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.


- - - - -

Never before seen footage

ufo

  • Please log in to reply
125 replies to this topic

#61    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,757 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 23 January 2013 - 11:49 AM

Good post, Chrlzs.




"skeptics are just jealous spineless cowards"   :rofl:

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#62    ChrLzs

ChrLzs

    Just a contributor..

  • Member
  • 3,075 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast (Qld, Australia)

  • I only floccinaucinihilipilificate
    when it IS worthless...

Posted 23 January 2013 - 01:02 PM

View PostHazzard, on 23 January 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

Good post, Chrlzs.
...

I take that as high praise from the direction whence it came..  :D

BTW, I mentioned above I might check if my video analysing friend had looked at any of this footage, and the answer is worth elaborating upon...

No, he hasn't.  But.. it just so happens that the very last video sequence he looked at was ... a sequence taken from the International Space Station, showing a (very boring looking) UFO.  Not this footage, but similar - what a coincidink...

And what was the result of the analysis?  I'm glad you guys asked..!  First up, it took quite some considerable detective work to identify the footage, but it was found.  It was found DESPITE the fact that the hoaxer had deliberately reversed the footage, both vertically and horizontally in his attempt to hide the origin!!  When the original NASA footage was matched up against the unreversed hoax footage, it was very obvious that the UFO had been added in a program like 'After Effects' - the original footage showed nothing of interest.

That hoaxer was in some ways clever to do the reversal, but by doing so (which CANNOT happen by accident) he gave away the game - he can't now claim NASA somehow saw his footage and then went back and post-edited it - the original footage shows all the continents and ISS details correctly, the hoaxer's doesn't, naturally.

Now that was a significant investment of time and effort on the video analyst's part in order to bust that attempt to mislead the gullible.  And people with a hatred of NASA seem to be lining up to do this sort of stupidity - I can point to plenty of examples of proven fakery..  On the reverse side - on NO occasion has NASA been busted for removing or altering imagery like this - in fact they are often the ones who investigate it, and apart from the enormous amount of material available in their massive archives that are publicly accessible, they are happy to help get access to all original footage (and even raw data if applicable) if there is genuine reason to do so.


PS, if anyone *without a NASA hatred* wants to see the debunking I referred to above, PM me for details.

___
All my posts about Apollo are dedicated to the memory of MID - who knew, lived and was an integral part of, Apollo.

#63    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    a paid-up member of the “tin foil hat brigade”

  • Member
  • 24,410 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 23 January 2013 - 05:54 PM

View PostVerloc, on 23 January 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

@Psyche101:"Skeptics see UFO's too. I have, so has Lost Shaman. We just do not believe what we have seen is a spacecraft, and physics do not back the type of space craft described in most recollections. And not one ever has been tracked going into, or leaving the solar system. Not one, Ever."
You really think thats enough of a reason to deny the existence of aliens travelling in and out of the solar system? Because we've never seen them do it?
Physics is the way we interpret the rules and structure of this reality, it doesn't necessarily mean that we know all there is to know about it.So it's very possible that some some alien travellers have technology to bend, if not brake the rules of physics...anti-grav systems, inertial dampeners etc.

If they were unmanned, G forces and so on wouldn't be an issue anyway; not to mention that if they used anti-gravity technology in some manner, they might be able to cancel out G forces as far as it affected them.
"not one ever has been tracked going into, or leaving the solar system." Into the Solar system? That seems a bit ambitious to hope to be able to track something the size of a smallish spacecraft that far. Besides, there are many, many possibilities, from warp drive so that they only drop into "real" space when they get near their destination, to the possibility that they might not have to come so far and that they may be operating from somewere, for instance, among the moons of one of the giant planets, or the Asteroid belt.

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.


Posted Image


#64    seeder

seeder

    Nut Cracker

  • Member
  • 9,523 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK. There if you need me

  • Never forget that only the weak fish swim with the stream, and a lie travels half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes

Posted 23 January 2013 - 07:38 PM

View PostFenderJazzBass, on 23 January 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:

Seriously. UFOs could blot out the sun

Well take a look at this image

clicky
Attached File  space-debris-1-580x410.jpg   56.98K   9 downloads

and see this page for some figures and more pics if it helps

http://www.universet...em-in-pictures/


So by now you get a 'visual' of the debris problem, and it doesn't take much reasonable thought (or shouldn't)  to consider that the ISS cams will be picking up lots of these twinkling, tumbling (flashing) images of just such junk, does it now?

Sure I can appreciate that if what the ISS cameras see's - is very occasional, then anything seen 'may' be of interest, but the fact that this stuff is seen on a huge number of available vids, and tonnes of it,  and the fact that - as the link above explained - space is teeming with junk, well the first thing anyone should think.... is that it IS - just junk.

