The Phoenix Lights revisited

[itsnotoutthere]

It's a credible stance if one assumes that there is no intelligent life in the universe but humans on earth.

It is also a credible stance in light of the lack of any evidence of intelligent life in the universe, & assumptions don't come into it.

[TheMacGuffin]

I am not sure you are the best judge of what is credible & what is not, your enthusiasm to accept any 'UFO story' as being credible borders on embarrassing at times.

Here's another caricature of me by the so-called "skeptics", since there are many UFO stories that I ignore or dismiss.

This is why people should not listen to what they say about me, but what I actually say for myself.

Edited October 13, 2012 by TheMacGuffin

[TheMacGuffin]

It is also a credible stance in light of the lack of any evidence of intelligent life in the universe, & assumptions don't come into it.

This is the way "Itsnotoutthere" wants it to be, or wants people to think it is, but of course I do not share his views in any way.

I have very good reasons to think the way I do, and have posted thousands of times to explain exactly why. You will never see these guys getting very detailed or specific, though--almost never.

Edited October 13, 2012 by TheMacGuffin

[booNyzarC]

It's a credible stance if one assumes that there is no intelligent life in the universe but humans on earth.

You are presenting a false dichotomy as a strawman argument here BR, and it has nothing to do with the position Hazzard holds. Having intelligent life in the universe and having said life never pay us a visit are not mutually exclusive. The universe could be teeming with life, but that doesn't mean any of that life has found its way into our little solar system.

[itsnotoutthere]

This is the way "Itsnotoutthere" wants it to be, or wants people to think it is, but of course I do not share his views in any way.

I have very good reasons to think the way I do, and have posted thousands of times to explain exactly why. You will never see these guys getting very detailed or specific, though--almost never.

There is a thread on this forum currently in it's 3rd edition 'the best evidence for alien visitation' now with around 6000 replies.

To date all we have had are a collection of word of mouth stories passed on over the years with embellishments added for dramatic effect, Roswell being the classic example. But at the end of the day, what REAL physical evidence do we have? It's a rhetorical question the answer is None.

There are thousands of scientists, astronomers & others who study the stars & the universe for a profession (rather than youtube) If there was any real evidence for these people to study, they would be falling over themselves to do so, & if the evidence was provable they would make every effort to publish it & go down in history as the person who had discovered it. But the reason they haven't is because the proof just isn't there. So until it is, anything else is just (to use your words) a UFO story.

Edited October 13, 2012 by itsnotoutthere

[TSS]

Edit - nevermind.

Edited October 13, 2012 by The Sky Scanner

[TheMacGuffin]

There is a thread on this forum currently in it's 3rd edition 'the best evidence for alien visitation' now with around 6000 replies.

To date all we have had are a collection of word of mouth stories passed on over the years with embellishments added for dramatic effect, Roswell being the classic example.

I've looked at that BE thread and I certainly wouldn't characterize it the way you do since they are plenty of UFO and ET cases on there that haven't been explained. Just because you think they are doesn't make it so--not at all.

Of course, your statement that there is no physical evidence is also a myth.

[itsnotoutthere]

I've looked at that BE thread and I certainly wouldn't characterize it the way you do since they are plenty of UFO and ET cases on there that haven't been explained. Just because you think they are doesn't make it so--not at all.

Of course, your statement that there is no physical evidence is also a myth.

Explain

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

As much as I love a tall tale,... but, eye-witness testimony doesnt meen s¤#t as far as proof of ET visitation.

'Zactly!

Why listen to the 10,000 who were there and who saw it when you can listen to MB pontificators who were not there.!

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Serious question here - and then some comments.

I will swear up and down I watched a show years ago on the Phoenix Lights. Was it UFO Hunters...? I can't say for sure. maybe.

anyway, in the documentary, *somebody* analyzed the light from the flares/craft. They proved not to be flare light, they also proved not to be light from conventional aircrafts (electrical). they did not know what type of light it was. They could make no match to that type light.

DOES ANYONE KNOW OF THIS "TEST" BEING DONE OR OF THIS DOCUMENTARY?

if not, I'll just as soon say "pass".

Now, those alleged flares were tubes that were about 5 inches in diameter and 36 inches long.

Did anybody ever attempt to retrieve them? interesting, nobody has mentioned that.

Also, if you really believe the US military would break the law and drop flares like that in a civilian area when there was no need, then I would suggest you are likely grasping at straws to keep your "DEBUNK" theory alive.

What they would have done would not only be illegal, it would be damn dangerous.

Also, again,,, I don't give two damns if those lights *were* flares*, 10,000 people became alarmed that night.

