Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

The Phoenix Lights revisited

ufo alien phoenix

  • Please log in to reply
1032 replies to this topic

#946    Sweetpumper

Sweetpumper

    Heatseeker

  • Member
  • 10,637 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avengers Tower

Posted 24 October 2012 - 07:08 PM

Posted Image

"At it's most basic level, science is supposed to represent the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated." - Hunt for the Skinwalker

"The ultimate irony of the Disclosure movement is that it deeply distrusts officialdom, while simultaneously looking to officialdom for the truth." - Robbie Graham Silver Screen Saucers

#947    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    BigFoot Whisperer

  • Member
  • 3,020 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Location:Planet Elsewhere

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is knowing when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 October 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:

Exactly, yet you seem to figure the skeptics are wrong and you have the answer?

And based on guessing what the dog was barking at?

Your own example illustrates that you delve into that which you defy.

Psyche, you were the one that asked "So what was *IT*?" When you say "it", you tacitly admit to existence - not identity, of course, but existence.

Go back and look at what I typed. I purposely never said one word that a possibe *IT* was causing the dogs to bark, whatever *IT* might be.
You, on the other hand, did what any normal person would do. You were so sure that the dog's actions were indicative of *something* being out there you simply assumed it had to be the case. Congratulations, so do I. So do we all, I'm sure.

"Body language" is quite important, and as loudly as those dogs barked that Wednesday night, a lot of humans barked the night of 3/13/97 in the South Western corner of North America. *LOTS* of humans. And they were gravely disturbed, many, fearful. Body language. Still think that means nothing?
Is that because using the same common sense in the Phoenix Lights case that you did in the dog's case leads you to understand your predetermined solution of "nothing out there" is wrong? Well, brace yourself...It is wrong. The people's body language is loud and clear.

Notice, my opinion based on body language is the same in both cases, it is you that are in contradiction with yourself.

It's a fait accompli, mon amis... *something* was out there that night in the skies over South Western North America.

"I'm not trying to say your wrong, I'm just saying I disagree with you" ~ Jeremy ~


#948    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    BigFoot Whisperer

  • Member
  • 3,020 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Location:Planet Elsewhere

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is knowing when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 24 October 2012 - 10:23 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 24 October 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

No they did not.

Some claim they saw a triangle, some saw a boomerang, some saw a half crescent  some said a chevron shape. Not the same thing at all. Some are rounded, some have a back on them, some are considered equilateral. They are not all describing the same thing by a long shot. Some said 100 yards, some said 500 yards and some said over a mile wide. If you are going to promote these claims, you really should listen to them first.


You are establishing the fact that the various people used different words and an assortment of similar-shaped objects to describe what they saw. Are you saying that because the reports are not all identical they saw nothing at all?? They are delusional??

If you think they saw *something*, please say so.



View Postpsyche101, on 24 October 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

That is certainly my opinion, how is it you feel he is taking this seriously?

Posted ImagePosted Image




You are using an appeal to authority in place of evidence. That is not the least bit constructive nor convincing. The mans a clown.



My my, aren't we judgemental!! Whew. So the guy had a little fun with it. He also paid a heavy price for that little stunt. A lot of people were mad at him for not taking them seriously, which shows all the more, these people are SURE they saw something not to laugh about.

I know why you slam the man so much. It's because his testimony of seeing something "not of this world" tic's you off.
Sorry, my man, he was elected into the Governor's office so he cannot be so mentally unstable, now can he.



View Postpsyche101, on 24 October 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

And you were there?



NO! which is why *I* rely on the testimony of people who *were* there, not that of some remote mathematician with a triangle up his butt.


View Postpsyche101, on 24 October 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

What about the people that say it was clearly individual lights? You know, the ones you are saying agree with everyone else, when they do not?


From what I have read, there certainly were individual lights as well as the big craft. that's certainly not a shocker nor a deal breaker.



View Postpsyche101, on 24 October 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

It would be good to see you adress the information presented instead of whinging about it. I have not seen you do any more than make false claims about thousands of witnesses that you appear to have made up.



