Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

I know what you saw.


Kurzweil

Recommended Posts

get real, will you?

What the hell??? This coming From Earl of Trumps? The same Earl who insist you believe him when he cannot back his wild stories? The Earl who flip flops his government support depending on who is telling the UFO story? The same Earl who says the Government are evil, and then refuses civilians for Government officials - who have had to front court on 21 (count em Earl!!) 21 counts of fraud. The man who refuses to understand "directors" and insist aliens were at the Battle of LA? Are you freaking having a joke with us all??????????

What you have show us is you are not flexible at all, a hypocrite, very closed minded and want pop culture to be real at the expense of facts. Jokes are supposed to be funny Earl, you failed there.

What's next for you mate? Moon landing hoax? Dem Ebil Gubberrminet types (except the ones positive to the ETH) had to be lying about that hey? After all, it's not supportive of a stupid idea about aliens is it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually called 'Unexplained Mysteries'; but that's by-the-by.

Earls reading skills being illustrated yet again, the same method he uses to read other posts too.

Damn that was funny mate :tu::rofl::lol:

Good to see more of you lately. That sense of humour deserves more exposure!! :D

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, well, I did but... some people will never admit it after they've been exposed, so....

just saying!

Again Earl!!

Describing yourself!!!

No matter how many real witnesses negate your fantasy, you still cannot see or hear them can you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool picture bro. Which artist's impression was it?

It doesn't look much like the still from the the Terry Proctor video, does it?

http://3.bp.blogspot...veryChannel.jpg

Now what about the reports that say the moon could still be seen when the formation passed in front of it; or distroted the view of the moon like contrails might?

LOL, he keeps posting Tim Leys picture, who thinks this is not aliens, but God on a spaceship.

He sure can pick em.

Not only that, but the details of Tim Leys own recollection negate one large object. Without realising it, he said the lights were separate, not part of one big thing. Earl missed all that too.

From Tim Ley's Blog - LINK

So I definitely was not on the “UFO bandwagon”, although I knew people who were. I was politely reserved on the subject of UFO’s. I would still feel uncomfortable just saying “I believe in UFOs”. In my understanding of the meaning of the word “belief’, I apply its meaning to God and to the fruit of God, which is life. I don’t believe in any objects, even UFO’s. I reserve my belief for people and for God.

Yes, that is the guy who drew the picture Earl keep flaunting as if a photograph. Further to that:

Tim Ley also confirms the observations that each of the lights were not just one light but at least two, "We noticed that one of the lights on the far side arm seemed to flicker into two lights." (Ley). Tim added, "The light I was focused on seemed to split into two lights, one above the other, and slightly separated from each other" (Ley). Another report from Prescott also pointed out that there were two lights, "When viewing them through binoculars their shape could not be determined, however, each object seemed to display two reddish-orange steady lights"(Page). Additionally, there was a report in the NUFORC database reporting each light being composed of two lights. Lastly, we read the following from an airline pilot, who was on his way to work that night, "When the lights were directly overhead, they appeared to be comprised of two lights per object, the bright light in the direction of motion and a much fainter light immediately behind it" (Davenport Database).

LINK

Which is exactly what everyone with an optical enhancement device said. Funny that......

And @ Earl

Get it Earl? THIS Guy Tim Ley is a crackpot, and you may apply the insane label, Symington just lied. Not rocket science Earl!!! Can you tell than apart NOW??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's Ok, too, NightScreams.

But here is how I look at it.

This site is called UNSOLVED MYSTERIES. and it is here for a darn good reason. Some people like the mysterious, and I dare say MOST in here do. I know I do.

If the subject matter you are discussing really is somewhat of a mystery (it should be in order to be in U-M) then I am sure that being in the whole SPIRIT of U-M is to come in and speculate on it.

We have to speculate because so many of the issues here are unresolved. But this is NOT a bad thing, it is a design of U-M and is frankly, to be encouraged.

Bang it out! Express yourself. I don't think mods would ever mind that, do you?

You notice that - in the end, you never really change anyone's predetermined mind, it seems.

Watch how quickly people will deny evidences when admitting them will make them alter their opinion. It happens all the time. And I love going up against it. LOL

especially when I'm right lOL

No, I do not come here to speculate, I come here to attempt to resolve mysteries. That is why they exist - to be solved, not to be placed on some pedestal and worshipped. Hollywood does speculation better than anonymous forum members.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not *MY* "football field" size, that is the term used by many hundreds, if not thousands of witnesses.

