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.

 

St Louis 1969 - the multiple pilot UFO sighting that never was

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon
Here's the actual description of the St Louis incident, so the re-entering junk passed within 300 feet of the aircraft?

www.nicap.org...

This is one of those cases you either take the word of a known liar Klass,, against that of someone who probably does know what they're talking about.


That link is in my OP, you should read it




posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by FireMoon
Here's the actual description of the St Louis incident, so the re-entering junk passed within 300 feet of the aircraft?

www.nicap.org...

This is one of those cases you either take the word of a known liar Klass,, against that of someone who probably does know what they're talking about.


That link is in my OP, you should read it


I did and maybe you should read this..hmmmm coincidence?... has Klass been shown to be liar and that photo looks like it was taken at night. www.nicap.org...

The meteor was on the 12th at 9 pm.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg


Yet reentries and launches are documented. We can look back on when and more-or-less where they occurred and the direction they were traveling.

When we do so -- and I've got to point out that top-grade pro-UFO researchers have RARELY bothered to do so -- we can see patterns of similarities of eyewitness reports from witnesses, including pilots. And repeatable patterns of misinterpretation.

...I sincerely believe this is a major advance in understanding UFO reports. I am saddened by the closed-minded refusal of belief, of ridicule, of denial, that most [not all] posters have reacted with.

It's really the first time we've EVER had experimental calibration of real-world witness [including pilot] reactions to specific types of apparitions.


I agree that back-checking specific UFO reports with documented known stimuli like re-entries and launches is a great opportunity to gauge the possible extent to which humans can misperceive unfamiliar sights in the sky.

It seems that somebody had a similar idea back in 1953 with the writing of the "Pentacle memorandum" (begins about 40% of the way down the page), which discusses the desirability of "experiments" which would involve thoroughly documenting all aerial traffic in particular areas - and even possibly staging aerial "activities" of different kinds - in order to ascertain better information on how people perceive (or misperceive) various stimuli and to what extent such stimuli lead to the making of UFO reports.


Assuming that, from our analysis, several definite areas productive of reports can be selected, we recommend that one or two of theses areas be set up as experimental areas. This area, or areas, should have observation posts with complete visual skywatch, with radar and photographic coverage, plus all other instruments necessary or helpful in obtaining positive and reliable data on everything in the air over the area. A very complete record of the weather should also be kept during the time of the experiment. Coverage should be so complete that any object in the air could be tracked, and information as to its altitude, velocity, size, shape, color, time of day, etc. could be recorded. All balloon releases or known balloon paths, aircraft flights, and flights of rockets in the test area should be known to those in charge of the experiment. Many different types of aerial activity should be secretly and purposefully scheduled within the area.

We recognize that this proposed experiment would amount to a large- scale military maneuver, or operation, and that it would require extensive preparation and fine coordination, plus maximum security. Although it would be a major operation, and expensive, there are many extra benefits to be derived besides the data on unidentified aerial objects. The question of just what would be accomplished by the proposed experiment occurs. Just how could the problem of these unidentified objects be solved? From this test area, during the time of the experiment, it can be assumed that there would be a steady flow of reports from ordinary civilian observers, in addition to those by military or other official observers. It should be possible by such a controlled experiment to prove the identity of all objects reported, or to determine positively that there were objects present of unknown identity. Any hoaxes under a set-up such as this could almost certainly be exposed, perhaps not publicly, but at least to the military.


Immediately below the document in this link is some commentary on it by Jacques Vallee. Quite interesting.
edit on 5-8-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join