I will address info when it is not so one-sided. if people post all about flares, Snowbirds or warthogs, I usually just glance at it.
those are not burning issues to me. not at all.
Talking about testimony (not one-sided) is good, as far as I am concerned.


View Postpsyche101, on 24 October 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

Yes it is fascinating.
Particularly in that it seems to dismiss the chevron shaped craft and the triangle shaped craft. Even that basic drawing asks questions.


I lost my own text here, I won't do multi-quote - I can't recall what I typed before your above response.

But anyway,. look at these images for a chevron - https://www.google.c...iw=1280&bih=857

I can easily see how one individual could see something like a triangle in the black of night, in the sky and call it a chevron shape.
Why are you so critical of that? these are just citizens, not professional witnesses and they only use the words and objects they are familiar with to describe something they saw up in the blackened sky at quite a distance. you call them delusional?? wow.

In my mind, you certainly cannot defeat "EXISTENCE" by trying to claim contradiction.
These people saw *something* that scared the witts out of them. Why do you deny this?


"I'm not trying to say your wrong, I'm just saying I disagree with you" ~ Jeremy ~


#949    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    BigFoot Whisperer

  • Member
  • 3,020 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Location:Planet Elsewhere

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is knowing when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 24 October 2012 - 10:31 PM

Psyche101,

Please understand that I do not have a lot of time to be in here.

As it is now, I usually get about half as much time as I would prefer so I have to really pick-and-choose, and then run.
I skip a lot of posts because I have to keep it short and sweet, so I look at ones of interest to me.

When you reply back to me, it is so damn hard for me to work with a text that has 10 quote-breaks in it that I prefer not to attempt the multi-quote now.

hope you understand.



trump

"I'm not trying to say your wrong, I'm just saying I disagree with you" ~ Jeremy ~


#950    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 24 October 2012 - 10:43 PM

*sigh*

Never mind...

Edited by booNyzarC, 24 October 2012 - 10:57 PM.


#951    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,732 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • If you don't believe the sun will rise
    Stand alone and greet the coming night
    In the last remaining light -Audioslave

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:20 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 24 October 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:

*sigh*

Never mind...

I think I might be able to read your mind there booN. Is that proof of the paranormal?? :P

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#952    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:28 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 24 October 2012 - 11:20 PM, said:

I think I might be able to read your mind there booN. Is that proof of the paranormal?? :P

I don't know mate, but I really wanted to leave that meme up there...  Just like I'd like to upload this screenshot I have of last night's edited post...

I know it won't do any good though.  The numpty has me on ignore anyway, and no amount of sensible discussion is going to sway him even if he did bother to read the posts related to another point of view.  He'll just keep on trolling away, calling skeptical people 'sheeple', 'slo-mos', 'stupid', and whatever other nonsense he manages to yank from his hind end.  He proved that much in the train wreck of a thread about that Russian missile test.


#953    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,732 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • If you don't believe the sun will rise
    Stand alone and greet the coming night
    In the last remaining light -Audioslave

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:29 PM

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 10:23 PM, said:


*Snip

These people saw *something*...

Sorry EOT but this is the only part of your post that actually had any relevance.

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#954    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,732 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • If you don't believe the sun will rise
    Stand alone and greet the coming night
    In the last remaining light -Audioslave

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:39 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 24 October 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:

I don't know mate, but I really wanted to leave that meme up there...  Just like I'd like to upload this screenshot I have of last night's edited post...

I know it won't do any good though.  The numpty has me on ignore anyway, and no amount of sensible discussion is going to sway him even if he did bother to read the posts related to another point of view.  He'll just keep on trolling away, calling skeptical people 'sheeple', 'slo-mos', 'stupid', and whatever other nonsense he manages to yank from his hind end.  He proved that much in the train wreck of a thread about that Russian missile test.

