I experienced a "classic" UFO sighting: Nov. 28, 2010

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527

Originally posted by ChaosMagician

Originally posted by RSF77
Looks like we are all human after all.

edit on 14-12-2010 by RSF77 because: Except me of course, I'm a dog.

omg what a beautiful doggie in your avatar... I used to have a dog similar to that. she was such a good girl.

are people in here still arguing about the authenticity of this sighting?

Its funny but,he said he had a [classic UFO SIGHTING] not a flying saucer or a flying triangle.It wasnt even debatable from the get go.

but look how far it's gone? That's the funny part. I have no idea if it's real or not... I'm in no position to draw a conclusion, I just think the arguing has been amusingly exhaustive.

Click here for more information.

A no-no?

so now you have to have expensive cameras on a tripod so it doesn't shake in your freaked out hand while you are seeing a ufo... in order to tell the story?

a no-no? is that equal to a boo-boo? Am I talking to a preschool teacher here or what?

I use all sorts of language when I a joking around but when someone seriously uses the word no-no while debating with someone else and not in a cynical sense... I can't help but to wonder if something went wrong in their childhood.

Very good sighting comrade
Would you happen to know if you live under any UFO hotspots? And thanks for the little .mov file, helped me understand what you saw heaps.
I have never experienced a sighting before, but would love to see something along these lines.
If you happen to have any more sightings, let the people of ATS know

reply to post by backinblack


Obviously the poster believes they saw something unusual..
But it appears questioning that view is considered off topic..
How is that considered debating?

Originally posted by ChaosMagician

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527

Originally posted by ChaosMagician

Originally posted by RSF77
Looks like we are all human after all.

edit on 14-12-2010 by RSF77 because: Except me of course, I'm a dog.

omg what a beautiful doggie in your avatar... I used to have a dog similar to that. she was such a good girl.

are people in here still arguing about the authenticity of this sighting?

Its funny but,he said he had a [classic UFO SIGHTING] not a flying saucer or a flying triangle.It wasnt even debatable from the get go.

but look how far it's gone? That's the funny part. I have no idea if it's real or not... I'm in no position to draw a conclusion, I just think the arguing has been amusingly exhaustive.

I would answer back butalot of personell phone calls and dimes are being dropped from a certain forums to certain moderators on here,who i guess are real close friends or something.

Its scary when you really dont know who to trust or whos REALLY working with whom.

i just dont understand the unreality of my major t@c violation,it just seems strange,i have gottten alot of pm,asking why ? i told all of them i have no idea.So after this i will just stay away from this thread.

I'm sorry but this is just not a very interesting sighting. I think it's interesting that a longtime skeptic had a sighting, but the sighting itself amounts to "lights in the sky." Granted it split into two pieces that headed out in a straight line, but I think, from a particular angle, a splitting meteor could cause this effect. Unlikely? Yes. But WAY more likely than aliens dropping in. Also, why would the splitting in two straight lines designate aliens? Are aliens like, "Yo, we gotta make sure we get these lines perfectly straight so as to denote to any observers how perfect our 'break-apart' is?" I wasn't aware that aliens only moved in perfect right angles.

I'm actually kinda shocked that a hardcore skeptic would put so much emphasis on this. Too far away to see if it was a craft. Just a realllllllllllllllllly far away light that split up. Could be anything.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


There you go The universe is full of surprises. I do agree on your earlier point when saying that you have a hard time understanding why an other extra terrestrial race than ourselves would be interested in any available tech we might have. I am working at the moment as a scientist in minneapolis, and after my understanding, they are not interested in our tech. You see we humans as you probably already know is built in a very amazing way, our machinery is a piece of art itself. We have fluids\dna\blood ect that other extra terrestrials out there do not have, and in some places out there in the galaxy our body functions\fluids would be an increased % of survival rate for other races in some environments.

But nice to see a sceptic experiencing something abit away from the ordinary.

thank you very much for your post. Hail the leader

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

The animation illustrates better than I could describe that the motion was very linear and abrupt... no apparent acceleration/deceleration, just instant full-speed motion

Very interesting indeed, and very similar to my own first sighting - 'terrific speed'... and 90° corners on a dime!!

Oddly enough, these same 2 characteristics are described many times, in the days just before Roswell (even clocked and recorded by theodolite as doing 15,000 mph).

Coincidence?

I too was compelled to create an animation to document the highly unusual nature of their movements, as mere words could not do them justice.

All I can say is - Welcome to the club! (and all that that entails!)

Since we are talking about lights in the sky, and in Arizona in particular, it's important to be aware of adaptive optics and how it is used to make artificial stars to adjust images generated by powerful telescopes.

www.space.com...

Such work represents a major update of adaptive optics technology that has been around for decades. Ground telescopes use adaptive optics to adjust for the ever-changing blurry effect that comes from peering at space through Earth's atmosphere, but can erase the blurriness only in a tiny view of the sky.

In adaptive optics, computers analyze the light from a natural or artificial guide star as a baseline to figure out the blurriness. Hundreds of actuators can then warp the surface of the telescope mirrors thousands of times per second to cancel out the blurry effect.

The new ground-layer adaptive optics system used five lasers mounted on the 21-foot (6.5-meter) MMT telescope at Mount Hopkins in Arizona. Past systems on other telescopes have used just one laser to create a single artificial guide star.

Each laser points in a different direction so that they end up spread out in a pentagon pattern as they punch more than 15 miles (24 km) into the sky.

Seemingly the beam is not always obvious especially if far away (the images of the beams are usually done by long exposure which makes them appear brighter than they really were). What I've read suggests that the artificial star is too faint to see with the naked eye.