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.

 

UFO filmed over Fernald Nuclear Facility - Nov, 1994.

page: 1
33
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+13 more 
posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Interesting UFO case investigated by the late Kenny Young (RIP) which involves an unknown object being filmed and witnessed by security personnel over Fernald Uranium processing site, Ohio on 23rd November, 1994.

The incident was reported by WCPO news station and its stated the Department of Energy witheld the security camera footage for three years until Mr Young was able to obtain it through the FOIA (theres also claims that the footage was 'edited').

The link below goes into more detail about the investigation and witness testimony - it also mentions other UFO incidents involving the Fernald U.S. Government nuclear weapons facility.




News report:








Testimony:



A 1:00 a.m. telephone call was made to the Fernald Security department, and a long talk with the primary witness finally made. The witness, also a part-time police officer, was willing to provide the tantalizing details of this mysterious event.

“I was just out on perimeter patrol enroute to stationary post, and there was this light in the sky that followed me,” stated the officer. “It looked like this thing had landing lights. When I turned, it turned, and just set there. It hovered east of my location, over the Hamilton parking lot.”

“It first appeared to be about the same elevation as routine air traffic, it was going due south, and then when I turned west, this thing turned around and followed me, so then I thought this was a helicopter. I rolled the window down and didn’t hear any sound, so then I called the Control Center.”

“Someone from the Control Center evidently swung their cameras around and was able to pick this up from a remote location. When 'The County' showed up, there were still photos of this thing that was given to them.”

“The Hamilton County Sheriff’s Department was summoned to the scene by someone from the Control Center, and they talked to me in the Administration Building and also took a report.”

The unidentified aircraft, described by the guard as a silent light which moved from north to south before suddenly hovering like a helicopter, performed a banking maneuver that could not be duplicated by conventional aircraft. According to the security guard, the object departed Fernald by lifting to a high elevation and hovering stationary in the sky, appearing as a star until well after daylight.







Security footage edited?





The videotape depicts a glaring light which shines toward the camera like a spotlight, only much brighter. Another videotape of the event was also recorded from a communications center camera, and it depicts an odd-looking light hovering in the sky, and then jump-cuts to the phenomenon as it hovers behind trees. Many voices can be heard saying, “Look at it, look at it!” and “didn’t it just move?

The images from the two cameras have been edited by the F.E.M.P. video department, and dubbed onto one videocassette labeled “Unidentified Object at the F.E.M.P.” The edited sequences are out of order, as per the time listed on the date-stamp within the video frame. There is some indication that there were other sequences not included on the video which had been edited out, based upon the gaps in the video date/time-stamp.







Other cases around Fernald Uranium processing plant:





A quick review of Fernald history revealed that an Unidentified Flying Object was reported over the FERNALD URANIUM PROCESSING PLANT on August 25, 1955. This event, witnessed by police Sgt. Ralph Weber, Patrolman Ernest Nehree and Patrolman Maurice Wiseman, was observed at 10:55 p.m. The ‘flickering red glow’ over the atom plant was described as 'something like the exhaust from an airliner, which flickered.' The object reportedly would drop 100 to 300 feet and then go back up, sometimes darting 'side to side' like it couldn't stay stationary. The Cincinnati Post reported that the Atomic Energy Commission had launched an investigation into the matter.


On April 10, 1983, an unknown object was visually observed by two motorists and an area resident in the vicinities of Layhigh Road and Hamilton-New London Road, both near Route 748. A power failure and unusual animal response followed as the object then landed in a field. A 50-foot circular area of effected ground was discovered, its outer fringes were scorched and there were several broken branches found there, having been forcefully removed from a nearby tree. A 3-foot ‘burned area’ was found at the center of the effected region. After meticulous research by Ron Schaffner and other investigators, this case remains unexplained. This location is 4.5 miles northeast of the Fernald facility.




Investigation:
kenny.anomalyresponse.org...
boyinthemachine.blogspot.com...

Kenny Young - bio:
www.theblackvault.com...