I'm sure you are aware that such tactics are reserved for those with a weak argument. They have to try to support it somehow and an air of superiority (real or not....not in this case) can stifle naysayers as well as those who would rather not goad such behavior. Then victory can be claimed when nobody wants to respond because they think they have everyone stymied. I too find it tiresome however.

Edited by Slave2Fate, 24 October 2012 - 11:42 PM.

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#955    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:44 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 24 October 2012 - 11:39 PM, said:

I'm sure you are aware that such tactics are reserved for those with a weak argument. They have to try to support it somehow and an air of superiority (real or not....not in this case) can stifle naysayers as well as those who would rather not goad such behavior. Then victory can be claimed when nobody wants to respond because they think they have everyone stymied. I too find it tiresome however.

Yes, it is tiresome indeed.  Oh well, such is life on these here interwebs I s'pose...  :P


#956    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:56 PM

View Postquillius, on 24 October 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

Gidday mate,

Gidday

View Postquillius, on 24 October 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

I am working with a map at the moment whilst researching it and trying to plot times and detail to try and figure things out. I am being quite 'strict' on reports used and I am trying to filter out all and any reports put forth within a two week window as opposed to using any that came months/years after.

Are you looking at military and civillian? I think you have your work cut out for you in the civillian area.

View Postquillius, on 24 October 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

Hence why I feel it is vital to have something in Mitchs own words. Barwood may well have added to the confusion but I dont think Ortega has helped either.

Maybe contact Mitch? I wonder if he might be conducive to helping solve the conundrum? I'lll have a look at that astronomy club he belongs to and see if I can make contact that way.

View Postquillius, on 24 October 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

Printy used the range of 19000ft to 35000ft I believe, he used these in relation to Mitchs sighting and how the formation could explain the vshape, whilst the height at the given range meant it loosly explained the single lights (as opposed to two per plane) and the apparent perceived slow moving craft.

I do not entirely doubt this at this point, it is just that I remember reading that Mitch seemed sure he had seen private planes, but that could be an embellishment, or Mitch making an assumption. He was not able to offer numbers or anything, so the exact identification would be hazy.

View Postquillius, on 24 October 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

Agreed, and again strengthens the argument I have for needing Mitchs own words.

Well, lets see if we cannot drag him into that which we have created for him. I think this might be the only avenue.

View Postquillius, on 24 October 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

And they do this without stopping to think for a minute how Mitchs sighting could actually strengthen their case if used correctly....i.e. military jets sent up :)

Hamiltons claim? They have more problems if the identified F15c is what was supposedly sent up.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#957    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 25 October 2012 - 04:48 AM

View Post747400, on 24 October 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

I see what you're saying, but to me that adds another mystery: why was there no record of the Hortens being flown in the US, and nothing has ever come to light ever since?

I really and honestly believe there could be hundreds of reasons.

Douglas Corrigan (January 22, 1907 - December 9, 1995) was an American aviator born in Galveston, Texas. He was nicknamed "Wrong Way" in 1938. After a transcontinental flight from Long Beach, California, to New York, he flew from Floyd Bennett Field in Brooklyn, New York, to Ireland, though his flight plan was filed to return to Long Beach. He claimed his unauthorized flight was due to a navigational error, caused by heavy cloud cover that obscured landmarks and low-light conditions, causing him to misread his compass. However, he was a skilled aircraft mechanic (he was one of the builders of Charles Lindbergh's Spirit of St. Louis and had made several modifications to his own plane, preparing it for his transatlantic flight. He had been denied permission to make a nonstop flight from New York to Ireland, and his "navigational error" was seen as deliberate. Nevertheless, he never publicly admitted to having flown to Ireland intentionally.

