Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
UM-Debate-Bot

Is this really an unexplainable object ?

34 posts in this topic

thefinalfrontier vs Moonie2012

This is a formal 1 vs 1 debate, full details on how the debate system works can be found in our Debates FAQ. The debate will begin with an introductory opening post from each participant followed by 4 body posts and finally a conclusion.

The computer has randomly chosen Moonie2012 to post first.

thefinalfrontier is arguing in favour of ufo hovers for six hours

Moonie2012 is arguing against Moonie 12 says its fake with cars parked in a mountianside

Once the debate is complete the thread will be open to member comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vmwwUr1e2M

It's my position that this video could be something completely terrestrial and explainable, not an alien ship or any ship, for that matter.

While at first glance it looks like something hanging in the sky, I will show that there could be other, far more mundane explanations for what it is.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My position is that object in the sky hovering for six hours could be not of this earth ot at least that we are familiar with,,, It is a huge craft and the outline of it can be seen, You can see cars driving below it as it hovers over a light pole throughout the video,

Nobody has mentioned aliens on my side of the argumant, Simply an object hovering above a light post,

Also at one point in the video its obvious that the craft can plainly be seen drifting in front of some branches and you can see the camera man has not changed position, The craft drifted in front of the branches and not the guy filming it,

The man who narrated this explanation as to what we are seeing says of course no media will report it and this I know because media is all owned by big money and that big money is the ones that tells who to film what and they already know enough not to upset the government thus the silence, Its all about big money is why this stuff never makes national news,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I first must apologize to everyone reading - I'm at work right now, so my responses may be delayed from time to time.

Anyway, I'll address this point by point.

My position is that object in the sky hovering for six hours could be not of this earth ot at least that we are familiar with. It is a huge craft and the outline of it can be seen

The object does not have a definitive outline, nor can the size be determined - it is very poor video. My assertion is that it's an illusion of lights from a terrestrial source, which would also have no definitive outline.

You can see cars driving below it as it hovers over a light pole throughout the video

It is only perspective that makes it appear to have cars driving below it - if it were something up on a hillside or down in a valley in the distance, it would still appear to be above said cars. Also, it isn't hovering over the light post - it is slightly to the left of it, and is off in the distance, judging by the resolution. I also should mention that it NEVER MOVES from it's spot in relationship to that light post.

Nobody has mentioned aliens on my side of the argumant, Simply an object hovering above a light post

I believe you just did that in your opening statement - "the object could not be of this Earth" - sounds pretty alien to me.

Also at one point in the video its obvious that the craft can plainly be seen drifting in front of some branches and you can see the camera man has not changed position, The craft drifted in front of the branches and not the guy filming it

These "branches" mentioned are nothing more than lens flare from the headlights of the passing cars.

On the note of passing cars, why don't any of them stop to look at this huge "mothership" in the sky? Wouldn't most people want to see what some crazy guy on the road was filming and look out the window? Since multiple cars keep on going by, it can only be assumed that there was nothing to see.

The man who narrated this explanation as to what we are seeing says of course no media will report it and this I know because media is all owned by big money and that big money is the ones that tells who to film what and they already know enough not to upset the government thus the silence, Its all about big money is why this stuff never makes national news,

Frankly, I find this irrelevant to the discussion. UFO clips are seen on the news all the time. The reason this one wasn't on the news was because it wasn't interesting.

One major point that needs to be made - this "huge mothership" was hanging over a large city for six hours, yet no one said a word about except this guy with his bad cellphone video. SIX HOURS - why didn't he tell anyone at the time? Why didn't anyone else see it or film it?

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The object does not have a definitive outline, nor can the size be determined - it is very poor video. My assertion is that it's an illusion of lights from a terrestrial source, which would also have no definitive outline.

Anyone who watches the video CAN make out the outline of the craft,

It is only perspective that makes it appear to have cars driving below it - if it were something up on a hillside or down in a valley in the distance, it would still appear to be above said cars. Also, it isn't hovering over the light post - it is slightly to the left of it, and is off in the distance, judging by the resolution. I also should mention that it NEVER MOVES from it's spot in relationship to that light post.

It is not a perspective of cars driving below it, It is a fact that cars are driving below it, And as far as knit picking the hovering over a lightpole means nothing in this debate, there was a lightpole used as reference, The craft can plainly be seen drifting behind some brances as it moves away from the lightpole, This simply is not a case of car tail lights ot ATVs on a hillside it is plain to see its not that distance away,

I believe you just did that in your opening statement - "the object could not be of this Earth" - sounds pretty alien to me.

If your gonna make a ststement like that then be truthful about it, Did I not say OR that we are familiar with?

The government is full of lies and black ops.

These "branches" mentioned are nothing more than lens flare from the headlights of the passing cars.

