It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ECETI's James Gilliland on UFO Fakers and More Predictions for 2014 (Part 2)

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 07:34 PM
reply to post by redmoon1

I don't post much on here any more, but noticed your post and felt compelled to reply to a post on here for the first time in perhaps 6 months.

You wanted someone who has experience with satellites to comment, and I have been observing satellites for the best part of 15 years now. My specialization is actually meteor and fireball photography, and whilst trying to observe meteors/fireballs I often observe satellites which has led me to understand as much as I can about them and to hunt for them specifically.

Basically I pretty much agree with everything Jadestar has to say on the subject, except for one minor point which I'll address in a moment.

One poster above said that:

The vast majority of satellites have a magnitude of +5 or greater meaning, they are on the very edge of visibility to many people, even under almost perfect viewing conditions.

Whilst this is basically true, it's not the whole story by a long way. The fact is that there are over 1000 operational satellites orbiting Earth, but if you also include non-operational satellites and junk, that number goes up to a few tens of thousands of individual objects.

The majority of these will be faint, but there are still plenty that reflect enough light to be visible in even quite light polluted skies. I used to live in the suburbs of a major city, yet it was still clear enough on a significant portion of cloud-free nights to see objects as faint as +5 close to the zenith (ie directly up where light pollution's effects tend not to be so pronounced).

Of course as soon as you get out of the city and into rural areas, you can start to see still fainter objects, and also many more because of this. The difference in how much more you see can be astounding.

With that said, and hopefully kept in mind, consider this:

With a visual magnitude of +5 or even +6/+7 (yet fainter), whilst many objects will be below the threshold of visibility for the majority of the time, this is not always the case. Many of these objects are small splinters of junk that are spinning or rotating randomly - because of this and due to the presence of various surfaces with different reflective properties, the brightness does not remain constant. Now although the object may well be below the threshold of visibility for most of the time, as soon as it randomly rotates and hits the correct angle, in that instant it can become 100's of times brighter than it was previously, and thus visible to the naked eye.

This is exactly the same principal as an "Iridium (satellite) flare" that has been mentioned previously, but because the rotation of Iridium satellites is carefully controlled, and the change of angle relative to observer/Sun (the source of the light) is gradual, Iridium flares tend to last a few seconds, compared to the relatively brief flashes caused by the wild rotation of junk.

So this is where I disagree with Jadestar. Yes, long drawn out flares are usually from operational satellites like those belonging to the Iridium satellite constellation, but if you see a brief duration flash (or series of flashes), chances are that it's one of 10's of thousands of fragments of junk that are whizzing around constantly above our heads.

I have even gone a step further by photographing some of these flashes and identifying the objects (junk) that caused them. Photographs and full explanations of the techniques used to both photograph and identify the flashes can be found in the following two threads I posted if you are interested:

Flashes and Star-like objects that move strangely in the sky explained

How to view, track, and identify satellites

I can understand why Jadestar has not been able to say much relating to junk-flashes since the type of camera she uses is not sensitive enough to be able to track most junk. Using DSLRs with fast lenses allows me to get around this problem.

What irks me is that although my results are relatively easy to replicate with a suitable camera setup that could be bought for as little as $200-300 (if you hunt for second hand bargains), no one seems to even want to try. The info has been out there for more than one and a half years, and I'm sure with the UFO community being relatively close knit, Gilliland or someone close to him would have stumbled on the info I provided by now, yet it seems that he would just rather ignore it, continue to deceive people (weather consciously or not), and take their money.

When you first come here (ATS), it can seem that many here are trying to find the "truth", but after having been on here and participating since 2007 I have come to the conclusion that this is not the case once you "dig under the surface". Whilst there are exceptions, most here tend to ignore an roads that might lead them to discover for themselves that which for them might be unsettling - ie that there may be mundane explanations for things that at first may appear to be inexplicable.

I am an optimist at heart, which is why I'm here now, and posting in the hope that things may have changed a little since I was last active here. So the question is, who is willing to take a risk and challenge their own beliefs. Realistically I doubt there will be any takers, although it would be nice if I was proved wrong.

PS. One other point to note is timing. Specifically that most satellites that are in Earth's orbit are only visible at certain times. This is due to a number of factors: Firstly, for an object in orbit to be visible it must either be shone on by our Sun or be self-luminous. There are no self-luminous satellites that I know of, although it is possible for any satellite to become self-luminous if it re-enters the atmosphere (relatively rare for most to see, although not unheard of).

