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 2
TheMacGuffin

UFOs with Speeds up to 27,000 MPH

472 posts in this topic

just to add (request) regarding the HP and metalic appearance...does anyone have any case studies of this? witness statements, photos etc

and also any reasoning as to why this (these) solid appearing objects are classed as part of the HP and possibly an unknown plasma?...I am curious as to the link apart from location... :0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the 2012 Chilean case was brought up (the one with SEVEN, that's 7, videos) analysed by Bermudez and his team and supported (or at least for while) by Leslie Kean, may I ask where is the promised analysis? Where are the other videos, or even stills from them? Triangulation is pretty easy, given a decent video or seven... so why haven't they been released for public perusal?

(ooh, ooh, ask me, I think I know that one..!!!)

I call BUGS, and I'm happy to go into lengthy detail on exactly why... but that detail could be either dismissed or heavily augmented AS SOON AS THESE 7 (that's SEVEN, VII...) ALLEGEDLY CORROBORATING VIDEOS ACTUALLY TURN UP... So, where are the others?

Perhaps I'll email Kean (*again*) to see what has transpired...

This one is another lovely example of the absolute worst of ufology - and some here wonder why no credibility is offered?

May I suggest readers interested in this case read this UM thread thoroughly... Perhaps someone who likes social networking a lot more than me can visit Leslie Kean's facebook page and see what has transpired since then... I'm sure if anything had happened, she would be flogging it on the Huff. Post, where she also gets good advertising for her book... Leslie, why not pop on over to Unexplained Mysteries and let's discuss..?

Paging Leslie Kean, paging...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the 2012 Chilean case was brought up (the one with SEVEN, that's 7, videos) analysed by Bermudez and his team and supported (or at least for while) by Leslie Kean, may I ask where is the promised analysis? Where are the other videos, or even stills from them? Triangulation is pretty easy, given a decent video or seven... so why haven't they been released for public perusal?

(ooh, ooh, ask me, I think I know that one..!!!)

I call BUGS, and I'm happy to go into lengthy detail on exactly why... but that detail could be either dismissed or heavily augmented AS SOON AS THESE 7 (that's SEVEN, VII...) ALLEGEDLY CORROBORATING VIDEOS ACTUALLY TURN UP... So, where are the others?

Perhaps I'll email Kean (*again*) to see what has transpired...

This one is another lovely example of the absolute worst of ufology - and some here wonder why no credibility is offered?

May I suggest readers interested in this case read this UM thread thoroughly... Perhaps someone who likes social networking a lot more than me can visit Leslie Kean's facebook page and see what has transpired since then... I'm sure if anything had happened, she would be flogging it on the Huff. Post, where she also gets good advertising for her book... Leslie, why not pop on over to Unexplained Mysteries and let's discuss..?

Paging Leslie Kean, paging...

Hey Chrlzs, when you do email her can you also ask her to pop along to UM, I am sure she will enjoy herself here ...... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Chrlzs, when you do email her can you also ask her to pop along to UM, I am sure she will enjoy herself here ...... :)

I already tried that back in July but got no reply. Maybe she has seen my work.. :P

But I'm sure MacG has the required kudos to get a reply, and surely if he's interested in these cases (after all, he raised it..), he should contact her...

I'd be most interested to hear what has happened, as I think this is a great example of *exactly* how and why these 'cases' are so worthless, and also how inept yet pretentious these pseudo-investigative bodies are (with their lame golden handshake retirement appointments like Bermudez, what should one expect..).

I wonder if the CEFAA gets funding from Maussan? Geez, I'm cynical, aren't I.. but in this case, with dam good reason.

I'd love to be proven wrong. And now I'm holding my breath..

1

..

2

..

3

..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already tried that back in July but got no reply. Maybe she has seen my work.. :P

But I'm sure MacG has the required kudos to get a reply, and surely if he's interested in these cases (after all, he raised it..), he should contact her...

I'd be most interested to hear what has happened, as I think this is a great example of *exactly* how and why these 'cases' are so worthless, and also how inept yet pretentious these pseudo-investigative bodies are (with their lame golden handshake retirement appointments like Bermudez, what should one expect..).

I wonder if the CEFAA gets funding from Maussan? Geez, I'm cynical, aren't I.. but in this case, with dam good reason.

I'd love to be proven wrong. And now I'm holding my breath..

lol....about as cynical as I am paranoid :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here is a link to the Haines report of the 2010 UFO pictures from Chile, which once again was not in the 1950s and 1960s. He stated that these UFOs shown in the 12 pictures were surrounded by plasmas.

