UFO: footages, disclosure, archaeological anomalies

[mirandansa]

OP clearly thinks aliens 'might' exist.

That's my personal view, yes. And that's a view i arrive at independent of all these UFO cases.

OP needs to provide extraordinary evidence for this extraordinary claim.

What claim? That aliens exist, or that UFOs are alien spacecrafts? I have no concrete evidence for both statements.

Until then, it's silly to claim that anything in the sky 'might' be alien.
Plus Occam's razor.

The objects might be extraterrestrial artefacts. For there are many principled individuals testifying to that.

I want to know if the objects are extraterrestrial artefacts. A further public investigation is required. Obama has the capability to initiate that. And the Disclosure Project has been preparing a briefing. That's why i think it's a good idea to support this project.

Also, I know you've stated: "If you read my post, you'll notice that i'm actually trying to look for non-alien explanations. If you can offer some, please do."
But seriously, I highly doubt you're as sceptical as you think you are.

And how am i supposed to respond to that doubt?

I don't aspire to be a sceptic. I aspire to be a good thinker.

 

[mirandansa]

Also, why would the government even bother to cover aliens up? There's literally no point.

Not necessarily the government as we know it, but a government within the government. In other words, the military industry complex. I already presented Eisenhower and Clinton's quotes referring to such a machinery operating independent of the President's hand. Why would the army hide the vehicles that are based on zero-point energy and anti-gravitational propulsion technology, if such things existed? One obvious reason would be that the release of such technology would destroy the current established economic structure benefiting various military entities and they wouldn't want that to happen.

Even if there were no such "shadow" government, there would still be factors that might prevent the government from being forthright about these things. I already mentioned the panic caused by the 1938 address rehearsal conducted through a fake radio broadcast. We also know that many U.S. citizens are religious, believing that "God" created them as a special unique "kind" of being in the centre of the universe. Can you imagine NephilimFree's reaction to Obama's announcing that we are not alone?

 

[MRaverz]

Also, why would the government even bother to cover aliens up? There's literally no point.

Not necessarily the government as we know it, but a government within the government. In other words, the military industry complex. I already presented Eisenhower and Clinton's quotes referring to such a machinery operating independent of the President's hand. Why would the army hide the vehicles that are based on zero-point energy and anti-gravitational propulsion technology, if such things existed? One obvious reason would be that the release of such technology would destroy the current established economic structure benefiting various military entities and they wouldn't want that to happen.

Even if there were no such "shadow" government, there would still be factors that might prevent the government from being forthright about these things. I already mentioned the panic caused by the 1938 address rehearsal conducted through a fake radio broadcast. We also know that many U.S. citizens are religious, believing that "God" created them as a special unique "kind" of being in the centre of the universe. Can you imagine NephilimFree's reaction to Obama's announcing that we are not alone?

The same question arises, why would people bother to have a 'government within a government' hiding aliens? I'm sure that nobody would care that much to do it. If people have zoobacian energy and flux capacitors, they'd weaponise it - that's what happens. And if it were really for the good of society, why would you want to uncover it?
Plus, that quote sounds suspiciously quotemined and I'd like to know the context a bit more.


In response to the rest. You try to be a good thinker, so be a scientific thinker. Start with the null hypothesis and try to disprove it, taking the claim 'Aliens might exist' into investigation is going backwards. Instead, start with the claim 'Aliens do not exist', then try to prove yourself wrong. After all, the default for any belief is to not believe it.

 

[mirandansa]

Not necessarily the government as we know it, but a government within the government. In other words, the military industry complex. I already presented Eisenhower and Clinton's quotes referring to such a machinery operating independent of the President's hand. Why would the army hide the vehicles that are based on zero-point energy and anti-gravitational propulsion technology, if such things existed? One obvious reason would be that the release of such technology would destroy the current established economic structure benefiting various military entities and they wouldn't want that to happen.

