etc.) where these things came down... Started several small fires and killed at least one person. If I remember correctly, and I may not be, this was a long while ago, when I was a kid some folks found the remains of one of them in a forest in Oregon...but I may be mistaken about that.

Not hush-hush at all...depending, of course, where you live.

Wow thanks seagull this is the sort of information I like to hear from a local we are the change of the Guard it is up to us to ask Our Elder folks about such things for real accounts before they are lost.

I have only Ever seen one photo from the L.A Battle same as the OP



I've always thought we need a Raw photo from the Negative, (this photo would be a copy of a copy from the News paper report than uploaded) than we will find it's dark very dark because night photo's or film from 1942 weren't so good until the artist enhanced the image for publication.


Notice I never mentioned photo's from other people in the location is there any? In 1942 if you had a good camera you wouldn't use it, it's in the middle of a war? (nothing new, get to the Bunker)


Zelong.

well it was not without reason that the us went to war then..
resulting in operation paperclip...

greyfalcon.us...

the germans had very advanced technology !!! per example..the first type of magnatron aboard the U-boats....for heating there food....

reply to post by 814ck0u7

and damn your mild-mannered intellect is soothing, i can see why you are a forum moderator.

Thanks! That's just about the nicest thing I've had said about me here... You're my new favorite member....

We're going to have to agree to disagree on the rationality of explaining what mundane object it could have been. I think the place to start is to see what it might have been, rather than immediately jump to the fantastic as an explanation...

Since there is no real evidence other than this very old, and not very good, picture; there's really no wrong answer here...only conjecture. Which is, of course, neither wrong nor right. But that's what makes discussing conjectures so much fun...no one's wrong.

reply to post by Zelong

I've always thought we need a Raw photo from the Negative, (this photo would be a copy of a copy from the News paper report than uploaded) than we will find it's dark very dark because night photo's or film from 1942 weren't so good until the artist enhanced the image for publication.

That would, indeed, be sweet. Possibly answer, and definitively, this question. But, barring some sort of miracle, the negative is probably dust, or gathering same, in some dark basement somewhere...

reply to post by 814ck0u7

A solid metallic object? How many witnesses described it that way? What about these descriptions?

Searchlights sought out either a plane or a blimp

www.bookmice.net...

Two hundred planes

No planes

A giant butterfly

bombs dropping everywhere

A plane shot down

www.bookmice.net...

Reports from excited civilian observers, who were sure they saw planes, ranged from one to 200. But one watcher near an aircraft factory said he had long-range field glasses trained to the sky areas raked by the long, slim rays of the searchlights, and saw "not one single plane in all the time the firing was going on.

www.bookmice.net...

No one had any clear idea or view of anything that night. There were no planes in the air, no blimps, no giant butterflies, nothing but possibly a weather balloon and a lot of smoke.



[edit on 2/15/2010 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage

A giant butterfly

Appropriate, since we were at war with Japan at the time... . I love Japanese monster movies...

I've never run across that particular description before...

It's unlikely it was a giant butterfly . But it does, so far as I know, remain a mystery as to exactly what it was so many saw, or thought they saw... I've not done any reading on this event in the past few years, so I'm not up to date, as it were...

A giant butterfly....

Any possibility the saucer was built in America way before WWII.
There is a suspected Los Alamos saucer operation in the late
1930s before WWII with van Braun.
Now the rail road passes not too far way and those same steps
were passed in the last 1940s for the Manhattan Atomic Bomb
Project. Now I don't know if high voltage is used in bomb production
but there is good assurance that the UFO saucer uses a special kind
of electricity.
So ten years between saucer work and bomb work wow.
Wait. There are indications that before the turn of the century and
1912 the saucer project was in the works in America and later offered
to the CFR (promoting the League of Nations) as a project for the League
of Nations to ward off wars. Naturally a JP Morgan was pulled and
like who needs the League when the CFR has the saucer.
Just so happened the saucer project may have been in another
facility that would some day be an atomic facility in the great north west
coast. So thats how our saucers got to the Battle of L.A.