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.


* * * - - 12 votes

Tantalising Testimony


  • Please log in to reply
5542 replies to this topic

#4111    ReaperS_ParadoX

ReaperS_ParadoX

    “What’s wrong with accepting madness?

  • Member
  • 2,521 posts
  • Joined:29 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A really cold region devoid of stars

  • The boundaries which divide Life from Death are at best shadowy and vague. Who shall say where the one ends, and where the other begins?

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:13 AM

View PostThe Sky Scanner, on 10 November 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

No I don't think they are all lying or hallucinating, but whether the origin of what caused it is alien or not there just isn't enough available evidence to conclude either way. That's not necessarily the fault of the 'abductee', the brain is a strange mechanism, i'm not sure anyone could accurately relay such an event if it happened to them. I do think something other then prosaic explanations may be behind some cases, not necessarily alien, but certainly something we haven't got a handle on yet.
Hmmm okay, so it remains a mystery then what could actually be happening to them even though they claim alien. I understand that I mean If it is aliens and there is no discernable evidence It would make sense to a degree, because in my opinion why would something so technologically further ahead then us leave traces of itself behind.

COME WITH ME. OVERWHELMING POWER AND MADNESS AWAIT

THAT IS NOT DEAD WHICH CAN ETERNAL LIE AND WITH STRANGE AEONS EVEN DEATH MAY DIE

#4112    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:12 AM

View Postzoser, on 10 November 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Compare the two clips; Denbigh and Fraserburgh.  They are identical.  She saw it hovering over her house.

More footage:

http://www.ufodb.com...eo.php?code=485
Is there a link to what was reported on BBC or the Sun.  I don't see one.
There's not even statements from witnesses unless I'm missing it.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#4113    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:40 AM

View Postsynchronomy, on 11 November 2012 - 04:12 AM, said:

Is there a link to what was reported on BBC or the Sun.  I don't see one.
There's not even statements from witnesses unless I'm missing it.

The only testimony I found on the Fraserburgh incident is the short paragraph on youtube; assuming that it was what actually happened and we have no reason to doubt it.  

I'm struck by the similarity of the object in the two cases and I absolutely believe that this is the smoking gun.

Posted Image


#4114    1963

1963

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,106 posts
  • Joined:02 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:BEDLAM

  • When the day is through,and the nightsky shades the blue,and the swallows cease to sing as they fly!.......

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:23 PM

View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 07:40 AM, said:

The only testimony I found on the Fraserburgh incident is the short paragraph on youtube; assuming that it was what actually happened and we have no reason to doubt it.  

I'm struck by the similarity of the object in the two cases and I absolutely believe that this is the smoking gun.

http://www.dailymail...home-hours.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk...etland-19989427






Cheers.

When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

#4115    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

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

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:09 PM

View Postzoser, on 07 November 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

I've just watched all 8 parts.  Apart from the family drama's that appear on the clips it looks like a darned good case.

In part 5 the investigator walks the route and shows us the terrain.  In part 6 another young witness (female) appears.

In part 7 they establish that the lights were most probably not in the field but closer; they draw this conclusion from seeing a reflection on a nearby car.  I tried to see this from the short piece of footage available on YT and I couldn't see it.  

The investigator does make the point that there is 8 minutes of footage altogether.  

The only missing thing for me is more witnesses.  When walking the route I would have called on a few houses to see it anyone else saw it.

A good case.  What are your thoughts everyone?

Okay, I finally got around to watching this.  The 8 parts made me hesitate because I wasn't looking forward to spending over an hour listening to that guy, but fortunately some of the parts were short.

The biggest hump for me so far is the claimed 8 minutes of footage mentioned in part 5, starting about here around the 2 minute mark.  Petey tells us (paraphrased)...  "There is 8 minutes of footage.  I've put up probably 17 seconds of it, 13 seconds of it max.  Simply because what I don't want to do is put everything up.  There's so many debunkers and haters out there that they would pick on everything and it would soon become a worthless piece again."

