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.

 

UFOs "Cloaking" or disguising themselves as other things ?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I often see this term used on here, but IMHO it makes little if any sense. Let me try and explain.

The example here with a "UFO thought to be disguising itself as a lenticular cloud", which prompted me to start this thread, would also make a good example here I think.

I posed the same question there that I'm going to pose here: If an ET craft wanted to hide from people, why would it take a shape that looks like what most people would regards as a "UFO shape"?

Why not "cloak" as more common objects that would be less likely to draw attention to themselves, like jets/helicopters/regular clouds? You could also say that, that car, or that tree, or the moon, or that hill is a UFO.

It would be just as valid IMO, perhaps even more so, since we are less likely to pay attention to these things, than a "strange looking" lenticular cloud. Wouldn't intelligent (not to mention technologically advanced) beings, or whoever "they" are, pick the latter strategy, that is less likely to draw attention to themselves?

The same goes for Starlike objects that move strangely in the sky, some of which are said to have de-cloaked and then cloaked.

Why not just stay invisible/"cloaked" if they are trying to remain un-detected, which "they" must be since they have not contacted us "en-mass"? Of course, there is the other alternative, that they are just messing with our heads, but I don't think that makes any sense.

In the case of the "star-like objects", they behave exactly as I (and others) have seen satellites behaving, so I am not convinced that what people are seeing there is anything stranger than a conventional satellite technology.

People also say, perhaps it's a "craft" disguising itself as a satellite or a star, but If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck IMO. Even if it was not a duck, what does an ET craft look like? How would we know one when we saw it?

The counter argument usually is that, it did not move as a satellite is "supposed" to move, or it made "impossible" sharp turns, which a satellite is not capable of. Whilst it is true that a satellite will always follow a straight path across the sky, it is possible for a satellite (or satellites) to appear to do these seemingly strange things.

This is also 100% provable since satellites are relatively easy to photograph and identify even using a relatively low cost DSLR setup providing you are careful to set the camera's clock to the right date/time. I capture satellites all the time using my cameras when I am photographing the night sky.

So why do these things we see have to be aliens trying to disguise/cloak themselves? I think it's just an excuse, although perhaps not a conscious one, to cover up a lack of understanding of the physics of the world around us and of how we perceive the world around us.

So what do you think ATS?




posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
I believe that UFOs are of another dimension, fading in and out often here.

I don't know if they totally manipulate aircrafts, helicopters, etc, but my most noticeable UFO sighting to date came down to me standing on a mountain overlooking the Atlantic and me and two friends saw two giant gold lights, just like stars, appear from clear areas of the sky with no cloud cover, then sort of wave its wave South across the sky as it got violently bright and gold, as if it had a mechanism to gauge its brightness.

Within moments it disappears completely, we see a plane in the same spot. 100% a plane, no one could disagree, but absolutely nothing like what was there, doing what it was doing.

Again, another bright one appears East from South, yet we didn't see it travel, and it had appeared again, huge and gold, gauging itself, until it vanished again, and then to the South where the first one was, where the plane had been, appears a shooting star over the ocean, whilst the plane is in the distant South sky, having no relation to the bright things we had seen or the shooting star.

Were they all connected? Most likely no, but the gold moving and reappearing stars can only be described as something that could be cloaked, but once it would reappear, it would be all gold, like the brightest star once more.

Often times at night I see about 10-20 aircrafts in a half hour span of time off track from the normal landing route that 90% of flights take daily. I have a clear view of them landing and where they appear over the mountains. These aircrafts are often very high up, and they always come from either behind or atop the brightest stars, usually Jupiter or Mars if they are out. You can watch them all come, whilst on other nights there is nothing at all, all night long. When these small aircrafts descend, you can see their lights in the distant sky for a long time, as though they are moving stars that move very slowly, but look in alignment as they descend.

The human eye, and what it interprets and takes in - a damn confusing tool.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


To me i always thought that U.F.Os were time travelers from the future. It makes sense because UFOs generally hide from us. The time travelers don't want us to notice them so they cloak to prevent altering history.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 11:17 PM
link   
One night in Huaral, 1 hour north of Lima, Peru, other witnesses and I saw 3 supposed stars doing a random dance. They swung as if on a pendulum, come together then separate again. One would fly circles around 2 of them then separate and rejoin. Finally, one swung back and forth as if tied to a rope finally shooting a fluorescent blue fireball at the horizon. All 3 "stars" faded after that. Erratic behavior for about ten minutes. WTF explain that.

edit on 4-2-2012 by Snoopy1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Cloaking...
...covering, hiding, masking...