Even if there were no such "shadow" government, there would still be factors that might prevent the government from being forthright about these things. I already mentioned the panic caused by the 1938 address rehearsal conducted through a fake radio broadcast. We also know that many U.S. citizens are religious, believing that "God" created them as a special unique "kind" of being in the centre of the universe. Can you imagine NephilimFree's reaction to Obama's announcing that we are not alone?

The same question arises, why would people bother to have a 'government within a government' hiding aliens? I'm sure that nobody would care that much to do it. If people have zoobacian energy and flux capacitors, they'd weaponise it - that's what happens.

Weaponise for what? From the military-industry perspective, winning & ending a war is not a good thing; keeping warfare is. They don't profit from a victory that ends the military demands but from a continuation of warfare that maintains the consumption of materials and fuels for military products. And such a continuation is most possible when the battling parties are on par in (ostensible) weaponry. As long as Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Cuba, Russia, etc. pose no threat to this balance, the best bet is to keep the super-technology up their sleeve.

(I don't firmly believe this to be the case. I'm just presenting a conceivable rationale for the reported cover-up.)

More on the military-industry complex:
http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/what-is-the-military-industrial-complex.asp

And if it were really for the good of society, why would you want to uncover it?

The panic incident was from the 1930s. People's mentality & paradigm have grown since then. I mentioned the factor of many American people being religious as something which the U.S. government might consider and be off the announcement over. True, there are anthropocentric nutcases like NephilimFree, but we can't really equate the antique public mind from these periods --

Show More Hide

{TEXT}

, to the more recent evolving public mind --

Show More Hide

{TEXT}

People have become more and more de-anthropocentralised, more and more prepared for "the announcement", if such a thing is to come.

In response to the rest. You try to be a good thinker, so be a scientific thinker. Start with the null hypothesis and try to disprove it, taking the claim 'Aliens might exist' into investigation is going backwards. Instead, start with the claim 'Aliens do not exist', then try to prove yourself wrong. After all, the default for any belief is to not believe it.

You are mistaken on 3 points.

I already said my view of "aliens might exist" is independent of all these UFO cases. My interest in investigating these cases derive primarily from my taking the testimonies seriously. Distinguished individuals have come out to report that extraterrestrial artefacts are kept secret by some machinery within the government; is that true? I want to know, since the implications are of a planetary import especially in terms of technology. So i support their cause for an official disclosure from the governments.

This is a matter of freedom of information, an extension of a fundamental right, not just a scientific research as you are simplifying it.

Even if we were to confine it to a strict such research stripped of any interest in protecting our basic rights, examining the veracity of the testimonies would still be part of the scientific investigation, to the extent that no null hypothesis actually works in this case. A null hypothesis is a statistical testing method to see whether the event in question is likely to occur by chance. We already know it's not a chance case. Hundreds of ex-government/military/intelligence individuals don't accidentally claim there is a cover-up. There must be at least one non-null hypothesis that accounts for why such a movement has emerged in the first place. And, should there be more than two such alternative hypotheses, we would have to further examine which one of them is more accurate.

 

[retardedsociety]

Its too easy to falsify pictures and videos, and it doesn't help for them to add up creepy music lol


But yeah its kinda sad humanity feels the need to find something out there that is superior than us, even aliens fill that role. We could possibly be the smartest species in this galaxy, and we are looking out there for flying saucers lol

 

[mirandansa]

Its too easy to falsify pictures and videos, and it doesn't help for them to add up creepy music lol

It's both too easy to accept for some without giving it sufficiently critical thought and too easy to dismiss for some others with an excessively sceptic and ridiculing attitude toward it.

But yeah its kinda sad humanity feels the need to find something out there that is superior than us, even aliens fill that role.

If extraterrestrial life existed and some of them could travel between different solar systems, they must be technologically more advanced than us.

And i'm not claiming such a travel has actually taken place. But that is what some evidences point to.

We could possibly be the smartest species in this galaxy, and we are looking out there for flying saucers lol

Possibly, yes.

 

[DeusExNihilum]

I mean, on the first page alone you brought forward THIRTEEN different things, which would take numerous pages of research and rebutting EACH. I mean FFS you gave us 9 of those 13 in your first post.