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]




posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   
S&F!

Good post as always karl 12.

They are always chocked full of good info, and put together really well. Keep it up!



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Interestingly enough, after a family member left NASA for a private defense contractor, he eventually ended up in his (or her's, lol) ladder years working to coordinate the clean-up of the Fernald facility due to his (or her's) experience with nuclear material and environmental protocols concerning such..

I could add more really interesting tidbits (as this was a close family member) however none of them have anything to do with UFO's or anything conspiratorial in nature, lol.


The ‘flickering red glow’ over the atom plant was described as 'something like the exhaust from an airliner, which flickered.' The object reportedly would drop 100 to 300 feet and then go back up....


There is not a chance that the witness was able to say this with any authority. Without major data, I don't care who he or she is, there is no way for them to give this type of estimate unless the thing was at a VERY low altitude (few story building height) and VERY close to their position.

And don't even get me started on security out there, lol. Most of them were of very low intelligence when I met them multiple times (being basically nothing more than washed up mall-security guard wannabes)

In the end, this report is not unlike many other reports, full of witness that report what they expect people to believe, what they expect to see, and completely consistent with many reports that have less than ideal circumstances or reliable witnesses. So, in a nutshell, nothing comes of things like this. No way to investigate, and nothing more than a light in the sky. Crap like this is nothing more than an earlier version of youtube, lol....only even less reliable!

I guess believers think if they bring useless things like this up often enough, that eventually they might reach the point of the straw breaking the camel's back and the rest of us (the world, that is) capitulating. Sorry, doesn't work that way. The straw that breaks this camel's back sure as heck ain't gonna be some report of some dudes seeing lights in the sky years and years ago. The straw that breaks this camels back ain't gonna come from some internet hero posting anything and everything they can find concerning this subject for personal gain, attention, or actual ignorance. Sorry to be the bearer or reality here.

Fun to discuss, fun to imagine, but useless in the grand scheme of finding the truth (unless you already believe that is...)

[edit on 31-3-2010 by IgnoreTheFacts]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I just gotta say one more thing, lol. Stationary light on a video, matches nothing that the "witnesses" claim to have seen (which is typical, because all that zipping around and right angle turn nonsense NEVER gets caught on tape when it counts, lol). And displays NOTHING of any importance that can't be explained by a hundred or so more mundane things. The only reason this jumps of the ledge of reason is the tale that has been weaved around it.

Also, gotta love the ridiculous reverb in the narrators audio (can you say cheap and moronic, aimed at the ignorant that eat this stuff up without actually pausing to think for themselves...)

And don't get me started on the "anonymous" source and the "mysterious" hiding of evidence for years (lol).

Nothing to see here, this type of crap is aimed at the very folks who support the very things that ensure this subject remains the LAUGHABLE joke that it is.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts

Nothing to see here, this type of crap is aimed at the very folks who support the very things that ensure this subject remains the LAUGHABLE joke that it is.



See your back to your old tricks again.


By all means comment on the actual incident but please stop with the childish rants.


Its a shame because you do make some vaild points but I suspect most of the time you're not taken seriously because you come across as an unhinged, attention seeking fanatic.






reply to post by susp3kt
 



Cheers mate, the only reference I could find to the 1955 police incident was in this catalogue listing UFO sightings at nuclear sites -there's not much on it but there does appear to be quite a lot of reports.



#4220: 1955/8/25 10:40 3 84:41:20W 39:16:40N 3333 NAM USA OHI 8 8
FERNALD,OH:2 SEP.COPS:LITE BROWN ORB HVRS OVR ATOMIC PLANT/NUCL FACILITY
Ref# 139 GROSS,L.:UFOs a HISTORY-1955/3 books Book # 2 Page 77 TOWN &CITY


Cheers.


+5 more 
posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
The straw that breaks this camels back ain't gonna come from some internet hero posting anything and everything they can find concerning this subject for personal gain, attention, or actual ignorance. Sorry to be the bearer or reality here.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by IgnoreTheFacts]


Well, here is another piece of reality for you, and I am sorry to have to bring it to you: I find your post rather insulting.

