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: 7
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Kandinsky.....

Nup.....it still won't work.

I'll U2U you.

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not




posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Foo Fighters to me are a huge enigma in Ufology. I really have not ever read an explanation about what they could be that was satisfactory in my eyes.

They also had the nickname "kraut fireballs" back during WWII.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by CheapShotArtist
Foo Fighters to me are a huge enigma in Ufology. I really have not ever read an explanation about what they could be that was satisfactory in my eyes.
They also had the nickname "kraut fireballs" back during WWII.


CheapShotArtist.....

I agree.....enigmatic is a good word for it.

The descriptions vary from "plasma balls" to "metallic objects".

It's all very odd indeed & that picture just adds to the mystery of it all.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


I read somewhere that people thought these "Foo Fighters" were some sort of top secret reconnaissance device used by the Germans.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by CheapShotArtist
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

I read somewhere that people thought these "Foo Fighters" were some sort of top secret reconnaissance device used by the Germans.


CheapShotArtist.....

Yes.....I've read that too.

I gotta say.....it was "Foo Fighters" that were one of the things that sparked my intense interest in this whole area of UFO's. I've been looking at that picture since I was very little.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


The Rendlesham forest incident was the one that got me into the whole UFO subject. That story just blew me away and how many people witnessed it (and who they were being Military)

I recommend the book Left at East Gate

PS. Sorry for being slightly off topic.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by CheapShotArtist
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 

The Rendlesham forest incident was the one that got me into the whole UFO subject. That story just blew me away and how many people witnessed it (and who they were being Military)
I recommend the book Left at East Gate


CheapShotArtist.....

Many thanks.....

I will have a look at that.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Anytime - Its one of many books in my Ufology collection



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   
I think the fact that the US planes tried to ram them and only managed to pass through them as though they were a mirage says to me they were definitely seeing something that the pilot's considered real enough to risk their aircraft in an amazingly risky maneuver. Some reports of these foo fighters are of a metallic disc and this was before the modern ufo phenomenon. I think we have to remember these pilots were not on a pleasure flight these were deadly serious battle flights that could easily end in aircrews being killed. Not a time to make up ufo rubbish. I for one believe the pilot's reports ,the question is are they a mirage secret weapon or really alien in origin.



[edit on 9-8-2010 by Foo_Lovers]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Well said Foo Lover,

Apparently we can send people up in the sky to risk their lives and trust them with winning the war, but when they report strange occurences in the sky we treat them as confused, war-fatigued fools who can't make out the difference between illusions and reality?



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Well said Foo Lover,

Apparently we can send people up in the sky to risk their lives and trust them with winning the war, but when they report strange occurences in the sky we treat them as confused, war-fatigued fools who can't make out the difference between illusions and reality?
Again, you present a false dichotomy. It's not a choice between whether it's an illusion, or real. In fact there may be no way to distinguish a light coming from a reflection versus a light coming from a solid craft, they may look completely indistinguishable, so there's nothing foolish about not being able to tell the difference. The light that hits your eye from a reflection is just as real as the light that hits your eye from any other source.

And I also agree with you that mirages or reflections probably don't explain all of them, but probably do explain some. If you know the percentage explained by mirages, you know more about it than I do. I can't really say how high or low the percentage is with that cause.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Well said Foo Lover,

Apparently we can send people up in the sky to risk their lives and trust them with winning the war, but when they report strange occurences in the sky we treat them as confused, war-fatigued fools who can't make out the difference between illusions and reality?
Again, you present a false dichotomy. It's not a choice between whether it's an illusion, or real. In fact there may be no way to distinguish a light coming from a reflection versus a light coming from a solid craft, they may look completely indistinguishable, so there's nothing foolish about not being able to tell the difference. The light that hits your eye from a reflection is just as real as the light that hits your eye from any other source.

And I also agree with you that mirages or reflections probably don't explain all of them, but probably do explain some. If you know the percentage explained by mirages, you know more about it than I do. I can't really say how high or low the percentage is with that cause.


We're not talking about the same thing Arbitrageur,

You're talking about the realistic quality of certain types of light reflexes and optical illusions, and how they can fool people into believing something. I agree with you that it can and probably did fool some of these men (no, I don't have a percentage), but most of them applied their training and protocols in order to rule out the possibility of illusions, such as in the Foo Fighter account I posted in this thread.

I'm talking about refusing to realize the big picture, the implications of the fact that hundreds if not thousands of highly trained men saw these objects stalk their airplanes, whole airplane crews giving vivid descriptions of how these objects manouvered through the sky, changing behaviour, altitude and speed. It happened more than 60 years ago, and still the only research conducted on this phenomenon so far is more or less limited to witness accounts collected by UFO buffs.