They were also metallic objects, flying 18 times faster than the jets, but mircom will never tell you about cases lie these either. What will he tell you about? He talks a lot but says very little.

http://www.narcap.or...NAL_summary.pdf

[...]

Good ol' Haines... Takes jpegs (with artifacts already), then blows-up parts (I'd give 100% using nonlinear interpolations), bastardizes images with various filters, and then concludes plasma!

He really should stick to the subject he probably (but not necessarily) knows better, i.e. psychology.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Haines has indeed written about plasmas and "earth lights", but don't expect someone like microm to tell you the truth about what he REALLY said. He doesn't dare, because it shoots his ideas all to hell.

what a load of nonsense... first off, don't lie... http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=238097&st=345#entry4568225 secondly, what you have mentioned below doesn't refute any of the 'published' data....

Piezo-electric Effects. Persinger has postulated in many papers that intense E-M field generated by the stress of tectonic plate movements in the Earth's crust can produce plasmoid luminous balls of varying color, size, and brief duration (typically under 15-20 seconds) (1976, 1979). Klass (1968) has proposed a somewhat less precise but similar hypothesis for the UFO phenomena involving ball lightning. Both gentlemen have failed to explain how such a phenomenon can travel high into the atmosphere (as is reported by many airplane pilots) or how the contained plasma can sustain itself for periods of time as long as those reported here (conservatively up to 20 minutes).

read up on the literature....

And, as Rodeghier (1988) has stated, ". . . there is no a priori reason to expect anything but a random distribution of piezo-electric events by hour of the day. in direct contrast with the bimodal distribution shown in Figure 1. Until such explanations are forthcoming and are supported by field observations and laboratory research the piezo-electric effect should be placed near the bottom of any list of credible explanations of the present high altitude E-M events.

what? does that even make any sense? if mark rodeghier is interested in refuting persinger's work... i would suggest he send his letters to the publishers / the journals, where persinger's work is... which data is he trying to refute? cause the only place that ^^ sentence can be found is haines' 'paper'... anyways, persinger not only hypothesizes, but follows through.... http://www.amsciepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pms.1993.77.3f.1059

Plasma Sheath Interference. A plasma is a particular region within a gas discharge containing very nearly equal number of positive and negative ions. Apparently, its neutral charge affords it some stability of character over time. It's form is thought to result from magnetic fields which establish a reasonably defined interface with surrounding air. It is well known that radio transmission can be disrupted or blocked altogether by atmospheric ionization. This occurred during the re-entry of manned spacecraft into the Earth's atmosphere as the plasma sheath surrounding the space capsule blocked radio communication.

http://authors.library.caltech.edu/5341/

so, the alien spacecrafts are surrounded by plasma?

The charged particles of a natural plasma move at random and would be expected to produce an apparently random interference pattern known as white noise or static in radio and television transmissions. Klass (1968; pg. 95) has suggested that most UFO phenomena are explained by natural atmospheric plasmas without ever considering the possibility that such plasmas are not a natural phenomenon at all but a by-product of the UFO phenomenon itself! Of course a contained ball of plasma could not reach beneath the hood of a car without being dissipated by the metal hood of an automobile or the engine cowling of an airplane, or could it?

why consider real data when you can interject speculations without the need to prove anything?

There are numerous verified accounts of ball lightning contacting a commercial aircraft in flight and somehow finding its way inside the passenger and crew compartment(s), sometimes to exit silently at some point or other times to explode with a loud clap. How the plasma enters the fully enclosed volume has never been explained but it does!

the alien craft can penetrate into third dimensional objects because they're made of 4d plasma... :unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haines and many others have reported and investigated UFOs that also have plasma sheaths, but mircom will never tell you about that either. For example:

UAP, as many of you know, is the acronym preferred by National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena in an effort to delouse the UFO stigma. Just this year, NARCAP founder Richard Haines, a retired NASA scientist, completed an extensive UAP analysis that didn’t rate any press whatsoever. And unlike the Turner-Loeb scenario, there was nothing hypothetical about it.

On Sept. 17, 2010, as five prop-job planes flew in wingtip formation some 3,500 feet above the Chilean capitol, something sublime and bizarre passed above them. No one saw it at the time, but the UAP turned up on a series of 12 photos taken over an 11-second span. In his 39-page report, the cautious but exacting Haines discovered that while the UAP maintained its relative size throughout the sequence, it appeared to change shape, which was more or less a “vertically oriented spindle or Saturn shape.”