On the note of passing cars, why don't any of them stop to look at this huge "mothership" in the sky? Wouldn't most people want to see what some crazy guy on the road was filming and look out the window? Since multiple cars keep on going by, it can only be assumed that there was nothing to see.

The person filming this on camera was not on the roadside, He is in fact quite some distance from the road where this craft was,, Most likely reason others did not stop to film it could be that they did not have a camera with them or the simply did not notice the thing, I see this as a possibility,

UFO clips are seen on the news all the time. The reason this one wasn't on the news was because it wasn't interesting.

Sure you will see the local independant news papaers and stations mention ufos but you will never see it on a national television show, Big money owns them all and they dictate whats to be aired,

One major point that needs to be made - this "huge mothership" was hanging over a large city for six hours, yet no one said a word about except this guy with his bad cellphone video. SIX HOURS - why didn't he tell anyone at the time? Why didn't anyone else see it or film it?

I supose that this person filming the object was using his cell phone and did not want to lose track of the craft so he kept filming and did not make a phone call, Thats pretty elementarty for anyone using the camera to take pictures of something,

Edited by thefinalfrontier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who watches the video CAN make out the outline of the craft

Here's a screen grab of it:

linked-image

I don't call that a definitive outline. While it has a general shape, there is nothing about it that says it's a huge, well defined, solid object. Even the light post down in the corner (which is probably much closer to the camera) is of such bad quality, it would be difficult to tell what it was if we didn't already know.

We can't tell specific shape from this video.

It is not a perspective of cars driving below it, It is a fact that cars are driving below it, And as far as knit picking the hovering over a lightpole means nothing in this debate, there was a lightpole used as reference, The craft can plainly be seen drifting behind some brances as it moves away from the lightpole, This simply is not a case of car tail lights ot ATVs on a hillside it is plain to see its not that distance away

linked-image

Look at this picture. Notice the people in the foreground. In reality, are they below that island out there? Is that island up in the sky? Obviously not on both counts - but the PERSPECTIVE makes it look like they are.

I'll admit, the light post really doesn't have any bearing, other than showing that it doesn't move at all. As for the branches you keep mentioning, I would have to ask you to point these "branches" out with a screen grab or exact time, since I do not see anything like that. Like I said before, I see lens flares that could be construed as branches, but they are NOT branches.

As for the distance of the object from the camera, I would have to ask you to please tell me how you can know this with ANY amount of certainty. Do your eyes work better than mine? I can't tell for sure how far away it is. I have an idea, but it isn't "plain to see" by any means.

We can't tell specifics about the perspective, background or distance from this video.

If your gonna make a ststement like that then be truthful about it, Did I not say OR that we are familiar with?

The government is full of lies and black ops.

I WAS truthful - you said it. Just because you throw an "or" in there doesn't mean you didn't allude to aliens being involved.

The talk of conspiracy has NOTHING to do with the debate, which is about analyzing the worth of this evidence.

The person filming this on camera was not on the roadside, He is in fact quite some distance from the road where this craft was,, Most likely reason others did not stop to film it could be that they did not have a camera with them or the simply did not notice the thing, I see this as a possibility

It shows that he's standing a few feet from the road, that isn't hard to discern (unlike most of this video). You say others didn't stop because they had no cameras? That's illogical and silly. Since when do people ignore amazing things simply because they don't have a camera? Perhaps some people wouldn't notice a huge mothership in the sky, but if they DID notice, they aren't going to not stop and gawk simply because they have no cameras.

Sure you will see the local independant news papaers and stations mention ufos but you will never see it on a national television show, Big money owns them all and they dictate whats to be aired

More irrelevant conspiracy nonsense.

I supose that this person filming the object was using his cell phone and did not want to lose track of the craft so he kept filming and did not make a phone call, Thats pretty elementarty for anyone using the camera to take pictures of something,

Completely illogical. Surely you can see how far you are reaching with this - the object was supposedly there for 6 HOURS. The video is around two minutes. What was he doing for the other five hours and 58 minutes? Not telling anyone else, obviously.

This video is NOT proof of anything other than bad camera work. It cannot be used to conclusively prove that the object in question is some sort of craft up in the sky, or that it is there for six hours. It falls apart under analysis and the elements of doubt are far too great.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After doing some massive research I come to the conclusion that we will not ever know the truth in this story, That said I just yesterday watched ufo hunters and they did touch base on a ufo hovering over mineapolis but they said it hovered for 9 hours but they did not go into any detail, That said i think something big happened there,, I done alot of searching for other video sources and could only find the one video on many web sites so therefore I back out respectivly, I still believe there is something to this article but the lack of evidence speaks loads IMO,

with all do Respect Moonie 2012, you have brought Quite an effective argument but the issue still remains unknown,

Best Regards;

TFF

Edited by thefinalfrontier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept your concession and the "win" since you forfeit. You're right, the lack of evidence DOES speak loads.

