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.

 

Aliens spoke to us in a 'cat-like language' claim Russian flight controllers.

page: 2
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Has anybody translated the russian language to english? And what are we looking at on radar?




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Bark bark bark woof woof woof,

Doggies are da best bettah den all da rest.

CHEEEEEE!



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by the owlbear
 



That Russian vodka works wonders
Second line


A classic example of drinking being used as a reason to ignore UFO reports, see my old post on this topic.

Above Top Secret link about drinking and UFO reports

Internet mime alert, Alcohol plus UFO means ignore report, even though there is no credible information correlating the two.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:14 AM
link   
lol on tv where i live Disney channel runs a cartoon called Kid vs Kat its about an alien cat.

The feature revolves around a 10-year-old boy's constant battle with his sister's Sphinx cat which, in reality, is a cybernetic alien. meow weof eow ooo eow



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:26 AM
link   
Geez I told my kitty to stop going on alien joy rides. So very busted....



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by IsaacKoi

Originally posted by bluemooone2
This is kind of interesting to me because of the because of the radar video.


This video was the subject of a new thread a few days ago, at the link below.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


I wonder if the recent thread on ATS was the source, direct or indirect, of the article on the website of The Daily Mail newspaper today about this video??

Incidentally, the article on the website of The Daily Mail today states:



The footage was first posted last month but it is unclear when it was taken.


That is not true.

It would take a reporter about, oh, 3 seconds to find that it was first posted earlier than last month.

Previous threads on this video on ATS include:

Russia is Tracking UFO's

UFO tracked on radar [VIDEO]

Those threads include a link to the copy of the video below:



That video was posted in May 2010.

So, someone may want to correct The Daily Mail on at least this detail (but this would probably be a waste of time...).

All the best,

Isaac




Are you the "we already have a thread below" person on ATS? This is like the 5th thread youve made that post



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Tholidor
 


Thank you for confirming what I guessed, that the "00000" designator number was because the target did not have a responder.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Haydn_17
Are you the "we already have a thread below" person on ATS? This is like the 5th thread youve made that post


I'd prefer to think of myself as the "this may help reduce the amount of reinvention of the wheel" person...

I've been posting about trying to reduce the amount of reinvention of the wheel within ufology for about a decade since given the limited resources within ufology I don't like to see time and effort wasted. Hence my developing various tools which I hoped would help - including:

(1) a 2,000 page chronology with lists of references to discussions in UFO of frequently discussed incidents, documents and people (circulated free on the Internet a few years ago),
(2) a database of details on infamous UFO videos and alien photos
(3) a new search engine to help find existing material.

I'm afraid virtually all that time has been wasted and has not really had an effect reducing the considerable amount of time wasted within ufology.

In relation to my posting links to existing threads, my view is basically that when a video has been discussed (whether it was an hour ago, a day ago or a week ago) members of ATS have already put in time and effort looking into the video and posting their views together with any additional information they have found.

Also, earlier threads can contain links to earlier copies of the video. This can help get closer to the actual primary material. For example, the earlier threads I mentioned above prove that - contrary to statements on about 3 new threads in the last day on ATS - this video was not "first posted last month". If people spend time trying to find information about an incident last month, they will be wasting their time.

Basically, I think it is useful to glance through earlier existing threads to find out what information has already been collated.

I find that this can take seconds to do and can save hours of wasted time.

All the best,

Isaac
edit on 2-3-2011 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


Take it easy, im sure the servers won't implode.

As i said before in another thread, 100's of new members join everyday, people who have never heard about this before, i never even knew about this case.

I think it's a lot easier to just make a new thread, it's save people lots of time trailing over a thread which has 40 pages, which they have to read to just understand how the argument has formed.

For example,

Imagine someone makes a thread (The first thread, with a new sighting) After a couple of months the thread gets 50 pages of posts, lets say for example on page 25 someone debunks the sighting, on page 50 the new member who has just found the thread will have no idea unless he/she reads over 25 pages of posts (which is a pain).

So rather than revive a thread which none of the new members have any idea whats going on, you simply make a new thread where the older members can just post "Already debunked" end of the thread. Or if the case wasn't debunked newer members can start a debate between themselves, rather than just repeating what has already been discussed in the bigger thread.

Its all about discussion on ATS, and from my experience it doesnt work when you try to revive a older thread, noone responds.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by IsaacKoi

Originally posted by Haydn_17
Are you the "we already have a thread below" person on ATS? This is like the 5th thread youve made that post


I'd prefer to think of myself as the "this may help reduce the amount of reinvention of the wheel" person...

Isaac
edit on 2-3-2011 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)


Also i would like to add, how are new members who have never heard of a certain ufo case supposed to search for a thread on a case which they dont even know exists?



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:10 AM
link   
I'm sending a link to a friend that speaks Russian. Hopefully he isn't busy at work this morning, and he can watch it right away. I'll post back in a few minutes.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
themoscownews.com...