[/Quote]

So you did not understand at all what I stated, which is not exactly surprising by all means of respect. First of all, where are the "hundreds, if not thousands of witnesses"? We simply do not have that many coming forth, it is something made up by UFOlogy. Secondly, please explain in your own words how you think that even a single person can estimate the size of an object they have no means to gauge the distance to.

If you can explain those two, then you have something.

And how do YOU know what they saw? You "say" A-10's were flying that night. SO WHAT?

I never claimed to know what they saw. I know people with optical aids saw airplanes, I know A-10s were in the area and I know that the few witness reports that we know of are showing wild discrepancies. The few witness reports describing planes are the consistent witness reports - that tells a lot.

You then infer that that is proof that that is what the people saw and you are FULL of it.

No, it is evidence. Again, you are putting words in my mouth to suit your own deceitful purpose of promoting your imaginary tale.

All you did was open the *possibility* that is what they saw. You never proved it at all.

Never said I would. All I can offer is evidence and my own interpretation.

Here is what they saw, or close to it: post-124371-0-40041500-1409704409_thumb.\

Who exactly? Because they saw solid crafts, transparent crafts, planes and so on. So why do you latch on to that artist's description and what do you build it on?

See that Badeskov...? does that look like a damn A-10 to you?? Are you GONE, man?????

No, it looks like the imaginary tales we have seen many times before and are promoted by those that do not understand how to do research. Just like the Belgian UFO flap, those were also triangles. Not only have the Petit Rechain UFO photo from back then now been confirmed as a hoax (by the perpetrator himself), but even the most vocal promoters of that flap (Prof Meessen) later conceded that was happening was most likely an atmospheric phenomenon.

So please, grow a pair and realize that objective reality is much more complex.

They are not talking about A-10's, Badeskov, even if there were some flying that night. Those people see A-10's all the time. Why do you talk like you PROVED that they got confused when you KNOW you have zero evidence to support that.

Of course they most likely are, they just didn't understand what they were looking at.

ANd people in Mexico and New Mexico could never see those A-10's of yours, too darn far away.

And yet the call the police??? over A-10's way way off in the distance????

What on Earth are you talking about? Who the heck is talking about Mexico or New Mexico?

You have nothing but windmills, Badeskov, yet somehow you claim to "know what they saw", those poor confused dumb dumbs.

Again, I never claimed to know what they were talking about. That is your desperate attempt of saving your pathetic fantasy.

..continued in the next post...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...continued from the previous post...

Badeskov, you have an ego the size of the Grand Canyon. I swear.

I do indeed, I never claimed otherwise. It is only dwarfed by that of Mr. Harte.

And I am still waiting for the link from you. I want to see the A-10 as big as 2-3 football fields that is V-shaped, and has these homongous circles on the side.

And I already told you that I cannot give you that, because that is a ridiculous strawman. Merely illustrates that you have nothing if that is the best you can do.

Show me or be done with your ridiculousness and admit all you ever did was sling a bunch of poorly constructed *theoreticals* that have ZERO support in reality. Nothing. All you ever did was go "click click click" on the keyboard and declare, "I solved it".

You should me a serious data set based on the claims you have made so far. You can't, I know, because they are all imaginary tales based of UFO tales you want to be true.

My friend, the object in question blotted out the damn moon, the stars, everything. That is how they could gauge the size. It was HUGE. When it is right over your head, you know if it is HUGE and you know it is NOT an A-10 or a damn FLOCK of A-10's. People know what jets look like. And they are NEVER V-shaped. Stop making stuff up on-the-fly

No, but a squadron of planes are, just like ducks flying south. Please do make an effort in educating yourself so you don't come across like this - it is rather embarrassing to be quite honest.

You notice the witnesses all had the same opinion...? you did notice that, right?

No, they did not and this is where you fail. You take the witnesses you like and discard the rest (the vast majority). Witnesses saw planes, transparent triangular crafts, solid triangular crafts, some heard jet sounds, some didn't. Please tell which to discard and why. I know you cannot.

Maybe one por two can get "confused" about things but THOUSANDS???

Bullship, farmer Browne, Bullship!

There are no "THOUSANDS" - that is all made up BS by the UFO crowd and you seem willing to perpetuate that fantasy for reasons I cannot even begin to fathom.

And maybe you wish to tell the governor of Arizona he's an idiot, too. He's the one that said the craft was "not of this world" on a news interview. If you think he was in error, fine!

Now PROVE he was in error.

