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 UFO Footage from Northeast England 7-18-10

page: 18
32
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


. The reason i went back to check the whole thread was because something on the video was nagging at me. I couldn't, for the life of me find the trees and bushes that are clearly shown in the video if the camera was facing West looking over Gateshead. Lo and behold, i find the post from mazzy saying they were over looking Jarrow.


Ahhhh. i think fair enough now lets go back and check the video once more. It is now absolutely clear to me where the trees are and how narrow the field of view really is through that camera lens. For the lights to be, even in the far left of the video, if they were over the firing range it would mean the horizon would have to some 40 miles in total west to east.

The camera is facing almost due North and the firing range is way out of shot on the left. It is nowhere near where the lights appear. You'd know that if you'd actually bothered to do as i suggested and checked the google map. The camera is pointing over the roof of what looks like a warehouse with the large tree and bushes in front of it. That means it is nowhere near the same field of view as the firing range. If they are being honest about the camera looking over Jarrow the lights are actually somewhere over a line bisecting North Tyneside/North Shields Cramlington/Bedlington further North. The firing range is some miles to the West oft his, it isn't even close to being in the field of view.

If the range was in view the camera would be facing Hedburn. It's not, it's facing the Jarrow and the field of view is nothing like wide enough to include the firing range. That is a simple fact.




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


FireMoon, let me make this clear for you......

These are flares, I have seen these before, these are mortar fired hence why you don't see the trail, regardless they are flares I can just tell from experience.

I am going to phone the ranges later today and find out if flares were fired that night.

REGARDLESS they are ground fired militay parachute flares, i didn't want to say this before for my own personal "dont want to sound like a smart arse" reasons. But i am now getting sick of this, THESE are flares, , end of story!



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk

I really hate to sound negative, but i'll refer back to what I said about pesky neighbours and their chinese lanterns. Once upon a time you only ever seen these at the odd hippy festival (like solfest up the road from me), and they were beautiful and mind blowing (especially after drinking one of those funny mushroom tasting tea's that the hippies offered, lol)

Now they seem to be getting released regularly, which is really gonna hamper research into genuine sightings.


Very true. It's indicative of Chinese Lanterns that in connection with these videos I searched for any reports of releases of Chinese Lanterns over Gateshead, even though I thought the lights were far too bright.


Let's try and remain calm people, and accept people may not agree with what you think the lights are.

We've done really well with keeping this thread nice and civil and in good spirit, let's not ruin that.



[edit on 31-7-2010 by Regensturm]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by yigsstarhouse

"#
ged8802
5 hours ago
im the ufoligist who filmed this event i was ghosthunting at cleadon mill.we caught one of the craft flying over cleadon village 2hrs before flying at 700ft it was the size of a house i hope to put this on youtube soon.this footage is not fake and they are not flares .why would flares be released over gateshead why? they dont even act like flares.and they are not man made.simple as that.this is for the debunkers and sceptics. "




This man who took the footage claims to be a ufologist and proceeds to say these are not man made without any proof whatsoever? How long's he been a ufologist for, 10 minutes? He actually called them craft too. This guy will believe anything, he's not in the least bit subjective. I'd like to see the bigger than a house claim though, I'd like to see what reference points he used to gauge the size.

He wants to believe so much that it clouds his belief.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
OK, it is official, Otterburn ranges have told me that flares were indeed fired, they even have a record at first flare fired 01:43 on 18/07/10, if someone else could phone them to verify what I have just wrote that would be fantastic. Can we please put this story to rest.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by yigsstarhouse

"#
ged8802
5 hours ago
im the ufoligist who filmed this event i was ghosthunting at cleadon mill.we caught one
of the craft flying over cleadon village 2hrs before flying at 700ft it was the size of a
house i hope to put this on youtube soon.this footage is not fake and they are not flares
.why would flares be released over gateshead why? they dont even act like flares.and
they are not man made.simple as that.this is for the debunkers and sceptics. "


Why would flares be released over Gateshead? This was already answered here in this
thread with enough information, why don't you read the thread and update yourself.

They don't even act like flares? Wrong. They look, act, behave like military flares and
this has been proved by me here, check the two videos I provided the one from Brazil
and the one showing mortars flares during a military action. Do yourself a favor and
get updated by learning how military flares act before claiming anything here.