"Flares" are not going to cause that kind of scare. No way. Nor does the "flares" theory explain how so many people saw the sky above them being blackened out by a huge craft going right over head.

Spin as you wish. I'd rather take the word of the many witnesses who saw it over the word of some mathematician who "proves" that the lights seen were flares.

One last question, as I did not look at the math to it all:

Does the person doing the math make the conclusion of "flares" simply based on the rate of decent?

If he did, he be quite foolish

[booNyzarC]

I've looked at that BE thread and I certainly wouldn't characterize it the way you do since they are plenty of UFO and ET cases on there that haven't been explained. Just because you think they are doesn't make it so--not at all.

Having an unexplained UFO case does not mean that it was ET. If the ET conclusion could be legitimately reached, it would no longer be categorized as unexplained.

Of course, your statement that there is no physical evidence is also a myth.

I would love to see you back this up with something verifiable. I truly would.

[itsnotoutthere]

Serious question here - and then some comments.

I will swear up and down I watched a show years ago on the Phoenix Lights. Was it UFO Hunters...? I can't say for sure. maybe.

anyway, in the documentary, *somebody* analyzed the light from the flares/craft. They proved not to be flare light, they also proved not to be light from conventional aircrafts (electrical). they did not know what type of light it was. They could make no match to that type light.

DOES ANYONE KNOW OF THIS "TEST" BEING DONE OR OF THIS DOCUMENTARY?

if not, I'll just as soon say "pass".

Now, those alleged flares were tubes that were about 5 inches in diameter and 36 inches long.

Did anybody ever attempt to retrieve them? interesting, nobody has mentioned that.

Also, if you really believe the US military would break the law and drop flares like that in a civilian area when there was no need, then I would suggest you are likely grasping at straws to keep your "DEBUNK" theory alive.

What they would have done would not only be illegal, it would be damn dangerous.

Also, again,,, I don't give two damns if those lights *were* flares*, 10,000 people became alarmed that night.

"Flares" are not going to cause that kind of scare. No way. Nor does the "flares" theory explain how so many people saw the sky above them being blackened out by a huge craft going right over head.

Spin as you wish. I'd rather take the word of the many witnesses who saw it over the word of some mathematician who "proves" that the lights seen were flares.

One last question, as I did not look at the math to it all:

Does the person doing the math make the conclusion of "flares" simply based on the rate of decent?

If he did, he be quite foolish

See post 152

[Bionic Bigfoot]

Also, if you really believe the US military would break the law and drop flares like that in a civilian area when there was no need, .

What they would have done would not only be illegal, it would be damn dangerous.

Not only this, but wouldn't the citizens of Phoenix be extremely familiar with flares? There is a base right there and as others keep pointing out, the military performs regular exercises including flare deployment.

[booNyzarC]

Serious question here - and then some comments.

I will swear up and down I watched a show years ago on the Phoenix Lights. Was it UFO Hunters...? I can't say for sure. maybe.

anyway, in the documentary, *somebody* analyzed the light from the flares/craft. They proved not to be flare light, they also proved not to be light from conventional aircrafts (electrical). they did not know what type of light it was. They could make no match to that type light.

DOES ANYONE KNOW OF THIS "TEST" BEING DONE OR OF THIS DOCUMENTARY?

if not, I'll just as soon say "pass".

The analysis that you are talking about was performed by Jim Dilettoso of Village Labs.

Here is a critical review of his conclusions and methods:

Ortega, Tony. "The Hack and the Quack." Phoenix Newstimes. 5 March 1998.

Here is a link to an episode of the Paracast where Dilettoso himself admits that they could have been flares:

The Phoenix Lights: After 12 Years, Original Photographic Expert, Jim Dilettoso Reverses Position - Says Famed Video 'Could Be Flares!'

Now, those alleged flares were tubes that were about 5 inches in diameter and 36 inches long.

Did anybody ever attempt to retrieve them? interesting, nobody has mentioned that.

Not to my knowledge, but there would be a great many of them in the Barry Goldwater Test Range from the regularly scheduled training missions that have gone on there for many years.

Also, if you really believe the US military would break the law and drop flares like that in a civilian area when there was no need, then I would suggest you are likely grasping at straws to keep your "DEBUNK" theory alive.

What they would have done would not only be illegal, it would be damn dangerous.

They weren't dropped in a civilian area. They were dropped over the Barry Goldwater Test Range.

Also, again,,, I don't give two damns if those lights *were* flares*, 10,000 people became alarmed that night.

"Flares" are not going to cause that kind of scare. No way. Nor does the "flares" theory explain how so many people saw the sky above them being blackened out by a huge craft going right over head.

You may want to make the distinction between the two events. This has been discussed at length throughout the thread, so I'm a bit surprised that you haven't picked up on it yet.