Haines, using wind data, was able to disqualify balloons from the suspect list. With an assist from “luminance stretching,” he detected a “halo” above and around the object. That effect, he stated, “may represent heat radiating (and rising) from the core of the UAP.”

The sequence left Haines stumped. Though the skies were clear and cloudless that day, his best guess was a “luminous contained plasma.” He also noted the somewhat geometric UAP nearly morphed into translucence in several frames. “If this is an accurate observation,” Haines wrote, “then further research is called for on physical mechanisms that can produce this type of periodic ‘transparency’ or ‘cloaking’ effect.”

What may be more remarkable than the UAP, however, is the source of the photos. They were recorded by an official Chilean Air Force photographer. The images worked their way up the military chain of command and were eventually forwarded to Haines via Chile’s Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena, under a data-sharing agreement signed with the nonprofit NARCAP last year.

http://www.google.co...ue5tLAJb-V6bECg

let folks decide for themselves....

pm50c20430.jpg

"Within the “body” of the UAP imaged in Figure 2a, on the other hand, one can see several regions of different hues and luminance."

:rolleyes:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

92-figure5L.gif

so, they stretch, go through planes, change form, disappear.... :whistle:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My UFO was doing at least 27,000 MPH then to a stationary pace with my aircraft,then back out of sight ,One thing for certain IT WAS NOT PLASMA NOR NATURAL ! Stuff like that ,if your lucky happens in your life time !

Too bad we can't show them to others, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Chrlzs, when you do email her can you also ask her to pop along to UM, I am sure she will enjoy herself here ...... :)

I can see why shouldn't wouldn't respond to him, since he is not being accurate in what he says about this Chile case, or indeed many others. All you have to do is look at all the things I just posted about it and you'll see what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
since he is not being accurate in what he says about this Chile case..

they all fill these threads up with lies, distortions and garbage..

MacGuffin, either state precisely what I was not accurate about and what lies I told, or withdraw that.

Here's the ORIGINAL LINK at the Huff. Post, where both LESLIE KEAN and 'Gen.' (term used advisedly) Bermudez and his crack CEFAA team make the assertion that 7 videos recorded the information.

I quote Leslie Kean from that page:

CEFAA officials collected seven videos of the El Bosque UFO taken from different vantage points..

These images come from one of seven videos taken of the UFO..

The UFO was captured on seven cameras..

I repeat, that's SEVEN videos and that claim was made by Leslie Kean and Gen. Bermudez. MacGuffin, are you calling Leslie Kean and Bermudez LIARS? Or have you simply not read ANYTHING about this case?

YOU, MacGuffin, raised the topic, so why are you now running like the wind? Is there some reason you don't want to see the analysis and any follow up information?

I invite the readers to do their own research and work out for themselves who is deliberately spreading misinformation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*snip*

Kean said that CEFAA, the government agency which investigates strange air phenomena, found the object on seven separate pieces of video tape, which implies the object - whatever it is - is not an abberation on the video tape.

Ricardo Bermudez, CEFAA's director, told a UFO conference last month that the spots were caused by an object traveling at speeds in excess of 4,000 mph.

Kean picked out a few elements that make this sighting a little special, in particular that the Government investigated the footage so thoroughly, and found examples of the object on seven pieces of film.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2EPQWDleH

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

http://www.google.co...vghnVXUVo4CuNbg

Edited by Saru
Removed personal attack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this. Don't just believe what people *snip* are posting on here about UFOs.

http://www.google.co...2ObHeaZhDh4ATvA

Bermudez is the director of the Committee of Studies of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena (CEFAA), which is an arm of Chile’s version of the FAA. During their analysis, Bermudez says CEFFAA first went to skeptical astronomers. Despite their disbelief in UFOs, the astronomers estimated the speed of one of the objects racing across the screen during the filming of the F16s to be moving at 10,000 KM (6213 miles) per hour.

According to OpenMinds.tv:

Gen. Bermúdez showed the analysis done by the astronomers from CEFAA’s External Committee of Advisors, which established that the object was not a meteoroid, a comet, reentry of space junk, a bird or an airplane. Furthermore, the scientists’ report stated the UFO undertook “a risky maneuver in front of the Halcones from west to east” and that it did “a flight maneuver at low altitude and high speed.” The report also established that “the object shows light and shadow effects of metallic like reflections and shows ellipsoidal shape” and that “the land observers do not detect the object in spite that it passes over their heads, thereby it is not accompanied by a sound wave.”