They are not man made? And where is your evidence to support that.

THE CHALLENGE - You say you are an ufologist, if this is true why haven't you provided
a daytime footage from the same location as required in any UFO investigation?
It would be very simple just to go again to the exact spot, record daytime views
and then upload the video to YouTube. What are you waiting for.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
To everyone who says it is flares remember that flares are dropped from an airplane. [color=#33FFFF]So where is the airplane in the video?



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


A picture is worth a thousand words...or two lines.




posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
To everyone who says it is flares remember that flares are dropped from an airplane.
[color=#33FFFF]So where is the airplane in the video?



Not exactly true, flares are also shooted by mortars during a military action.

Military Tactics - Ground Flare

When our troops made contact with the enemy at night, one of the first things they'd do
was to fire mortar flares to get a light on the scene. It's a lot easier to hit something if
you can see it. That's a very big deal when you're in a night firefight.

If you like to see a video of mortars firing flares wacth this one. At 0:26 you can even
see the actual mortar shooting these flares. Do these military flares look and act similar
to you? Click on the video or on YouTube Link.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Here we go again. back slapping without the facts.

fact the elevation of the point the film was taken from is no higher than 80 metres. That on a perfect viewing day gives a rough maximum horizon of some 32 kilometres, or some 20 miles. it was a cloudy night so the horizon was probably a lot closer than that. The range is over 30 miles away.

The cameraman says that the water tower was on the left of their position as they filmed. Well that cannot be overlooking Jarrow if they filming from the mill. Jarrow is actually west by north west of the mill. Ie almost due west.

The second lot might well be flares but if the telemetry is accurate they sure ain't the ones being fired from the Otterburn range if the camera was pointing North with the Water tower to the left as is claimed is exactly the same in the picture mazzy linked us to.


That still leaves the video of a light travelling at a rate of knots across the sky in the first video. If that is 32 miles away it is moving at hundreds of miles an hour. It isn't a flare from Otterburn then end of as flares dont fly over South Shields when shot from 32 miles away.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 



Here we go again. back slapping without the facts.

No...here YOU go again.

Repeatedly we( myself and other members) have requested YOU; FIREMOON to show us anything other than your text/retoric : ie: maps...data, phone calls etc.
anything other than your rhetoric ....but you fail to produce...everyone else (too many too list). but those who have actually been following this thread know now that YOU are in fact incapable of providing corroborative evidence to substantiate your claims here. You have no stance to claim other than your ability to type. In fact, I want you to prove me wrong...post 1 map or corroborative external source to back your claim. You don't know how!...your avoidance of my direct challenge to you to refute my claim, will assuredly be the acquiescence of the facts as they now stand.

In other words....produce your claims in proof other than words ....or STFU!

Moonsparkle said:

The cameraman says that the water tower was on the left of their position as they filmed. Well that cannot be overlooking Jarrow if they filming from the mill. Jarrow is actually west by north west of the mill. Ie almost due west.



The eyewitness said:

Originally posted by mozzy1113
Guys I have got myself confused, and I have given you incorrect information. The tower was to the right of where were were looking, NOT to the left. We were standing just to the left of the mill, looking north northwest.


Now...T&C now truly prevent me from telling you how incredibly inept a reader you must be..(in terms I would say to your face).... because this is the SECOND time you have missed this!...YOU FAIL mOON fizzle.




Wrong Twinklemoon...as corrected by Mozzy: Now, once again...YOU go back and read the whole thread!


Edit to edit an edit










[edit on 1-8-2010 by Zeptepi]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 03:51 AM
link   
GUYS OTTERBURN HAVE CONFIRMED THAT FLARES WERE FIRED AT THE TIME THE VIDEO WAS SHOT, THEY DID NOT TELL ME HOW, BUT I AM TELLING YOU FROM EXPERIENCE THEY WERE GROUND FIRED MORTAR // PARACHUTE FLARES,


[edit on 1/8/10 by woogleuk]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


Yes...Thanks for calling them woogleuk...
Case closed as far as I am concerned..Smack the moon dude if you see him again..
good work ATS!