If you lived near a lonely motorway and saw one car a week  - you may start behaving like a trainspotter and look forwards, with interest, to seeing whatever vehicle came down it, but live next to a busy motorway with thousands of cars passing daily and the novelty soon wears of doesn't it? As per the ISS.

besides, if youre still unconvinced, then you need to know that 'The US Space Surveillance Network' - tracks all objects that are 5-10 cm - in low earth orbit, and also tracks everything larger than 30 cm, in the Geo-stationary ring. So, If you really wanted to know if this junk is anything MORE than just junk, or if any powered craft have even skimmed by us, or even directly entered earths atmosphere, then 'those' are the people to ask!

Edited by seeder, 23 January 2013 - 07:49 PM.

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me... It's all the rabbit poop you stumble over on your way down...
“It's easier to fool people - than to convince them that they have been fooled.”  Mark Twain

"The tragedy of life is not that it ends so soon, but that we wait so long to begin it"

#65    JimOberg

JimOberg

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,812 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2007

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:15 PM

View Postseeder, on 23 January 2013 - 07:38 PM, said:

....
besides, if youre still unconvinced, then you need to know that 'The US Space Surveillance Network' - tracks all objects that are 5-10 cm - in low earth orbit, and also tracks everything larger than 30 cm, in the Geo-stationary ring. So, If you really wanted to know if this junk is anything MORE than just junk, or if any powered craft have even skimmed by us, or even directly entered earths atmosphere, then 'those' are the people to ask!

I agree that the vast majority of dancing dots on the 'dotty' youtube videos is 'junk', but I think the origin is slightly different from the traditional 'space junk belt'. Stuff out there -- the stuff being tracked by NORAD -- is usually so small and moving crossways to the ISS flight path that it is to all intents and purposes unseeable. If close enough to register on eyeball or optics, it will flash halfway across the sky in a single scan.

Occasional distant sightings of large satellites, or even pairs or triplets of satellites [see the DoD 'NOSS' constellation] can occur by chance, but I'd judge them to be unusual. That's unless the other vehicles were associated with the orbit of the observing vehicle, perhaps arriving or departing supply drones. They are often seen and observed, and occasionally misrepresented on youtube.

The other reservoir of 'junk' is the spacecraft generated category, really small stuff really close to the vehicle, so small it rarely or ever gets radar-tracked and catalogued, so light it usually decays from orbit in days or weeks.

I made this point in my '99 FAQs', which I again recommend to new readers.
www.jamesoberg.com/ufo.html

Although mere visual tracking can provide no insight to actual distance, three factors argue strongly for very near distances:
1. At sunrise the dots usually fade into full light at the same time and rate as the main vehicle, evidence they are nearby.
2. In the minutes after sunrise, some additional dots occasionally 'appear', in the field of view consistent with the known 3D location of the projection of the shuttle's own shadow [for example]. If you're close enough to be shadowed by a vehicle, you are very close indeed.
3. At mid-range -- out over the payload bay sill for example -- some dots respond to thruster firings in the expected directions, indicating proximity and small size.

Another 'proof' of the existence of this category of objects is crew eyewitness reports, where binocular vision allows depth perception out to 40-60 ft, where there dots are observed by human witnesses.  There are also videos where the dots pass in front of background structure such as shuttle tail or station solar array.


#66    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,024 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 07:34 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 23 January 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

If they were unmanned, G forces and so on wouldn't be an issue anyway; not to mention that if they used anti-gravity technology in some manner, they might be able to cancel out G forces as far as it affected them.
"not one ever has been tracked going into, or leaving the solar system." Into the Solar system? That seems a bit ambitious to hope to be able to track something the size of a smallish spacecraft that far. Besides, there are many, many possibilities, from warp drive so that they only drop into "real" space when they get near their destination, to the possibility that they might not have to come so far and that they may be operating from somewere, for instance, among the moons of one of the giant planets, or the Asteroid belt.

No it is not ambitious at all. The only thing I can suggest is to immerse oneself in astronomy and become aware of the community. It's bigger than most realise.

Yes, indeed it would be spotted. How come if we can see them on RADAR we cannot track them leaving the atmosphere on RADAR?

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

#67    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,024 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 07:39 AM

View PostVerloc, on 23 January 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

@Psyche101:"Skeptics see UFO's too. I have, so has Lost Shaman. We just do not believe what we have seen is a spacecraft, and physics do not back the type of space craft described in most recollections. And not one ever has been tracked going into, or leaving the solar system. Not one, Ever."

You really think thats enough of a reason to deny the existence of aliens travelling in and out of the solar system? Because we've never seen them do it?
Physics is the way we interpret the rules and structure of this reality, it doesn't necessarily mean that we know all there is to know about it.So it's very possible that some some alien travellers have technology to bend, if not brake the rules of physics...anti-grav systems, inertial dampeners etc.