I think you agree that this just goes to show that this video can be interpreted in different ways, so it's impossible to use it as proof of an otherworldly craft or unknown technology.

The people who are responsible for it can't even get the facts straight or put out details, even though they supposedly had 6-9 hours to film and get the word out - that just smacks of hoax or later realizing they were wrong.

Well, I guess we're done here. Mods can open it up for comments if they want.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both for participating, this debate is now open to member comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was .. short....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the video, and frankly, the position that it's car lights on a mountainside seems weak when one views the video. I grant that the shape is not clear and that one can't really make more of it than some sort of outline, it is still a definite shape and not just lights hanging there. However, thefinalfrontier damages his stance by saying the UFO "drifts" into branches when even cursory observation of the video makes it clear there are no branches between the videographer and the object and all we are seeing is lens flare from the lights of the passing cars on the camera's lens. Additionally, the fact that no one else seems to notice this huge ship generates several questions: 1. Was this object actually a large object in the distance or a small object nearby? 2. Was this "object" a trick of light and distance and are we really just looking at a mundane object being viewed from a weird angle?

Edited by IamsSon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I watched the video, and frankly, the position that it's car lights on a mountainside seems weak when one views the video. I grant that the shape is not clear and that one can't really make more of it than some sort of outline, it is still a definite shape and not just lights hanging there. However, thefinalfrontier damages his stance by saying the UFO "drifts" into branches when even cursory observation of the video makes it clear there are no branches between the videographer and the object and all we are seeing is lens flare from the lights of the passing cars on the camera's lens. Additionally, the fact that no one else seems to notice this huge ship generates several questions: 1. Was this object actually a large object in the distance or a small object nearby? 2. Was this "object" a trick of light and distance and are we really just looking at a mundane object being viewed from a weird angle?

I'm not 100% on the "cars on a hill" angle, but I do think they are some sort of ground-based lights, either on a hill or in a valley. I believe it's an illusion of light and distance.

And yes, the fact that nobody else sees it when it's supposedly over a huge metropolitan district for 6-9 hours is more suspect than anything to me.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you agree that this just goes to show that this video can be interpreted in different ways, so it's impossible to use it as proof of an otherworldly craft or unknown technology.

Ahhh BUT, The fact remains this object is on a video and it is an unidentified object so you see Moonie2012 your presentation IMO did not add anything to the debate, I simply could not find any other video of this object and that is why I pulled out, Nothing has been gained thru all this, Its all just simply speculation and will remain thataway until it proven to be a hoax,

Regards;

TFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ahhh BUT, The fact remains this object is on a video and it is an unidentified object so you see Moonie2012 your presentation IMO did not add anything to the debate, I simply could not find any other video of this object and that is why I pulled out, Nothing has been gained thru all this, Its all just simply speculation and will remain thataway until it proven to be a hoax,

Regards;

TFF

In debate language - you gave up. You conceded. You lost. Now you make excuses? Don't make it worse.

Not being able to find more video of this event isn't what the debate was about, and was no excuse for you to quit - it was about the validity of THIS video.

Saying my argument meant nothing after quickly giving up on trying to refute it is beyond lame, and shows your true colors. Grow up and admit you lost.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In debate language - you gave up. You conceded. You lost. Now you make excuses? Don't make it worse.

Not being able to find more video of this event isn't what the debate was about, and was no excuse for you to quit - it was about the validity of THIS video.

Saying my argument meant nothing after quickly giving up on trying to refute it is beyond lame, and shows your true colors. Grow up and admit you lost.

Ya know Moonie 2012? I simply gave up for lack of evidence as you can see in the post I made, Hence the search for other evidence and that dont make it wrong one bit, Its all part of the argument and here you are acting as if this is a prize to you and quite frankly I have had about enough of your offending comments,

There will be no further comments from my end, Its over Moonie2012, Get on with life,

Regards;

TFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ya know Moonie 2012? I simply gave up for lack of evidence as you can see in the post I made, Hence the search for other evidence and that dont make it wrong one bit, Its all part of the argument and here you are acting as if this is a prize to you and quite frankly I have had about enough of your offending comments,

There will be no further comments from my end, Its over Moonie2012, Get on with life,

Regards;

TFF

The only "prize" I was ever looking for was for you to open your mind to other possibilities that you may not have considered - that, and for you to quit trying to make me look like a moron when I offer up various plausible possibilities other than "not of this Earth" for some of these videos.

Sadly, it appears that prize will never be won. You simply refuse to see anything other than the most unlikely possibilities - and if I'm the one who dares to suggest it's something explainable, I'm somehow an idiot who can't possibly ever be right.

