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.

 

The “Original” Foo Fighter Photo – Is It “Real”?

page: 5
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


I have tried to find the documentary made for British Tv where the Concord sighting is fully explained by someone who use to use the very same camera as the one in the Concord film. It is a lens effect, a known one, of a certain series of cameras.




posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
www.ufologie.net...


Several cases discussed here. I believe the Beaufighters concerned were carrying the latest air to air Radar units. I doubt a reflection does this. Plus, some were seen by multiple witnesses in the same flights from wholly different positions.

23 More Foo-Fighters were in the air last night. The Ops. Report says: "In vicinity of Hagenau Saw 2 lights coming Toward A/C from ground. After reaching the altitude of the A/C they leveled off and flew on the tail of Beau for 2 minutes And they peeled up and turned away. 8th mission - sighted 2 orange lights. One light sighted at 10,000 the other climbed until it disappeared.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

It was purportedly taken ”in 1942, over the Pacific”



www.ufocasebook.com...

I have pondered this picture for many years.

My question is, do you think the photo is “real”?


Hi Maybe...maybe not, interesting post.


I always did find it an intriguing picture and do still think it is a “real” photo, not a hoax or fake.

But it is impossible to say if the lights in that photo represent some real so called “Foo Fighters”.


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
My dad was a fighter pilot in WW2 and seen them himself over the pacific. He said they were like fire balls and they just followed them.

The Japanese and Germans did not know what they were either. Funny how nobody fired on them im sure they realized it would be foolish not knowing what these things were capable of. As for the foo fighters being the Nazi's secret weapon i really cant see it simply because the foo fighters did not down any planes or disrupt the campaigns.

What are they? I have no clue.


Thanks for sharing that Unknown Soldier .


I personally believe that the “Foo Fighters” phenomenon is a real phenomenon and that it has all to do with ET/Alien observations during the war.

Because they are as it seems mostly so small looking in comparing with the planes, I think it where/are remotely controlled observation crafts of some sort.

My two euro-cents.



[edit on 8/8/10 by spacevisitor]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Heliocentric
The Foo Fighter phenomenon was born mainly from eye witness observations by experienced war-time pilots and gunners who saw them with their own eyes outside the aircraft, and they (often) behaved in a guided manner (stalking the planes), which is why it was thought to be a new German weapon, not optical illusions.

That is exactly my point. For some reason people seem to think that optical illusions don't stalk or follow a plane, but in fact they can and do. So I think therein lies part of the reason people thought these things couldn't possibly be illusions or reflections because they didn't understand that those things can follow the plane.


Well, yes and no.

Perhaps a minor part of the Foo Fighter phenomenon was just about optical illusions.
Perhaps a tired, weary gunner who had been flying mission after mission caught a reflex or some type of optical illusion in the corner of the eye and went "What was that!?" Nerves on edge, expecting German fighters any time, and perhaps even fired a round at it.

Then again, these people were trained for the job. They just could not allow themselves to be fooled by optical illusions, and when you bring into the equation that whole airplane crews saw these dancing balls around the planes for long periods of time, in all different types of weather, often describing them as metallic, sometimes jumping from plane to plane, then no, I don't think optical illusions is an alternative.

If we can't take these people and their testimonies seriously, simply because we cannot accept the possibility that the Foo Fighters was (is) a phenomenon we cannot understand, or that it implicates something some consider incredulous, then aren't we pulling the rug under our concept of reality?


Originally posted by FireMoon
I have tried to find the documentary made for British Tv where the Concord sighting is fully explained by someone who use to use the very same camera as the one in the Concord film. It is a lens effect, a known one, of a certain series of cameras.


Easy to say, harder to prove. But I'm keeping an open mind, so bring it on!


[edit on 8-8-2010 by Heliocentric]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


I can only find part of the same documentary on line about a sighting by a BBC camera crew and reporter in Oxfordshire. The name of the actual whole documentary isn't listed.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


I can only find part of the same documentary on line about a sighting by a BBC camera crew and reporter in Oxfordshire. The name of the actual whole documentary isn't listed.


I'll see if I can track it down as well, I want to know.

Perhaps it would be better to post it in MMN's thread on the subject, it would be fun to see that thread come back to life:

abovetopsecret.com...

Another witness account of Foo Fighters (called "The Lights" or "The Thing" by British air crew):

www.uk-ufo.org...