LINK


Pilot creates scare in the air with plane's unauthorized flight - LINK


SKYWEST PILOT TAKES JARRING RIDE IN STOLEN PLANE LINK

And on the Hudson Valley UFO

Some of you reading this are, I’m sure, terrified, but worry not: gigantic alien spaceships are not roaming the skies of New England. Go back to using your tinfoil for luncheon meats, not helmets. The ‘UFO sightings’ were the results of that group of glorious airmen, The Stormville Flyers. They owned ultralight aircraft that they had modified with some fancy lights, and their boredom and willingness to dupe the locals is the sole cause of this case. Flying in formation, using controls inside the cockpit to change the colors of the lights or to switch them all off (making it look as though the craft had mysteriously disappeared), and using the public’s gullibility and the inevitable UFO hysteria that follows any sighting, they were able to convince the public that people from outer space had decided to cruise the area.

LINK

The FAA even has a form so that one can report low flying aircraft, which indicates to me that rules are not as tight as they could be.


HELP FAA IDENTIFY UNAUTHORIZED LOW-FLYING AIRCRAFT - LINK



View Post747400, on 24 October 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

Exactly the same question applies for the Yb-35 or similar things. What we're doing if we adopt this theory is that we're talking about nine mystery aircraft flying in formation. If, as I'm afraid, I don't see any reason to accept the explanation that they were Hortens and/or Northrops, then we're still left with UFOs, whether they (or rather whether an artist's impression) look like one particular kind of terrestrial aircraft or not.

But where they all the same? Arnold says he became aware of their shape when sunlit reflected form them. With that description it seems to me that he might have identified only one craft, and assumed the rest were the same design.


Quote

Arnold described them as a series of objects with convex shapes, though he later revealed that one object differed by being crescent-shaped.

LINK


View Post747400, on 24 October 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

Besides, might not Arnold's description itself be influenced by his subconsciously thinking what an advanced aircraft might look like? He didn't suppose that they had to be ET, after all. What they were as far as he was concerned was mystery aircraft. If an Artist, coming up with a suggestion of what he might have seen, came up with something that resembled an advanced Terrestrial aircraft, he'd have seen no reason to reject it.

Perfectly reasonable, but how could one verify this?
And what shape would we be looking for if this was the case?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#958    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,833 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 25 October 2012 - 05:25 AM

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

Psyche, you were the one that asked "So what was *IT*?" When you say "it", you tacitly admit to existence - not identity, of course, but existence.

I have never denied the existence of the military exercises and private planes in the area. I do feel that all evidence that exists firmly supports these solutions.

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

Go back and look at what I typed. I purposely never said one word that a possibe *IT* was causing the dogs to bark, whatever *IT* might be.
You, on the other hand, did what any normal person would do. You were so sure that the dog's actions were indicative of *something* being out there you simply assumed it had to be the case. Congratulations, so do I. So do we all, I'm sure.

Indeed, the scenario you typed out insisted something different happened on that night. And it did. Hale-Bop was making itself visible. A Major celestial event, which I feel is why people were looking up that night so late, and noticed what was going on.

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

"Body language" is quite important, and as loudly as those dogs barked that Wednesday night, a lot of humans barked the night of 3/13/97 in the South Western corner of North America. *LOTS* of humans. And they were gravely disturbed, many, fearful. Body language. Still think that means nothing?

Yes, My wife will jump if she hears a hare outside. She will sit in bed terrified talking to me on the phone until I arrive home. If I hear a Hare outside or a Roo, I know what lives in the area, and am not concerned but curiosity will prompt me to have a look most of the time, as I like seeing wildlife in my yard. She is gravely disturbed, but not I. People react differently to different situations. Not to blow my own horn or anything, but I think perhaps I am a bit more fearless than others? I could never understand why people fear fear at a ball of light. But many claims such. My two sightings did not at all send a shiver through any part of me. I was merely fascinated.

That is why some people saw a giant craft and some saw individual lights.

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

Is that because using the same common sense in the Phoenix Lights case that you did in the dog's case leads you to understand your predetermined solution of "nothing out there" is wrong? Well, brace yourself...It is wrong. The people's body language is loud and clear.

But it is not. Some people who had tales of terror to tell made the papers, because.... that sells. If we were having a beer at my local, and the newspaper were dropped of in front of us, and one pile said "Military Exercise confuses Residents" and the other said "GIANT ALIEN CRAFT HOVERS OVER PHOENIX", which pile do you think would still be there at the end of the day?