I don't understand. Why is that a problem? I present information so that we can talk about it. The Wikipedia article on "Loch Ness Monster" brings forward 20+ different things; is that a problem?

And you're doing what the majority of "UFO's are aliens" proponents do in your replies - If someone objects, just find another blurry picture of an indistinct shape and go "But what about THIS?!?!?!?".

Yes, closer examination.

The fact of the matter is that you're saying "These unexplained flying objects have not been explained, therefore, the most likely explanation is the most unlikely explanation - Aliens in spaceships."

Fact 1 -- Some of the objects are not fully explained.

Fact 2 -- Hundreds of distinguished individuals testify to the existence of a cover-up machinery and some even to the existence of spacecrafts of extraterrestrial origins.

Possibility 1 -- The testimonies are either lies or based on a mistake. The objects are not extraterrestrial artefacts.

Possibility 2 -- The testimonies are not lies but based on a mistake. The objects are not extraterrestrial artefacts.

Possibility 3 -- The testimonies are neither lies nor based on a mistake. The objects are extraterrestrial artefacts.

We could say that for an extraterrestrial life to exist and travel all the way to this planet is less than likely. But the problem is the testimonies. We cannot flat-out dismiss P3 without properly examining these first-hand reports. And that's what i'm trying to do with you people here.

1. A wikipedia article and a discussion thread are not the same thing. In a discussion focus on detail is important. But i've already explained why it's not in the interest of discussion to spew out a million different things one after the other - It gives us absolutely no time to look at any of them in anything more than a superficial glance.

What you're presenting us with is "Evidence" (very loose usage) for a claim, and "I have lots of this" does not give your claim any more weight if none of the evidence is valid. So what do we need to do as Skeptics? Examine the evidence. Not look at your tally for how many blurry video's with spooky music you've managed to post in 10 minutes and go "Wow, 30 video's, this shit must have some validity!". Each thing you have brought forward needs to be looked at properly.

But you've no interest in letting us examine one thing properly, even cursory objections or critiques of one video compels you to post 5 more, over and over again. It is exactly like how a retard creationist would "Discuss".

"If evolution exists, why are there still monkeys?"
"well you see-"
"Howcome monkeys aren't still evolving into man?"
"Evolution doesn't work like-"
"Some things are too complex to of evolved!"
"Like wh-"
"The bacterial Flagellum"
"Actually we can-"
"The immune system"
"But these studies-"
"Blood clotting!"
"If you'll just let me-"
"SEE! I'VE GOT ALL THIS EVIDENCE! AND YOU CANT EXPLAIN IT AWAY!"

~

2. No thats not closer examination. You've already come to your conclusion. And no, running off to find more of the same "Evidence", that you've not shown to be valid or let anyone examine, and going "I gots some more!" Is not closer examination.

Closer examination is looking at one thing, in detail...the very thing you've consistently failed to do in this thread, and have stopped others doing so.

~

3. Testimonies, Anecdotes, are not evidence. I can find you thousands, if not 10's of thousands if not MILLIONS of testimonies that Jesus Christ has spoke to the individual PERSONALLY. I can find you hundreds of times more Religious experiences than that of UFO experiences.

I can find you testimonies that number in the thousands for ghosts, God, Prophets, the power of prayer, that a bomb went off on 9/11, that a missile hit the pentagon, The efficacy of Homeopathy, the future predicting accuracy of psychics/astrology/tea leaves/the intestines of goats et cetera ad infinitum

But all the testimonies in the world amount to exactly squat. They're useless as evidence, utterly unreliable as sources of information, often completely contradictory...Fuck there are studies that show that the majority of people will remember the same thing in two completely different ways if you give them enough time. That a good portion (a quarter I think) of the sample used in one study, when confronted with their original testimony, refused to accept that the testimony was theirs...Even though it was in their hand writing, and signed by them.

