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.

 

UFO over Minneapolis right now.

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I've been thinking about this since last night and one thing about it reminds me of some videos from Mexico that I saw on Alien Confirmation (1999). I pulled out the tape and I would say that the object above Minnesota yesterday looked very much like those in Mexico with the exception that there was only one. Here's a link to a photo of the ones in Mexico and a related story from Minnesota...

www.virtuallystrange.net...
www.rense.com...

~Jammer




posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Did anyone happen to see any jets that were scrambled around the area yesterday? if it in fact was there for that long and it wasn't claimed by any certain group or branch, wouldn't you think we'd wanna get some of our own aircrafts up there to take a look?

Oh, and if you saw that video, didn't ya like the title they gave the woman who was talking about it being a very large baloon? It read "woman who knows about baloons"



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Yeah, that struck me as wierd. My immediate though was 'is she a clown in her spare time who makes animal balloons and helium party favors'?

I LMAOed that one



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   
It doesn't matter what the object is. The government will endeavor to discredit it by any means. Short of a full scale landing of alien spacecraft, nothing will be enough to answer the skeptics. The skeptics fear a paradime shift, and the government lose of control. Imagine a power, extra-solar, who's intrusions can't be prevented or attack defended against. This isn't fantasy many presidents have study the matter in secret as to not be a laughing stock. This is problem humans can't seem to really buy into the notion that we may not be alone in this universe.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by everlastingnoitall
Yeah, that struck me as wierd. My immediate though was 'is she a clown in her spare time who makes animal balloons and helium party favors'?

I LMAOed that one


HA!
They ARE the most qualified people to make such claims!



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Question:

Even with binoculars/telescopes... would it really be that easy to differentiate between a balloon and something that's just shaped like a balloon?

Balloons, generally, lack detail or distinctive shapes that jut from their sides. They are not like airplanes or helicopters... both of which have recognizeable components that allow for identification even at a distance. From the ground they are just ovoid blops without features.

So... wouldn't a circular or oval 'craft' that lacks a lot of surface detail automatically resemble a balloon? Let's say you took an Apollo command capsule and somehow managed to suspend it in the air... my guess is that, at a distance, it would just look like a gray bowl or dish and people would consider it to be a balloon.

We're really dealing with a situation where the object sighted -- at a distance, at least -- lacks a lot of recognizeable surface detail. We're also dealing with an object that appeared to have a basic geometric shape. It's easy, then, to group it in with balloons simply because balloons are so non-distinctive (amorphous) that anything with a remotely ball or ovoid shape can be said to resemble one of them.


Ultimately... my point is that even if a bona fide flying saucer was spotted hovering over a city people could dismiss it as a balloon simply because ballons and 'saucers' are both extremely simple shapes. The best one can do, strictly speaking, is state that they saw a 'circular' or 'ovoid' object... calling it a saucer or balloon amounts to associating the raw shape with something you already know about.

Now... we have Muckwa's drawing of a rectangle with what looks like a notch in the front. It doesn't resemble a balloon... but it does resemble the thing photographed in that other MN UFO link someone provided above. Still... this is a case where the object, at a distance, is so 'vague' that a positive ID based on visual observations is really impossible..

What are we left with, then? Well... at this point we have to get data on winds aloft and the launch times of every balloon in the region (considering its size, I believe we can rule out random hoaxers or something a kid let go into the air). So... the weather service says it isn't one of theirs... who else launches weather balloons? Universities, the military, nasa?

I'll try to comb for this info... but it may take a while.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   
So whats happening now? Is it gone? Still hangin around?



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I found a link here from august 5. someone is also claming to see an object slowly moving in north east minneapolis. I don't know if it has to do something with this.

www.hbccufo.com...



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Don't understand why someone didn't use any telescope to observe it?



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   
A little off topic, but


this site has some great documentation related to curren tyear sightings and locations:

www.hbccufo.com...



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by rai76
Don't understand why someone didn't use any telescope to observe it?


Someone did and claimed it was a balloon. That is what the local media reported.
I didn't find out about it until the end of the day and on the way to softball practice.
When I got home I tried taking a photo of it with the digital but it was getting dark, plus my camera broke (battery cover clip holder cracked) so I couldn't take anymore before it got dark.

I would expect that any video or photos will show up eventually, but not everyone is web savy.

~Jammer



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I don't know if any of you bothered to look at the link I posted.

I am thinking it was something similar. I have emailed the creators of the blimp to see if I am correct in my thinking.

Will let you know if I recieve a response.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Well, on the thread regarding this as a news story on atsnn, someone posted that they receied an e-mail claiming it was a balloon launched by Canadian officials to study the ozone. If so, it not only was launched ahead of schedule, but drifted off course. Here's the link detailing the release:


www.ec.gc.ca...