...or a combination of cloaking and 'tech' which sometimes has difficulty, as most tech does?

...and a 'civisilation' capable of 'traversing' into our 'space' would probably have no problem manipulating perception through tech, and non-tech means...read abduction material...

The necessity to 'disguise' cannot be assumed to be the M.O. of all 'aliens'...

Akushla



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


I am more convinced that it is a lenticular cloud for why should a UFO "cloak" itself to look like a UFO-shaped cloud?



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   
IMO, since 95% of sightings that occur are reported by people quite ignorant of what they're seeing, a number of these 'cloaking' UFOs are simply satellites falling into the Earth's shadow and thus 'disappearing' suddenly.

As far as actual disguises, heh, makes me think of Dr. Who's police box with it's broken Chameleon circuit.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   
On September 17, 2011 I was walking at night. I was looking up at the clouds (my husband was with me), and we saw a strange milky glow. Upon further inspection, we saw a boomerang/chevron shape 'cloaking' the sky. If it wasn't for the craft blocking the stars behind it, we would have never seen it, although it was only 500 feet above us. The object perfectly cloaked the color of the sky. The leading edge was a spattering of blinking 'stars' that literally made the object undetectable unless you were looking directly at the sky above your head. There was no noise at all, only a strange sensation like you feel before a thunder storm. We have looked for the object again to no avail. It was unbelievable that something so large, could be so quiet. It literally glided through the sky.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   
I am glad your an expert on these matters, and have personal experience. 95% of people who accuse others of being ignorant, are ignorant.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by lostviking
I am glad your an expert on these matters, and have personal experience. 95% of people who accuse others of being ignorant, are ignorant.


What's with the hostility? Did you think my post was precognitive calling you ignorant?
The 95% thing is statistics, cut and dry. Take a look at the aliens and UFO forum listing here and read through them all on your own to see just how MANY people seem to freak out over Venus, or Jupiter.

Your story sounds cool.
Wish I could see one too.

Now, cheer up, try to be friendlier.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Thank you for all your replies. Some interesting and puzzling reports there.

I should perhaps clarify, that whilst I maintain that most reports for example in the star-like objects thread are most likely caused by satellites, some could be due to other non ET-related objects/phenomena, and there is also the possibility that some could be ET related, although I have yet to see proof of this.

Some UFO reports are puzzling and may never be solved, but that does not mean they are necessarily anything very out of the ordinary.

Regarding cloaking, i don't buy that an advanced civilization that could travel here from another star would have cloaking technology that is so flaky it only works properly some of the time.

I think that is a bit like saying "we cant see something, so there must be something there, and it must have cloaking technology"

There is no evidence the alien craft exists, or the cloaking device. The theory that aliens are visiting does not stand up to (scientific) scrutiny, so to make sense of what does not make sense, we have to theorize on top of that that there must be a problem with their technology

The problem is there is no hard evidence for any of this, whilst there is plenty of evidence that the way people in general perceive objects that they have trouble identifying, is often distorted. The human brain has many quirks, which could IMHO account for many UFO reports, and even reports of abductions.



posted on Feb, 5 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by lostviking
I am glad your an expert on these matters, and have personal experience. 95% of people who accuse others of being ignorant, are ignorant.


Quite so often, as it happens, there are certain subtle hints that help one figuring out the circumstances, whence other people are coming from. For example, "your" doesn't equal to "you're", which is what you were saying. Let's face it, 95 % of the UFO sightings come from people, who are ignorant; they don't really pay any attention to detail and, therefore, they never really get any closer to finding the truth about the silly darn extraterrestrials.
edit on 5-2-2012 by Ufomies because: Edited, because I noticed that my own grammar sucked, which was all new and wonderful. Never experienced that before.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
One night in Huaral, 1 hour north of Lima, Peru, other witnesses and I saw 3 supposed stars doing a random dance. They swung as if on a pendulum, come together then separate again. One would fly circles around 2 of them then separate and rejoin. Finally, one swung back and forth as if tied to a rope finally shooting a fluorescent blue fireball at the horizon. All 3 "stars" faded after that. Erratic behavior for about ten minutes. WTF explain that.

edit on 4-2-2012 by Snoopy1978 because: (no reason given)


You were seeing light glinting from various parts of a large satellite as it rotated in its orbit. It can look very odd.