On the evening of 26th April 1944 Arthur Horton taxied his Lancaster bomber onto the runway at RAF Mildenhall in preparation for a raid to Essen in Germany. It was, he thought, just another routine, if terrifying, mission. When interviewed by us in 1987 Horton claimed he had not heard about any unusual aerial phenomena during the war and as usual was only concerned with the task in hand - find the target, drop the bombs and return home as quickly and safely as possible. He had no idea of the events which would unfold over the next few hours, and how ‘The Thing’, as he called it, would almost cost him and his crew their lives. The raid went as exactly as planned despite the potentially fatal distractions of Luftwaffe night-fighters and the flak which sought them in the searchlight beams. Bombs dropped, the Lanc. turned for home and the crew allowed themselves to relax slightly. But shortly after leaving the target Horton’s intercom crackled into life with a panicky warning from his rear-gunner. Unidentified lights had appeared out of the darkness and were following the ‘plane. Horton asked the gunner if he was certain. Yes, he replied, four orange balls of light were tailing them, two on each side of the aircraft, accelerating in short, powerful, spurts. According to the frightened gunner they were about the size of large footballs and had a fiery glow to them. Intercom reports made it clear that other crew members could see them now, and Horton realised they must be real and not hallucinations brought on by combat fatigue. One gunner thought he could see small, stubby wings and possibly an exhaust glow from the rear of the objects. Now Horton was getting worried. He had never experienced anything like this before and whilst the unidentified flying objects were not displaying any signs of aggression he couldn’t take the risk. Forty three years after the event Arthur Horton clearly recalled exactly what he did next: ‘I of course immediately dropped the aircraft out of the sky. My gunners didn’t know what they were. Should they fire? By this time I was standing the aircraft on its tail and beginning a series of corkscrews and turns with the things following everything I did - but making no move to attack us. By this time we had the throttles ‘through the gate’, the gunners still asking what they should do. Apart from flying the thing I had to try and answer them. But were they some form of flying contraption that would explode at some specific distance from us, or on contact? Did they want us to fire at them to cause an explosion? Out of the kaleidoscope of thought the only answer was ‘If they are leaving us alone, leave them alone’.

Horton’s term ‘through the gate’ refers to a technique by which Lancaster pilots could move the throttle sideways and forwards, breaking a wire, ‘the gate’, in the process. This would then give considerable extra power. But the strain on the engines was immense and three minutes was the maximum amount of time recommended. Horton continued evasive action for ten minutes, during which time all the crew except he and the bomb aimer saw the phenomena. Whatever the objects were they stayed close to the Lancaster, duplicating its every move, until they reached the Dutch coast when, in the words of one of the gunners, ‘they seemed to burn themselves out’.

Exhausted, but relieved, Horton flew the Lancaster back to England. His dramatic evasive manoeuvres had caused a serious mechanical fault which resulted in them having to land at a different airfield. Horton and his crew were baffled by their mystery visitors, and could only presume they had been chased by a German secret weapon, perhaps a radio-controlled anti-aircraft rocket or shell. Upon reporting their experience to the Intelligence Officers at de-briefing they were met not with interest but with ridicule and no explanation as to what they had experienced. But Horton stuck to his account and wouldn’t be persuaded that his crew had imagined the glowing orange balls.

We have been unable to locate reference to this sighting in PRO files but evidence it took place does exist. In his log book for the flight Horton recorded they had been ‘Chased by rockets -4’. Bernard Dye, the mid-upper gunner also noted the incident in his log-book as, ‘Rocket attacks lasting ten minutes...’.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   


If I'm facing the same direction as other planes, the ocean is estimated -170 to -160 degree and my view is to my right, why wouldn't I captured part of my cockpit?

If I'm behind my pilot and standing with my roof open, why I couldn't captured part of my plane's wing?



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


I agree with what boondock has said.

Plenty of reports out there, that are not based on this or any other photo, but eyewitness testimony from bomber crews and fighter pilots.

(From all sides of the conflict)

I agree that because they are still 'unexplained', that it does not necessarily follow they were of ET origin, but all things being equal, i'd imagine they were/are ET. If one of the Earth powers had these ultra fast, ultra maneuverable football sized craft, the war would never have got started.

Many attribute these to Nazi secret weapons, but accounts say that they could not be used as weapons, due to the fact that any guns fitted could not shoot through the strong emf developed by these football sized craft.

I say that's rubbish.

If these were indeed developed by the Nazi powers, they wouldn't have needed to mount guns of any sort! They would have simply flown into the enemy aircraft, and destroyed them that way.

I seriously doubt that a mind brilliant enough to conceive and build such devices, or anyone else in command for that matter, couldn't have figured they would make perfect guided missiles.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Ok, just for the sake of trying a logical argument, place yourself as the ET explorer who went to outer space and ended in the atmosphere of an inhabited planet where their species fly rudimentary aircraft compared to yours.

Now would you bother their pilots following them tight close buzzing around their canopies and moving around and suddenly disappear? why in the heck would you do that?

You would understand that these pilots are already under stress when flying and you would certainly not add more stress and annoy them doing things they don't understand unless you're totally mischievous or dumb.

And if you wanted to communicate and tell them something, you would not have a problem inventing a transmitter that use their radio wavelengths and if you had no mouth or tongue to talk in it, you could just record an extract of the tons of messages and communications they have there and put up something like "Hello, how are you? this is a recording" and send this message into their cockpits.