I have no problem with that - he was just plain out wrong. And it is him (or you, as promoting his claim) that has to prove him right. Burden of proof seems like something you are struggling with, Earl.

It' one thing to move your lips and propose a theoretical, Bad, it's another to walk the walk.

Yes, and all you have done so far is moving your lips.

Let's put it this way, Bad, I won't be holding my breathe in anticipation. you know you don't have the goods.

No, because it is you that has something to prove - but you obviously do not have the means - factually or intellectually.

Cheers,

Badeskov

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do indeed, I never claimed otherwise. It is only dwarfed by that of Mr. Harte.

:w00t::tu: :tu: :rofl::lol:

Love it :D

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not Leeloo.

That's Burning Man Leeloo.

IOW, Flealoo.

Harte

Burning Man Leeloo is good to go for me ! I will go there some day !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So someone accused you of being a "thinker"?

pfffft.

Harte, let me tell you something, you're clever, but not so clever I can't prove you a liar.

Keep it up,buddy. keep it up. "intellectual prowess" is never going to get you out of it when you start out with a lie.

So, your response to a reasonable argument is, again, "Nuh UH!!! You're lying!!!"

No surprise there. Your argument that politicians owe you an explanation for UFO sightings is bankrupt. The fact that you can't admit it says more about you than anything you post.

Harte

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John we're not talking about A SINGULAR person - we are talking about THOUSANDS of people, in Arizona, in Mexico, in New Mexico, all at the same time.

get real, will you?

ya think sometimes people can tell the truth, too?

When you or anyone else can PROVE to me they are wrong, I'll listen

Thousands of people saw the parachute flares floating above the mountains before they, one by one, sank behind them. Tens of millions saw them on television around the world. All those numbers don't make them a spaceship. Then there were a handful of people that described something that sounds like aircraft flying in formation at night. I don't dispute any of the sightings. It's just that my interpretation is much less fanciful and mudane than yours and your woo-woo crowd. Edited by John Wesley Boyd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK...so what does 2-3 football fields actually mean?

Using a literal definition - here in Australia it could mean anything from 200 to 450 metres?

But in practical terms it is meaningless. Very few people if anyone has ever seen more that one contiguous football field. It's not useful to estimate distance or area in these terms.

OHhhh, you're Ozzie!

Ok, well, a football field has 120 yards in length. No mystery when you see one all weekend long while drinking beer.

Sorry for the flippy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool picture bro. Which artist's impression was it?

It doesn't look much like the still from the the Terry Proctor video, does it?

http://3.bp.blogspot...veryChannel.jpg

Now what about the reports that say the moon could still be seen when the formation passed in front of it; or distroted the view of the moon like contrails might?

The artist , I do not know. I just wish I had a copy of it on my wall. Enchanting, isn't it?.

No, the TP video is not so detailed, I agree.

Here is how I seriously look at it all. The big picture.

Out of *nowhere* seemingly, thousands of random observers over a large swarth of land suddenly became quite alarmed over "sights" in the sky and called police. This *cannot* be conspiracy, they concern has to be legit. Now if I look for clues, and you can bet your bippy I am going to listen to people who were *there* and saw something, and I refuse to listen to pontificating self proclaimed experts tell me that they know what the witnesses *really* saw when they WEREN'T there. Ain't happening!

I read the testimonies and yes- there are some that saw this craft go right over their heads. They claim in some cases that the moon and the stars were blocked from view.

Of course I believe them, I have every reason to. Their stories dovetail nicely and that could never happen with random joksters making stuff up on-the-fly. They're telling the truth as best they can.

I believe them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, admittedly I can very well have missed that post of yours where you accomplished that feat - I don't have the luxury of reading every single post on this board. Could you please point me in the right direction? If so, I would very much appreciate it.

Thanks!

Cheers,

Badeskov

Badeskov, the ball is on YOUR court, not mine.

You made statements. I asked for links numerous times that back your claim. I want *EVIDENCE* to what you say.

If you think I am going to take seriously your off-the-wall assertion that witnesses saw A-10's and *only* A-10s simply because you dreamed it all up, I have news for you, Badeskov..... AIN'T HAPPENING.

You talked the talk, now walk the walk.

I want a link showing me an A-10 warthog, as big as two football fields, that is V-shaped, and - oh, BTW, that has been outfitted with a silencer.

If you are not up to the task, admit that your A-10 assertion is nothing but a fabrication made from an armchair quarterback that thinks he knows more than eyewitnesses.

That's all.