The OP, the "internet hero" as you call him. has brought a UFO case to our attention, and I find it strange that you seem to question his motives for doing so. In case you haven't noticed, Karl12 is hardly the OP's real name, he does not use his photo in his avatar, there is no personal "glory" for him to be earned. He does not own this website either, he does not ask you to buy anything, there is no money to be made for him by posting anything here at ATS. All he will get is some pixel stars and flags, it's not like he can use them to buy a new car. So why in the world would you bring up the question of "personal gain"?

And regarding ignorance? In case you haven't noticed this either: ATS is actually a discussion board! Many of us are here to learn and gain knowledge in order to become less ignorant. We "talk" about things, different people bring different pieces of information to the table. In this thread the OP brought an old UFO case to the table. All you brought to the table was a claim that the security guards were of "very low intelligence". (A claim with nothing to back it up, by the way. So it is basically useless, don't you agree? Like a tale, almost...)

I am sorry to be so blunt, ITF. I respect you in many ways, but I had to get this off my chest. I also apologize to the OP that my post is somewhat off topic, and I understand if a Mod want to remove it.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
I would humbly suggest that the unhinged attention seeking fanatic is more the type of person that continues to post case after case in a manner that makes them out to be some authority in the absurd.

But what do I know, I am just a fanatical debunker, lol. But, I might add, it is not the fanatical debunkers that has led this subject into the gutter.....you might want to give folks like me more credit, as we are trying to save you guys from yourselves.

You consistently shoot yourselves in the foot every chance you get.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Star and Flag.
Another good one. I like that you have plenty of info(back up) and not a lot of conjecture!



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by ziggystar60
And regarding ignorance? In case you haven't noticed this either: ATS is actually a discussion board! Many of us are here to learn and gain knowledge in order to become less ignorant. We "talk" about things, different people bring different pieces of information to the table. In this thread the OP brought an old UFO case to the table. All you brought to the table was a claim that the security guards were of "very low intelligence".



Ziggystar60, thanks for the reply and I do think you make a good point there - this is a discussion board and there are many unexplained UFO incidents out there to discuss (or possibly shed new light upon).

Granted many of the more puzzling UFO incidents (and threads) get wilfully ignored by armchair cynics who prefer to concentrate on the vague 'easy to explain away' cases but I suppose it's to be expected.

When it comes to this subject, attempts at derailing objective discussion have always existed but maybe one day there will be impartial, rigorous investigation into some of the incidents - I think Dr James Mcdonald makes a few good points in this thread about the failure of mainstream science to address the UFO subject and the statement below about 'ignoring the facts' is a relevant one.




"Because few scientists have carefully studied the literature and conducted field investigations, most know pratically nothing about UFOs. Their ignorance of the subject has much to do with their attitudes towards it".

Dr David M Jacobs, Professor of History, Temple University - (UFO Congress paper, 1980).


Cheers.


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
The late Kenny Young, the lead investigator in the Fernald case makes some appropriate comments below about 'sceptical' agendas, motivations and bias.





He also did some great work on collating police 911 UFO audio reports and goes into detail about other Ohio police UFO cases and recordings in this radio interview with Art Bell.


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Double post.


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Karl,

Many thanks for bringing this to our attention. I hadn't heard of this one, and whilst the video doesn't tell us too much, the police report was certainly interesting.

As to why the incident was kept out of site for three years, who knows. Possibly just embarrassment. Possibly a deliberate cover-up.

Either way, I think the audio comments loan weight to something strange occurring. Couple this with the police observations, and we have yet another tantalising - yet frustrating - glimpse into something possibly very extraordinary.

S&F'd



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mckyle
 


Mckyle, thanks for the reply and appreciate the comments -I thought it was worth making a thread on the incident as it sounded a pretty intriguing one.

I also looked everywhere for the sheriff report on the case as it's said the two attending policemen also witnessed the object but haven't found a thing.

