Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Interesting video about a sighting

page: 2
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Huh???? and depending on the audience I am dealing with depends on the details i give about particular sightings. Like for instance,, on here, there;'s a few sightings I will talk about and leave out a huge part of the actual sighting because, I have genuine reasons to. I might even give some outlandish fact to throw people off the scent as I simply don;t want to discuss that with people as I have genuine reasons for not wanting to. The mere fact that he says it was 10-20 miles away should warn you that he's simply avoiding talking about it in that particular company/ Why, i don't know however, the fact they accepted it was 10-20 miles away should suggest a good reason.

We have a sighting with multiple witnesses and true to form, there's someone on here arguing semantics and acting like a school kid who's discovered the teacher has quoted the wrong exam question. I don't really give a monkey's about the afters of the sighting, given the huge psychological "trauma" these events often have on people, I'm always a tad wary of the afters. One has to be careful of magical thinking and the laws of big numbers as these events are, in fact, the equivalent of the sort of events that created the likes of St Paul and Joan of Arc and the whole Mormon Faith.

Within weeks of this sighting, one was reported to me from a place not 5 miles from Pailton and yes, all I ever say about it on here is that. Two work colleagues saw a "classic flying saucer" shape "floating silently not more than 50 feet/15 metres off the ground" over an old airstrip. Is that the whole story?? No, not even really the most interesting part of what actually went on however, because of who it was, how it was told me, for the time being, I have to hold back on the fine detail on a forum such as this. in different company I am happy to give the full details.

There lies one of the key weaknesses with this site. There are a good few of us on here, who could scare the living daylights out of a good few people who think they know about UFOs and think they can explain them all prosaically. However, those who do pass on genuine information often know damn well, that under current circumstances, it can never be circulated that widely. Be that as it may, many insiders feel they owe those who have a genuine interest in the subject and are not on some prurient ego trip, an explanation of certain happenings. They also know full well, that information will find its' way around certain circles. Now, had you been following the excellent thread authored by The GUT about the Aviary you'd have some inkling of what goes on. The fact is both sides of the fence indulge in it and at times, there are those who deal with both genuine facts and deliberate disinformation.

ATS Aliens is the equivalent of Weird# 101 beginners class. and the vast majority of the information on the Aliens side of this site conforms to that level of understanding and interest. Not all. there are some very deep threads that do real ground breaking work however, when it comes to just "nuts and bolts sightings" ATS is little more than The Daily Mirror of web sites. That's not meant as an insult, that's just happens to be level of general discussion about sightings,hamstrung as it often is by blind adherence to agendas on both sides of the fence and utterly childish "points scoring" based on often, nothing more than semantics.




posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Yup, I think WMD is missing the point, he simply describes the smaller craft and does not mention the big one simply because he's ONLY describing the smaller craft.

I don't think he's fraudulently avoiding mentioning the big craft.

I like this report because he's a non UFO bloke at the time of his original report and more importantly he mentions the bigger craft in it but presumed the craft had grown in size, its only later he thought it was 2 separate craft.

Love the detail and the notions about a locking mechanism are great and makes perfect sense.

What he describes is something not seen in our skies by the military and as said would seem an odd joke for them to decloak a flying craft in front of witness's just as a wee laugh on the part of the military. Having seen one of the giant triangles and reported it officially many years ago and mentioned it on here a few times I can confirm that what my wife and I saw loosely resembles his craft except what we saw had no 'back end' like his but the size and lights on tips was the same, incredibly big and silent craft.

Great article and interesting view, seems a sane intelligent honest man.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 

eyewitness accounts without video are not interesting.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


What's the point of the remark? Even when he had taken a video the naysayers would simply label THAT a hoax too. Skeptics would have pointed out that the availability of any video materials would be suspect in itself! After all in those days video equipment was still very expensive and it is quite infeasible that a guy drives down to a pub for a familiy meal whilst lugging his BetaMax, VHS-C or whatever he might have had in those days, so he could "accidentally" shoot a UFO...



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Mclaneinc
 


just
this is the group he was presenting to in the older video



Seriously is that the best excuse you can come up with.

In the older video he says that they returned to that site MANY TIMES and the lights he saw in the distance were most likely AIRCRAFT remember thats a key point they keep pushing about this so called witness he worked in the aircraft industry.

Looking at what we see in the background of the old video I linked to it safe to say they are a group of people interested in ufo's etc so why would he change his story. That was filmed FIRST his new video years later is the CHANGED STORY!

The more likely scenario here is he thinks no one has seen OR WILL REMEMBER the old video so lets embelish the story a little!!!