I've given you more than one chance to come through and I am not letting you off. You either back your claim with evidence or stop preaching to me and others like you're the authority on all things Phoenix Lights.

Yes, Badeskov, I am enjoying undressing you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying you feel you could without doubt positively identify an A10 Warthog flying at night without any optical enhancement devices? Do you know how the human eye works Earl? I think you are just lying there Earl.

You, know, I live next to a municipal airport and am within 20 miles of an international one.

I see anything from piper cubs to A-380's go right overhead *all the time*.

I could tell you I saw a piper cub go by overhead today, and you could start on me with the exact same LAME argument you have above. And half the people in here would *believe* you. I never saw anything because of optical illusions!! It's proven!! By you!!! right above!!! It's all how the human eye works, it FAILS every time!!!! we all know that!!!!

What horse manure.

It's your ego that be the real problem here. I am not the only one to not only refute you,

You refuted me??? No, you made your lips go up and down with unsubstantiated claims.

You want to refute me...? get something called EVIDENCE, not a pile of theoreticals.

but call you out on the BS you post like the claim that you have provided NOTHING to back your position, You have not Earl, not at all, but many of us have asked you to fill these claims. You are full of crap, and simply refuse to admit it, just getting adversarial with others thinking you can bully them into where you want them to be. Not gonna work with me lad. NOBODY bullies me. Get used to it.

Excuse me,... but are you suggesting that eyewitness claims are not evidence????

But unsubstantiated claims of windmills in your mind are REAL?

Oh, psychie boy, you are a different type of burger!

I gave you the timeline of Symingtons claim. Proving he was lying with his very own evidence, yet you continually say I consider him insane, you do not even read what is posted Earl, terribly hypocritical and very rude of you to expect others to converse with you amicably when you have NO intention of returning the courtesy. The very least you could do is read other peoples posts in full if you expect the same in return. If you do not, I have no idea why you annoy people here.

I swear I know nothing of this Symington thing. I must have missed our post, I guess.

Psyche, I hate laboring over one witness at a time. I like looking at the testimony *as a whole*.

If you prove Symington is a non entity, so what? you have thousands of others to refute.

Good luck!

This has nothing to do with my opinion or yours, and it has nothing to do with "being there" that is a childish rant that only make you a hypocrite as you were not there Earl.

I have freely admitted I was not there. I then went on to point out something that is very important and it is what makes ME way different than YOU and others. I rely on EVIDENCE at that scene, and you rebuke it because you don't like the implications.

You know, Sherlock Holmes was a great detective. He was never at the scene of the crime when it happened but what he did was *gather evidences*. And then he thought about the evidences and drew some conclusions. It isn't really that hard, Psyche.

And that is what I did. I looked at what people were saying and came to the conclusion that so many people screaming "foul" at the same time, in the same locale, HAS to be real. The stories dovetail, meaning, they have to be truth based.

You look at the same evidences and say, "why those lying bastids!"

See the difference, Psyche? You're not a very good detective.

That is right, you are a hypocrite, look it up and see the definition is describing your posting. Stupid childish hypocritical rants are not debating points and do not further your wild claims. You are not smart enough to even comprehend the real evidence from people who undoubtedly had the best view of the phenomena but think phantom witnesses you have heard about, but know NOTHING of, are the true recollection of events. If you are trying to be like Yam, just don't, hot n spicy is his gig, he called it first, you do not do it so well and just come of as a arrogant so and so. Because you cannot back your position, never provide supporting evidence, and try to convince others to follow an appeal to authority. You keep saying stories "dovetail" and yet have not provided on single instance to illustrate that. I have given you the detail that shows Symingtons story is a lie. You are full of crap Earl and all you want to do is champion the underdog. Stupid mate, get over it. You have the potential to actually contribute in a valuable fashion here, give up with the BS Bluster and claims you cannot back. Just be a bit more honest and you will do OK.

you have a nice night now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When all is said and done, Earl is OK. It is fun to believe. It was for me, back in the day.

Edited by John Wesley Boyd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you did not understand at all what I stated, which is not exactly surprising by all means of respect. First of all, where are the "hundreds, if not thousands of witnesses"?

Don't play "cute" with me, Badeskov, I don't like the insult.

I don't have to introduce *anything* to you, you know those witnesses exist. Don't play games.

Or we're DONE. You think I am going to run around gathering links of eyewitness accounts when I know you read them years ago?

I am not your fool to tool, Bad.

We simply do not have that many coming forth, it is something made up by UFOlogy.

Now, this is lie.