Also you would understand that those creatures you are visiting have their own airspace and in their views you are transgressing it, why again would you do that ?


Anyways, logically talking i see no reason at all for those foo-fighters for being of ET origin. It has to be unknown natural or created by us phenomenons.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
I was wondering if somebody knew what type of radars were used at that time on both sides (ground and aircraft mounted) . Specifically what kind of waves were used to determine the radar picture . Maybe by accident a special wave range can be used to reveal semi cloaked orbs ? and that is why they seemed to appear out of nowhere and disappear from second to second ?

Just thinking out loud . Great thread by the way



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Conan The Usurper
 


You are assuming alien creatures , if those really are ET have the same thinking patterns as humans .

Also this does not have to be an advanced alien spacecraft , it can also be a rudimentary life form that lives in the atmosphere and is just attracted to something that planes emit , like heat , radio waves , etc
Just like a moth is attracted to light


[edit on 8-8-2010 by Thill]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thill
reply to post by Conan The Usurper
 


You are assuming alien creatures , if those really are ET have the same thinking patterns as humans .

Also this does not have to be an advanced alien spacecraft , it can also be a rudimentary life form that lives in the atmosphere and is just attracted to something that planes emit , like heat , radio waves , etc
Just like a moth is attracted to light


[edit on 8-8-2010 by Thill]


1- no i'm not assuming they have the same thinking patterns, i am assuming they would adapt their thinking to ours since they are the visitors, it's the least they could do.

2- Yes, it could be. With what i know i can't say it's impossible.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Personally, from the research I have uncovered, I think Foo Fighters could very well be plasma life forms that share our biosphere with us, and could possibly inhabit all of our solar systems planetary plasma atmospheres. There are far too many stories of these Foo Fighters, which move around the aircraft, as if they are playing with our clumsy flying machines. There is just far to many reports, not only by planes, but by astronauts themselves of this phenomenon.

Here is a thread I started on the subject.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conan The Usurper

Originally posted by Thill
reply to post by Conan The Usurper
 


You are assuming alien creatures , if those really are ET have the same thinking patterns as humans .

Also this does not have to be an advanced alien spacecraft , it can also be a rudimentary life form that lives in the atmosphere and is just attracted to something that planes emit , like heat , radio waves , etc
Just like a moth is attracted to light


[edit on 8-8-2010 by Thill]


1- no i'm not assuming they have the same thinking patterns, i am assuming they would adapt their thinking to ours since they are the visitors, it's the least they could do.


So you are adapting to thinking patterns of apes when going to the zoo ? or Elephants when going to the savanna ? or fish when you are diving ? I do not think so , You (generally speaking) still follow elephants around in cars, you still follow fish around underwater , you still go stare at apes in the zoo. I would say we as the visitors do not adapt to other species thinking patterns , so why would they
?



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


This is also my point of view , that those orbs are some kind of plasma based "animal" that either thrives in the atmosphere or even in outer space (might be 2 different species of animals , one being able to only sustain itself in planets atmospheres and other that might be able to survive in outer space)

I am not saying that all of the orbs are life forms , some sightings might be of advanced crafts but overall I am leaning more towards plasma based life forms that we have not yet discovered .

Edit : Thank You for the link to your thread looks informative


[edit on 8-8-2010 by Thill]



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
i will give you all a hint on this: it is the turtle shell like shape of them that makes me think that they are real.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


Thanks Thill, its my favorite subject.

The implications are huge. I am surprised this theory has n ever been given main stream media attention.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thill


1- no i'm not assuming they have the same thinking patterns, i am assuming they would adapt their thinking to ours since they are the visitors, it's the least they could do.





So you are adapting to thinking patterns of apes when going to the zoo ? or Elephants when going to the savanna ? or fish when you are diving ? I do not think so , You (generally speaking) still follow elephants around in cars, you still follow fish around underwater , you still go stare at apes in the zoo. I would say we as the visitors do not adapt to other species thinking patterns , so why would they
?


sigh, no but zoos are a wrong to preserve some animals, and it's totally stupid that we are building zoos. If you drive a jeep to go see elephants, then you have no respect for wildlife and non for the elephants either.

The anthropologists who study Apes DO adapt to their social patterns and learn how to behave like them in order to understand them.

So, i am assuming intelligent ETs would adapt to us in order to make any kind of contact, or like i said they are mischievous or dumb or simply stupid, and i doubt they would send us their dummies as explorers.



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
The planes look like Japanese Ida's to me. Also, I'm not a photo expert and don't claim to be.
Is it possible that the graininess of the photo could be a result of extreme vibration the photographer experienced from that rustbucket he was flying in?



posted on Aug, 8 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


There does seem to be quite a lot of organic looking/acting UFOs and orbs.

Maybe if your theory about cryptobiological is right, the engineered craft may be here to mainly study them, not us.

They may be the main reason to come, and we're just a mildly interesting sideline.




top topics



 
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join