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ForteanOrg

What's the point of the remark?

I don't find anything interesting about hearsay. We need to move past this trying to get people to believe with eyewitness accounts and video and all that anyway. No matter what you show or describe will be "debunked" no matter how great it was. People should take their personal experiences over this phenomenon as a growth experience and not worry about "proving" anything to anybody else. Maybe some people will never be able to understand or accept this reality, so let them go by way of the Dodo bird. Point is instead of wasting time beating a dead horse just move on with your new paradigm and wait for the rest to catch up on their own.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Looks like Colin cant remeber what he say's on your video link go to about 9:26 watch and listen to what he claims to have seen.
Now go to this video listen from about 9:50 onwards now what do you think about his report.


In your link he claims to have seen the largest flying craft he had ever seen yet in the video made years before he didn't.
HOAX!!!


You thoughts, recognized but too simple assumption that this is a hoax!

I know it's difficult for people to believe when they have not made such an experience. I might also be biased because I had a similar experience. But let me try to explain why this is likely NOT a hoax.

What you see with your eyes in this world is something which you know. Your brain tries to adapt to objects which it knows. Therefore if you see something totally new your brain needs time to adapt. That is basic mainstream science. You always try to map things you see to something which you know.

First step you don't see this "object" which is not in your memory. Than your eyes try to adapt it to known things and than you brain starts to associate the seen to known objects.

If you see an ufo for the first time in that distance as he was you will come in a very strange body reaction. First you deny, than you map it to an airplane and finally if you find not an explanation it becomes something new.

The reaction of this guy is normal. You don't want believe it at the beginning, because if you live a normal life, never believed in aliens and you get confronted with such a situation a normal reaction is that you try to keep up your belief system otherwise your whole world will fall apart. IT is something total different if you have heard about ufos or when you stand in front of it!

Whether the lights in the distance were a plane or an ufo doesn't matter. What you should listen is his observation when the object was close. How he is describing it is something which he had experienced. There is no doubt for me (apart from my encounter with other eye witnesses).

But of course you will always argue there is no video evidence. And that is true. But that's another story why there is so little evidence of really good ufo footages.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Brucee
 


You ufo guys are just in denial in the OLDER video I linked to he mentions his so called close sighting of the craft which they lose sight of and then he sees some lights far of in the distance and after some return visits he then says were most likely aircraft.

He is also talking to a group of people with a great deal of interest in the subject so why would he not give them all the details of the sighting (answer that FireMoon)

In the recent video he losses sight of the craft then claims to have seen the biggest flying craft he had ever seen.

Also he states this so called craft had the 3 lights underneath yet he could only see the front one he claimed when he gave his description yet if tilted to show the front one the back 2 should have been visible.

Another thing worth noting they went for a pub meal with his family his wife was driving so looks like Colin had had a little drink then


It's rather convenient for some on here to claim that he may not have given all the details in the first video I find that strange considering the amount of effort put into his models/paperwork etc now if I saw something I wouldn't really give a monkeys you know what about what others think I would give all the info but maybe that's because I am a straight talker.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Sorry to go off topic but there was a thread here a couple of days ago about a "UFO" in a documentary and someone had posted an intriguing screen cap. I've just checked and said thread has completely disappeared. Why?



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Brucee
 


You ufo guys are just in denial in the OLDER video I linked to he mentions his so called close sighting of the craft which they lose sight of and then he sees some lights far of in the distance and after some return visits he then says were most likely aircraft.

He is also talking to a group of people with a great deal of interest in the subject so why would he not give them all the details of the sighting (answer that FireMoon)

In the recent video he losses sight of the craft then claims to have seen the biggest flying craft he had ever seen.

Also he states this so called craft had the 3 lights underneath yet he could only see the front one he claimed when he gave his description yet if tilted to show the front one the back 2 should have been visible.

Another thing worth noting they went for a pub meal with his family his wife was driving so looks like Colin had had a little drink then


It's rather convenient for some on here to claim that he may not have given all the details in the first video I find that strange considering the amount of effort put into his models/paperwork etc now if I saw something I wouldn't really give a monkeys you know what about what others think I would give all the info but maybe that's because I am a straight talker.



Your answer tells me that you didn't understand my post and that you have no glue how human brain works. You think that you are in rational mode when you see these things and when you sort them later.
Well, you won't understand it until you will make your first experience. So it is wasting time to bring you off your track.

There is something in the eyes of someone you can recognized immediately if he/she had contact with an UFO. But as I said you won't understand it until you experience it.



posted on Aug, 6 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Brucee
 


Is that the best BS you can come up with to cover his different statements really!





new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join