6153 replies to this topic

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Oh, I've learned more than I could ever wish to know about RADAR, and sines, cosines amd tangents, believe me.

And flares.
Lots and lots about flares.....  

but seriously, yes, I do agree, surely these have been well & truly and comprehensively put to bed by now. There's only one person who's still arguing about them, and no amount of arguing is going to persuade him.

[bee]

re. the Phoenix Lights......don't know if this video of a CNN broadcast featuring Fife Symington,
former Arizona Governor (at the time of the sightings) has been put here before...






While he was in office he played down the whole thing for reasons he explains in the interview,
but when out of office he said different things....like...



1:07

Quote

"I suspect that unless the Defence Department proves otherwise that it was probably
some form of an alien spacecraft."

and

2:06

Quote

"The lights were really brilliant and it was just fascinating. It was enormous.
It just felt other-worldly, you know, in your gut you could just tell it was other-worldly."

[lost_shaman]

quillius, on 26 April 2011 - 10:33 AM, said:

Hey Ls, I dont agree im afraid, I think it is a misunderstanding because your post implied boredom as mentioned three times. I never once said I was bored because I am not bored. I simply suggested the next case to be looked at being the Colares case assuming discussions on Phoenix had concluded.

As I said, I wasn't talking about you personally but rather the 'idea' in general.

If you want to talk about the '77 UFO flap in Brazil, that's fine but it won't be the first time I've discussed it.

Colares, Brazil & Operation Prato(Saucer)

[bee]

747400, on 26 April 2011 - 10:48 AM, said:

but seriously, yes, I do agree, surely these have been well & truly and comprehensively put to bed by now. There's only one person who's still arguing about them, and no amount of arguing is going to persuade him.

One person?

I think you have forgotten the hundreds (thousands?) of actual eye-witnesses.

The flare-supporters might like to think it has all been 'put to bed'....and might

like to think that everyone is persuaded and agrees with them.....but....this is probably wishful thinking...

IMO..

possibly even willful ignorance and confirmatory bias on the part of the dedicated Phoenix flare-supporters....

[quillius]

lost_shaman, on 26 April 2011 - 11:22 AM, said:

As I said, I wasn't talking about you personally but rather the 'idea' in general.

If you want to talk about the '77 UFO flap in Brazil, that's fine but it won't be the first time I've discussed it.

Colares, Brazil & Operation Prato(Saucer)

I know you said you didnt want to single me out, however that implies that you were grouping me instead, and never had i made comments that would put me into the 'bored' group alluded to by your comment. Anyhow, the 'idea' in general comment I agree with and as stated earlier it causes me frustration also.

I thought it would make a good case and one that Sky could also add to without us reverting back to Roswell in the middle of the discussion.

Thanks for the link I will go and look into it further. If you get a chance, may I ask what your general feel for the case is? Has the evidence you have looked at point to any conclusion (even if you are speculating) so far?

[booNyzarC]

bee, on 26 April 2011 - 11:17 AM, said:

re. the Phoenix Lights......don't know if this video of a CNN broadcast featuring Fife Symington,
former Arizona Governor (at the time of the sightings) has been put here before...






While he was in office he played down the whole thing for reasons he explains in the interview,
but when out of office he said different things....like...



1:07


and

2:06

Hey bee, how have you been?  Haven't seen you around for a while, hope you're doing well.

Regarding the Phoenix Lights discussion, we've been talking primarily about the video evidence which has been documented and analyzed.  The answer is conclusive, the videos are of flares dropped over the Barry Goldwater Test Range.

What good ol' Fife is talking about was from earlier that day, around 8:30 PM if I'm not mistaken.  We haven't been discussing the earlier sighting at all.

bee, on 26 April 2011 - 11:30 AM, said:

One person?

I think you have forgotten the hundreds (thousands?) of actual eye-witnesses.

The flare-supporters might like to think it has all been 'put to bed'....and might

like to think that everyone is persuaded and agrees with them.....but....this is probably wishful thinking...

