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.

 

NEW uneditted VIDEO. So Cal Sept 14. No Meteor!

page: 13
75
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

No. I forgot today was Friday.

I don't understand how you can think that the lights videoed in Texas are connected to the meteor and other unrelated videos, none of which bear any resemblance to each other.


It's becoming really hard to keep up with this due to the multiple threads which have becoming very long with many pages.

I have heard like 4 or 5 different types of stories of which none of them correspond to each other.

I even heard people claim they saw "black helicopters" which doesn't make any sense either. How can you identify the color of a helicopter at night when it's dark? I call that unreasonably difficult. Also, how do they know it wasn't marked?

"Black helicopters" usually indicates it was Unmarked / Unregistered. There is absolutely no way to make this determination about a helicopter at night flying around. Especially if it's using blinking lights as per regulations, because the light flashes would make it even harder to see any identifying features such as color or markings.

Also none of them cared to identify what make-model the choppers were either. If someone came and said "it's a UH-60" than maybe I would be inclined to take it more seriously, but no one bothered to supply information of that quality.

Yes, there probably was helicopters, but thats all we can assume. We don't know what types they were or color etc.

When I spot aircraft I go for the make-model first, the color doesn't really matter actually.

Just pointing out the fact that there are all kinds of conflicting reports about this and I hate to say it but I can't help but want to dismiss all of it as utter confusion.




posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The video is probably not a hoax.

The presentation of it may be false, or a hoax.

But the video itself appears rather authentic for the most part.

If I gave you a video of rain, and said "Lava pours from the sky", and you saw a video of rain water, you would call me a hoaxer for claiming it was lava. However the video itself of rain water, is authentic and not faked at all.

Differentiating between the two is always a good maneuver.



I am totally on your side
and that was my position when questioning why a news station would use this exact video and risk having a plagiarized law suit on their hands??

If it so 'obvious' to all these debunkers then, the onus is on them to prove with their proof that this proof is not only not proof but copyrighted as something else!!!
(somethin' like that!)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
This is getting ridiculous...

Any other day you would be crying about the media being part of the "cover up" and not trusting them... but not today... not when they confirm your religious like beliefs. When they confirm your beliefs you take every word from the media as gospel.

Hypocrites!!


Why does this even matter this much? I am sorry but your posts are totally belligerent and audacious. Recklessly bold.

I honestly get the feeling you have a horse in this fight.

Maybe you are equally as religious in your belief system as others are in theirs? Ever considered that? It's doubtful.

You speak in absolutes without certainty, you merely assume you are correct. This is actually the exact same mentality that the zealots of fundamentalism exhibit.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I have not seen any documented evidence yet.

I will retract my assertions that it is unknown when this irrefutable proof is presented.

Until then, speculate on brotha!



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Again - why would you take something seriously seen on youtube, by someone who REPEATEDLY has posted videos on aliens and UFOs, many (or most) of them hoaxes. So this person who constantly is posting UFO videos, amazingly caught the only footage of this object looking different than all other videos, pictures or accounts, including by a pilot who described a meteor sighting to a T?

Gullible comes to mind.

We also have a single report of a spot where the meteor "landed," with no substantial proof or collaborative story.

And this makes it a non meteor? Seriously?



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by apusnuthook
Just wanted to throw that in, could it have been a failed unannounced shuttle start?
Would explain 2 events and shuttle video.
The 'meteor' coming down were the remains of the shuttle...




Thanks for weighing in Apusnuthook



It could've been a black-op mission returning from Elenin ----and NASA destroyed it upon re-entry due to the evidence it contained which was about to be intercepted by Hoagland!


My point is it could've been anything BUT a meteor! And that's what makes this so interesting. Especially when other videos ---from that evening ----from other areas are coming in (or at least, I am just finding them).



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Ok, I found a better comparison video.

This is PROOF that the OP's video is the Space Shuttle Endeavor STS-130 taking off on Feb. 7, 2010.



Here is the source video:
www.youtube.com...

The OP's video lied about it being a UFO. They lied about the location. They lied about the date. It is complete deception. It is a HOAX.

HOAX DESTROYED



edit on 16-9-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
The puppet masters are testing their projected laser beams all over the place. You know something is wrong when the mass media is reporting on it. We have now entered the infant stages of the last card. ~SheopleNation
edit on 16-9-2011 by SheopleNation because: TypO



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
No I don't think so. You speak in absolutes, I speak in probabilities typically. Saying things like "maybe" "possibly" "could be" "might be" are the safest way to communicate usually.



I only speak in absolutes when I know I am right, and when I have solid proof that I am right. I have displayed multiple forms of proof, and all you have done is displayed your ignorance and denial.


Originally posted by muzzleflash
Also, did you prove the video in the OP was a shuttle launch? No? Just because they look similar doesn't automatically mean it is. If it is indeed a specific shuttle launch, supply DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE of it or else I will merely laugh at your asinine absolutist assumptions.