People are too easily influenced by their bias's and their culture, their senses are too easily fooled and their memories are too easily distorted. Testimonies are useless

And yes! Some things are unexplained, but in the immortal words of Dr Cox from "Scrubs"

"IF you hear hoof beats, think HORSE before ZEBRA"

And you think Zebra long, long before you think "Alien Horse".

But really. If you're swayed by evidence that amounts to "Testimony + footage/pictures which require hefty interpretation" you must believe just about everything under the sun.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

In some prespectives, it would be really cool if we were being visited by aliens, but that ain't the truth. You just get to live on a boring planet not visited by outsiders. I would like to live in a world that is the way I wanted it to be, but it ain't that way, I can't change reality for you and you are stuck with what you have.
I could have nod all along and say "sure aliens", but that wouldn't be the truth and neither would it change how things really are, you and I both know that.
It is really sad to see you choosing to have your mind in lala land, because you don't live in lala land, you live in the real world and that is where your mind need to be.
I want to you to give me your most honest answer. Do you really seiously believe that you are being visited by aliens? Or do you just hold that on the surface and deep down inside you know that the story is a bit of?

 

[lrkun]

Our main concern at the moment is what will constitute as evidence with respect to the existence of UFO/aliens?

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Thank you for being very concise.

The disclosure project seems to be running a classic scam; the evidence (or enlightenment, or the millions in a frozen bank account) is always just over the next hill and they just need a little more support from you to bring it out. The paranormal is so unlikely and human knavery is so common that I must reasonably conclude that this project is an example of the latter.

Is that not a prejudiced speculation on your part?

There's a difference between prejudice and judgment. I went to the website for the disclosure project. The first link was to a book about preparing your "energy" for 2012. I presume you remember what a giant scam Y2K paranoia was, and 2012 is the next big scam. None of the links on their front page was any more credible.

You're reminding me of a story I read from the James Randi Million Dollar Challenge. I can no longer find it, but it involved a highly intelligent woman who believed she had the paranormal power to influence candle flames with her mind. This power was by no means dramatic, and she proposed a massive data collection project involving thousands of samples to determine if she was having a minuscule effect. It was suggested to her that minor variations were within the expected range of error of the measurement, but she refused to consider this. Towards the end of her correspondence she noted that her ability seemed to work better the more she believed in it. A final plea was made for her to consider that she was engaging in self deception, but she refused to consider this as well. Like her, you're allowing your pride in your obviously advanced intellect to blind you.

I'm blind to what?

To science; that the things you believe are not supported by evidence; that you are a dupe of scammers and dolts.

 

[mirandansa]

1. A wikipedia article and a discussion thread are not the same thing. In a discussion focus on detail is important. But i've already explained why it's not in the interest of discussion to spew out a million different things one after the other - It gives us absolutely no time to look at any of them in anything more than a superficial glance.

What you're presenting us with is "Evidence" (very loose usage) for a claim, and "I have lots of this" does not give your claim any more weight if none of the evidence is valid. So what do we need to do as Skeptics? Examine the evidence. Not look at your tally for how many blurry video's with spooky music you've managed to post in 10 minutes and go "Wow, 30 video's, this shit must have some validity!". Each thing you have brought forward needs to be looked at properly.

Examine the evidence, yes. That's what we need to do.

But you've no interest in letting us examine one thing properly, even cursory objections or critiques of one video compels you to post 5 more, over and over again. It is exactly like how a retard creationist would "Discuss".

Posting more pictures of the same object/incident, yes. More pictures, more data.

2. No thats not closer examination. You've already come to your conclusion. And no, running off to find more of the same "Evidence", that you've not shown to be valid or let anyone examine, and going "I gots some more!" Is not closer examination.

Closer examination is looking at one thing, in detail...the very thing you've consistently failed to do in this thread, and have stopped others doing so.

Looking at one thing in detail, yes. More pictures, more angles, more details.

3. Testimonies, Anecdotes, are not evidence. I can find you thousands, if not 10's of thousands if not MILLIONS of testimonies that Jesus Christ has spoke to the individual PERSONALLY. I can find you hundreds of times more Religious experiences than that of UFO experiences.