There are some *big* satellites up there, with large inflated antennae.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Sounds like a convenient gimmick to allow the unconditional U.F.O. believer to dismiss any and all conventional explanations of or challenges to their claims.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
What I believe is that UFOs are actually Demons who are disguising themselves in order to deceive people.

Chuck Missler goes into quite some detail on this phenomena and can explain things better than I can.

His website is called the Koinonia House, but his primary message is about UFOs are actually demons.

When you think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense because all UFOs have the ability to disguise themselves just as demons do, and there are quite a few parallels between them.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
What I believe is that UFOs are actually Demons who are disguising themselves in order to deceive people.

Chuck Missler goes into quite some detail on this phenomena and can explain things better than I can.

His website is called the Koinonia House, but his primary message is about UFOs are actually demons.

When you think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense because all UFOs have the ability to disguise themselves just as demons do, and there are quite a few parallels between them.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


Hey C.H.U.D.,

Been a while, see you're consistent (or is that persistent?).


We've discussed things like these before and you know I agree that many UFO sightings are due to uneducated sightings blinded by ignorance. However there is a danger that true unexplained aerial phenomenal may be missed by generalisations...its double edged sword I suppose; education is key.

I still haven't won the lottery, I've even purchased more tickets to increase my chances.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Has anyone seen an airplane just look like hanging out in the air without moving e.g before landing on the airport? It was weird but I didn't take a picture - afterall, if we were to believe the stories and Lacerta story how they disguise but cameras show the true look, well I didnt think of taking a picture.

Or I had an interesting case in Seattle - I took pictures from the Space Needle and on one of them I got two black orbs on the sky. I looked up and it was two airplanes, at first I was stunned cause from all the picture I took arond never got such artifact. I deleted the picture eventually as I thought of it - artifact - but my next pictures that I still keep are clear, meaning that wasn't dirt on the lens :>



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
One night in Huaral, 1 hour north of Lima, Peru, other witnesses and I saw 3 supposed stars doing a random dance. They swung as if on a pendulum, come together then separate again. One would fly circles around 2 of them then separate and rejoin. Finally, one swung back and forth as if tied to a rope finally shooting a fluorescent blue fireball at the horizon. All 3 "stars" faded after that. Erratic behavior for about ten minutes. WTF explain that.

edit on 4-2-2012 by Snoopy1978 because: (no reason given)


You were seeing light glinting from various parts of a large satellite as it rotated in its orbit. It can look very odd.

There are some *big* satellites up there, with large inflated antennae.


I agree, satellites can look very odd at times, and what Snoopy saw sounds like it could have been a satellite, but I very much doubt rotation would be visible as motion to an observer on the ground. Rotation would manifest itself as changes in brightness though. The autokinetic effect (or a closely related effect/illusion) would be my guess as to the erratic movements or "swinging".

What Snoopy describes as a "fireball", was most likely just that, an unrelated but coincidental fireball class meteor.



posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by dsm1664
 


Hello there dsm. It has been a while! Hope you've been keeping well.

Well, I agree, there is always a danger that a genuine UFO may be dismissed by mistake. I think if that was the case it would have to be quite a subtle UFO, or not very "UFO like" to put it into other words.

The trouble is, what characteristics define a true UFO? If it makes an unexplained maneuver, but otherwise looks like a satellite? The trouble with that is that we know people make bad observers, especially when it comes to observing objects in the sky...

It certainly is a double edged sword. I would argue that it's more harmful to the UFO field to tout a case as "the real deal" and have the case later proven to be something relatively mundane, than it is to mistakenly discard some random sighting by "Joe Blogs" that turns out to be the real deal. In that scenario, the UFO is acknowledged to be the real deal eventually anyway.

I also agree, education is the key. I've always said that basic astronomy should be taught at schools.

Don't get too greedy dsm - you've already won the lottery once



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join