I did prove it was the shuttle launch, but you are too blind to see the proof because of your confirmation bias. It doesn't just "look similar". It also moves the same speed, and the Solid Rocket Boosters dimmed out at the same speed, and the same time, at the same distance from the shuttle. It was an exact match... but nope, you just didn't want to have it.

Now I have TWO comparison videos that prove the video is a HOAX. The OP's video is of the Space Shuttle Endeavor STS-130.

Now, I laugh last like I promised I would.

edit on 16-9-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
Ok, I found a better comparison video.

This is PROOF that the OP's video is the Space Shuttle Endeavor STS-130 taking off on Feb. 7, 2010.



Here is the source video:
www.youtube.com...

The OP's video lied about it being a UFO. They lied about the location. They lied about the date. It is complete deception. It is a HOAX.

HOAX DESTROYED



edit on 16-9-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)


YOU KNOW you might want too compare this :


STS-93 Columbia night landing

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

reply posted on 16-9-2011 @ 01:20 PM by BobAthome
www.youtube.com...

Uploaded by TheJediCharles on Oct 6, 2008

STS-93 Columbia night landing, I filmed from North Richland Hills, Texas, (where we lived at that time) July 27th, 1999, at 10:20 PM CDT.

I pulled this off of old home video (Sony Handycam) and converted it using eyeTV. Sorry it's so much grainier than our other videos, but it was the best we had at the time and I converted it as soon as it was possible.

Thank you Gatedialer for help tracking down mission information

wanna compare??
--------------------------------
STS-93 Columbia night landing,STS-93 Columbia night landing,STS-93 Columbia night landing,

see the difference,,STS-93 Columbia night landing,STS-93 Columbia night landing,STS-93 Columbia night landing,

PAGE 9
edit on 16-9-2011 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)


Space Shuttle Night Reentry

www.youtube.com...
edit on 16-9-2011 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 


I've seen that video. It's not the landing though. The two red dots next to the object are the Solid Rocket Boosters which are only present during takeoff.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


How the heck did this sillyness end up on the front page of ATS...

hmmmmmmmmm



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SheopleNation
The puppet masters are testing their projected laser beams all over the place. You know something is wrong when the mass media is reporting on it. We have now entered the infant stages of the last card. ~SheopleNation
edit on 16-9-2011 by SheopleNation because: TypO




Perfectly put!!

And the confrontational carnivore combat carries on.
(No wonder they never want to land!)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Comparison videos are not proof. They are mere comparisons, and tenuous ones at best.

It's a video of a dot of white light over a black backdrop, that's not enough information to go with sorry.

Have you supplied any Documentation proving this video is indeed a specific shuttle launch? I want documentation, not a "comparison video" which you feel super-sure about. I am not so sure, and with documentation which correlates the two than I will accept your explanation.

It's real simple. Provide actual proof.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I had 100% proof that the OP's video is the shuttle all this time. Of course I was speaking in absolutes! That is like mocking someone for speaking in absolutes when they say 1+1=2!




posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


How the heck did this sillyness end up on the front page of ATS...

hmmmmmmmmm




With people like YOU, bumping it!!!!
Thanks!

Apparently there are two schools of thought here. That's what makes this forum so great!



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Definately a UFO.

We dont know what it is.

With the red smoke trail it looked a lot like an arty flare.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Comparison videos are not proof. They are mere comparisons, and tenuous ones at best.

It's a video of a dot of white light over a black backdrop, that's not enough information to go with sorry.

Have you supplied any Documentation proving this video is indeed a specific shuttle launch? I want documentation, not a "comparison video" which you feel super-sure about. I am not so sure, and with documentation which correlates the two than I will accept your explanation.

It's real simple. Provide actual proof.


If 7-billion of us looked at one ink-blot test I guarantee there will be at least 1 billion different opinions.

Hey I think Obama looks exactly like Osama. Guess there's a cut-off point for comparison, huh?



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I had 100% proof that the OP's video is the shuttle all this time. Of course I was speaking in absolutes! That is like mocking someone for speaking in absolutes when they say 1+1=2!





No evidence provided, just subjective opinions.

I can claim it was one of the Titan rocket models. How do you know it's not one of the Titan III models? They have dual boosters as well!

But you were so sure it was the shuttle. Please. Tons of rockets use duel boosters. Cmon!



Titan Missile Family

Why is it not a Titan III model? Exactly how do you know it's the shuttle?
I'll await your reply.
edit on 16-9-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Comparison videos are not proof. They are mere comparisons, and tenuous ones at best.

It's a video of a dot of white light over a black backdrop, that's not enough information to go with sorry.

Have you supplied any Documentation proving this video is indeed a specific shuttle launch? I want documentation, not a "comparison video" which you feel super-sure about. I am not so sure, and with documentation which correlates the two than I will accept your explanation.

It's real simple. Provide actual proof.


If 7-billion of us looked at one ink-blot test I guarantee there will be at least 1 billion different opinions.

Hey I think Obama looks exactly like Osama. Guess there's a cut-off point for comparison, huh?


Exactly.

And some of those people will get belligerent and scream up and down as if they know exactly what the ink blot is.
Look at my post above. I just debunked them. Haha.




top topics



 
75
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join