I can find you testimonies that number in the thousands for ghosts, God, Prophets, the power of prayer, that a bomb went off on 9/11, that a missile hit the pentagon, The efficacy of Homeopathy, the future predicting accuracy of psychics/astrology/tea leaves/the intestines of goats et cetera ad infinitum

But all the testimonies in the world amount to exactly squat. They're useless as evidence, utterly unreliable as sources of information, often completely contradictory...Fuck there are studies that show that the majority of people will remember the same thing in two completely different ways if you give them enough time. That a good portion (a quarter I think) of the sample used in one study, when confronted with their original testimony, refused to accept that the testimony was theirs...Even though it was in their hand writing, and signed by them.

People are too easily influenced by their bias's and their culture, their senses are too easily fooled and their memories are too easily distorted. Testimonies are useless

Do you realise the testimonies from those ex-government/military/intelligence/corporate participants of the disclosure project are not without hundreds of de-classified official documents? It's not just eye-witness. There are written formal documentations to consider. The project has been compiling them so that it's ready for a briefing to the President.

And yes! Some things are unexplained, but in the immortal words of Dr Cox from "Scrubs"

"IF you hear hoof beats, think HORSE before ZEBRA"

Should i stick to the horse hypothesis when stripes are documented?

And you think Zebra long, long before you think "Alien Horse".

It came to the point where i had to start thinking both.

But really. If you're swayed by evidence that amounts to "Testimony + footage/pictures which require hefty interpretation" you must believe just about everything under the sun.

I wouldn't have broadened the range of my interpretations of the footages if it weren't for the testimonies underpinned with de-classified documents.

 

[mirandansa]

In some prespectives, it would be really cool if we were being visited by aliens, but that ain't the truth. You just get to live on a boring planet not visited by outsiders.

Is that a conclusion?

"a boring planet"... i guess many scientists would disagree with that.

I can't change reality for you and you are stuck with what you have.

I'm stuck with what is unresolved.

I could have nod all along and say "sure aliens", but that wouldn't be the truth and neither would it change how things really are, you and I both know that.

We don't have to say "sure aliens". We have to ask "is that true?"

It is really sad to see you choosing to have your mind in lala land, because you don't live in lala land, you live in the real world and that is where your mind need to be.

My mind is at a place where "lalala they are lying" would be an unreasonable statement.

I want to you to give me your most honest answer. Do you really seiously believe that you are being visited by aliens?

No, i don't believe that.

Or do you just hold that on the surface and deep down inside you know that the story is a bit of?

I already wrote about that in the OP. It was hard for me to imagine an interstellar travel. I used to think that the extraterrestrial hypothesis for UFO was quite unrealistic.

 

[mirandansa]

Our main concern at the moment is what will constitute as evidence with respect to the existence of UFO/aliens?

"UFO" stands for "unidentified flying object". Such objects factually exist. It's a fact that people have been witnessing flying objects which are unidentified.

For me, the existence of aliens and the alien visitation are quite different subjects. We can investigate the former completely independent of the latter.

The evidence for the existence of aliens could come in various forms. An artificial electromagnetic transmission from the outerspace could be one such evidence, searched by projects like SETI. While such a transmission can be misidentified, it's a genuinely possible evidence for an extraterrestrial civilisation:



As regards the idea of "aliens have visited the Earth with their spacecrafts", one of the possible direct evidences for it might be found in the military facilities specified in the de-classified documents brought forward by retired officers joining the disclosure project. And i think this is the most realistically obtainable of the possible proofs of the hypothesis. But we need the authority of the head of state to carry out a public investigation into it. The disclosure project has been preparing a briefing to at least the President of the U.S. I support that cause, not because i believe aliens must have been visiting this planet, but because i want to know if the testimonies are true and because the ramifications are too big to ignore (the reported technology would solve many ecological problems, for instance).