At any rate, the flare event took place later in the evening around 10 PM. The majority of the footage used in reference to the Phoenix Lights was of this event. The earlier event is what you're talking about. For the most part this earlier event took place between 8 and 9 PM, though some cite an earlier start time and others cite a later end time. This would be the fly over event.

Spin as you wish. I'd rather take the word of the many witnesses who saw it over the word of some mathematician who "proves" that the lights seen were flares.

Again, please make the distinction between events. The 10 PM flare conclusion is definitive, heavily supported by more than just "math," and widely accepted even by the big wigs of UFOlogy. The earlier fly over event is still questioned by many, though in my opinion thoroughly explained here. Feel free to disagree, it is your prerogative.

One last question, as I did not look at the math to it all:

Does the person doing the math make the conclusion of "flares" simply based on the rate of decent?

If he did, he be quite foolish

The math was used in a variety of ways, including rate of descent, yes. It was also used to triangulate the position of the lights as being over the Barry Goldwater Test Range by comparative analysis from 4 source videos taken at different vantage points. Also used to roughly gauge the likely flight speed of the A-10 Warthog(s) which dropped the flares, based on the timing, sequence, and distance between each light's initial appearance. Finally, it was also used to confirm that the lights would indeed be visible from various vantage points in the greater Phoenix area despite the fact that the Sierra Estrella mountain range stands between the observers and the BGR. (edit) I almost forgot to mention that it was also used to validate the expected luminosity of the types of flares used at the distances from which they were observed. (/edit)

I hope that helps.

Cheers.

Edited October 13, 2012 by booNyzarC

[synchronomy]

Serious question here - and then some comments.

I will swear up and down I watched a show years ago on the Phoenix Lights. Was it UFO Hunters...? I can't say for sure. maybe.

anyway, in the documentary, *somebody* analyzed the light from the flares/craft. They proved not to be flare light, they also proved not to be light from conventional aircrafts (electrical). they did not know what type of light it was. They could make no match to that type light.

DOES ANYONE KNOW OF THIS "TEST" BEING DONE OR OF THIS DOCUMENTARY?

A link to that video was posted a couple of pages back but it was snipped IIRC for copyright reasons.

If you seach Youtube for "UFO's Over Phoenix - Discovery Channel 1997" you will find it, about 46 minutes in length.

There's a company in there that does spectral analysis of the phoenix lights and compares it to various known light sources. Near the end of the video they analyse known flares and find they do not match the Phoenix Lights.

You were also asking why no one had attempted to retrieve the spent flares. If you watch towards the end of the video there's a Lt. Col. from Maryland National Air Guard saying the flares were dropped in a nearby military test ground, so I would assume Joe Public can't go wandering around there. I posted about this a couple of pages back also. See my post #273.

Edited October 13, 2012 by synchronomy

[badeskov]

Having an unexplained UFO case does not mean that it was ET. If the ET conclusion could be legitimately reached, it would no longer be categorized as unexplained.

Indeed. So far we only have unexplainable, and I personally am perfectly happy with that (well, maybe not entirely ).

I would love to see you back this up with something verifiable. I truly would.

Wouldn't we all, Boony, wouldn't we all?

Cheers,

Badeskov

[booNyzarC]

Not only this, but wouldn't the citizens of Phoenix be extremely familiar with flares? There is a base right there and as others keep pointing out, the military performs regular exercises including flare deployment.

This is a valid question and deserving of an answer.

Consider that first of all, the majority of witnesses reporting the sightings appear to be in relation to the earlier flyover event. As such, these witnesses weren't looking at flares at all.

Secondly, the flare event took place much later, at 10 PM, when most people are not regularly outdoors.

Third, the flare drop on that night actually happened at a slightly higher altitude than most flare drops take place. The reason for this was that the pilots were finished with the mission and they were jettisoning the remaining flares as they were heading back to base, which is standard procedure, but it appears as though at least one of the pilots made this final jettison while on ascent to cruising altitude for the flight home. The point of this third consideration being that most flare drops over the BGR in previous and subsequent training flights were at a low enough altitude to be blocked from view by the Sierra Estrella mountain range.

Fourth, this night in particular would have drawn more people outside than normal because of the rare opportunity to see the Hale-Bopp comet.

Hopefully this provides enough reasoning for why this particular flare drop event may have seemed more significantly impactful than other training missions likely were. It is also important to note that many people have seen flare drops since then, and have confirmed the similarity between those and the original 10 PM Phoenix Lights.

Cheers.

[booNyzarC]

Indeed. So far we only have unexplainable, and I personally am perfectly happy with that (well, maybe not entirely ).