While preparing for his talk behind stage, the General told me that he had actually been skeptical of UFOs, but that this case had finally convinced him that there was something mysterious to the phenomenon. He told the audience at the UFO Congress that he is convinced that it is very important that the study of UFOs continue. Furthermore, he believes that an agency should be established to investigate the issue on a global scale, preferably within the United Nations.

Edited by Saru
Removed namecalling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad we can't show them to others, huh?

No need Sweet , we that see need not prove what we saw, THose who cant never see whats there to Look at !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, as Bruce Maccabee points out, not all the "fireballs" were green or even fireballs at all. I have said this many times. In January 1951 at Artesia, New Mexico, scientists launching a Skyhook balloon say a dull white object that was larger than their balloon and flying above it, which is to say over 110,000 feet.

Then from another location they say two, dull gray objects fly around the balloon. They were flying at very high speeds and appeared to tilt on edge when they made their turn.

*snip* What was flying around in 1951 that could do things like that, and if someone says "plasmas" or meteors to me one more time I am just going to do a Primal Scream.

Anyone who keeps bringing up "explanations" like that is talking utter nonsense, so naturally all they can do is simply ignore or dismiss all the evidence.

http://books.google....ved=0CDkQ6AEwAw

Edited by Saru
Yet more namecalling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Michael Swords points out, Project Twinkle was not really about investigating only the "green fireballs", but also the more "conventional" UFO reports, which were quite common in New Mexico at the time.

Dr. William Carter at Los Alamos had reported that UFOs had tripped off the radiation detectors on at least four occasions, which was reported to the Air Force's Cambridge Research Labs, the same organization that was in charge of Project Twinkle. They also did the same things at Mt. Palomar Observatory and Oak Ridge at this time--1949-51.

At Holloman Air Force Base, the military wanted permission to fire "live ammunition" at these UFOs, but I do not believe it was granted at this time.

http://books.google.com/books?id=_Xab1hqwco0C&pg=PA105&dq=project+twinkle&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RuDCUP31IIK29QTTzYGAAw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nowadays of course we do have planes that can fly like this, no matter whether they are called Aurora, Dark Star, the Blank Manta, the TR series planes or whatever. Things like these have been seen over the years, but they are not "true" UFOs.

auroracontrail1.jpg

JPGS%5CFuture%5Cwedgecrop2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, it's a lot harder to get pictures and eyewitness reports about these secret military projects that it is about real UFOs, and of course virtually no military people are going to come forward to talk about these really classified projects--not like they talk about UFOs.

I know that I would never talk about such things if I knew about them, whereas I don't mind telling what I know about UFOs. There's a big difference between these things in my book, and I think secret military projects should be secret, but I think UFO reports should be public knowledge.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread cleaned

Enough with the name calling and personal attacks please.

If you can't put your point across without resorting to post after post of derogatory insults then it's time to reconsider the merits of the point you are trying to make and your participation in this discussion. Let's keep the responses civil and respectful.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread cleaned

Enough with the name calling and personal attacks please.

If you can't put your point across without resorting to post after post of derogatory insults then it's time to reconsider the merits of the point you are trying to make and your participation in this discussion. Let's keep the responses civil and respectful.

I should learn not to respond to these constant provocations, which are designed only to irritate me and (they hope) get me kicked off of here. I understand that very well, so now I really am going to put more of them on Ignore--permanently.

And yes, I know they are getting a laugh out of this.

Edited by TheMacGuffin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, there really were a number of these videos about the Chile UFOs of 2010, which were all removed. None of them even wanted to discuss these so what is it that they don't want you to see here? Let's assume that it's not just bugs and birds, shall we? There were quite a few of these videos taken from different locations showing the same UFOs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=bB8AxktVm8Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There may well have been seven of these videos of the Chile UFOs, and I have found three or four in the Internet. What is it that they don't want you to see in these?

[media=]

[/media]

Edited by TheMacGuffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They even imply that Gen. Bermudez is not a representative of the Chilean government when he discloses these UFO reports, but he is. What is it they don't want you to know?

"Think for a moment, if one experienced commercial pilot reports to me that something flew across in front of his airplane, I pay careful attention; but now if a second commercial pilot reports the same a few seconds later, I become interested; but if a third pilot, a military one, confirms the same fact, I tend to believe it. In this case, do we have one UFO close to the airplanes, or we have two UFOs? If we have one, its incredible speed doesn’t correspond to anything we have now."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.