Where are the state and university sponsored research projects studying the Foo Fighter phenomenon (I guess they read the Condon report and decided it was all just St. Elmo's Fire)? Where are the scientists trying to reproduce the phenomenon, in order to understand it?

60 years is enough time of dilly-dallying, It happened. The objects these men saw were real, and even if just ONE of these incidents were real and all the others merely optical illusions, it changes everything.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by ufoorbhunter
 


Ufoorbhunter.....

It's very nice to see you drop by!


I know this "orb" topic is very important to you.


Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not


Hello Maybe...maybe not. Excellent idea bringing up the foo photo.

Yes the orb topic does play on the mind constantly and this foo fighter stuff seems so similar to the lights seen all over the Planet Earth and in space.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


But Arb, I've never seen an optical illusion/reflection that I couldn't quickly identify as such. When you move or it moves, it moves proportionately.

Anyone with reasonable observational skills can quickly identify the source.

We are talking about pilots and gunners on these aircraft. Men who have been tested and shown to have excellent eye sight and observational skills. Usually the gunners were the most skilled shooters.

You have crews of exceptionally skilled observers looking at something, all the while talking with each other about the phenomenon. Considering the numerous observations, I'd say that this pretty much proves the notion of optical illusion as completely unrealistic. Throw in multiple planes sighting, and is just doesn't seem realistic to explain this off as an optical illusion.

Then mankind ventures into space, and surprise surprise, astronauts observe the same phenomenon.

Why hasn't any serious research been done on this phenomenon?


niv

posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Then mankind ventures into space, and surprise surprise, astronauts observe the same phenomenon.


That's interesting. I thought this an entirely WW2 phenomenon.

Except for the astronaut observations you mentioned, why aren't foos being seen by pilots after the 1940s? If they were as common as it appears in the war, we should see a stream of reports to this day. This is an honest question – not a debunking by any means.

I've heard it hypothesized that the foos, if ETs, were observing the war. Seems logical; certainly scientists would be interested in social/violent behavior of their subjects.

If the foos are biological, you would expect to see them today. If the foos are natural, they also should be seen regularly. If they are illusions or examples of poor observations, surely modern pilots would make similar mistakes.


[edit on 8/9/2010 by niv]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Foo_Lovers
 


Foo Lovers.....


...the fact that the US planes tried to ram them and only managed to pass through them...


Why would the pilots try to ram the "objects"? I can understand if they tried to shoot the "objects".....but ramming them.....?


Also.....

Based on your "name" (Foo Lover), I'm guessing you have a strong interest in this subject. Is this true? If so, do you have any specific info about this photo?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by niv
 


There are numerous reports of Foo fighters after WW II, from astronauts and commercial airline pilots. There was even a Air Force pilot who tried to to dog fight with one over Kansas or somewhere like that. They just don't call them Foo Fighters, they simply call them UFOs.

Do a Foo Fighter search on ATS and you will find numerous threads on the subject describing similar sightings before and after WW II.

I also provided links on the page before that discuss the subject, where you can find numerous examples.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by niv
Except for the astronaut observations you mentioned, why aren't foos being seen by pilots after the 1940s? If they were as common as it appears in the war, we should see a stream of reports to this day. This is an honest question – not a debunking by any means.

I've heard it hypothesized that the foos, if ETs, were observing the war. Seems logical; certainly scientists would be interested in social/violent behavior of their subjects.


Foos (you're right, Foo 'Fighter' is not a good definition since they never fought, nor responded to attacks) are seen today, there are plenty of witness reports from pilots observing orbs.

I don't know if the Foo/orb phenomenon was more common during the war than today. As you said, the war could have been an incentive for increased activity... but then again that suggests that Foos/orbs have an 'intelligence' behind them, that are interested in human activities.

I can imagine that war time pilots were way more attentive to what was going on around the aircraft (then contemporary pilots), since enemy aircraft could appear at any moment. There was also gunners giving them a better range of vision, and they constantly flew in formation, which could be an answer to why more Foos were spotted during the World War.

Has anyone come across Foo accounts from WW I pilots?



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric
Well said Foo Lover, Apparently we can send people up in the sky to risk their lives and trust them with winning the war, but when they report strange occurences in the sky we treat them as confused, war-fatigued fools who can't make out the difference between illusions and reality?


Heliocentric.....


...we treat them as confused, war-fatigued fools...


I don't really think we are doing that, simply by discussing the nature of Foo Fighters.

However, now that you have raised that issue & sparked my thoughts about that.....

I have a very dear friend who is experiencing psychotic episodes caused by severe PTSD from active & violent military service.

It's not completely impossible that under the extreme stress of these combat situations, the "line became a little blurred" at times.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Arbitrageur.....

Who knows.....

If the pilots & crew started to become very concerned about the possibility of encountering a Foo Fighter, they maye have become more sensitised & therefore more inclined to mistake reflections, mirages, etc... for the "real thing".

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join