When it gets dark at night, it is because Earth has rotated and the Sun is below the horizon. When the Sun is just below the horizon is the best time to observe satellites since although the sky is dark, at the altitudes at which satellites orbit, the Sun is still shining. However, as the Sun sinks further below the horizon over the course of the night, Earth's shadow covers more and more of the sky above your head. Satellites flying through Earth's shadow are not reflecting light, so are effectively invisible to the naked eye, which means that you'll see less as the night progresses up till midway through the night when Earth's shadow begins to retreat in the run up to dawn.

So there is a big difference in how many satellites are visible on the deepest part of the night versus how many are visible close to sunset/sunrise, but there is an even greater difference between observing at the summer solstice versus observing at the winter solstice. During summer time in the Northern hemisphere at mid-latitudes the Sun never dips very far below the horizon, meaning satellites can be observed most of the night although there will be less around midnight when the Sun is at it's lowest below the horizon. In winter however, due to Earth's tilt, at mid-latitudes in the Northern hemisphere the Sun sinks deep below the horizon very quickly, meaning that there is only a very short window of an hour or two before you can not observe satellites over the majority of the sky.

This is something that anyone can try for themselves - Go somewhere away from the city for a few nights in July/August and then again in November/December. Make careful notes of the time of any events, and if possible what part of the sky/constellation over the course of a few hours. Compare notes and the differences between winter/summer and late night/early night should be obvious. Note that you'll need something to lay on (sun-bed that goes flat or camp bed), warm cloths, and a sleeping bag or two (especially in winter) to climb into if you want to be comfortable whilst observing the sky for significant amounts of time.

If you do try this, keep in mind you may see the occasional meteor too, and that sometimes meteors can imitate satellites. Usually meteors are quite fast and easy to tell apart, but if one moves towards you, perspective can play an illusion and the meteor may appear to move slowly, or not even at all in extreme cases. Meteors, or rather small meteoroids entering the atmosphere, might also be the cause of some of the brief/extremely brief random flashes that yourself and many others have observed. Earth is bombarded by far more small stuff than large stuff, and if you find a very dark observing site, well away from any lights, and spend a few hours observing on a clear night close to a new moon, you'll probably be surprised how many you see.

PPS. In answer to your question ""Do you believe that all UFO sightings are faked?""

Absolutely not. I think most UFO sightings are from people who have genuinely misidentified common phenomena. Few people are aware how easy it is to see something considered to be a familiar phenomena and mistake it for something completely different. In general, most people/the general public take little or no interest in the sky, and tend to underestimate the frequency of which some quite spectacular phenomena can be seen, which is a recipe for "UFO sightings".

It's almost impossible to educate everyone about everything that they *might* see in the sky over the course of a lifetime, so there will always be UFO sightings that are genuine (but misidentifications) mixed in with a few hoaxes... just enough to keep the more gullible people clinging on to the hope/idea that we are being regularly "visited by other beings". Don't fall into the same traps that so many have stumbled into before you by ignoring the facts. Science may not have all the answers just yet, but despite the claims to the contrary, the vast majority of UFO sightings can be explained if thoroughly investigated.

The beauty of science is that, as in this case, you can prove to yourself that what you saw was not anything that unusual if you follow my suggestions above - you don't have to take my word for it if you choose.

edit on 19-1-2014 by FireballStorm because: ran out of room

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 02:06 AM
Flashing Satellites anyone?

The above is a short time exposure of an "Iridium Flare", that I photographed.
A specular reflection that occurs fairly often. That is, there is a constellation of these birds, so at any given time one may be beaming a little reflected sunlight you. The time that it took for the trail to form in the photo was about 5 seconds..Then it became dim, but still visible.

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 02:59 AM
I definitely believe that aliens are working with the government and have for a long time but finding the proof that aliens exist at all is so difficult, i have researched so many documents that people claim is tangible proof that the government are aware of aliens but most of it only points to ufos and accounts of what others have seen this is not exactly them saying " yes aliens exist " i don't feel any documents can really satisfy us enough i feel that it would have to be solid physical evidence (a piece of debris or an alien), the only thing i feel comes close to real evidence is witness testimony's, now i know some people mock steven greer but he has a lot of people that have come forward and testified now weather they are telling the truth is a different matter but what would they have to gain to lie? as for satellites, yes i agree that what we see at night probably is misidentified and is just satellites, but i have seen a few ufos myself and i can tell you what i saw was zipping from one side to the other going up and down stopping and repeating shooting across the sky and disappearing in a blink of an eye and every time it does happen it happens too quick that i get sucked in by what i am seeing and forgetting to have a camera to take pictures, because it catches you in a moment that your not prepared, also we have to look at radar evidence these are professional people too,my every day life is consumed by this subject because i know deep down that there is life beyond our world,and i can not even talk about it to the close ones around me because they do not care,nobody will take it seriously they are not interested why? because it does not affect them they are too consumed with routine and what they know of every day life,and sadly this is the problem also we have,the government dont care of the few people who do want to know the truth we need to wake people up but how can you do that with what evidence there is ? look at area 51 they have always denied it ever existed never acknowledged it and now they admit that it is real? who has ever trusted their own government? they are corrupt we all know that,we need more people to get together and to really take it more seriously