IMO..

possibly even willful ignorance and confirmatory bias on the part of the dedicated Phoenix flare-supporters....

With all due respect bee, if you have compelling reasoning for how the video evidence we've been analyzing, discussing, and thoroughly dissecting isn't flares... place it on the table.

[bee]

booNyzarC, on 26 April 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Hey bee, how have you been?  Haven't seen you around for a while, hope you're doing well.

I've been ok cheers......hope you are doing well, also.....

As for the whole Phoenix Lights episode(s).......ummmmmmmmm

Lot more to it than just flares..IMO

What that 'more' is... ????....dunno

[booNyzarC]

lost_shaman, on 26 April 2011 - 07:15 AM, said:

Interesting that ALL three of your links quote the exact same sentence.

"They explained that the A-10 had released the flares at about 6,000 feet and that the flares had ignited at around 3,000 feet."

You clearly did not search far nor wide for your links. A Google search of the exact sentence above returns not only this thread (before my post here) but also your three links within the top 5 returns!

What is ironic is that you constantly accuse others of not "doing their homework" and using 'sites' that are biased. Yet you seem to think linking to the same sentence three times 'proves' something... It doesn't.

Nor does it 'prove' you can do "your homework", it proves you just searched for people who quoted Gazrok!  

Yes, that was quite funny if you ask me.

lost_shaman, on 26 April 2011 - 07:15 AM, said:

The actual quote... "(Our pilots) told me that at 6,000 feet and using those types of flares, you can see them from 150 miles away on a good night," Shepherd said."

http://kenny.anomaly..._ANG_GUILTY.htm


Here is a question for you... Could such a statement be true?

(I say it is.)

And a bonus question... If so what was the 'clue' that you picked up on?

Good job tracking down the original source of the quote lost_shaman.  When placed in context it certainly makes a lot more sense.  Don't you just love the way this statement has been taken out of context by sky and molded into a false format that gave the appearance of being an official statement?

quillius, on 26 April 2011 - 08:34 AM, said:

I havent been posting much but have still been lurking whilst doing more research. Interesting to see how these threads progress.

Sky, whilst researching it has come to my attention that you are quite knowledgable on the colares case (Brazil).

I would ask that we possibly discuss this next as quite a few people have stated that this is a very baffling case.

Quite a few skeptics have stated the same, Sky you too know of this case, and I also think that some of us 'fence sitters'/'believers' would also like to thrash this out in the hope we can understand more.

So having said all that, can we leave Phoenix, Roswell, MacArthur and BOLA alone for a while and freshen up the thread with the Colares case??

Boon, I know you suggested we talk about multiple cases but I think this seems to not work so well. I believe the detail that many people go into in every case is hard enough to follow and conclude without trying to do this across multiple cases.

Therefore if you feel Phoenix still needs discussing then we can hold back discussing Colares case until deemed appropriate.

Thanks

Hey Q, I'm totally for discussing colares.  But certainly you can see that the discussion here is driven by multiple people and will undoubtedly hop around from subject to subject.  It may not be completely organized, but that is the nature of this particular thread.

To answer your question though, yes I think there is plenty more discussion room for the Phoenix Lights as well.  We've only really touched on one aspect in detail, though our focus was on this because of the documented evidence (the videos).

[booNyzarC]

bee, on 26 April 2011 - 12:57 PM, said:

I've been ok cheers......hope you are doing well, also.....

As for the whole Phoenix Lights episode(s).......ummmmmmmmm

Lot more to it than just flares..IMO

What that 'more' is... ????....dunno

I've been doing well too, thanks for asking.

Question for you in light of your response...  Are you saying that you don't think the video tapes we've been discussing of the 'boomerang shape' from March 13, 1997 were of flares?

[synclastic44]

Not sure why everyone needs proof to believe or needs to convince the sceptics .Just think how big this universe is & how many other possible universes / dimensions there may be & then try to justify the fact that we are alone.Have faith in your own mind, after all once they thought the world was flat & believe it or not some people still do! & will never be convinced otherwise.Still it makes for interesting & amusing discussions.