That is what I see wrong here. The media. Whenever we rely on the media for information, from science to sightings, it gets it all wrong 99.9% of the time. Scientists hate talking to journalists for this very reason. I am sure I have left you the link to ABC's media watch article, whereby the Australian Broadcasting Commission went to the NT Times, a northern newspaper, and ousted the constant claims of alien ships, the NT News editor got snarky and cheeky, and said "All the UFO stuff is tongue in cheek anyway". The media has absolutely no accountability, and canot be relied upon as an accurate source. Hence, the photos, videos and math. That can tell us who is telling the truth, and who is not.

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

Notice, my opinion based on body language is the same in both cases, it is you that are in contradiction with yourself.

Please extrapolate, as I am not following you here.

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 24 October 2012 - 09:49 PM, said:

It's a fait accompli, mon amis... *something* was out there that night in the skies over South Western North America.

That I agree with that. Yes I do not deny people saw something. Yet evidence does not support the erratic claims of a giant craft.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#959    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,082 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 25 October 2012 - 06:59 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 25 October 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

I really and honestly believe there could be hundreds of reasons.

Douglas Corrigan (January 22, 1907 - December 9, 1995) was an American aviator born in Galveston, Texas. He was nicknamed "Wrong Way" in 1938. After a transcontinental flight from Long Beach, California, to New York, he flew from Floyd Bennett Field in Brooklyn, New York, to Ireland, though his flight plan was filed to return to Long Beach. He claimed his unauthorized flight was due to a navigational error, caused by heavy cloud cover that obscured landmarks and low-light conditions, causing him to misread his compass. However, he was a skilled aircraft mechanic (he was one of the builders of Charles Lindbergh's Spirit of St. Louis and had made several modifications to his own plane, preparing it for his transatlantic flight. He had been denied permission to make a nonstop flight from New York to Ireland, and his "navigational error" was seen as deliberate. Nevertheless, he never publicly admitted to having flown to Ireland intentionally.

LINK


Pilot creates scare in the air with plane's unauthorized flight - LINK


SKYWEST PILOT TAKES JARRING RIDE IN STOLEN PLANE LINK

And on the Hudson Valley UFO

Some of you reading this are, I’m sure, terrified, but worry not: gigantic alien spaceships are not roaming the skies of New England. Go back to using your tinfoil for luncheon meats, not helmets. The ‘UFO sightings’ were the results of that group of glorious airmen, The Stormville Flyers. They owned ultralight aircraft that they had modified with some fancy lights, and their boredom and willingness to dupe the locals is the sole cause of this case. Flying in formation, using controls inside the cockpit to change the colors of the lights or to switch them all off (making it look as though the craft had mysteriously disappeared), and using the public’s gullibility and the inevitable UFO hysteria that follows any sighting, they were able to convince the public that people from outer space had decided to cruise the area.

LINK

The FAA even has a form so that one can report low flying aircraft, which indicates to me that rules are not as tight as they could be.


HELP FAA IDENTIFY UNAUTHORIZED LOW-FLYING AIRCRAFT - LINK





But where they all the same? Arnold says he became aware of their shape when sunlit reflected form them. With that description it seems to me that he might have identified only one craft, and assumed the rest were the same design.




LINK




Perfectly reasonable, but how could one verify this?
And what shape would we be looking for if this was the case?
I will consider the arguments which you raise in the "Why do you beleive in UFOs" thread, since we're taking the question of Phoneix somewhat off topic here. Stay tuned!

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#960    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    BigFoot Whisperer

  • Member
  • 3,020 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Location:Planet Elsewhere

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is knowing when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 25 October 2012 - 09:21 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 24 October 2012 - 11:29 PM, said:

Sorry EOT but this is the only part of your post that actually had any relevance.

wow.

you're impressive/

"I'm not trying to say your wrong, I'm just saying I disagree with you" ~ Jeremy ~





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users