You don't recall the governor of Arizona commenting on the craft he saw, and he said on that news clip that what he saw was "... not of this earth"?

You're shapeshifting, Badeskov, you're trying to get out of it.

Secondly, please explain in your own words how you think that even a single person can estimate the size of an object they have no means to gauge the distance to.

If you can explain those two, then you have something.

Badeskov, when the craft goes right over head and it blots out the moon and stars, it's HUGE.

you want perfection from these people or what, their description does not count?

Now there's a chicken sh!t way to dismiss them! Good job, Bad, good job!!

So now you bargained it all back to "they saw nothing!!". and to think you did this from your own living room, without ever being there.

Aren't you cool, man! I am impressed.

NOT

I never claimed to know what they saw.

Yes you did. You claimed they saw A-10's. Short memory, Bad?

I know people with optical aids saw airplanes, I know A-10s were in the area and I know that the few witness reports that we know of are showing wild discrepancies. The few witness reports describing planes are the consistent witness reports - that tells a lot.

No, it is evidence. Again, you are putting words in my mouth to suit your own deceitful purpose of promoting your imaginary tale.

Never said I would. All I can offer is evidence and my own interpretation.

Who exactly? Because they saw solid crafts, transparent crafts, planes and so on. So why do you latch on to that artist's description and what do you build it on?

No, it looks like the imaginary tales we have seen many times before

I see. and you proved these tales were imaginary?? LOL!

All from your living room?

I mean, you are just the best, Badeskov!!

and are promoted by those that do not understand how to do research. Just like the Belgian UFO flap, those were also triangles.

Oh, you mean the - HeHummm, "triangles" that were on radar and that the dutch scrambled F14s six times to intercept? Yeah, I had heard about those wiley "triangles"

Weird world huh? Lots of CRAZY military people over there.

Not only have the Petit Rechain UFO photo from back then now been confirmed as a hoax (by the perpetrator himself), but even the most vocal promoters of that flap (Prof Meessen) later conceded that was happening was most likely an atmospheric phenomenon.

So please, grow a pair and realize that objective reality is much more complex.

Of course they most likely are, they just didn't understand what they were looking at.

What on Earth are you talking about? Who the heck is talking about Mexico or New Mexico?

Again, I never claimed to know what they were talking about. That is your desperate attempt of saving your pathetic fantasy.

..continued in the next post...

Ah, yes Bad.

And so I still wait for your links, your evidences. Remember, ball is in your court

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again Earl!!

Describing yourself!!!

No matter how many real witnesses negate your fantasy, you still cannot see or hear them can you.

You do understand, genius one, that all I ever posed as evidences were eyewitness testimonies, right?

I never said I was there.

I never garnered anything that was not there already.

Can't take the truth, psyche?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, he keeps posting Tim Leys picture, who thinks this is not aliens, but God on a spaceship.

He sure can pick em.

Not only that, but the details of Tim Leys own recollection negate one large object. Without realising it, he said the lights were separate, not part of one big thing. Earl missed all that too.

From Tim Ley's Blog - LINK

So I definitely was not on the “UFO bandwagon”, although I knew people who were. I was politely reserved on the subject of UFO’s. I would still feel uncomfortable just saying “I believe in UFOs”. In my understanding of the meaning of the word “belief’, I apply its meaning to God and to the fruit of God, which is life. I don’t believe in any objects, even UFO’s. I reserve my belief for people and for God.

Yes, that is the guy who drew the picture Earl keep flaunting as if a photograph. Further to that:

Tim Ley also confirms the observations that each of the lights were not just one light but at least two, "We noticed that one of the lights on the far side arm seemed to flicker into two lights." (Ley). Tim added, "The light I was focused on seemed to split into two lights, one above the other, and slightly separated from each other" (Ley). Another report from Prescott also pointed out that there were two lights, "When viewing them through binoculars their shape could not be determined, however, each object seemed to display two reddish-orange steady lights"(Page). Additionally, there was a report in the NUFORC database reporting each light being composed of two lights. Lastly, we read the following from an airline pilot, who was on his way to work that night, "When the lights were directly overhead, they appeared to be comprised of two lights per object, the bright light in the direction of motion and a much fainter light immediately behind it" (Davenport Database).

LINK

Which is exactly what everyone with an optical enhancement device said. Funny that......

And @ Earl

Get it Earl? THIS Guy Tim Ley is a crackpot, and you may apply the insane label, Symington just lied. Not rocket science Earl!!! Can you tell than apart NOW??