What is in that 8 minutes that he doesn't want us to see?  Why does he think it might expose something to debunkers and make it "a worthless piece again?"

It is precisely this kind of deliberate obfuscation that makes UFOlogy such a joke.

Plus, my initial opinion is that his attempted day/night overlay in parts 2 and 3 is quite poorly done.  I'll have a closer look to see if I can improve upon it, but so far I'm thinking that it might simply be sparks coming out of the chimneys.  And the 'third witness' seems contrived to me, like she's just seeking attention.  I think she made up the bit about it being level at first and then tilting later, or imagined it.


#4116    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:38 PM

View Post1963, on 11 November 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

Thanks for that '63.

The statement that the lights appeared for 4-5 hours is interesting.

I noticed at approx. 0:22, there is a light which briefly appears to the left of the main grouping.
Also, at about 0:55, there is a light which appears to break away from the main group and move off to the right.
Still frames from the video:
Posted Image
Posted Image

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#4117    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:51 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 11 November 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

Okay, I finally got around to watching this.  The 8 parts made me hesitate because I wasn't looking forward to spending over an hour listening to that guy, but fortunately some of the parts were short.

The biggest hump for me so far is the claimed 8 minutes of footage mentioned in part 5, starting about here around the 2 minute mark.  Petey tells us (paraphrased)...  "There is 8 minutes of footage.  I've put up probably 17 seconds of it, 13 seconds of it max.  Simply because what I don't want to do is put everything up.  There's so many debunkers and haters out there that they would pick on everything and it would soon become a worthless piece again."

What is in that 8 minutes that he doesn't want us to see?  Why does he think it might expose something to debunkers and make it "a worthless piece again?"

It is precisely this kind of deliberate obfuscation that makes UFOlogy such a joke.

Plus, my initial opinion is that his attempted day/night overlay in parts 2 and 3 is quite poorly done.  I'll have a closer look to see if I can improve upon it, but so far I'm thinking that it might simply be sparks coming out of the chimneys.  And the 'third witness' seems contrived to me, like she's just seeking attention.  I think she made up the bit about it being level at first and then tilting later, or imagined it.
I found the omission of 8 minutes strange too.  I got the feeling that dragging it out to 8 parts, and his mention of it going viral with number of "hits" etc,  that perhaps a little revenue was hoped for out of this.  They are entitled to it, but to me it knocks the credibility down a notch.

Also, I mentioned the chimneys as a possible source of the lights in post #4078.  (sorry for not using multiquote, I usually bugger it up and have to write my posts again)

From #4078, I said:

Here's a "could be" idea I have:

"The "lights" don't seem to have a distinct shape and seem to vary in brightness and size, and flicker somewhat.
There are drifting up and to the right.
As claimed in the video, I see no "saucer" shape.

There are a few chimneys in the area, so I think it may be someone burning newspaper or something similar in their fireplace. I've seen that happen when the papers will drift right out the chimney while still burning.
I don't get a "UFO feeling" about this sighting at all."

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#4118    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:06 PM

View Post1963, on 11 November 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:


Great testimony thanks; no this is it for me I'm afraid; two almost identical objects seen several hundred miles apart in the same year.  Nothing can really explain this.  In both cases we have testimony and eye witnesses.

Extremely difficult to explain away.

Posted Image


#4119    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:13 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 11 November 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

I found the omission of 8 minutes strange too.  I got the feeling that dragging it out to 8 parts, and his mention of it going viral with number of "hits" etc,  that perhaps a little revenue was hoped for out of this.  They are entitled to it, but to me it knocks the credibility down a notch.


Why don't we email him about the other 8 mins?  I wouldn't automatically assume anything sinister is involved.

View Postsynchronomy, on 11 November 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:



Also, I mentioned the chimneys as a possible source of the lights in post #4078.  (sorry for not using multiquote, I usually bugger it up and have to write my posts).


Now there are two cases not one, any explanation has to satisfy both!

Posted Image


#4120    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 11 November 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:


As claimed in the video, I see no "saucer" shape.


