Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Undebunkable UFO Documentary 'Secret Access' HD

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by PerfectPerception
 




She very well could be telling the truth

It's the hair. You can always tell by the hair. People with wild hair always tell the truth.

edit on 5/20/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


I think hes had an hair cut now honest


Anyway im off to watch it now
edit on 20/5/2012 by maryhinge because: Last line




posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


If only things were that easy to tell if someone was lying/telling the truth,the world would be a much better place I imagine.

I do find her account highly questionable but it makes for a good story.

At the same time, I know not to be so arrogant as to believe I have all the answers,Just a intellectually inferior being humbled in contrast to the limitless realm of realities and potential possibility.

Maybe the hair is some type of Samson complex

edit on 20-5-2012 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


What do you think the beam of light, that originated from the craft and....shot to the ground in front of the men....might've been all about?

"Go no further?" Like drawing a line in the sand? They reported that several of these things were at triangle ends of the compass overhead. In my mind like a "fighter cap" if you know what that means. One approaches, hovers overhead the men outside the base perimeter (in the forest) and puts down a "beam". The others patrolling overhead protecting what...? Reports also indicate beams were put down into the weapons storage area. Was that a threat too? For arguments sake? I have no idea what that was all about. The whole thing is one big mystery. Other reports tell of locals who also witnessed similar events over the same period. They live outside the base nearby. So there is that corroboration as well.

There are other reports from other base personnel that night that have surfaced (there is so much info about this case) that puts one eye witness who claimed he saw a craft on the ground and there were little "beings" talking to men in uniform (assumedly base higher ups?) Later this same witness claims he was interrogated by off base "personnel" that employed drugs and hypnosis over an unknown period of days? Others that he recognized were there with him.

Although 80 base personnel were witness to some aspect of this event, few have come forward. They were all sworn to secrecy about it, threatened, etc. Halt and Penniston talk about this. What else are they covering up? Like they are "approved" witnesses because they haven't been shut up. They tell us just so much but no more. Who knows? We get a "glimpse". Surely intriguing the whole of it. One of the best and not "debunked" yet. Thanks for letting me play along. Remember Human, I debunk a lot but am a believer. Just very cautious and skeptical about evidence.

Rendlesham is one of those that keeps rearing its head with new tidbits about an old time worn case. Keep an eye on it from time to time. I think this one was real. (what do I know). There is no reason to keep a fake like that alive down thru the decades. And the elements, when they are added up , give off that UFO odor.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 





There is no reason to keep a fake like that alive down thru the decades. And the elements, when they are added up , give off that UFO odor.


Depending on what you believe.

To play Devils advocate.

If you are one who subscribes to either 'UFO's are man-made' or believe in a possible 'false flag alien invasion.'
Then there definitely would be reason to push an agenda. (for whatever reason)

I am undecided,still on the fence with this case,Although I do agree that Rendlesham is one of the better known and interesting cases in ufology.(If all of the testimony is to be believed)

The agenda could be some non-human intelligence does exist/has visited or it could be that they stumbled upon something they were not supposed to see...Or were they?

Other than the Rendlesham forest case are there any other cases in ufology that intrigue you,leave you stumped?

What about you Phage? (if you are still there?) is there one case that you have personally found to be unexplainable? or that interests you for one reason or another.

Anyone for that matter. What case(s) blows you away.made you a believer.began your quest into the mystery of ufology/aliens/secret government man-made tech etc.
edit on 20-5-2012 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by PerfectPerception
reply to post by intrptr
 

If you are one who subscribes to either 'UFO's are man-made' or believe in a possible 'false flag alien invasion.'
Then there definitely would be reason to push an agenda. (for whatever reason)

I don't subscribe to either. I have seen one. I personally believe that what I saw was not earth technology, and yet was technology. Elements of Rendlesham match my experience.


I am undecided,still on the fence with this case,Although I do agree that Rendlesham is one of the better known cases in ufology.(If the all of the testimony is to be believed)

Absolutely. All we have here are eyewitness accounts after all. I have been watching this one develop over the years. These guys maintain their story line without wavering. I haven't caught them in a blatant lie anyway. We're talking 30 plus years. The part where he draws the "dripping eye" is a new bit I think. And he drew it and recounted it like he always has verbatim. It lends an element of credence because this was a life changing experience for him and if he was lying it would show. And if real he would remember it like 'yesterday'.


The agenda could be some non-human intelligence does exist/has visited or it could be that they stumbled upon something they were not supposed to see...Or were they?

I think what happened that night was an approach to the base and visitation for whatever reason like you say, but then these guys got caught up into it more than maybe they were supposed to? Like Penniston being able to close approach a vehicle like that. In recorded history most all accounts indicate that upon close approach, hovering or landed Unknowns leap into the air or disappear, always moving out of reach. There are few exceptions. Thats what makes me think Pennistons encounter with the landed craft was by accident and that adds an unusual element to the story. Same with the beam at their feet or the other one in the woods; the "red eye" that drips and explodes? Weird. Like warning them off or keeping them back from what was really gong on?