For your own good - open your mind to the ordinary once in a while.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In debate language - you gave up. You conceded. You lost. Now you make excuses? Don't make it worse.

Not being able to find more video of this event isn't what the debate was about, and was no excuse for you to quit - it was about the validity of THIS video.

Saying my argument meant nothing after quickly giving up on trying to refute it is beyond lame, and shows your true colors. Grow up and admit you lost.

I have to say Moonie, your tone (not only in this thread) is often very defensive, I don't mean to offend but I do find it quite strange how you seem to take the challenge of debunking UFO's to an almost grail-quest-esque level sometimes... It sometimes seems that winning is more important than actually investigating the problem.

Again, i dont mean this personally, I'm just suggesting that maybe you should breath and count to ten before you write some of your posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived in Minnesota for eight years, and i always!!!! saw weird stuff in the sky! So with that said i do believe if they wanted to hover for six hours they had reason and will

to do so! Strange sky up there, you can see millions of stars on a clear night. I lived

90 miles south of the Canadian border, that is 4 hours north of Minneapolis. Thanks

for listening. LS :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say Moonie, your tone (not only in this thread) is often very defensive, I don't mean to offend but I do find it quite strange how you seem to take the challenge of debunking UFO's to an almost grail-quest-esque level sometimes...

You're absolutely right. I don't know why it bothers me so much when some people fail to see the more mundane explanations and blindly accept the incredible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're absolutely right. I don't know why it bothers me so much when some people fail to see the more mundane explanations and blindly accept the incredible.

absolutely, fair enough.... I hate it when im trying to get a point across and the person reading it seems to just miss the emphasis in what im saying... I find it happens a lot with my uni essays.

Peace dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're absolutely right. I don't know why it bothers me so much when some people fail to see the more mundane explanations and blindly accept the incredible.

Moonie, I'm not directing this at you here but by that same token ,many UFO cynics are also guilty of blindly projecting their own narrow minded preconceptions onto events/incidents and wilfully (and conveniently) ignoring glaring discrepencies,factual inaccuracies and blatant contradictions about certain cases.

I'm not talking about true,objective,open minded scepticism here, just the kind of cynical 'lazy prejudice' armchair debunking thats often practised by people who haven't even bothered looking into the subject for themselves and thus have a hard time holding informed,balanced opinions.

These people do the impartial study of the subject a great disservice and I think they are just as bad (and a mirror image of) people who think 'everything 'is a UFO.

Perhaps the best place to put oneself when looking into this subject is somewhere in the middle of extremely naive,open minded gullibility and hysterically prejudice,close minded cynicism.

Once again this is not directed at you-I'm just having a rant :)

Cheers Karl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offence to either participant intended.

You both debated reasonably well. Unfortunately it came down to the individual audience members' own interpretations of what they saw that shape to be.

So in effect, you both let the picture try to speak for you, rather than sway the to audience to your position with your presentation of the arguments for why you take that position.

Regarding that, it would be unfair to award any 'marks', so to speak, to one side over the other, since I don't see a definitive alien spacecraft in that video.

Instead I see something blurry, very indistinct that, squinting the right way, could be anything from an alien spacecraft, to car tail lights, to red LEDs on a toy used as a hoax. Personally, I'm inclined to think it is not a spacecraft.

Edited by Evangium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

linked-image

Daytime image

linked-image

I don't think anyone has offered a concrete mundane,rational explanation as to what this object was (or is) so it remains unidentifed. ;)

Edited by karl 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
linked-image

Daytime image

linked-image

I don't think anyone has offered a concrete mundane,rational explanation as to what this object was (or is) so it remains unidentifed. ;)

Where did you find that daytime pic - can the source be verified? Is there a a bigger pic that includes the surroundings a little better?

I do see a hill in the background too, which is extremely relevant - also that photo wasn't taken in the exact same spot the guy was standing, the angle is way off.

linked-image

It could also be a completely different post - if it's a hoax/known object, we can't expect them to be honest about where they took it.

Edited by Moonie2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where did you find that daytime pic - can the source be verified? Is there a a bigger pic that includes the surroundings a little better?

All fair points,the full screen daytime image is shown below.

At one point in the video you can see the lights of an oncoming car which put the objective into perspective:

linked-image

The daytime image is from this site,although you are right that the angle appears slighty different:

http://www.jerrypippin.com/UFO_Files_rob_Kritkausky.htm

linked-image

According to NUFORC,there does seem to be multiple sightings reported in both Arizona and ST.Paul on the relevant dates.

http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxe200408.html

It has been suggested that the object is in fact wild fires raging on a distant hill but as yet,nothing has been proved definitively either way.

Cheers Karl

Edited by karl 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.