Look carefully at the first couple of seconds of the Fraserburgh footage.  It looks as if a saucer shape is discernable.  The footage itself isn't as clear as it could be; poor Morag it was all she had!

Posted Image


#4121    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

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

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:25 PM

View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

Why don't we email him about the other 8 mins?  I wouldn't automatically assume anything sinister is involved.

I think you should, and report back his refusal as he almost undoubtedly will refuse.


View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

Now there are two cases not one, any explanation has to satisfy both!

Why on earth are you tying these two cases together?  You have absolutely no reason to link the two other than they are both grainy videos of lights in an apparent array.  They aren't identical zoser.  You worry me sometimes.


#4122    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:27 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 11 November 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

Okay, I finally got around to watching this.  The 8 parts made me hesitate because I wasn't looking forward to spending over an hour listening to that guy, but fortunately some of the parts were short.

The biggest hump for me so far is the claimed 8 minutes of footage mentioned in part 5, starting about here around the 2 minute mark.  Petey tells us (paraphrased)...  "There is 8 minutes of footage.  I've put up probably 17 seconds of it, 13 seconds of it max.  Simply because what I don't want to do is put everything up.  There's so many debunkers and haters out there that they would pick on everything and it would soon become a worthless piece again."

What is in that 8 minutes that he doesn't want us to see?  Why does he think it might expose something to debunkers and make it "a worthless piece again?"

It is precisely this kind of deliberate obfuscation that makes UFOlogy such a joke.


No I actually agree with him; there are too many people in this field who make mocking bird at such things and will make undue accusations.  Put yourself in his position.  If it were your footage (I accept that he is acting on behalf of the family) would you want it derided if you knew it was genuine?  

Plus what else do we need to see?  The boys apparently did not leave the room, so the remaining footage is only likely to be from the same perspective.  If there were anything vital in the remaining footage I'm sure we would have seen it.

Plus there are now two sightings of this 'thing'.  It should certainly be making people think.

View PostbooNyzarC, on 11 November 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:



Why on earth are you tying these two cases together?  


Erm; the footage is extremely similar???

Posted Image


#4123    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

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

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:33 PM

View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

No I actually agree with him; there are too many people in this field who make mocking bird at such things and will make undue accusations.  Put yourself in his position.  If it were your footage (I accept that he is acting on behalf of the family) would you want it derided if you knew it was genuine?  

I would put the whole thing out there if I thought it was genuine.  Why would I hide parts of it?  What value would that provide for the field of UFOlogy?

Don't UFOlogists always deride the government for supposedly hiding evidence?  Double standard zoser... think about it.



View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Plus what else do we need to see?  The boys apparently did not leave the room, so the remaining footage is only likely to be from the same perspective.  If there were anything vital in the remaining footage I'm sure we would have seen it.

How can we know what else is in the remaining footage without seeing it?



View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Plus there are now two sightings of this 'thing'.  It should certainly be making people think.

Again, you have absolutely no reason to link these two events together.  No reason at all.



View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Erm; the footage is extremely similar???

Not really.


#4124    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ontario Canada

  • Facinating

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:33 PM

View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

Why don't we email him about the other 8 mins?  I wouldn't automatically assume anything sinister is involved.
I just left the following comment on his part 1 of 8 video.

"Why can you not upload all of the video you have of the lights?  It would give your story more credibility.  The fact that you state on your video that you don't want to upload it for fear of it being debunked, would seem to indicate that you don't have much faith in what has been recorded.  Please upload it."

View Postzoser, on 11 November 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

Now there are two cases not one, any explanation has to satisfy both!
I disagree.  You could have two completely different sources for these lights creating a similar appearance on video.
Just because the 2 cases look similar, doesn't mean they are connected.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#4125    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:39 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 11 November 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

I disagree.  You could have two completely different sources for these lights creating a similar appearance on video.
Just because the 2 cases look similar, doesn't mean they are connected.


P >0.99

Lets see if I'm right.  Time will hopefully tell.

Edited by zoser, 11 November 2012 - 04:40 PM.

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users