So, did the governor of Arizona lie?

We got a whole lotta' liars again, huh, psyche?? Hey, it got you out of it before, go for it!

wave your magic wand, "everyone who disagrees with me is a lair"

Cool beans, man, very scientifico

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OHhhh, you're Ozzie!

Ok, well, a football field has 120 yards in length. No mystery when you see one all weekend long while drinking beer.

Sorry for the flippy

Hey no dramas EOT.

What, I am taking a long time to, get at - is how can you estimate two or three football fields?

You say you stare at one regularly (I assume on the ground); but, how often stare at two or three next to each other. One field on it's own takes quite a bit of your field view; so much you probably have to turn your head to take it all in.

I'm just questioning how the mind of the observer came up with an estimate they did and why they framed it in those words.

Did they give any reference to landmarks or anything else?

I couldn't imagine giving the estimate of the size of a cloud with just my eyes. I would need to refer to the meteorological reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, your response to a reasonable argument is, again, "Nuh UH!!! You're lying!!!"

No surprise there. Your argument that politicians owe you an explanation for UFO sightings is bankrupt. The fact that you can't admit it says more about you than anything you post.

Harte

that's your opinion, and you can have it, if you really like.

All I know is, the pols work for ME, they work for EVERYBODY. 310 million of us.

YES, they owe us an explanation.

And what was this you refer to as a reasonable argument...? Run this by me again, Harte???

Are you arguing everyone is a liar or mentally unbalanced because they disagree with you?

May I remind you that you were not there, Harte.

People who were not there and would like to tinker with the idea of Phoenix lights really ought to do what any detective would do, look at EVIDENCES.

You're allowed to make sh!t up on-the-fly, Harte, but I am also allowed to totally ignore it.

No real harm intended, I just have these scrupels, ya know? I'll never say I know better than thousands of eye witnesses just because I want to stroke my own ego. It don't work that way for me. And I say that PROUDLY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The artist , I do not know. I just wish I had a copy of it on my wall. Enchanting, isn't it?.

No, the TP video is not so detailed, I agree.

Here is how I seriously look at it all. The big picture.

Out of *nowhere* seemingly, thousands of random observers over a large swarth of land suddenly became quite alarmed over "sights" in the sky and called police. This *cannot* be conspiracy, they concern has to be legit. Now if I look for clues, and you can bet your bippy I am going to listen to people who were *there* and saw something, and I refuse to listen to pontificating self proclaimed experts tell me that they know what the witnesses *really* saw when they WEREN'T there. Ain't happening!

I read the testimonies and yes- there are some that saw this craft go right over their heads. They claim in some cases that the moon and the stars were blocked from view.

Of course I believe them, I have every reason to. Their stories dovetail nicely and that could never happen with random joksters making stuff up on-the-fly. They're telling the truth as best they can.

I believe them

Not all of the reports dovetail.

I don't think anyone is suggesting any witnesses were lying. Testimony needs to be looked at objectively and the detail drawn out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey no dramas EOT.

What, I am taking a long time to, get at - is how can you estimate two or three football fields?

You say you stare at one regularly (I assume on the ground); but, how often stare at two or three next to each other. One field on it's own takes quite a bit of your field view; so much you probably have to turn your head to take it all in.

I'm just questioning how the mind of the observer came up with an estimate they did and why they framed it in those words.

Did they give any reference to landmarks or anything else?

I couldn't imagine giving the estimate of the size of a cloud with just my eyes. I would need to refer to the meteorological reports.

Oh, I see.

So you are questioning their accuracy. Well, I have no idea how to qualify their sightings. All I do is parrot their sentiment and claim it to be evidence. Anyone can try to counter that but saying they saw "nothing" because you think they are inaccurate - all without evidences, is not very scientific, IMO. They saw something that scared the crap out of them. They called police. Ergo, they saw SOMETHING impressive.

Judging by their actions, I'm kinda' guessing that what they saw was bigger than a breadbox. :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thousands of people saw the parachute flares floating above the mountains before they, one by one, sank behind them. Tens of millions saw them on television around the world. All those numbers don't make them a spaceship. Then there were a handful of people that described something that sounds like aircraft flying in formation at night. I don't dispute any of the sightings. It's just that my interpretation is much less fanciful and mudane than yours and your woo-woo crowd.

I see. so they all saw "nothing"

Gotcha', John!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see. so they all saw "nothing"

Gotcha', John!

Don't feel so bad, Earl. You're still free to believe they saw something extraordinary.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.