ATS Exclusive - Turkey UFO Incident - New Details - A Fresh Look At The Kumburgaz Case 2007 to 2009

page: 16
131
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 7 2013 @ 11:03 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on May, 8 2013 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 



posted on May, 23 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 05:26 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2
More analysis HERE



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by CigaretteMan
My blogsite has all my research so for listed here: turkeyufocase.blogspot.com...



Originally posted by CigaretteMan
Everyone please have a look a this blogsite. turkeyufocase.blogspot.com...Thanks



Originally posted by CigaretteMan
This blog has alot of information

turkeyufocase.blogspot.com...



Desperate for hits are we?

Got anything new to add? Other than Youtube links to the same old footage over and over and over and over again....



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 01:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by CigaretteMan
The case totals over 26 seperate days.

Nothing has been proven to be a boat yet.... still waiting...

At least two or three have been shown and proven on this forum to be boats of some sort. If some are boats, then it's safe to say they all are boats. Boats are boats whether they're recorded over a span of 6 days, or 26 days.


But there's no denying this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


It's irrefutable.




edit on 12-3-2013 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)


Doesn't look "irrefutable" to me.

A possible explanation, and a stretch at that.

Those overlays simply do not match. The picture of the cruise ship was taken from and angle of around 40 to 50 degrees on the bow and from a low vantage point, in order for those pictures to be a match (A) the cruise ship had to have been stationary(in open water at night highly unlikely), (B) have the exact same angle on the bow, and (C) the ship's bridge have an identical angle off the horizon, relative to both the photographer of the cruise ship and the videographer of the 'UFO' . These factors make the odds of the footage being that of a ship astronomical, hardly irrefutable.






edit on 30-7-2013 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
These frames taken from the July 2, 2008 footage are a lengthy distance from the camera. The objects are not as close as it may seem. You can view the original footage yourself to see this is an accurate screenshot.

The moon provides the lighting and as you can see the shifting shade pattern which changes back and forth several times. There is alot of camera shaking eventhough the camera was on sticks the wind was picking up.



There are 2 types of phenomenon that happened:

1. Solid structured appearing objects or UFOs
2. Plasma/light orb/orange fireball phenomenon ----of course its always possible these are lanterns or oil flares.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by CigaretteMan
There are 2 types of phenomenon that happened:
1. Solid structured appearing objects or UFOs
2. Plasma/light orb/orange fireball phenomenon ----of course its always possible these are lanterns or oil flares.

3. Mistaken optical aberration caused by a crappy camera rig and an inexperienced photographer. He got a better camera and the "UFOs" suddenly disappeared. Coincidence?

edit on 31-7-2013 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by CigaretteMan
The case totals over 26 seperate days.

Nothing has been proven to be a boat yet.... still waiting...

At least two or three have been shown and proven on this forum to be boats of some sort. If some are boats, then it's safe to say they all are boats. Boats are boats whether they're recorded over a span of 6 days, or 26 days.


But there's no denying this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


It's irrefutable.




edit on 12-3-2013 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)


Doesn't look "irrefutable" to me.

A possible explanation, and a stretch at that.

Those overlays simply do not match. The picture of the cruise ship was taken from and angle of around 40 to 50 degrees on the bow and from a low vantage point, in order for those pictures to be a match (A) the cruise ship had to have been stationary(in open water at night highly unlikely), (B) have the exact same angle on the bow, and (C) the ship's bridge have an identical angle off the horizon, relative to both the photographer of the cruise ship and the videographer of the 'UFO' . These factors make the odds of the footage being that of a ship astronomical, hardly irrefutable.






edit on 30-7-2013 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)


One thing to note about the people comparing the May 13, 2009 image to a cruise ship.

1. There are 25 seperate dates that footage was taken on. Even if the May 13, 2009 segment matches a cruise ship (and I am not impressed with this explanation) it still does not explain the other 24 dates and 24 video segments. This is far from coming close to debunking the case.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by CigaretteMan
There are 2 types of phenomenon that happened:
1. Solid structured appearing objects or UFOs
2. Plasma/light orb/orange fireball phenomenon ----of course its always possible these are lanterns or oil flares.