And THAT is what I want to know. What is really going on? I have my ideas but already conjecturing enough here.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
It's the hair. You can always tell by the hair. People with wild hair always tell the truth.


You might be right about that...





posted on May, 20 2012 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


A very good programme, and for me the Belgium wave is the most exciting, because in 1993 my self and a friend witnessed a massive, slow moving, silent black triangular object. Blocking out the stars as it moved. But this sighting had no lights. But it was the most incredible thing I have ever seen, and would love to go back in time, and have a camera to hand. It was no stealth craft, and there is no logical reason for a craft to have been silently gliding over a small Kentish village in southern England.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by NotReallyASecret

This is not the usual History Channel crap.



The pilot reports in this one were pretty interesting as well:


Google Video Link



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Idk what's your problem with her this time, she is just making a suggestion on the cases, is it wrong? It was already aired last year, so that's nothing new, there was a thread about it. It's probably one of the most serious documentaries without the guesses of people from Ancient Aliens. Should watch it before assuming it will be bad.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I have not watched the video yet, but, nothing is beyond speculation, or even investigation to the point of criticism where the points of criticism can outweigh any speculation for a 'positive' ufo' sighting.

I'll watch the video and perhaps add some extra thoughts to this when done.


My first, immediate criticism is: History Channel, which is already on record with the Ancient Aliens series in showing us the lengths of sensationalism and poor reporting it gives on the subject.
edit on 19-5-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)


So how many creditable pilots, generals, etc. would it take for to stop and say, "Hey, many there is something to the millions of sightings and other reports from the unwashed masses?

Debunking and denial without knowing what you are talking about? Do you do this often?



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Druscilla
 


Have you seen the thread where a pilot in Mexico was escorted by two identical UFO's? The event was witnessed by a fellow pilot in an adjacent flight path, and confirmed by flight control on radar.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla
I have not watched the video yet, but, nothing is beyond speculation, or even investigation to the point of criticism where the points of criticism can outweigh any speculation for a 'positive' ufo' sighting.


Actually, there exist UFO cases that ARE immune to the kind of speculation and criticism you describe. (I'm assuming, of course, that you're confining your 'speculation' and 'criticism' to an appropriate level of reasonableness?)

Hynek, the original and ultimate UFO skeptic, addressed your point over 40 years ago, when discussing the uncomfortably large number of high-strangeness/high-credibility cases that remained in the Bluebook files despite his best efforts to construct reasonable explanations:

"These reports contain descriptive terms which collectively do not specify any known psychological event, object, or process, and which do not specify any known psychological event or process. And, furthermore, THEY RESIST TRANSLATION into terms that do apply to known physical and/or psychological events, objects, and processes. That is, as [Thomas] Goudge points out, TRANSLATION WOULD ALTER THE MEANING of the original report and hence effectively violate the methodological criteria governing the advance of science: namely (a) that it must be possible for new observational data to occur; that is, the existing conceptual framework of science, or the attitudes of scientists, must not rule out such new data a priori; and (b) the existing conceptual framework must allow new concepts, principles, and laws to be formulated to interpret and explain the new observational data."
(My emphasis.)
(Hynek, "Twenty-one Years of UFO Reports", from the AAAS 134th Meeting, Dec. 1969.)

That and the surrounding text is worth careful re-reading. What Hynek is saying -- and he was clearly as surprised by this as anyone -- is that some small number cases do in fact involve levels of UFO strangeness and witness credibility that, combined, make the cases sturdy enough to withstand any reasonable levels of "speculation" and "criticism".

The only criticism of these types of cases that might at first appear reasonable is that all witnesses, together, were either hallucinating, or lying. And of course that can never be completely ruled out in an individual case, but in the context of the cases of which Hynek was speaking -- those involving multiple witnesses of high community standing, with nothing to gain but much to lose by coming forward -- the hallucination / hoaxing criticism becomes unreasonable (if not absurd) rather quickly, especially when looking at the surprisingly high number of these types of reports.

Are you familiar with the types of reports of which he was speaking? Many people, new to ATS or to the UFO topic in general, are completely unaware that such cases exist.

Hynek's evaluation of the Condon Report ("Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists", April 1969) touches on some of these same points in a very effective way.
edit on 20-5-2012 by TeaAndStrumpets because: hyperlink



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   
Great documentary

Thank you for posting



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


I have had my own experiences as well,so you are not alone there.

I am still wrestling with what I saw,If it was not for two other witnesses corroborating my experience,I would probably think it was a hallucination or I would of continued to down play it as something else.

I do not believe it was a case of Folie à deux

I had subtle events leading up to my UFO sighting,as if almost like it was a warning precursor or build up,letting me know,that they knew. If that makes any sense.

Although my personal experience was nothing like rendlesham,or like yours I will assume,since you said it shared similarities to what they saw.(the ship or elements of their sighting?)