Another factor in the hypothesis is archaeological:





These archaeological anomalies are not conclusive proofs of the hypothesis, but they are something which the hypothesis can explain within a perfectly naturalistic framework and which alternative no-alien-intervention hypotheses don't fully account for. They are evidences in that they demonstrate, not prove, the truth of this particular naturalistic hypothesis rather than of other hypotheses. It's fundamentally different from the case of the supernaturalistic "God did it" Creation vs the naturalistic "Nature did it" Evolution.

I again stress that i do not believe the hypothesis is decidedly true. But neither do i think it can be dismissed. My epistemological stance on it is the same as that of those who didn't flat-out dismiss Michael Faraday -- the founder of electric motor technology -- by calling him a "charlatan" just because his thought seemed far-fetched.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

I want to you to give me your most honest answer. Do you really seiously believe that you are being visited by aliens?

No, i don't believe that.

So why do you insist in statments like "hey I don't want to believe in aliens, but if we didn't done that, then WHO (wink wink, nudge nudge, know what I mean? know what I mean?) did?

 

[DeusExNihilum]

Examine the evidence, yes. That's what we need to do.

Posting more pictures of the same object/incident, yes. More pictures, more data.

Looking at one thing in detail, yes. More pictures, more angles, more details.

If you were posting more pictures and video's of the same incident then yes, everything you just said would make sense. But you're not. You're repeatedly posting superficial data on DIFFERENT EVENTS.

This is not hard to grasp, so I don't understand how you're not grasping this.

Seriously, if you don't understand the difference between 30 posts on one event and 30 posts on 30 events then there may be no hope for you at all.

You have not been looking at one thing, one event, one UFO sighting in detail.

If I just isolate the first page of this thread, and I look only at the video's you posted you demonstrably posted 8 separate events (occurring years apart from one another, in different parts of the globe) in 7 posts. If you are under the impression that you are looking at "One" thing, "One" incident, "One" object in detail...Then this certainly explains why you believe in Alien visitation; You're not seeing reality.


TL;DR - You can't say you're looking at thing one thing in detail whilst demonstrably posting many things with barely any detail other than a blurry 5 minute video. I mean FFS You're still posting video's! STOP! SO WE CAN LOOK AT ONE THING IN DETAIL.

 

[mirandansa]

There's a difference between prejudice and judgment. I went to the website for the disclosure project. The first link was to a book about preparing your "energy" for 2012.

What website are you talking about? Here's the official one:

http://www.disclosureproject.org/

I did a text search for "2012" on all 7 pages linked from the main page, and i found none.

I presume you remember what a giant scam Y2K paranoia was, and 2012 is the next big scam. None of the links on their front page was any more credible.

It's true that those believers of the various 2012 myths are attracted to the disclosure project. The project's purpose, however, is not to promote those myths any more than to raise public attention to the testified cover-up incidents.

I'm blind to what?

To science;

Science is different from scepticism. Science is about formulating and developing an unproven hypothesis into a proven theory based on observed evidence. How could i be blind to science when i'm actually looking for further evidence for the hypothesis suggested by the testimonies?

that the things you believe are not supported by evidence;

I don't believe the hypothesis is true. I want to know whether or not it's true, hence my call for a further public investigation.

that you are a dupe of scammers and dolts

So, you think these people are "scammers and dolts":

Show More Hide

{TEXT}

And you talk about the difference between "prejudice and judgment"? Your judgment itself is prejudiced. You decided to take it as a scam case without looking further into it.

 

[mirandansa]

No, i don't believe that.

So why do you insist in statments like "hey I don't want to believe in aliens, but if we didn't done that, then WHO (wink wink, nudge nudge, know what I mean? know what I mean?) did?

"I don't want to believe in aliens"... what are you talking about? I never said that.

The existence of aliens and the alien visitation are different subjects. This thread is concerned with the latter.

I currently don't believe either that this planet has been visited by aliens or that it hasn't.

There are recorded footages and insider testimonies and archaeological anomalies that suggest the visitation hypothesis. Could the hypothesis be true? That's what i'm interested to find out.

