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.

 

The most convincing UFO video footage we have.

page: 11
62
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by IBelieveInAliens
 



IBelieveInAliens

RUInsane
reply to post by Ollie769
 


The Jerusalem videos were shown to be a hoax. The people behind it also confessed.
edit on 27-12-2013 by RUInsane because: (no reason given)
can you link to this confession?


A person would have to be pretty darn gullible, if not stupid to believe a alien spaceship hovered over what is probably the most holy places in the world, a place that people visit 24 hours a day if not to just to stand outside. And there are only what 2-3 very short videos, from what seems to be pretty far away posted online by website that is known for hoaxes?
A website that claimed bigfoot is a alien?

Really? REALLY


I know you people "want to believe"....but really?
edit on 28-12-2013 by Blahable because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 


I concur.

2nd



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by MissBeck
 


For me it was the "piece de resistance" in the center. I still get chills.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   

jhn7537
Hey man... I still stand behind this one too. I posted this earlier because I've never believed the oil rig theory. The pilots stated that the objects were accelerating/deaccelerating around them and that they weren't just stable points...
Please point out where they said that. According to what I've read, none of the pilots saw the targets themselves.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I have never seen UFO footage as convincing as my own experiences. I don't think I ever will in this age of technology. Very little is unquestionable or impossible to recreate with the right CGI. I feel bad for those that are looking for proof in this way. Seeing is not believing.. Seeing is KNOWING



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   

MissBeck
Very interesting that they seemed attracted to the lightening storms.

That second part was the one I posted. I prefer a separate video because I don't think the first part shows the same thing as the second.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


I'm searching for the article that discusses just that. Can't remember exactly what link it was under, but I'm looking... This article below came from the AP.. And it states that the objects were allegedly all around the jet.



MEXICO CITY (AP) - Mexican Air Force pilots filmed 11 unidentified flying objects in the skies over southern Campeche state, a Defense Department spokesman confirmed Tuesday.

A videotape made widely available to the news media on Tuesday shows the bright objects, some sharp points of light and others like large headlights, moving rapidly in what appears to be a late-evening sky.

The lights were filmed on March 5 by pilots using infrared equipment. They appeared to be flying at an altitude of about 3,500 meters (11,480 feet), and allegedly surrounded the Air Force jet as it conducted routine anti-drug trafficking vigilance in Campeche. Only three of the objects showed up on the plane's radar.

``Was I afraid? Yes. A little afraid because we were facing something that had never happened before,'' said radar operator Lt. German Marin in a taped interview made public Tuesday.

``I couldn't say what it was ... but I think they're completely real,'' added Lt. Mario Adrian Vazquez, the infrared equipment operator. Vazquez insisted that there was no way to alter the recorded images.

The plane's captain, Maj. Magdaleno Castanon, said the military jets chased the lights ``and I believe they could feel we were pursuing them.''

When the jets stopped following the objects, they disappeared, he said.

A Defense Department spokesman confirmed Tuesday that the videotape was filmed by members of the Mexican Air Force. The spokesman declined to comment further and spoke on customary condition of anonymity.

The video was first aired on national television Monday night then again at a news conference Tuesday by Jaime Maussan, a Mexican investigator who has dedicated the past 10 years to studying UFOs.

``This is historic news,'' Maussan told reporters. ``Hundreds of videos (of UFOs) exist, but none had the backing of the armed forces of any country. ... The armed forces don't perpetuate frauds.''

Maussan said Secretary of Defense Gen. Ricardo Vega Garcia gave him the video on April 22.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


assesine?

You meant asinine,did you not?
Idiotic or foolish

However,in the interest of brevity and clear thinking,I repeat;

All UFO videos are hoaxes.

I did not mean:all UFO sightings are hoaxes.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   

ArMaP

MissBeck
Very interesting that they seemed attracted to the lightening storms.

That second part was the one I posted. I prefer a separate video because I don't think the first part shows the same thing as the second.


Oh my, yes it is! So sorry. I even clicked on yours twice as well earlier when you asked Jim about it. But my 5 year old was being a pain,
and I never actually watched it. Forgot to go back to it.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   

jhn7537
I'm searching for the article that discusses just that.
Please let me know when you find it as I'm after the truth here. I'll post my source:

home.comcast.net...

All of these observations are consistent with system generated images. It's important to note that the pilots never saw these objects visually, only through the infrared imaging system.


I did find this when I searched some more:
www.skeptic.com...

Accounts of what actually happened varied wildly. Skeptic publisher Michael Shermer appeared on CNN three times the week the story broke. “Initial reports indicated that the UFOs were only discovered upon later review of the footage after the flight,” Shermer said. “Subsequent reports stated that the pilots saw the UFOs during the flight, but nothing much was made of it until the infrared footage was later reviewed. Still later reports claimed that the pilots not only saw the UFOs during the flight, but that they chased them, were surrounded by them, but were unable continue the chase. It was like a fisherman’s tale, growing with each retelling.”
So they may have changed their initial story, that they didn't actually see anything during the flight.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Maybe they changed their stories due to pressure from the US? Just a thought, but knowing how our Govt. works, I wouldn't rule it out of the realm of possibilities...