I know its certainly not the first time UFOs have been reported over nuclear weapon storage areas - I don't know if you're aware of the work of Robert Hastings, Lawrence Fawcett, Barry Greenwood, Donald Johnson etc.. but they have done some great work on the subject and some of the incidents are very difficult to dismiss.


UFO reports from Nuclear/Atomic Sites.


Cheers.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Thanks for that link mate. I am not aware of those authors per se, but I've read some of their work, without knowing whose work I was reading - if that makes sense. I'll certainly have a look at the sources in detail, now that you've been kind enough to point me in their direction.

I noticed you put up the video of Kenny Young. Did you know Kenny personally? Also, do you know Royce?

As you know, Kenny did some great work, and whilst Royce has taken a hiatus, I still consider him one of the most competent, yet sadly, unsung, Ufologists.

Once again, thanks for the link.

As for that police report, I wonder if Internos could help you track it down? He seems to be well-connected to say the least ;-)

Cheers,
Matt



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts
 


If I were you I would never visit the "Aliens and UFOs" forum again.
It seems to make you troll-like. If you disagree with the material, then post why with evidence and polite discussion, not things like:


No way to investigate, and nothing more than a light in the sky. Crap like this is nothing more than an earlier version of youtube, lol....only even less reliable!
...
Fun to discuss, fun to imagine, but useless in the grand scheme of finding the truth (unless you already believe that is...)
"/ridicule"
Do you perform any research to be presented to the forum, or are you just against dedicated researchers doing the best they can on a topic that you cannot "wrap your mind around"? Why don't you get on the team and come on in for the big win? Couldn't hurt anymore than trollin'!



Also, gotta love the ridiculous reverb in the narrators audio (can you say cheap and moronic, aimed at the ignorant that eat this stuff up without actually pausing to think for themselves...)

And don't get me started on the "anonymous" source and the "mysterious" hiding of evidence for years (lol).

Nothing to see here, this type of crap is aimed at the very folks who support the very things that ensure this subject remains the LAUGHABLE joke that it is.



[edit on 31-3-2010 by 1SawSomeThings]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by mckyle
 



Hey bud, I didn't know Kenny Young personally but do have quite a lot of respect for his work -especialy on the Trumball Police UFO case featured in the Art Bell interviews. UFOWatchdog also seemed to hold him in pretty high regard as well (is that the Royce you mean?):




Kenny's investigations served as an example of what the word investigation meant. Kenny's dedication, professionalism, and diligence in being an objective reporter and investigator were an absolute credit to the field of UFO investigation. Kenny was never afraid to call a report unfounded or a hoax and was never afraid to speak out when a case merited further investigation or serious attention.

Link



As for the Fernald case, you're not wrong about Internos having a quite remarkable gift when it comes to tracking down UFO documentation -I'll send a nice message.


Cheers.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1SawSomeThings
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts
 

If I were you I would never visit the "Aliens and UFOs" forum again.


G'day 1SawSomeThings

I reckon IgnoreTheFacts is OK


He appears to know this subject well & he adds strong & colourful commentary to this forum......

.....albeit his commentary has become a little more strong & colourful during the past little while!

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 31-3-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


Thank you for that nice video of the late Mr Kenny Young discussing skeptics (debunkers). I do agree with the skeptic (IgnoreTheFacts) in parts as this is not the strongest case out there, but the hiding of it from the public for three years needs to be answered. Also, the reverb on the narrative in the video does sound ridiculous.

Thank you for the post, as I have not heard of this case before.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


G'day karl 12

A star & flag again for you my friend!

I enjoy your material very much


As stated by ITF, this might not be the strongest of cases, but it provides more "food for thought" & I'm sure the members will enjoy the discussion of this case.....

.....I know I will.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Maybe...maybe not, thanks for the post - I think Ignorethefacts makes some fair points on this thread...although you may be right about his commentary getting a little colourful (and emotional) of late.
There's a question on that thread which I'd be very interested to hear the answer to - let's hope he responds to it.

Cheers.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join