 

[mirandansa]

Examine the evidence, yes. That's what we need to do.

Posting more pictures of the same object/incident, yes. More pictures, more data.

Looking at one thing in detail, yes. More pictures, more angles, more details.

If you were posting more pictures and video's of the same incident then yes, everything you just said would make sense. But you're not. You're repeatedly posting superficial data on DIFFERENT EVENTS.

I thought you were talking about the STS-088 photos.

If I just isolate the first page of this thread, and I look only at the video's you posted you demonstrably posted 8 separate events (occurring years apart from one another, in different parts of the globe) in 7 posts. If you are under the impression that you are looking at "One" thing, "One" incident, "One" object in detail...

I meant the falling object captured consecutively by Endeavour in 1998.

You have not been looking at one thing, one event, one UFO sighting in detail.

We can do that.

Then this certainly explains why you believe in Alien visitation; You're not seeing reality.

I don't believe in alien visitation.

TL;DR - You can't say you're looking at thing one thing in detail whilst demonstrably posting many things with barely any detail other than a blurry 5 minute video. I mean FFS You're still posting video's! STOP! SO WE CAN LOOK AT ONE THING IN DETAIL.

Sure. Let's continue the discussion of the Phoenix Lights from my post on "Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:45 pm" (page 2).

ArthurWilborn brought up an article concluding that the lights were flares. But the flare hypothesis doesn't account for the details of the phenomenon observed by 10,000+ people at the night. Flares don't maintain its midair position for an extended period of time; they are not stationary. Flares don't travel from one city to another. Flares emit smokes. These characteristics don't correspond to the observed objects in question. Also, flares aren't to be shot above such a populated area in the first place, because the falling cylinders can hurt or even kill civilians below.

What alternative explanation can you offer?

 

[ArthurWilborn]

ArthurWilborn brought up an article concluding that the lights were flares. But the flare hypothesis doesn't account for the details of the phenomenon observed by 10,000+ people at the night. Flares don't maintain its midair position for an extended period of time; they are not stationary. Flares don't travel from one city to another. Flares emit smokes. These characteristics don't correspond to the observed objects in question. Also, flares aren't to be shot above such a populated area in the first place, because the falling cylinders can hurt or even kill civilians below.

What alternative explanation can you offer?

Let's test your reading comprehension!

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4041

flares aren't to be shot above such a populated area in the first place, because the falling cylinders can hurt or even kill civilians below.

"The Barry M. Goldwater Range is a big place , over 4,000 square miles , and the Phoenix metropolitan area is even larger, about 14,000 square miles. The distance between the two is usually cited at 60 to 80 miles, but as we can see, that's going to depend on a lot. We do know a little about where the A-10's were flying inside the Goldwater Range. The guy who was in the lead A-10, Lt. Col. Ed Jones, says they were near Gila Bend when they ejected the leftover flares, and Gila Bend is just about exactly 50 miles from downtown Phoenix. Mesa and Scottsdale are farther away, so let's take a super rough stab at it, be conservative, and say that the average observer of the Phoenix Lights was 70 miles away from the A-10's."

"As has been thoroughly documented, including by a Fox television special, the moment that each light disappeared on the evidential videotapes corresponded exactly with the horizon line of the Sierra Estrella mountains, proving that the lights were behind the mountains, and not over Phoenix."

Fail.

Flares don't maintain its midair position for an extended period of time; they are not stationary.

"Once it ejects its parachute and ignites, it puts out 1.8 million candela for 4 minutes, or 1.6 million candela for 5 minutes. It falls in its parachute at 8.3 feet per second. ... About halfway through the burn, enough of the canister has been burned away that it actually lightens the load and it falls more and more slowly."

In the first two minutes, the flares would have fallen about 1000 feet; and as established, most viewers were about 70 miles, or about 370000 feet away. According to my calculations, the apparent motion would be about 0.25 degrees; or effectively stationary. The rest of the fall would be even slower.

