UFO Sighting Above the White House

[pureshark1980]

It happened in 1952...there's a solid Wikipedia article about it too just search "UFO White House 1952." You guys ever heard of this? I'm surprised it's not discussed more.

[Professor Buzzkill]

I have heard the explanation to this is that the UFO's are lense flares from the street lamps. That never struck me as a valid explanation as the camera moves in both directions, but the UFO's only move left to right. If they were lense flares then they would mirror what the camera was doing (i.e moving left when the camera turns right and vice versa)

[The Id3al Experience]

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=274878&st=540&p=5426089&hl=+ufo%20+white%20+houseentry5426089

[Starhunter]

When a story gets that old - like the Roswell incident, it is covered with so many conflicting stories that for practical purposes it is gone, and can even be wiped out as sensationalism, or something which never happened at all.

It is very difficult to know what has happened in many reported cases. Unless you are with a group who know what they are looking at, and have had first hand experience in either witnessing an incident or proven the technology behind it, there is very little support and enough evidence to satisfy a lone researcher or an interest group regardless of whether it is scientific or simply mad.

Photographs, eye witnesses, media reports, magazine articles, YouTube, scientific comments, UFO clubs, disaffected area 51 workers, alien believers, religions, spiritualists, you name it, don't have much that much credibility because the evidence can be manipulated so easily.

Yet you will still find some people short of a brick or two, asking for photographs or videos of a report. Like children that can't read who need picture books.

[ChrLzs]

I have heard the explanation to this is that the UFO's are lense flares from the street lamps. That never struck me as a valid explanation as the camera moves in both directions, but the UFO's only move left to right. If they were lense flares then they would mirror what the camera was doing (i.e moving left when the camera turns right and vice versa)

You do realise that the piece of footage showing the wandering ufo's is absolutely NOT original footage and has been manipulated? It is a STILL image, for heaven's sake. Please do some real research before offering what sounds like a considered opinion..

BTW, not all lens flares do as you say. Unfortunately the term is now used to include effects that do not necessarily move in synch with the camera/lens/light source. But that doesn't apply here - you are 'analysing' manipulated fake footage... which will generally lead to a pretty useless conclusion.

As linked above, that case has been done to death here and elsewhere. That's why it no longer gets much attention (except perhaps from Skyeagle..........).

[Podo]

It seems to have been an event where weird lights did in fact appear above the american capital, the american military did say that while they caught objects on radar, but that they were not solid and therefore posed no threat to the american people. I find that interesting because while it explains the lights, it doesn't write off that there *were* lights. As for what the lights were, I've never heard or read of an explanation that really makes sense, unfortunately.

[ChrLzs]

For the sake of completeness, here is the most recent iteration of discussions on the Washington 1952 'incident'. To summarise the important points:

- the images most commonly associated with this case are NOT, I repeat NOT from the incident at all!! For example the one posted on the OP, and the one shown in the first post of that thread I just linked to, along with any animated 'video's are NOT images taken at that time. They are merely artistic creations, or unrelated images of provable lens flares

- there are a number of alleged 'matches' of radar data and light sightings, but when properly analysed, no such matches can be verified, and no usable source data can be found from any of the radars.

- there is no tangible evidence whatsoever of anything non-terrestrial

... so ... we are left with nothing but stories (gee, sound familiar?)..

It's a non-case, and summaries can be found here, here and here... If you read that thread, you may be overwhelmed by the innumerable, largely incoherent, mostly unsupported and mostly irrelevant posts by Skyeagle (block him and you'll find the thread is a much easier read). Now IF anyone reading this finds any of Sky's claims worthy of a more full rebuttal, please post your very best researched and verifiable example, preferably on that thread..

Similarly, Sky, if you wish to pollute the topics with more endless postings of the sad quality that you used over there, here's a very strong suggestion. Bring your VERY VERY BEST evidence here FIRST. And if that, once properly and carefully analysed, is shown to be horribly lacking (and it has been and will be), then have the sense to stop Gish Galloping onto other irrelevancies...

[Jackscolon]

It was weather balloons! Or Illuminati... Lets go with Illuminati on this...