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:38 AM
The thought that people who are rather un-knowledgeable about space technology, astronomy etc. are spending a night on a ranch and paying $20 to see "UFOs" is rather scary.

How many people are forming a belief, a pseudo-religion even (with some Guru like that guy as the "leader") based on NOTHING LESS than they saw satellites on the night-sky?

I for my part, I know of satellites and how they look ever since I was little boy, 7ish years old when I started to have an interest in the night's sky.

To convince me that I did in fact see an UFO it would take a lot, A WHOLE LOT more than seeing what I (as a little kid) called " moving stars", ie. satellite..and the thought that people are getting impressed by those "moving stars" (satellites) and seriously think it's extraterrestrial craft is just...frightening.

On the plus-side...thank god you only had to pay $20....because I think there are other calibers of "UFO gurus" out there which easily charge $200 - $2000..and of course those who actually gladly pay it....
edit on 12014R000000MondayAmerica/Chicago47AMMondayMonday by NoRulesAllowed because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:10 PM
reply to post by redmoon1

Apologies redmoon - after reading through all relevant posts again today, I realised that in my eagerness to try and explain the mechanics involved I neglected to address most of the questions you posted. Let's try again shall we...

reply to post by JadeStar

There may be lots of satellites orbiting our Earth, but I personally have never seen them before, so I find it unusual that I would see that many within that short period of time on 1 night. So, is it possible that some or all of them were satellites? Perhaps one or more of them were... I'm just saying the truth of what I saw.

!0 satellites per hour is not that many. On a very clear night, observing from my own property which is in a rural area and relatively light pollution free, on a busy night I have observed as many as 10 or 20 satellites in a 10 minute period. I have never actually tried to count them so that is just a rough estimate. Brief flashes are so common here in Summer that I often ignore them. When I rig up a camera with a 24mm lens (F1.4/ISO 1600), point it up, and keep taking 10-15 second exposures, perhaps 90% of the images have caught at least one obvious satellite in them,and perhaps 50% have at least 2. Occasionally I'll even find a single image with 4 or 5 trails caused by satellites in it.

reply to post by JadeStar

You mentioned that you can pull up the satellite tracking data and if you can, are you able to show that there were at least 10 visible satellites (probably 15-20 since I didn't see all of them that others saw) on that date in that area? If you can, then great, maybe all of them were satellites.

You can easily do this for yourself if you download software like that which I suggest in the link I posted earlier. You will have to download the archived TLE data for the period you are interested in otherwise the timings/positions will all be a long way off.

Feel free to ask if you are having any problems - I have yet to install any tracking software on this "new" PC (my old PC died in 2013).

reply to post by JadeStar

so how do we know that you are not hired by the govt to try and invalidate any legitimate claims to sightings?

Whilst these questions have not been directed at me, I hope no one minds if I answer for myself, and say that:

You don't know for sure, but, you can easily check for yourself that what people like me are saying is true if you try some of the things I suggested.

The sky can be observed by anyone with a mind to do it, so it's easy to check if someone is lying, or if what they say is true.

reply to post by JadeStar

"Do you believe that there are any legitimate UFO sightings?"

If you are asking "do I think there are sightings where science can not find an explanation?", then yes I do, but that does not necessarily mean an explanation might be found at some point in the future. We are still discovering/documenting new natural phenomena after all.

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 06:18 PM
James Gilliland is a prime example of what is wrong with UFOlogy. That's about as nicely as I can say that.

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 09:04 PM
reply to post by Notheycant

Another great video Josh! Keep em coming

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 10:52 PM

reply to post by JadeStar

Hi Jadestar. Thank you for that detailed response. I understand your position and the videos you showed were similar to what I saw. We stayed there for 3 nights, Fri, Jun 29, 30 & July 1 of 2012. It was the night of July 1 and I saw 10 of these things in that one night within a 1-2 hr period of time (around 9:30-11:30 pm).

10 is not that many in the dark skies of Trout Lake, WA.

Read fireball's responses, they are essentially what I was about to reply to you but there is no need to repeat the same information he gave you.
As he said, you can verify what we're telling you yourself if you want. We're both here to help assist you in that.

My position on UFOs is that 1) hoaxes (such as Gilliand) are rare, 2) the vast majority can be explained as misidentification, 3) of the tiny portion which can't (less than 1% of all UFOs) there is no compelling evidence to jump over potential new natural phenomena to aliens.

I'm open to the idea of aliens and feel personally (speculation on my part) that we live in a fairly populated galaxy. However I see no compelling evidence which is beyond question that 'they' have been here or are here now.

I can also assure you I am not a 'government agent'. I'm just an astronomy undergad who operates a meteor camera.

In the interest of full disclosure I have done some stuff as part of a program NASA has with students like me but that doesn't make me some nefarious debunker. I'm just skeptical that the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis should be the "go to" one regarding UFOs. It should NEVER be a default that if one sees something unexplained it therefore is aliens. Leave that to Giorgio with the big hair.

I am on ATS in the interest of its motto "Deny Ignorance" and in the Aliens & UFOs forum in the interest of perhaps following through on what Peter Sturrock's report suggested: More connections between hard science and UFOlogy can potentially benefit both.

And yes, there IS something wrong with charging people to view satellites which he knowingly is doing, while dressing them up in UFO/Alien lore.

You were had. And yes, you should be interested in finding out just how he did it.
edit on 20-1-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 09:31 AM
There is a whole lot of hooey and mis-ID's re: UFO's. Someone not versed with satellites would see "UFO's" on a nightly basis... and do.

I would suggest that a moving point of light, like a moving "star," is most likely a satellite as suggested above.

If the nighttime sky-light does any of the following: stops, takes a sudden right-angled turn, or whips around a point in the sky and then shoots off in a new direction, then it is likelier to be strange.

I've been lucky enough to see some weird things overhead, but it isn't usual. Building a new-age mythology around a light in the sky doesn't help finding out what these things actually are and in fact, detracts from the general efforts to do so.

It's irritating when one knows that something truly weird is happening and the flakes, like J.G., ruin serious investigation. Heck, he might even be spot on in his world-view, but his presentation is so over the top and silly that intelligent, incredulous folks would never give his ideas a second glance.

Unfortunately or not, presentation is important and is how people weed out spurious information... oh, and the interview was quite well done in general.

edit on 1/21/2014 by Baddogma because: add

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 02:36 AM
And who can guess first what drugs these guys ni the OPs video are on?

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:02 PM
Love how a thread with 3 pages keeps at the top of the website, despite not having any mechanical reason to be there. 100+ flags, for what? A video? Please. Pander much?

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:16 PM
reply to post by Chronogoblin

I think the 100 flags are from people who do research and have heard James speak and some who have witnessed more than a light on the mountain there, and in their own lives....

So they're flagging, like I did. But then on the other hand, scores of the most negative and skeptical posts. Who would bother. I felt like maybe James could use some ego boosting support, but then he's probably used to getting put down publically, they always put down the truth, period. But then with the type of posts here, nah. Just know I don't agree with any of them.

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:24 PM
Oh, and a little tip on the real nature of ufology, our holographic reality, and that we are much bigger than we think and have access to our HS and Soul and Source, and there is a Team that watches over these dangerous earth escapades.

He had some wonderful, extraordinary meditation videos. Lucky I saved them but won't post the ones he removed. With that kind of ability to direct groups into those kind of wonderful meditations, he deserves some credit.

And I'll give you another hint. If he was only in it for the new age money, whatever that means, I don't think he's all that wealthy. But lets just say he was only in it for the money, but was a spiritual guru with meditations that are powerful at connecting you to source and Holy Spirit and Higher Self, (note he himself tells you to use whatever terms you are comfortable with, ie, Michael, Christ, Higher Self, Highest Love and Goodness, the Good Family, for those watching over.

Anyway, I just have to say, if he was in it for the money with this kind of talent at meditations, he'd have had scores of contact with LOVE AND GOOD FAMILY by now, and so would all those participating, most who are serious about purifying self, anyway.

So, full circle, he is in contact and its for real.

The one left: its a real treat to participate in this! Such a blessing to be able to view this, its wonderful.

james meditation

Something about attitude comes to mind however. Because it takes really loving and reporting for duty, I want to help, want to do the work I came to do, help me deprogram, thank you so much!

Of course some of us see the furball! Big Cat! Mr. Sirius ET himself, well I guess human here and now.

edit on 22-1-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 08:13 AM
Why is this thread still on the front page????

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in