Flares emit smokes.

Smoke probably wouldn't be visible at night, at a great distance, from cameras that weren't set up to take pictures at night.

Flares don't travel from one city to another.

"Over the next couple of weeks, corroborating reports flooded in, of triangle-shaped craft from as far away as Henderson, Nevada cruising over the southwest, to Prescott, over Phoenix, and off toward Tucson. UFO's are reported nearly every day in most areas by someone, so it's to be expected that the normal background noise of typical reports would be given special attention during a large-scale episode like the Phoenix Lights. And, obviously, such a furor offers an easy opportunity for any clown to go on the news to say that a triangle-shaped craft passed over his house on its way to Phoenix. What would have been truly unusual and shocking is if there had been no other reports from nearby areas. Too bad none of these people owned cameras."

Note emphasis.

 

[mirandansa]

"The Barry M. Goldwater Range is a big place , over 4,000 square miles , and the Phoenix metropolitan area is even larger, about 14,000 square miles. The distance between the two is usually cited at 60 to 80 miles, but as we can see, that's going to depend on a lot. We do know a little about where the A-10's were flying inside the Goldwater Range. The guy who was in the lead A-10, Lt. Col. Ed Jones, says they were near Gila Bend when they ejected the leftover flares, and Gila Bend is just about exactly 50 miles from downtown Phoenix. Mesa and Scottsdale are farther away, so let's take a super rough stab at it, be conservative, and say that the average observer of the Phoenix Lights was 70 miles away from the A-10's."

... which may have been the case, yes. And this is already discussed in the "flare theory debunked" video i presented earlier.

The Barry Goldwater Range has been in operation since 1941. If they dropped flares in 1997 on the day of the Phoenix Lights, that was not the first time they did it. The people were more or less familiar with what flares would look like. They could more or less tell the difference. Was there any mass sighting like this prior to 1997? No. The 1997 incident was special. The people thought it was so unusual that they had to call the police at the very moment of the sighting.

Note also that, in the documentary, an anonymous military pilot with more than 40 years of experience witnessed the lights and doubts the flare hypothesis.

"As has been thoroughly documented, including by a Fox television special, the moment that each light disappeared on the evidential videotapes corresponded exactly with the horizon line of the Sierra Estrella mountains, proving that the lights were behind the mountains, and not over Phoenix."

Fail.

"Once it ejects its parachute and ignites, it puts out 1.8 million candela for 4 minutes, or 1.6 million candela for 5 minutes. It falls in its parachute at 8.3 feet per second. ... About halfway through the burn, enough of the canister has been burned away that it actually lightens the load and it falls more and more slowly."

In the first two minutes, the flares would have fallen about 1000 feet; and as established, most viewers were about 70 miles, or about 370000 feet away. According to my calculations, the apparent motion would be about 0.25 degrees; or effectively stationary. The rest of the fall would be even slower.

I'll take that calculations for granted, thanks.

Another problem is that some of the lights moved horizontally across Arizona, not vertically.

Flares emit smokes.

Smoke probably wouldn't be visible at night, at a great distance, from cameras that weren't set up to take pictures at night.

That's a possibility, yes. But not a certainty:

The cameras weren't the only eyes. At closer distances too people didn't see any smoke:



You discredit these witnesses as follows:

"Over the next couple of weeks, corroborating reports flooded in, of triangle-shaped craft from as far away as Henderson, Nevada cruising over the southwest, to Prescott, over Phoenix, and off toward Tucson. UFO's are reported nearly every day in most areas by someone, so it's to be expected that the normal background noise of typical reports would be given special attention during a large-scale episode like the Phoenix Lights. And, obviously, such a furor offers an easy opportunity for any clown to go on the news to say that a triangle-shaped craft passed over his house on its way to Phoenix. What would have been truly unusual and shocking is if there had been no other reports from nearby areas. Too bad none of these people owned cameras."

Note emphasis.

What about the hundreds of reports that flooded at the time of the incident? A veteran 911 police operator recounts: