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.

 

Pilot claims to see UFO at KCI Airport - Aug 1, 2012

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by OnionHead

Originally posted by Human_Alien
To those of us who know (alien) UFOs are real and here


Where?


Where? Where, what? Where are they? If that's your question then....I can't answer that. That is outside my understanding plus it's not my role or purpose to prove anything. This has to be realized not proved. I am just here to share.

Here is how it feels when people like me run into people like you (no offense intended
) but....imagine you are starving and haven't eaten in weeks. Not a morsel. Not a crumb.
Then as luck would have it....you run into me and am willing to share my food. Only....instead thanking me you insist on me producing a receipt for the food!

It's almost the same feeling. I feel (like millions of us probably do) we should be thanked not questioned/insulted but in a twisted ironic way, I do really understand why this is so. It doesn't feel good but....I understand.

So my friend, I hope you get to experience this truth real soon!
edit on 2-8-2012 by Human_Alien because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
It's unclear from MUFON investigator Margie Kay's comments to what extent this case has been investigated beyond an initial conversation with the alleged witness. She does mention that there are supposedly two additional witnesses to this sighting. Scant details at this point.

Assuming the event occurred as described, it sounds like a pretty good one in terms of proximity, duration, appearance and behavior of the object and the fact that it was viewed by multiple witnesses from a few different angles. At this point, however, without any confirmation of the witnesses' identities or any real investigation there is very little to go on.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


According to Flightradar24.com there were no flights between St Louis and Kansas City at 07/30/2012 09:25 UTC.


edit on 2/8/2012 by cripmeister because: (no reason given)




I'm not going to argue this because I don't feel like taking the time to check it out.....so I will assume you're right.
But at the same time I would think MUFON put in this slightest effort too just as you did.

Plus, I have personally used that site (when debating chemtrails) and very often the planes... that were right overhead... were not on the active map.
So not sure how reliable that is although the planes I was seeing might've been military.

But like I said, I would think MUFON would've done something very similar to what you just did. I just don't have an explanation.
edit on 2-8-2012 by Human_Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orkojoker
It's unclear from MUFON investigator Margie Kay's comments to what extent this case has been investigated beyond an initial conversation with the alleged witness. She does mention that there are supposedly two additional witnesses to this sighting. Scant details at this point.

Assuming the event occurred as described, it sounds like a pretty good one in terms of proximity, duration, appearance and behavior of the object and the fact that it was viewed by multiple witnesses from a few different angles. At this point, however, without any confirmation of the witnesses' identities or any real investigation there is very little to go on.



I agree.
It would be interesting to hear what the other two witnessed though. Maybe there will be more on this story soon?
Thanks for your input



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
..

I am ASSUMING the MUFON investigator (who interviewed him) asked him pertinent questions to convince her to proceed forward and he was who he claimed he was. He might've given her his name and flight number and she, as good investigator would, followed through and checked it out. Again, I am just assuming. MUFON is a pretty thorough organization.

Yea, the TV-reporter sure did a miserable job, very poor. He couldn't get info, so instead interviewed random passengers:
'Do you believe in UFOs?' Who cares, do your job!



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Here's his report:


As called in to ASD by phone: (witness wishes to remain anonymous) I am the pilot of a regularly scheduled commercial aircraft flight from St. Louis to Kansas City and was on approach to KCI when my co-pilot said he saw an unidentified object to the right of the aircraft that appeared to be following us. It was not yet in my range of view, so I asked him to confirm that and the object remained. I radioed the tower and asked for radar confirmation but there was none. Then the object came into my view to the right front of the aircraft. At that point we were approximately 35 minutes out from the airport. The object was a silver/gray color and had three blue/white lights on the bottom and one on the top. It was a disc-shaped craft with a low dome on top. It was approximately 300 feet from our aircraft and NNE of our position. Then the object suddenly moved underneath us and to the left, and continued at the our same rate of speed. I discussed this with my co-pilot and we decided not to tell the tower what we saw because of what happens when reports like this are made. The tower then asked us to confirm an unidentified object and I said it was no longer in view. I was concerned, however, that it might be a problem. The object stayed with us for approximately 22 minutes. When I decreased aircraft speed for approach, the object slowed as well, then went directly south of our position at a very high rate of speed - faster than any aircraft I've ever seen. I was a military pilot for 14 years and know what type of aircraft we have. It was definitely NOT a man-made aircraft. Some pilots have lost their jobs when they report a UFO, and I would like to keep mine so am not providing my name or contact information. Some of the passengers were discussing this as they left the plane but we did not discuss it with them. Other crew members saw it as well, but did not report it. I just wanted to tell someone about it.
www.ufostalker.com...



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 

100 to 150

edit on 8/2/2012 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Did he explain why no pictures were taken?



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinkererJim
Did he explain why no pictures were taken?



Is it standard practice that there's a standby camera in the cockpit?
This is a real question. Not sarcasm.

Their cell phones are probably packed away in their small carry-on cases seeing they can't use them when flying so.............



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orkojoker

Originally posted by Human_Alien

This did go through the rigorous scrutiny of MUFON so it's not "THAT" easy.
I was just wondering what type of vetting was used.



If you don't know how or if the alleged witness was vetted in any way, what leads you to believe the report went through "rigorous scrutiny'?



Because MUFON aren't a bunch of ghost hunters. It's a professional organization. I was a member. That's how I know. There's an actual check-list one must use and have so many 'checks' checked off to give the story any credence let alone publicity.

And because there are two other witnesses, that alone brings this to another level. There might be more to this story. I wouldn't doubt MUFON is hot on the trail of the other witnesses.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by TinkererJim
Did he explain why no pictures were taken?



