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.

 

[NEW PICS!] China airport UFO was no helicopter!!

page: 5
57
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Faiol
people here on ats are junkies for these fake pictures ... they want so much to believe that they think there is a conpisracy inside the website to say different things about the pictures

lol

its time to stop ...

those are not real pictures, u guys are trying to put a subject to the front page that doesnt have any data yet ... just wait, if it comes up then fine, otherwise, stop trying to deny that it is a helicopter


great, now I'm a helicopter-denier...

blurred lights in the sky may not be an alien craft, but just because it looks similar to other pictures of blurry helicopter lights doesn't necessarily make it a helicopter. The argument has merit either way and if ALL we had was this picture with no story - no airplane diversions, no light trails in the sky, no 1000s of witnesses - then I'd probably write it off as well ... but we do! We have a story. Maybe we can't trust the main news media, government, and military of China but the point remains that this is not simply a picture to debunk.




posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Originally posted by Phage
The first image you posted has nothing to do with the closing of the airport.

The second image is a helicopter.

Why do we need a new thread?

You are wasting your time, Phage.

No matter how many times you (or I, or anyone else) repeat over and over these blatantly obvious facts, certain users will persist against all reason.


right... "against all reason" like news agencies around the world claiming this is a UFO... you're right I should probably just close my mind, tap into the Phage is always right network, and just stop trying.

@Phage - this is not a personal attack on you at all, or any of the other ATS members who have a following, I'm just noting that just because a certain member says something and has a reputation doesn't mean they are always right and should be backed without sources and due diligence to the truth.

* This may be a helicopter
* The whole story might be a lie by some group of Chinese agenda-promoters

Theoretically one could take a picture of a car driving on a mountain road at night and end up with the same blurry light trail.

but we don't KNOW yet. the fat lady hasn't sung, case is still open, Tom Cruise is still in the closet.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by Thermo Klein]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Well, obviously the airport can pick up aircraft, incoming and outgoing. Can it pick up intercontinental missiles as well? They said they caught it on radar. Also it was stated that they didn't think any witnesses could see it, it would require special equipment (i.e. one would assume they mean a radar).

How high do intercontinental missiles fly? Well, even for short flights, the can go as high as 125,000 feet. That's a 100 mile flight altitude. For a longer flight, they can go as high as 1000 miles.

How far out does an airport radar detect objects? Well, as an example, the newest airport radar put into a Dheli airport this month, covers 250 nautical miles (one nautical mile, being 1.15 statute miles).

At the shortest flight distance for such a missile, it would be 23 miles out. But of course, this was a much higher flight. As such, it was probably quite a bit higher. Even at say, 400 miles out, it's out of range of pretty much all airport radar systems. Unless this airport has additional long-distance radars, used for other purposes. But, the stories say the radar control tower personal are the ones who spotted it on the radar, and were baffled.

So imo, whatever they saw... I do not think it was an missile test. Seems unlikely their radars would have caught it at all.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by fleabit]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Once again. The image of the rocket launch is from an event that occurred on June 30. It is not related to the closing of the airport. That image, and the story to accompany it was published here (among other places) on July 5.
www.global-military.com...



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
...so where are the new pictures, all I'm seeing is what we went over ad nauseam in the last thread.

This needed a second thread because...?

- Fry



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I understand that, but many eyewitnesses reported seeing something that one would assume would be a rocket test.

Just trying to head off the "it was a rocket test" theories.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 

You have posted two images. The first has nothing to do with the closing of the airport as it is of an event which occurred on June 30. The second may or may not be associated with the airport closing but just because it is published with a story about the closing does not mean it is.

Look at this story and the image posted. Did the Phoenix lights move to China?
www.nationalledger.com...

How about this one?
www.brahmand.com...

Oh, look. Helicopter photos that were posted right here on ATS months ago.
www.buzztab.com...

The images you posted are not "new". We know very little about what happened, all we know is that the airport was closed because officials thought it prudent. That's it. Everything is rumor. You say there were thousands of witnesses. We get one supposed image of the "object" which may or may not actually have anything to do with the incident.

This whole thing is a classic example of how the blanks in information get filled in with...nothing. A classic example of why UFO research is in the state it is.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


A thought just occurred when I saw the comparison between China photo 2010 and Christian painting 1710.

The beams of light could be a `projection` of an image into the skies, which appear to be cloudy at that time. Hmm. Perhaps, E.T. lives inside the earth and has `projected` images UFOs into the cloudy skies for a long time.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
I believe in UFOs because I have seen them. But I rarely, I mean rarely believe any UFO sightings posted on ATS. There have just been way to many fraudulent threads of UFO evidence.

That being said, I don't believe or disregard this incident. But I'm going to say that the original photo, IS NOT A HELICOPTER.

This is a helicopter at night.



Note the headlight at the front of the bottom, with the large blade and the tail light with the small blade.