Pardon if I misunderstood your post, just thought I'd comment.


Why yes indeed I do. I feel with the number of reports, and claims of RADAR tracking that at least one instance should be tracked entering, or leaving the Atmosphere, and indeed the solar system Do you think it is quite acceptable that hundreds of sightings a year, thousands in total, have managed each and every entry and exit unnoticed? But we only notice them in the atmosphere?

And might I ask if you are aware that Amateur community informed NASA of the last 2 Jupiter stikes? I can tell you now that astronomy forums are not buzzing with talk about spaceships, it is considered quite nonsensical in all the ones I have visited.

You did not misinterpret, but I do not agree with you. At every moment, literally thousands of pairs of eyes are trained i the skies, not to mention satellites and other surveillance equipment. How do they miss every encounter across all time, when what they do is monitor immediate space?

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

#68    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:14 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 January 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Skeptics see UFO's too. I have, so has Lost Shaman. We just do not believe what we have seen is a spacecraft, and physics do not back the type of space craft described in most recollections. And not one ever has been tracked going into, or leaving the solar system. Not one, Ever.

me too.. when I was a kid.. back in the early 70's..


#69    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,024 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:17 AM

View PostDingoLingo, on 24 January 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

me too.. when I was a kid.. back in the early 70's..

There we go!

Believers tend to think skeptics have no experience, when in fact they have simply a different experience.

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

#70    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    a paid-up member of the “tin foil hat brigade”

  • Member
  • 24,410 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:22 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 24 January 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

Why yes indeed I do. I feel with the number of reports, and claims of RADAR tracking that at least one instance should be tracked entering, or leaving the Atmosphere, and indeed the solar system Do you think it is quite acceptable that hundreds of sightings a year, thousands in total, have managed each and every entry and exit unnoticed? But we only notice them in the atmosphere?

And might I ask if you are aware that Amateur community informed NASA of the last 2 Jupiter stikes? I can tell you now that astronomy forums are not buzzing with talk about spaceships, it is considered quite nonsensical in all the ones I have visited.

Well, maybe that's why. If people know that something is going to be laughed out straight away without even being considered, no one's going to be likely to bring it up, are they? it's like the people who proposed that the earth went round the Snu. If the weight of convention is that you'll be laughed down as a loon, no one who wants to be taken seriously will bring it up, will they?

Regarding the question of spotting them visually, it could be a very simple answer in that, due to the propulsion system they use (or the materials from which they're made), they're only visible to the naked Eye (or with natural light) under certain circumstances. After all, even to travel between planets in the solar System, let alone reach here from outside it, it'd take years at conventional speeds, wouldn't it, so again, surely the same argumrent as with interstellar travel would apply, in that they'd surely use some different technology so that they wouldn't have to waste years trudging between planets. So they'd only "pop in" to normal space when they were fairly near their destination. I mean, UFO reports commonly mention that it appeared and then disappeared without seeming to fly off, don't they, or they accelerate very, very quickly. Surely this is unequivocal proof that they use technology not of this world*.



* :innocent:

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.


Posted Image


#71    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,024 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:58 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 January 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Well, maybe that's why. If people know that something is going to be laughed out straight away without even being considered, no one's going to be likely to bring it up, are they? it's like the people who proposed that the earth went round the Snu. If the weight of convention is that you'll be laughed down as a loon, no one who wants to be taken seriously will bring it up, will they?

If spaceships were indeed common, it would not be taboo. People are there to talk about astronomy, not spaceships. If someone had a picture of a spaceship, and it was genuine, and if that was indeed the case, then it would be relevant  Never happened either as far as I know. If such did happen, it is highly likely that more than one person would have a photo, and many would know "where to look" or what to look for.  A great many people have cameras attached to their scopes. If is was a regular occurrence as purported, then I do not see how the best eyes in the sky are missing all the action.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 January 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Regarding the question of spotting them visually, it could be a very simple answer in that, due to the propulsion system they use (or the materials from which they're made), they're only visible to the naked Eye (or with natural light) under certain circumstances. After all, even to travel between planets in the solar System, let alone reach here from outside it, it'd take years at conventional speeds, wouldn't it, so again, surely the same argumrent as with interstellar travel would apply, in that they'd surely use some different technology so that they wouldn't have to waste years trudging between planets. So they'd only "pop in" to normal space when they were fairly near their destination.

We look at many spectrums what you seem to be describing sounds more like Star Treks Sub Space. Even so, the alleged invisible mother ship is till sending scout ships to earth that are photographed, and seen if UFO's are indeed ET. It strikes me as having it both ways to claim that we cannot see them, but people report them.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 January 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

I mean, UFO reports commonly mention that it appeared and then disappeared without seeming to fly off, don't they, or they accelerate very, very quickly. Surely this is unequivocal proof that they use technology not of this world*.