The above story titled "UFO spotted above Siberia" was posted to Moscow News on 2/04/2011

There are eyewitnesses on the ground seperate from the traffic control tower. Apparently they saw a glowing object that seemed out of place.

Someone contact those witnesses.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
It's a very technical language , so forgive me if I made some mistakes in translation, but hope it will help you in some way.
Here is a comment of the guy who posted the video:

Radar system has demonstrated the speed of the object 9800 km / h, and the height of 19,780 meters. It was changing direction very fast and did not send any identification signals, and the secondary radar was showing the object by default as the number 00000. It was also stated by Aviabort(?)that the object " was interfering with the aviation frequencies, making the work of pilots and air traffic controllers more complicated".

There is a comment in russian though, which in my opinion makes sense:

"It is a falsification (fake), as Aeroflot's mark was not moving, the secondary radar can not measure the distance from an aircraft that is not equipped with the identification sensor (?) ...It's very likely simulated"

As for the people talking on the video.... It's mostly just pilot talking to the controller. Then at some point the pilot can not hear the controller and later tells him that there was a woman's voice. She was not talking but meowing like a cat.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 06:59 AM
link   
OK, so my buddy came by and watched the video last night. It is legitimate Russian, and he said all of the conversations sound legitimate. Overall it was just boring data, but they do start watching something on the radar that isn't pinging any transponder code. It starts in the middle of the screen, then it goes all the way out to an edge, and then it comes back toward the middle. The controllers spend the majority of the time trying to contact the unknown aircraft, then about 2/3rds of the way through, it starts to communicate back, but they can't understand it. They talk among themselves about how it is just noise, and it isn't understandable. One of the controllers finally does say, "It sounds like 'meows'" and they have a very slight chuckle.

They never talk about the speed of the craft or mention anything about UFOs. They do mention how much distance it has covered compared to the other craft on the screen. They remained professional and calm throughout the video, and they simply do their jobs, exchanging data with other aircraft and trying to contact the unknown one.

To my buddy, who grew up in the USSR, he thinks the video is a legitimate flight controller video, but he thinks the aircraft was unremarkable, because the controllers didn't react with much surprise or anxiety about it.

As I watched with him, and he translated some of the stuff, I thought it was odd how some of the other craft don't move at all. In a 2 minute time span, everything on the screen should have moved significantly, but some were at the same spot from beginning to end. Maybe those were something on the ground, but it caught my eye, so I thought I should mention it.

Hope that helps everyone.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   
Maybe it was a rescue ship sent to collect Jake.

It's a bit overdue...33 years overdue actually.




An interesting little tidbit is that this movie, Disney's 'The Cat from outer space' was made and released in 1978.

Now go back and have a look at the video clip the OP posted, showing the screen with the 'anomaly' moving...have a look at the 'ident code' they have assigned to this unknown object...it's 1978!

Weird coincidence, when you factor in the 'cat language' aspect.
edit on 3/3/2011 by spikey because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Yeah, it does help, cheers for posting.




To my buddy, who grew up in the USSR, he thinks the video is a legitimate flight controller video, but he thinks the aircraft was unremarkable, because the controllers didn't react with much surprise or anxiety about it.

As I watched with him, and he translated some of the stuff, I thought it was odd how some of the other craft don't move at all. In a 2 minute time span, everything on the screen should have moved significantly, but some were at the same spot from beginning to end. Maybe those were something on the ground, but it caught my eye, so I thought I should mention it. Hope that helps everyone.


Perhaps they didn't react with anxiety because these controller guys see so much of this type of thing, it's probably pretty normal to see these anomalies all over the place.

The other aircraft not moving very much, or appearing to not move very much, might be due to the resolution of the radar...IOW, they are zoomed right out, making the aircraft appear to stay more or less still. If they were 'zoomed' in, they would look like they're zipping off the edge of the screen...like a telescope zoomed in on the moon has to be continually moved to keep track with the apparent fast movement of the moon, but if it were low magnification, you'd hardly need to move the scope to keep the moon in shot, it would look more or less still.

Cheers.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


I bet you are correct. They probably have the radar zoomed out and that is why some of the craft are barely moving. I am a private pilot, and the radar screen did look legitimate, although it looked old, but it would be impossible to tell between a real one and a simulation, and I don't know what kind of equipment they are working with in Siberia, LOL! It might be 80's technology still.

I noticed right away that the unidentified one had a transponder code of 000000, which means it had no transponder or it was turned off. Without a transponder, most towers won't know altitude or speed of a craft, they will only know location, and they can estimate speed compared to other crafts, and they can get an altitude estimate from other pilots, but it will all just be educated guesses.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
In the video it starts with a nice view of the air traffic control area , then suddenly cuts to a close up of the screen . The fact therefore , that the voices all sound legitimate is defiantly important . Thanks )



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   


i just happen to have a photograph of a cat-like alien, shown at actual size. if you think this is a terrestrial cat you need to look closer.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join