I'd prefer to have explanations where possible, and one which involves ET visitation would be just as fine with me as one which involves flares or airplanes. What matters to me most is that the provided explanation is adequately supported and verifiable. As for the unexplained, I'm not exactly happy with it, but neither am I particularly perturbed. There will always be mysteries and some events will always be shrouded in ambiguity, getting upset about that will do nobody any good at all.

Wouldn't we all, Boony, wouldn't we all?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Yes indeed!

[badeskov]

I'd prefer to have explanations where possible, and one which involves ET visitation would be just as fine with me as one which involves flares or airplanes. What matters to me most is that the provided explanation is adequately supported and verifiable. As for the unexplained, I'm not exactly happy with it, but neither am I particularly perturbed. There will always be mysteries and some events will always be shrouded in ambiguity, getting upset about that will do nobody any good at all.

I am in complete agreement with you. Any explanation should be accepted only if it is adequately supported and verifiable. Otherwise it is just guesswork - in some instances it can be very educated guesswork, but guesswork nonetheless.

Yes indeed!

Good to see you around at this little corner of UM

Cheers,

Badeskov

[mcrom901]

sorry... wrong thread

Edited October 13, 2012 by mcrom901

[Bionic Bigfoot]

Hopefully this provides enough reasoning for why this particular flare drop event may have seemed more significantly impactful

Cheers.

Not really. You wrote a lot, but you didn't address the fundamental question. If we assume that the citizens of Phoenix are quite familiar with flares, having seen them dropped and deployed numerous times, then they should be qualified to tell the difference between flares and whatever they saw earlier in the sky. But.....you and others are going to tell us again that the earlier event was planes right?

Rather than continuing this debate that just keeps going in circles, why can't you and the other skeptics just admit that something strange happened that night. Those people saw something else besides flares or planes, both of which I'm certain they are used to seeing all the time. It's not logical to believe that thousands of people got all worked up that night if they had seen something typical. The huge number of witnesses really should speak for itself. If this was only noticed and reported by let's say 50 or 100 people, then whatever they saw might be able to dismissed more easily. But, when 10,000 people come forward and all report seeing something unusual, this shouldn't be dismissed and can't be.

[Just Dave]

Not only this, but wouldn't the citizens of Phoenix be extremely familiar with flares? There is a base right there and as others keep pointing out, the military performs regular exercises including flare deployment.

Don't worry people here now everything about everything, even if they don't, they still do... See in all years of Phoenix city, where planes fly all the time, hell there is even a base nearby, people never before witnessed or reported an event like that night, nor did they ever got a reasonable explanation about the V shaped vehicle/object... right so why did they do a flare exercise that night? Oh wait a let me restate that... How many times before did military actualy dropped flares? Ok lets say they did dropped flares couple of times before? Why is that so odd then? Why don't people believe that then? Right because they never before did such an exercise, but right on that night they did? Let me think, mabye they tried to cover up the original event that took place abit earlier, you know people who don't think much will go " Hey then the first event was the a-10 too probably right? " Wrong the first event was UNEXPLANIED, our friend Mitch Stanley has got to be a winner with best theory in UNEXPLAINED field of study and it is called PLANES.... Now tell me how can an airplane fly in formation with 5 others in perfect V shape for 5-10 mintues is that even allowed by FAA, or why didn't such formation been observed so many times before, hell there is a base there... ( and again.... ) and the city of Phoenix is standing there for quite some time, 120 years +/-10...and people there have seen that for the first time even the current major or the town said " That the object he seen was outwordly

.

This is from wiki:

"The first-hand witnesses consistently reported that the lights appeared as "canisters of swimming light", while the underbelly of the craft was undulating "like looking through water.."

But our friend Mitch saw airplanes, someone here is lying 1 man or 1000 others, lets do the famous math... Anyways i stick to UNEXPLAINED theory for the first event, second event i don't care... since the point of the topic was the first event, NOT THE FLARES.

Ow and Welcome Bigfoot, welcome to the frontlines, there are burning sceptics and believers!

[Just Dave]

But, when 10,000 people come forward and all report seeing something unusual, this shouldn't be dismissed and can't be.

They will ignore that FACT, and they will believe a source of lies our friend Mitch... and thrust me there is alot of fail logic on this forum, explanations that don't make any sense but people believe them so like i said .... frontlines...

[Bionic Bigfoot]

Thanks for the welcome, Nuke_em and I am in basic agreement with your above post.

[zoser]

Not only this, but wouldn't the citizens of Phoenix be extremely familiar with flares? There is a base right there and as others keep pointing out, the military performs regular exercises including flare deployment.

Another nail in the coffin of the flare theory. Totally.