Is it standard practice that there's a standby camera in the cockpit?
This is a real question. Not sarcasm.

Their cell phones are probably packed away in their small carry-on cases seeing they can't use them when flying so.............


Well, cameras are definitely allowed in cockpits. Some pilots like to shoot in-flight pictures, even videos of approaches, thunderstorms, you name it. If I were a pilot and I did not have a camera with me, I would call for a flight attendant and I would ask her to get one presto. There's bound to be a camera in a commercial plane somewhere. I understand they would possibly need to keep quiet not to cause panic among the passengers, but it looks like they had enough time to find a means of filming it.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel
reply to post by cripmeister
 

100 to 150

edit on 8/2/2012 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)


Assuming this was a direct flight between St Louis and Kansas City do the times mentioned in the report seem correct? I am not a native English speaker so I am not really sure how to read this.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by cripmeister
 

I really haven't looked that close. I often track flights so that was my guess of range based on what I have seen, An actual commercial pilot, if here, could give better feed back. I bet the airport, conditions, aircraft will have much to do with timing. Also, what is the point that for instance, the30 minute away references.

A flight between those cities should not be very long.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
What's happening on August 4th then? Anything exciting? Boy oh boy! Gee Willikers!
edit on 2-8-2012 by jamdan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by WideOpenSpace

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by TinkererJim
Did he explain why no pictures were taken?



Is it standard practice that there's a standby camera in the cockpit?
This is a real question. Not sarcasm.

Their cell phones are probably packed away in their small carry-on cases seeing they can't use them when flying so.............


Well, cameras are definitely allowed in cockpits. Some pilots like to shoot in-flight pictures, even videos of approaches, thunderstorms, you name it. If I were a pilot and I did not have a camera with me, I would call for a flight attendant and I would ask her to get one presto. There's bound to be a camera in a commercial plane somewhere. I understand they would possibly need to keep quiet not to cause panic among the passengers, but it looks like they had enough time to find a means of filming it.



Pilots have to keep their cool and maintain composure even if a plane is going down. So I highly doubt a level-headed pilot would get others involved and ask a flight attendant to grab a camera because he thinks he's seeing a UFO.

Until this phenomenon is better understood, people are liable to fear it before they welcome it.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jamdan
What's happening on August 4th then? Anything exciting? Boy oh boy! Gee Willikers!
edit on 2-8-2012 by jamdan because: (no reason given)


There's a lot of rumor that Saturday there will be a world-wide UFO event. Whether it's disclosure or a massive sighting is obviously unknown.
And because of the recent crop circles (apparently) depicted August 4th...people are tying things together.

Here's a blog-cast that explains it better. Somehow, the Queen is even involved

www.blogtalkradio.com...



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Nameless pilot,Airline unknown,............... This could have been filed by anyone.
As usual, not a shred of evidence.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skywatcher2011
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



He described the object as...silver or gray in color with three blue or white lights on the bottom and one on the top. He said it was a disc-shaped craft with a low dome on top.


It sounds like the classic UFO sighting. I wonder if those three lights were in the shape of a triangle maybe???


If there are three lights, they are either:
1) in a straight line, or
2) in a triangle

There is absolutely nothing "mysterious" or "mystical" about three lights forming a triangle!
edit on 2-8-2012 by bluestreak53 because: grammer



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
I hope this helps. Coming in to land is a busy time for pilots, they don't need distractions, yet he says he called the airport for advice on other traffic on radar, but only once. The 'fact' that he made such a call means that someone would know about it ie; the traffic controller it would be heads up time, so the flight and conversation is identifiable from that person at least.

That he declined any more info to the ground then, has put him in a sticky position, now that he has gone to the internet with his story when knowing that an unidentified craft was a possible hazard to both his plane, and any other aircraft that may be in the vicinity, that doesn't make much sense.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla
The story is all very well and nice, and even more so since it got some MSM coverage, however, anyone, any internet troll on the planet can make anonymous reports to UFO sites, and even call up news agencies claiming credentials they don't have with no way to have said credentials vetted because of the anonymity.

I could claim to be a pilot. You could claim to be a pilot. Anyone could claim to be a pilot and say any number of fantastic things to media outlets, UFO websites, any many other venues under the charade and 'protection' of anonymity.


And therefore all witness testimony can be discarded? Is that actually logical to you?

Without knowing the specifics of the case myself, I wonder... what if the witness HAD been vetted, a newspaper HAD checked his credentials, he WAS a pilot, there were other witnesses, and he wished to remain anonymous not to the reporter, but only to the general public? This happens quite often. (Usually because of the irrational 'UFO taboo', which is perpetuated by illogical and narrow-minded thinkers.) I have no doubt you ignore those kinds of witnesses, too.

Disregard all eye-witness testimony if you must, but ask yourself why you must. And I hope you apply your standards to every person, even yourself, and that you apply them consistently.

----------------
(ETA: I'm referring back to your recent post which said:
"To cut down on error and false positives, I'd recommend any and all evidence that relies on sole eye-witness testimony, regardless the credentials of the eye witness, regardless the number of eye witnesses, to have only consideration of interest, but, no more consideration than that.
Eye witnesses are unreliable and eye witnesses can be tampered with, altered with chemical, social, and hypnotic suggestion."

I'm not sure how you're defining "consideration of interest" here, but I wonder if some skeptics around these parts would even grant eye-witnesses THAT much consideration?)
----------------
edit on 2-8-2012 by TeaAndStrumpets because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join