What I witnessed was closer to what would best be described as a sphere of energy,commonly referred to as a orb/fireball in ufology.That is the best way I can describe what I saw.






edit on 21-5-2012 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   
No offense, but when you mention "alien" and "undebunkable" in your thread title you know you must be bring solid verified evidence to the public than even the MSM can't ignore.

So yeah, as usual, your thread is a fail and a reason for the average Joe to continue to ignore this laughable subject (laughable because of the ignorance that causes you to make this thread title among other things)

But yeah, thanks for blowing up the cover up on some obscure BB broad. I hope it keeps your fantasies alive enough for you to keep on keeping one, lol......

Have you considered maybe posting more often to GLP, where the average person lacks the intelligence to actually consider the ignorance your posting?

But hey, as long as it generates click-thorough I guess ATS wins.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by gameisupman
 


That is more an issue with the original title given to the documentary,not necessarily Human_Alien's fault.
It is apart of the rules of ATS,to use the original article/source title.As I understand it.

You can choose to change the title if it you feel as though it is inaccurate or contains sensationalism / inappropriate content .

I cannot find the link to where it explains this

I know in the breaking alternative news forum you have to use the original source title.

I believe you are being overly critical in this particular situation.

Any thread related info can be found here - Index of Important ATS Related Threads
edit on 21-5-2012 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by PerfectPerception

I believe you are being overly critical in this particular situation.[\quote]

Yeah, no need to be even mildly critical concerning "undebunkable" evidence of alien visitation, your correct. I apologize for my ignorance. We should accept the average internet fodder than convinces the ignorant masses that populate thisp lace and many others that "they are here"without question, right?

And you guys wonder why your the laughing stock of the internet. Wake up and grow up. The guy who posted this should know better. He either lacks the mental capacity to understand what he is posting, or has a serious mental issue and you guys are encouraging it. Sad, but 100% true. He has been around a while, and hasn't LEARNED A DARN THING. What's that tell you? Think real hard about that one.

But hey, as long as the site gets clicks, right?



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by gameisupman
 





And you guys wonder why your the laughing stock of the internet. Wake up and grow up. The guy who posted this should know better. He either lacks the mental capacity to understand what he is posting, or has a serious mental issue and you guys are encouraging it. Sad, but 100% true. He has been around a while, and hasn't LEARNED A DARN THING. What's that tell you? Think real hard about that one. But hey, as long as the site gets clicks, right?



I suggest you rethink your personally reasoning for being here and stop worrying about other members or their thread titles.

It is up to a MOD whether the title is wrong/misleading and ATS rules in general.Not you or me or anyone for that matter.

You must of missed what I posted previously or completely ignored it,the part about thread titles etc.

edit on 21-5-2012 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by PerfectPerception
 


Other than the Rendlesham forest case are there any other cases in ufology that intrigue you,leave you stumped?

Thats a long list. I don't have all of them handy, but can cite a few.
Besides Roswell (not going there, too muddied), there is
Travis Walton, "Fire in the sky" about some reluctant loggers. (aslo muddied but have been following this one for 30 years as well) Lot of disinfo there as well. But can be sorted . Look for interviews with him and his buddies who have been hiding from the press until recently.

Then there is the Belgium wave.

Shag Harbor

Them school kids in Zimbabwe.

That alaskan one with cockpit recordings from a jumbo jet that saw something as big as an aircraft carrier.
"...intermittent object in trail with you. I say again... in trail." (radar confirmation)

This video:


And this one:


Oh, and 1:45 into here:



And they say this is "debunked", but not by me:


This is one of my favorites. All the elements of visual, audio, multiple witnesses, "Do you see it?. They even shooting at it in the background.


I actually prefer video as you know about a 1000 words and all? But any "unknown" must have different elements that add up together to make something "legit". Notice that in each of these sightings spanning decades, there is an element of defying gravity, silent running, and impossible speed or movement. That is key.



posted on May, 21 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   
It is nice to finally see a documentary produced by the history channel that actual stands behind what they are looking into when dealing with UFO's/Aliens. Almost every program they produce when dealing with UFO's/Alien's you will hear these phrases "Could Be, May Be, Possibly, etc" in order to protect their own behinds. So for me it was a relief to see the history channel finally stand behind factually information that was being provided.

That being said, something stood out to me that I think needs being said. The common consensus of ET's is that if they are able to travel interstellar they are more than likely advanced in technology, and religion/spirituality. The markings on the side of the UFO that was landed near the joint base was claimed to look like some type of Egyptian hieroglyphics. Almost every military personal throughout the world have a uniform with their countries patches and symbolic meanings. With an advanced civilization that has a higher understanding of Mathematics, could they have used the combination of their species unified symbolic meanings, a higher religion/spirituality, and mathematics to come up with in depth symbols that anywhere they went would be seen be the universe's intelligent species to explain who they are with minimal amount of information.

The Egyptians of their time may have figured a portion of this out and possibly mimicked the "Gods" that came about on some of the pyramid's wall paintings. Which would mean a entire civilization that affects who we are today could have been constructed and based on a UFO sighting or visitation.

Just some food for thought.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join