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:51 AM
link   
I think case should be closed before it gets nasty. Both the witnesses and ATS members have put forth their comments in good faith.





posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zeptepi
reply to post by woogleuk
 


Yes...Thanks for calling them woogleuk...
Case closed as far as I am concerned..Smack the moon dude if you see him again..
good work ATS!


I'm sorry? And you're taking his word for fact why exactly?

For someone who has phoned a military base to get answers he hasn't come back telling us very much.

Maybe military bases do just answer random questions from strangers on the phone and maybe those strangers would come back to a multi page thread, where people have been very interested and not give any worthwhile description of how the conversation went.

I dunno. But why believe one persons word for something and not anothers if neither are offering any proof?



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by triplesod
 


You make a very valid point triplesod.

Indeed, I seem to have placed undue faith on the "phone call". I can't honestly take that as blind faith that the call was actually made. I will blame my excursion on the wine last night.

I would be interested to have more proof that the base did in fact make those statements.

Thanks triplesod, for pointing out my error.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


Woogleuk.....

Your info aligns with my own initial opinions as posted to the effect the objects are flares.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Zeptepi
 


streetmap.com...,+South+Tyneside+&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf

Note position of of windmill to Tower... also note the contour lines. Its called science. it called trying to ascertain whether the people who shot the footage have a clue what they were doing and if they reported it correctly.

If as they say the Water tower was on the left when filimng, then it was looking in a totally different direction to that they claim. Plus lets just ignore the inconvenient fact that. The firing range is mostly spread out over an area about 300 metres in heights. Directly in front of the firing range is a wooded set of hills 400 meres in heights. In other words, the range is in effect, from the South West covered by a wall that is up to 300 feet high. You and your cohorts on here just steamed in knowing the answer without recourse to actually studying the reality at all.


have you explained the corroborative report of *strange lights over Blaydon* or were they flares form the range? Have you even come close to explaining the object that they claim flew over them?

Oh no you haven't at all. So do everyone a favour and just either put up or shut up and quit acting like you know everything when the truth is, you haven;t actually addressed the evidence at all, just the part you think you can explain and chosen to dump the rest. That is not science it's just bs.

[edit on 1-8-2010 by FireMoon]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   



1 minute 10.... "When it come past it were about the size of a house"

From what the poster said, they pulled out the camera in the aftermath of this to try and film it. Maybe they didn't it just goes to show hoe one needs to actually keep your wits about you and report exactly not assume and guess. , but lets actually start with the facts not work back from a perceived solution that happens to fit the mindset of some people on here. That's exactly the same sort of science those same people are all over when it's the likes of Stephen Greer.

Fact, if the Tower is to your left, the camera is pointing almost due North

Fact, Jarrow is West by North West of the Mill not North West.

Fact, the firing range is at least 10 miles over the horizon and has a range of hills up to 300 feet+ higher than the range, blocking the view from the South West almost immediately in front of it.

Fact an independent witness claims they saw *strange lights" over the Blaydon area from their vantage point in Gateshead. Thats 25 miles South of the firing range.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


We were standing at the hilltop where the cleadon mill is located, right next to the cleadon mill.

We were looking inland, northwest I think (but I will have to check that) towards jarrow.




Yes, its an old unused windmill. We were standing just to the left of it. Sorry, I got my dad to use google earth on his computer and he must have gave me the wrong coordinates.



Guys I have got myself confused, and I have given you incorrect information. The tower was to the right of where were were looking, NOT to the left. We were standing just to the left of the mill, looking north northwest. The tower was in front and to the right of where we were looking. The tower is clearly visible, even at night, as it is in fact very close to the mill. By contrast, the lights were very far in this distance, and NOT coming from the tower, of that I am certain. The tower is less than a mile away from where we wer standing, and as I said, was clearly visible at all times.


They were standing near the mill. The tower was on their right. The map I posted shows the mill. It shows the direction to Otterburn. The direction corresponds to the witness report.

Illumination flares are typically fired to ignite at an altitude of 400 to 750 meters, giving them a line of sight visibility of more than 50 miles.
www.globalsecurity.org...

The flares would be, and were, visible. In exactly the correct direction.

[edit on 8/1/2010 by Phage]




top topics



 
32
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join