It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I think this picture says it all...
Originally posted by imitator
reply to post by Xtraeme
You can't be serious lol...
I wouldn't dismiss the chopper, first off the these two cops panicked and ran off with their tails between their legs.
They probably couldn't judge distance under the hysteria like behavior they described, their sensory and motor functions where out of wack... thus they drove off 110 mph.
I'm guessing non of you ever had the experience of an helicopter popping over your head without notice? Helicopters can be right on top of you before you can hear them... very common...
The most logical explanation is "Two panicked Cops, a Helicopter and an Alligator.
When experiencing a vague or random stimulus the mind looks for a fit.
Basically by assuming in advance what something is, you predetermine the outcome. That's why you have to look for other details to see if they confirm or falsify your suspicions. Accepting the reported observations as true, we then look for the best explanation that fits the greatest number of details.
As it stands the helicopter theory requires ignoring or discarding all the reported facts. Ergo it's bunkum.
No it's not very common and you would have to deaf dumb and blind to not know if a Huey helicopter was 50 yards away. Sorry bro but that dog doesn't hunt ! lol
Two Sheriff deputy's saw something they couldn't explain so we don't know what it was.
Originally posted by Kandinsky
Of course, it doesn't rule out the possibility that someone had stolen a state-of-the-art silent Huey, decked it with purple/blue lights and found two blind, deaf guys driving a Ford that idled at 200db...
What you've written isn't an explanation, it's a dismissal. To have a productive conversation involves accepting certain things as true and then trying to figure out based on those true statements what can be discerned. You've decided nothing is true, and that despite having zero first-hand knowledge about the circumstances or the quality of the men that they were both delusional.
This is hardly rational especially when you consider that the sheriffs contacted Ellington AFB and one of the base officers, Maj. Leach (who theoretically would have known if they launched a chopper), interviewed the men and investigated their claims. He himself attested to their character.
So what you have isn't an argument. It's a dismissal. So there's no productive conversation to be had. To claim that a single sketch looks like a helicopter when none of the other facts fit (visibility was good so where's the rotor? or the landing gear? why were the lights the wrong colors? the lighting was bright enough to illumine the cabin of their car and the ground outside -- who uses a purple search light? doesn't this also necessitate that the object was close by (i.e. several hundred yards)? why was it four times the size of a normal chopper? why was there no noise? what was the blue light that separated from the craft? and so on). Failing to answer these questions, or just outright ignoring them, while still trying to discern what the men saw is to engage in a type of pareidolia. No different than looking at clouds and imagining what you what.
You're certainly free to dismiss the whole story, but that isn't necessarily logical it's merely dismissive. Even children can dismiss things. It's not very hard to say, "no" and disagree. If that's your angle. Power to you.
Well I guess your intitled to be wrong, what I described is my explaination. It is a dismissal of an UFO encounter based on their circumstances.
To have a productive conversation involves accepting certain things as true and then trying to figure out based on those true statements what can be discerned. You've decided nothing is true ... So there's no productive conversation to be had.
The quality of men does not matter,
...they are human and no human is perfect.
Yes they where delusional and hysterical based on their behaviour, you can not refute that fact.
If you was to ask Maj Leach to take a ride with these two clowns, I'm sure he would turn them down...
The sketch is a shape they saw in the dark, your not going to see the rotor or landing gear, that makes perfect sense in the dark.
The night of September 3, 1965, was almost perfect in southeastern Texas: no clouds, a clear sky, sparkling stars. A three-quarter, gibbous moon hung about the south-southwest horizon, its light throwing the shadows of trees and buildings onto the ground. ... In subsequent statement to Air Force Maj. Laurence R. Leach, Jr., on September 8, 1965, McCoy described what he saw, 'The bulk of the object was plainly visible at this time and appeared to be triangular-shaped with a bright purple light on the left end and the smaller, less bright, blue light on the right end. The bulk of the object appeared to be dark gray in color with no other distinguishing features. It appeared to be about 200 feet wide and 40-50 feet thick in the middle, tapering off towards both ends. There was no noise or any trail. The bright purple light illuminated the ground directly underneath it and the area in front of it, including the highway and the interior of our patrol car. The tall grass under the object did not appear to be disturbed. There was a bright moon out and it cast a shadow of the object on the ground immediately below it in the grass. (source)
I'm sure you have seen a house light bulb put out a yellow hue, but the light itself is actually white! My light pole outside is a white light that puts a blue purplish hue....and well, Helicopters do use search lights that do the same thing at great distances. As for the size and distance they simply got it wrong.
You seem to dismiss the state of things as they appear to be,
It flys, it hovers, it has a spot light and it's near a AFB... and based off of their sketch it's in the shape of what? oh yes it can fly up on you before you know it.... Please answer me this?
You failed my challenge, ...