[bee]

booNyzarC, on 26 April 2011 - 01:10 PM, said:

I've been doing well too, thanks for asking.

  

Quote

Question for you in light of your response...  Are you saying that you don't think the video tapes we've been discussing of the 'boomerang shape' from March 13, 1997 were of flares?

The eye-witnesses of the event...that I've seen so far (on video)...don't think they were looking at flares
and I am inclined to go with them. They were there, after all.

I don't have the time/inclination to follow all the posts on it in detail....but....as this whole episode is billed as
a MAJOR 'sighting'.....and as I do believe there is some kind of cover-up re. the whole UFO/ET issue...I suppose
flares is going to be the best thing that can be used to de-bunk it all...????

[quillius]

booNyzarC, on 26 April 2011 - 01:00 PM, said:

Hey Q, I'm totally for discussing colares.  But certainly you can see that the discussion here is driven by multiple people and will undoubtedly hop around from subject to subject.  It may not be completely organized, but that is the nature of this particular thread.

To answer your question though, yes I think there is plenty more discussion room for the Phoenix Lights as well.  We've only really touched on one aspect in detail, though our focus was on this because of the documented evidence (the videos).

Hey Boon,I believe you and a couple of others have quoted that it is one of the most interesting cases, along with Portage county, hence why I thought it would be a good discussion. I did try and discuss Portage county but the thread spiralled off in another direction, although as stated I think I will re-ignite the original thread for this to save duplicating info.

As for the thread here being driven by lots of people, I agree hence why I did state that if people were happy to discuss this case as long as Phoenix was finished with. Having read some of Bee's comments and viewing some new info on Phoenix, I think that it is not over yet, you are right there is plenty more discussion to be had, especially with the other sightings on the day as opposed to the 10.30 one that you have been discussing as flares.

So having said that, what do you make of the earlier sighting at 8.30pm? Were there any others on that day that you know of?

[booNyzarC]

bee, on 26 April 2011 - 01:29 PM, said:

The eye-witnesses of the event...that I've seen so far (on video)...don't think they were looking at flares
and I am inclined to go with them. They were there, after all.

I don't have the time/inclination to follow all the posts on it in detail....but....as this whole episode is billed as
a MAJOR 'sighting'.....and as I do believe there is some kind of cover-up re. the whole UFO/ET issue...I suppose
flares is going to be the best thing that can be used to de-bunk it all...????

Alright, well thanks for answering anyway.  If you ever find the time and inclination to legitimately investigate the analysis we've gone through and have any questions about it, feel free to ask.

Cheers.

[quillius]

synclastic44, on 26 April 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Not sure why everyone needs proof to believe or needs to convince the sceptics .Just think how big this universe is & how many other possible universes / dimensions there may be & then try to justify the fact that we are alone.Have faith in your own mind, after all once they thought the world was flat & believe it or not some people still do! & will never be convinced otherwise.Still it makes for interesting & amusing discussions.

Hello Sync and welcome, personally I do not need the proof to believe as I do so. However I would like to see proof so that my belief cant be classed as a blind faith, which I cant argue against with logical conviction.

I would also just like to point out that most people here including skeptics believe we are not alone in the universe, however the sticking poiint is on visitation, or if indeed some UFO are actually ET controlled.

[bee]

synclastic44, on 26 April 2011 - 01:23 PM, said:

Not sure why everyone needs proof to believe or needs to convince the sceptics .Just think how big this universe is & how many other possible universes / dimensions there may be & then try to justify the fact that we are alone.Have faith in your own mind, after all once they thought the world was flat & believe it or not some people still do! & will never be convinced otherwise.Still it makes for interesting & amusing discussions.

welcome to the forum.....

the whole UFO/ET business is a mine-field of info and disinfo...but we plod on.

lol