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Posted by rai76


I found a link here from august 5. someone is also claming to see an object slowly moving in north east


I went to the link. The first photo had the shape of what I observed. I realize as you look at more of the photo's it seems pretty cylindrical. But that 1st photo, if it was a bright, whiteish light, and the image spun around 180 degrees, looks very similar.

What is disappointing for me is not hearing any more about it locally. Not even reports from cities south of here, or any location for that matter. If it was there, and it moved that slow, why isn't it showing up and noticeable somewhere else. One question. If this was a weather balloon that was not moving because there was no wind. How is it possible that it stays in one place, and moves with the earths rotation to stay on top of the Twin Cities? What am I missing?



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Local news station WCCO ran the story again. They said that someone with powerful telescope looked at the object and indicated that it was a balloon. They also said that U.S. and Canadian weather authorities both said that neither had released a balloon. The video that they showed on the newscast looked a lot like a balloon shaped object with a dark center. It looked very convincing........



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 05:39 PM
link   
[edit on 10/2/2004 by esther]



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 05:58 PM
link   
I have just been informed that at some point of the afternoon that there was a 2nd unknown object much higher then the one seen in the pictures. Is there anyone that may be able to confirm the possibility of a 2nd object?



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 06:12 PM
link   
I have not heard of that report. I got home about 2:30 this afternoon, not a cloud in the sky, and unfortunately, I spent some time scanning the sky....... Hoping. I'm in a suburb of Minneapolis.



posted on Aug, 21 2004 @ 12:46 AM
link   
About it being the Asteroid 2004.. someodd, that was 0.0306 AU from here, that's still 4,590,000 kilometers.. Our atmosphere ends at roughly 100km, so that's a LONG way out still.

To Kriz - the Aerostat things are only 1-200 feet long, and they are always tethered, and float at approximately 15,000 feet. I think this object was said to be at least 30,000 feet, and there was no visible tether.

To Henry, or whoever it was that said "Skeptics just dont want a shift in paradimes" - Well, you're wrong. That's all that can be said there. I'm a skeptic in a lot of ways, and it doesn't amount to me being unable to grasp change, or to me hating change, it amounts to me having a healthy amount of sense before I jump into something that could just be a trick. If it weren't for folks like me the world would be a lot crazier of a place, and very few people would have escaped telemarketing scams.

Now, consisely:

Things We Know:

1) Object did not move very far throughout day.
2) Object was very high and very large.
3) Object's shape is uncertain.
4) There seems to be no direct proof from anyone on what the object actually is.

The Big Possibilities:

Weather Balloon - Weather Balloons deflate after approximately two hours, no local weather services launched this, Weather Balloons move freely and far with the winds, Weather balloons travel very high and are not very large, Weather Balloons are generally teardrop shaped.

Conclusion: Very unlikely.

Near Earth Object: In order to move only minutely over several hours on end, with little change in size or brightness, object would have to be very far away, and very very large. If the object was that far away and that large, it would be visible from other locations, not chiefly localised around Minneapolis.

Conclusion: Very unlikely.


Extra Terrestrial Craft: No real expected properties, as an extra terrestrial craft could likely replicate those of another object, but, would definitely not have to. It would not have to move very far, it would not have to change in any real way. It would not have to have a certain shape or bear any particular insignia (though it is right to note, there does appear to be a distinct V shape - whenever I look at this I feel like it is a model of a Grey's head, or it is a hoaxer who loved the movie and TV series V.) - So overall, there isn't much hope of saying it can't be this, but the best hope of saying it is this is coming to the conclusion that it cannot be otherwise explained.

Conclusion: Probably not likely, but definitely not excluded.


Other: Well, again we run into an unexcludable territory. Could it have been a special high altitude experimental craft? Could it have been much lower than originally believed, and have ended up being just a long-lived balloon? We can't particularly know.

Conclusion: As likely as an Extraterrestrial object.


The Long And Short Of It: This was unexplainable. The devastating lack of good photographic evidence is almost enough to make one cry. Hopefully this will be the first in a series of such sightings, hopefully someone with a damn telescopic camera can get in to take a good picture. If there are no other conclusions, an extra terrestrial object almost seems likely. The problem with that, though, is that there are other conclusions.

Keep Watching The Skis! Er, Skies!

[edit on 21-8-2004 by Viendin]



posted on Aug, 21 2004 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Am I the only one who thinks this "jammer" kid heard this from another kid at school, and did not actually see this?

First he gave his parents his telescope.
Then the battery cover on his cam cracked...which he assumes stops him from taking pics, but we ALL know you can slap a piece of tape over it, and it still works.

Secondly, it's not a balloon, they aren't naming who spotted it through the "high powered telescope", and seeing as how that happened so quickly, I'd be comfortable in calling it a cover up story.

If it sat there and didnt move, then how is it a balloon?
As much as I remember, when something is in the air, it moves with the air current, and doesnt hover if its free floating such as a balloon is.

This is Signs all over again.




top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join