* :innocent:


Or proof of visual inaccuracies. I suspect the UFO's that largely exhibit outlandish manoeuvres are more likely natural phenomena. Aliens still have to obey physics, if it will kill a human, it will kill an organic alien.

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

#72    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    a paid-up member of the “tin foil hat brigade”

  • Member
  • 24,410 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:16 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 24 January 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

If spaceships were indeed common, it would not be taboo. People are there to talk about astronomy, not spaceships. If someone had a picture of a spaceship, and it was genuine, and if that was indeed the case, then it would be relevant Never happened either as far as I know. If such did happen, it is highly likely that more than one person would have a photo, and many would know "where to look" or what to look for. A great many people have cameras attached to their scopes. If is was a regular occurrence as purported, then I do not see how the best eyes in the sky are missing all the action.



We look at many spectrums what you seem to be describing sounds more like Star Treks Sub Space. Even so, the alleged invisible mother ship is till sending scout ships to earth that are photographed, and seen if UFO's are indeed ET. It strikes me as having it both ways to claim that we cannot see them, but people report them.

yes, they'd pop into visible space when they get here, but not en route. That's why they're not reported going in & out of the solar System, or our Atmopshere. I really don't see why the idea of the "alleged invisible mother ship" is treated with such Disdain; do you really not think that a ship even of considerable size (several kilometres in size, perhaps) would be easily spotted among, the say, the asteroid Belt , or the moons of some of the big planets? And there might not even have to be a mother Ship; what if they used, say, a suitable Asteroid or moon as a base? If they used time dilation technology to get from place to place, they'd be invisible from the moment they took off to the moment they arrived.

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.


Posted Image


#73    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 31,024 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:42 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 January 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

yes, they'd pop into visible space when they get here, but not en route. That's why they're not reported going in & out of the solar System, or our Atmopshere.

So you are saying that ET uses some sort of wormhole to open up inside our atmosphere? And that sort of energy surge goes unnoticed?


What supports that hypothesis? Not being able to catch a flying saucer?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 January 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

I really don't see why the idea of the "alleged invisible mother ship" is treated with such Disdain; do you really not think that a ship even of considerable size (several kilometres in size, perhaps) would be easily spotted among, the say, the asteroid Belt , or the moons of some of the big planets? And there might not even have to be a mother Ship; what if they used, say, a suitable Asteroid or moon as a base? If they used time dilation technology to get from place to place, they'd be invisible from the moment they took off to the moment they arrived.

Yes, Sky Scanner pointed out to you that we monotor the Asteroid belt. Surely you can understand that all those rocky bodies pose a danger to earth? The moon, I do not believe either, they are watched every bit as much, if not more so than the planets. I often have several of Jupiters moons come into view should I point my scope that way.
How would time dilation make them invisible?

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

#74    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    a paid-up member of the “tin foil hat brigade”

  • Member
  • 24,410 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:56 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 24 January 2013 - 09:42 AM, said:

So you are saying that ET uses some sort of wormhole to open up inside our atmosphere? And that sort of energy surge goes unnoticed?


What supports that hypothesis? Not being able to catch a flying saucer?



Yes, Sky Scanner pointed out to you that we monotor the Asteroid belt. Surely you can understand that all those rocky bodies pose a danger to earth? The moon, I do not believe either, they are watched every bit as much, if not more so than the planets. I often have several of Jupiters moons come into view should I point my scope that way.
How would time dilation make them invisible?
How many of the Moons can we actually study the surface of in detail? Are you saying that if someone was on the Moooon, (our Mooooon), and was watching through a telescope, they'd be able to keep a close enough eye on every part of Earth all the time to be able to watch every single aeroplane flying about? And that's from our Mooon; could anyone keep watch on the moons of Jupiter or Neptune closely enough to be able to spot that? Similarly, the Asteroid belt; what would be the odds on someone being able to spot some craft that might be using one of them as a base, just at the moment it takes off? considering how many Asteroids there are. How would time dilation make them invisible? I expect it's probably something to do with bending light; a similar effect has been reported by people seeing a UFO when they're directly underneath it, when people nearby couldn't it. It's probably to do with manipulation of gravity, I expect.
:yes:

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.


Posted Image


#75    SwampgasBalloonBoy

SwampgasBalloonBoy

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:1 Star State

Posted 25 January 2013 - 12:55 AM

View PostDingoLingo, on 24 January 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

me too.. when I was a kid.. back in the early 70's..

what did you see?

Edited by SwampgasBalloonBoy, 25 January 2013 - 01:22 AM.






Also tagged with ufo

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users