This is NOT a HELICOPTER.

I'm not saying the the event is authentic or isn't. There have been reports but it's so, so, so in what I eel is reliability in them since all sources say the exact same thing and show the exact same thing.

But what is in that image IS NOT A HELICOPTER.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by pikypiky
 


The problem with the projection theory (and one of the reasons I believe the global elite would never use global projection/holograms to stage a UFO event) is that if there was even one flicker/glitch in it for even a second, people would know the truth, but I've yet to see a single UFO video where the UFO was "out-of-phase" for a flicker, although maybe they've perfected the technology that well.

On a side note, can anybody here link me to a post in the past where Phage was definitively proven wrong? I agree, to blindly believe whatever Phage says is stupid, but for the life of me, I can't think of a single time Phage wasn't correct or it was so vague that he couldn't be proven right or wrong either way.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


gotta say I agree with you...

When I saw the June 30th picture on so many different sites (as part of this) I assumed they were related. After seeing the source you provided of the missile test it seems this thread is irrelevant.

The picture of the alleged UFO in my OP does NOT look like a helicopter to me, but after seeing the less blurry version it could easily be a helicopter... se la vie. Next!!



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SonicInfinity
 
Hate to go off topic, but this was actually touched upon in the op.

Phage has a reputation for accuracy, and I believe it is well deserved. It seems that some members may be jealous of that sometimes.

I do not believe that anyone should blindly follow what someone posts because they have a good reputation, but when they have facts backing them up yet again, what are you to do?



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ahmose
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.




Reported.

You need a lesson in manners

On topic.. it should be obvious with a little bit of research that those are overexposed helicopters. Denying that is denying ignorance.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
A couple of those shots look like the rear end of the Millennium Falcon! It was just Han and Chewie taking her out for a spin...

On the more serious side, if I've learned one thing from reading these threads on ATS it's this:

IT WILL NEVER BE A U.F.O.

It will ALWAYS be a helicopter, a missile, a strangely-lit frisbee, swamp gas, some form of lightning, a flying squirrel, a flock of geese, lens flare, window reflection, some guy with a pie plate and a fishing rod, group hallucination, Venus, "one of ours", or the moon reflecting off a pond.

It will NEVER, EVER, however, be an actual U.F.O.

So say the debunkers (who, more and more lately, are starting to look as crazy of some of the hard-core "everything's a UFO" crowd.).

I'll just sit here and wait for the proverbial landing on the White House lawn.

In the meantime, however, it's just a missile, or a helicopter, or a bird, or...or....

*sigh*

[edit on 10-7-2010 by Nyteskye]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   


"China’s media activity has rocketed in recent years. It now has:

2,000 Newspapers

9,000 Magazines

287 TV channels

700m Mobile phone users

338m Internet users

180m Bloggers"




Over 700 MILLION mobile phone users and only 2 mediocre images.

This is proof enough for me, not to mention the obvious lack of any UFOs in the photos. I'm not buying it.




www.chinatoday.com...

[edit on 7/10/2010 by agent violet]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Just saying.. if it wasn't a rocket. And it wasn't. And it wasn't a helicopter. That would hardly be a UFO to the airport.

What was it?

Even military jets would be identified. Not that I'd believe that they would be so obtuse as to blindly fly a military craft (test or otherwise), over one of their airports.

I'm more concerned on what this thing was, than a couple of photos that may (and probably are), completely unrelated.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Has anyone else noticed that there are conflicting reports about this object being visible on radar? Chinadaily.com has reported that this object was not visible on radar while cnn.com and others boast that it was visible on radar. Members seem to generally agree that it was spotted on radar but Chinadaily.com was the original source of this info from the original article posted on ats. Today, I believe that this is an important discrepency that is being over-looked. UFO researchers seem to be pretty excited over the picture and the article and they spend so much of their time analyzing photos and videos to seperate obvious fakes from potentially authentic examples. I believe that chinadaily.com is one of the few sites that used an authentic photo of the craft actually seen in the skies that day. And if it didn't in fact show up on radar, and the picture is so convincing, and 1000's of witnesses didn't know what to think, why would we sit back and just accept the idea that it was a helicopter. As we know, a helicopter wouldn't shut down an airport. I just wanted to add that I don't believe it was a vehicle from another planet or galaxy, I do believe it was our own technology. I just want to help seperate the more probable truths from the fictions we are led to believe.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by anyjerk]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Do you folks not see the vapor trailing all the way down to the ground? It's a hologram.

I'm not saying all are. But this one is. A more advanced version of the Norway Spiral.

Obviously it's not your everyday "aircraft" or occurrence. But it's not real either.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by mryanbrown]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Paradigm2012
 


Maybe if you knew anything about long exposure photography you may have a different opinion. Take a 5 second photo of an airplane flying, or a helicopter with a search light on, and then compare them with the photos here.



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join