3. Mistaken optical aberration caused by a crappy camera rig and an inexperienced photographer. He got a better camera and the "UFOs" suddenly disappeared. Coincidence?

edit on 31-7-2013 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)


1. Yalman is still filming UFOs. He however moved to another area of Turkey and is currently taking care of his mother who is in the hospital.

2. These anomalies are still being seen in Turkey and of course unless you can read Turkish and visit Turkish UFO sites you would not be aware of this.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 



1. There are 25 seperate dates that footage was taken on. Even if the May 13, 2009 segment matches a cruise ship (and I am not impressed with this explanation) it still does not explain the other 24 dates and 24 video segments. This is far from coming close to debunking the case.


So than why do you post the same pictures of the same dates? And you are right because the pictures and videos you do post are different objects on different days. Sometimes it's lights some times it's a boat. Why with all this footage is there no clean transformation from the night to day? Why don't we ever see it fly in or fly away? That's a lot of footage to miss it fly away or do ANYTHING. It doesn't do anything. So nobody thought to take a boat out to get better footage after 25 days? Or even move to a different spot on the beach? So it there every night and you are going to stay in the same spot to watch something that doesn't move? Night after night?
edit on 31-7-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 



1. There are 25 seperate dates that footage was taken on. Even if the May 13, 2009 segment matches a cruise ship (and I am not impressed with this explanation) it still does not explain the other 24 dates and 24 video segments. This is far from coming close to debunking the case.


So than why do you post the same pictures of the same dates? And you are right because the pictures and videos you do post are different objects on different days. Sometimes it's lights some times it's a boat. Why with all this footage is there no clean transformation from the night to day? Why don't we never see it fly in or fly away? That's a lot of footage to miss it fly away or do ANYTHING. It doesn't do anything. So nobody thought to take a boat out to get better footage after 25 days? Or even move to a different spot on the beach? So it there every night and you are going to stay in the same spot to watch something that doesn't move? Night after night?


Look at all the dates my friend. All you have to do is notice all the dates change and all the times change. Simple thing to figure out. Different dates and different times. 25 seperate dates. Count them yourself.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by CigaretteMan

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 



1. There are 25 seperate dates that footage was taken on. Even if the May 13, 2009 segment matches a cruise ship (and I am not impressed with this explanation) it still does not explain the other 24 dates and 24 video segments. This is far from coming close to debunking the case.


So than why do you post the same pictures of the same dates? And you are right because the pictures and videos you do post are different objects on different days. Sometimes it's lights some times it's a boat. Why with all this footage is there no clean transformation from the night to day? Why don't we never see it fly in or fly away? That's a lot of footage to miss it fly away or do ANYTHING. It doesn't do anything. So nobody thought to take a boat out to get better footage after 25 days? Or even move to a different spot on the beach? So it there every night and you are going to stay in the same spot to watch something that doesn't move? Night after night?


Look at all the dates my friend. All you have to do is notice all the dates change and all the times change. Simple thing to figure out. Different dates and different times. 25 seperate dates. Count them yourself.


Yes but that doesn't address my questions which have nothing to do with the dates. I don't deny that there are 25 days where separate footage was taken but who cares. It doesn't change anything because its the same thing each time with no variation. Who would do that? What does it mean? Why is it important? Is there ONE day where it does something? One day is all you need.
edit on 31-7-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   
So far nobody has come close to matching the following dates to a cruise ship.


June 22, 2007


August 12, 2007


June 8, 2008




May 23, 2008


July 2, 2008

This July 2, 2008 screenshot is probably one of the best single frames of the entire series of video. This screenshot is from the high quality version of the video that is 100x times better than what is seen on Youtube.

Remember the object above dated July 2, 2008 was pretty high in the air over the sea and it included witnesses. It is not as close to the camera as it may seem but quite far away.

More coming on this case.
edit on 31-7-2013 by CigaretteMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 



So far nobody has come close to matching the following dates to a cruise ship


And who cares? What is it? It could be anything because there is no context to the images whatsoever. And if it is an alien craft, they are some boring ass aliens and I still don't care. My quad copter can out perform their sorry ass space ship. And it looks waaaay cooler too.
edit on 31-7-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)


And I only count 4 days where are the other 22?

edit on 31-7-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
131
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum