It just the same cases again and again and again

a reply to: PandaPrincess

tom delong

originally posted by: redchad
d. Or the Zimbabwe event in 1994 a hundred school kids witnessed a landing. .

that event is one of the most compelling ive ever looked into
did you say theres interviews with them as adults now
can you link me it

also i dont understand in 1994 not one person had a camera?
surely the craft and alien was around a while
not one person could get any physical evidence?

a reply to: PandaPrincess

Can’t get a link but I watched it with some of the interviews on searching for Aliens (Blaze TV) they go over some of the old cases

originally posted by: PandaPrincess
that event is one of the most compelling ive ever looked into
did you say theres interviews with them as adults now
can you link me it

Alongside the 1966 Westall school sighting, I agree that it's compelling.

A new documentary on the case, 'Ariel Phenomenon', has been in the works for some time - alternatively known as Development Hell in the industry - but is currently awaiting a distributor the last I heard.

Here are links to the official site and Twitter account:

www.arielphenomenon.com...

twitter.com...

And here are two trailers - from 2016 (which you may have to access via the included link to YouTube itself), and 2018 (no restrictions on watching via ATS) ...




Phew. Hope that helps.

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
It could be the Colares case is the only legit UFO sighting, nothing says aliens have to keep visiting.

One of the wisest observations in the thread. Not that Colares is the Real Thing per se (perhaps it is), but the notion that only a handful of cases over 70+ years hold the strongest evidence is entirely logical. Which also underlines how much pure junk exists in ufology - which is a massive business enterprise, lest we forget.

I mentioned the Colares case because there were pictures taken by the military along with with lots of witnesses. But again, there are rarely any pictures at all even in mass sightings like Belgium or Hudson Valley. If cases like those dont have pictures, why should we expect there to be pictures in other cases with far fewer observers?

Im not prepared with my cell phone to whip it out and try snap a picture in poor lighting, especially if the object is moving at some speed. Its like there is this expectation the ufo is going stop conveniently for a selfie? Good luck with that.

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
Im not prepared with my cell phone to whip it out and try snap a picture in poor lighting, especially if the object is moving at some speed. Its like there is this expectation the ufo is going stop conveniently for a selfie? Good luck with that.

Exactly.

Many people talk about it as if everybody with a cellphone is walking around with it in their hand, ready to take photos. An easy test is trying to get a photo of something much more common, like, for example, a car of a specific maker or colour, as you go about your daily life. It's not easy. Adding the fact that most people do not look at the sky makes it even more unlikely they will get any photos of UFOs.

Also, although some cellphones have really good cameras, those are a minority, most have cheap cameras with cheaper lenses.

what i dont understand is why is there this excuse given about ufos needing to cloak themselves

ie `nowadays they dont appear like they did in the 40s because everyone has cameras`

i mean really? beings who are clearly if they are real, are going to be far far far more advanced than us, and a lot older maybe thousands of years old, are going to be bothered by wether we see them or not?

why on earth would beings travel through dimensions or thousands of light years just to abduct a random swiss farmer and then fly away

originally posted by: PandaPrincess

i mean really? beings who are clearly if they are real, are going to be far far far more advanced than us, and a lot older maybe thousands of years old, are going to be bothered by wether we see them or not?

That's a reasonable question if you assume these hypothetical aliens think roughly the same way we do and are not wildly illogical according to our standards. Following that line of thought, then you must assume whatever they do is somehow for their own benefit, but not necessarily ours. This made me think at one time (and still occasionally) that they're what could loosely be called "time travelers.". At least the more nuts-and-bolts aliens who look sort of like us. They can allow themselves to be seen, but not too much, because too much overt interaction with us might have a direct and negative affect on themselves in the future. But they still need to come back for some reason anyway. And it explains why they're so elusive. If they screw up in some way that blows their cover, they can just go back and fix it before it happens.

These days, I don't know. These days I tend to think it's all about us just not having the right kind of senses and intelligence to see the bigger picture. Bigfoot shouldn't exist, yet people keep seeing them, along with all kinds of other crazy nonsense. It seems to be beyond our logic and reasoning. Glitches in the simulation? Our brains only give us a very limited and distorted view of actual reality (the Greeks probably had a word for that), so in a way we're creating our own approximation / simulation of reality. These things seem to be the stray bits old old code or processing errors you would expect from a poorly planned and written program.

anyone asked good ol` billy why hes not provided any new photos/material since 1992?

a reply to: PandaPrincess

i mean really? beings who are clearly if they are real, are going to be far far far more advanced than us, and a lot older maybe thousands of years old, are going to be bothered by wether we see them or not?

I would say this is the case in Belgium sightings and many others. The Colares case I mentioned earlier had the military show up and start filming while the sightings continued to happen.

why on earth would beings travel through dimensions or thousands of light years just to abduct a random swiss farmer and then fly away

Humans seem to have all kinds of interest/hobbies - bowling, archaeology, drugs, physics, genetics, cars, ping pong. One of the more interesting hobbies takes place after the oak island mystery snooze fest. These jokers want to experience/confirm the different levels of pain from getting bitten or stung by various critters.

At least ufology is not Christianity. They've been repeating the same crap for 2000 years.

originally posted by: PandaPrincess
what i dont understand is why is there this excuse given about ufos needing to cloak themselves

ie `nowadays they dont appear like they did in the 40s because everyone has cameras`

i mean really? beings who are clearly if they are real, are going to be far far far more advanced than us, and a lot older maybe thousands of years old, are going to be bothered by wether we see them or not?

why on earth would beings travel through dimensions or thousands of light years just to abduct a random swiss farmer and then fly away

Don't forget they love to perform 10 minute light shows over Arizona, and elsewhere, and fly back to their distant planets, because that makes sense too!

I think the waters are so muddied these days in UFOlogy, it's become very difficult to see what's real and what's not. The older cases we all know, love and research all the time have all but been called real and legit sightings.

Why is this?

Because people were more trusting back then and wouldn't lie to us?
Aliens knew there were not many cameras back then?

If someone sees something and puts it on Youtube, we all scream hoax and laugh. Straight away we poo poo it and move on.

With the MSM now becoming more open to the whole UFO community, I feel that could be the reason we see less sightings. Makes me think that the whole thing was a plan by our own governments from the beginning.

Humans are easily manipulated.

originally posted by: rhynouk
I think the waters are so muddied these days in UFOlogy, it's become very difficult to see what's real and what's not. The older cases we all know, love and research all the time have all but been called real and legit sightings.

Why is this?

Because people were more trusting back then and wouldn't lie to us?
Aliens knew there were not many cameras back then?

If someone sees something and puts it on Youtube, we all scream hoax and laugh. Straight away we poo poo it and move on.

With the MSM now becoming more open to the whole UFO community, I feel that could be the reason we see less sightings. Makes me think that the whole thing was a plan by our own governments from the beginning.

Humans are easily manipulated.

This was planned from day one, for sure.

The plan was to fake alien landings, make it look like a cover-up, and keep faking it, and covering it up, again and again, so everyone thinks it's alien cover-ups for sure, look at all the evidence!!


Everyone wants 'disclosure' from the government, they are hiding all knowledge of aliens - a secret!

It's complete nonsense.

If I were more paranoid, I'd say it was an attempt to "suppress the truth", but seems to me that it has more to do with clicks and ad revenue than anything else.

I get better results if I do a search for "UFO sightings" plus a year or date like "2019." Even then, I have to click past at least the first page of results, and even then, I look at channel names. Typically the best ones are named after the person and it's the only UFO video on thier channel. "Visitors" or "the visitors" is a good comp channel and there's another one that escapes me at the moment.

originally posted by: redchad
a recent documentary managed to track down the lighthouse attendant from the 1980s who had never been interviewed or asked any questions before and came out with the comment. The lighthouse light was screened 50% so as not to light up the country side so therefore could not be seen from anyone inland.

In fact the lighthouse was screened only from the town of Orford, not the forest from where the flashing light was seen – see here for photographic evidence
www.ianridpath.com...
The lighthouse keeper had never been to the forest so he didn't know.
It's bad research, and the failure to reference previous research, that keeps the UFO subject going round and round. Real science builds a body of knowledge, but UFOlogy never does.

Ian Ridpath is well known in UFO circles. Unfortunately for him he is well known as a disinfo agent. ATS posters might be aware of disinfo agents because there are several that post on this website.

The other option is of course that Ian is an idiot. Because light houses do not fly. At least not yet. And the Oxford lighthouse never flew, not before 1980 and not since.

The lighthouse was always there. The military members on those bases knew the light house was there as they had seen its light for years. It was not like they turned the lighthouse on for the first time on December 26th, 1980 and then turned it off the next night, only to turn it back on again on the 28th and then turn it back off again for good.

No UFO’s were reported before those dates because of the lighthouse and none were reported after those dates because of the lighthouse. I’m sure it is easy for the English (or at least Ian) to think that the American service men and women would resided at the bases were too stupid to know the difference between a single grounded lighthouse and multiple lights flying through the sky - at different points of the compass no less. After all, Americans are only the bastard children of the Kingdom, what would they know.

But no, the light house was always there and the men and women who saw UFO’s on those 2 nights knew the light house was there. Unlike Ian, they knew the difference between a flying (and landed) UFO and a light house. The people on the roads outside the bases who witnessed the UFO’s also were not confused that they were watching a light house fly though the sky.

The Oxford lighthouse does not fly and it does not change the color of its lights nor does it split into multiple lights or even change the number of its lights.

The Oxford lighthouse is not a UFO; it is though an excuse to detract from actual UFO’s. The kind the military does not want you talking about.

originally posted by: PandaPrincess
why on earth would beings travel through dimensions or thousands of light years just to abduct a random swiss farmer and then fly away

The cruise ship docs in the harbor and you get off and go to the market and buy a figurine. You take it back to the ship. Later, you decide to return it to the market store where you got it from.

Their ships are already HERE. They do not fly across the galaxy every time they want to abduct a farmer to do test on him. They merely fly out of the ocean, grab who they want, and fly back to their underwater location. Then they repeat the process.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Why do you think the city of Oxford has a lighthouse? It's nowhere near the sea. You obviously don't know do you?

nm