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 

My first guess would be the involvement of Maussan and his affiliates. They have tried to debunk the oil field fire explanation, but they are not unbiased in this investigation like many others are.
edit on 28-12-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I don't know about video but here is an image that I feel is probably the most accurate and 'real' in relation to flying UFO's.




posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Arbitrageur
reply to post by jhn7537
 

My first guess would be the involvement of Maussan and his affiliates.
edit on 28-12-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification


But like us all on here, I'm not just believing for the sake of believing. If this incident can be explained in a manner I find to be a legitimate reason, I will change my stance 100%. The last thing I want is to believe or be pushing some false story. I just don't believe the oil rig theory, especially with some of the statements I've read with my research over time. Could I be wrong? Of course. Could I be closer to the truth than the oil rig theory? definitely, but who knows... There's still research to be done.. And I am a firm believer that 99% of the stories we see on here today and on YT are hoaxes or fakes or can be explained, but this story just has so many interesting angles to it.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 


Maybe they changed their stories due to pressure from the US?

The US pressured them to change their story from not seeing anything at the time to seeing the objects flying around the aircraft? Any idea why the "US" would pressure them into doing that?



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by jhn7537
 


Maybe they changed their stories due to pressure from the US?

The US pressured them to change their story from not seeing anything at the time to seeing the objects flying around the aircraft? Any idea why the "US" would pressure them into doing that?


I may have misunderstood the other poster. I thought he was stating that the Mexican pilots changed their story from seeing something to not seeing anything... I haven't had time to checkout his source yet.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

jhn7537
I just don't believe the oil rig theory, especially with some of the statements I've read with my research over time.
If you are able to provide convincing statements that might influence others to your point of view, however the quote I provided about the statements changing casts doubt on different versions of the stories being told, doesn't it? In other words, inconsistent statements and stories are not very compelling, are they?

In this case, it's prudent to rely on the physical evidence. When we do that, the oil fire explanation is compelling enough to cause a professional research organization like NARCAP to issue a statement like this:

www.alcione.org...

"National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena"

It is the opinion of NARCAP, based upon the evidence available, that the most likely source of this alleged
UAP observation was the oil flares from the Cantrell oil fields in the Gulf of Campeche.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Let me ask you this. The infrared camera clearly shows 11 objects, and the oil rig theory states the cause being from the 11 burning fires at the oil rig. During the time of the 11 objects being captured on infrared camera they had radar hits, but from only 3 of the 11 objects. If these objects are all just fires at the oil rigs, wouldn't you think they would all be on the radar screen and not just 3? I feel like here it should be an all or nothing type situation...



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
At aproximately 17:00 PM the Merlin C26A detected an unknown traffic at 10,500 feet over Ciudad del Carmen, Campeche airspace and according to the protocol and suspecting a drug dealer airplane Mayor Magdaleno Jasso made a maneuver to approach the unidentified traffic at certain range to get a close look and record the target with their equipment. At the same time Mayor Jasso reported by radio to the base that a posible suspect was detected requesting the interceptor planes to be in alert condition.

The RADAR AN/PS 143 BRAVO VICTOR 3 was detecting the unknown traffic and the FLIR STAR ZAPPHIR II was recording the object in infrared. As the Merlin C26A tried to approach the unknown traffic to make a visual identification it suddenly in a surprising maneuver escaped flying away at tremendous speed. By this time Mayor Jasso tried to persecute the target but it was very fast. All this was being recorded by the FLAIR and also the radio conversations with the base describing the inexpected maneuver of the unknown. However the C26A still have not made visual contact with the unknown object.

Just some moments passed when suddenly the unknown object returned and began following the Merlin C26A in a surprising situation. This was detected by the RADAR and the FLIR while the personal aboard were trying to make visual contact of the unidentified traffic now following them. In seconds the equipment detected now not only one but two traffics following them. The images in both RADAR and the FLIR were clear and unmistakable. But both pilot and personal still could'nt have visual contact with these two traffics following them adding a great suspense to this disconcerting situation.

Have you had a chance to look at this report?



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 


Now we get into the real evidence, which is good. This false view of a correlation between radar and FLIR was promoted by Maussan and Yturria, the guys who make money off of this stuff:

home.comcast.net...

Yturria is misleading people and himself because he knows that the lights and radar contacts are not related in any way as this webpage and many other sources have shown.
There is no relationship. For you to expect there is one indicates you are likely a victim of Yturria's propaganda.

That page also answers your earlier question about why the experiment you and Dr. Maccabee would like to see probably won't ever happen...potential embarrassment:


Even UFO proponent Dr. Bruce Maccabee seems to have become more receptive to the oil well fire hypothesis:

...he may be correct in identifying the lights as oil field fires. Notice I said "may". In my opinion it is premature to state a conclusion. An important experiment has not yet been done to test the oil fire hypothesis. (Maccabee)

His experiment has to do with the Mexican military reproducing the flight. I doubt the Mexican military is going to do this because it has potential embarrassment written all over it. Maybe Maussan can shell out some cash to reproduce the flight. I would not hold my breath based on his track record.




top topics



 
62
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join