Monday, July 25, 2016
Contact us    |    Advertise    |   Help   RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon
    Home  ·  News  ·  Forum  ·  Stories  ·  Image Gallery  ·  Columns  ·  Encyclopedia  ·  Videos
Find: in

Debunking the Phoenix Lights flare theory



The flare theory is by far the most common theory and the official explanation for the Phoenix Lights.

   

Recent comments on this video
Comment icon #29 Posted by booNyzarC on 29 April, 2011, 23:37
Not really. It's simply that I have seen these analyses done time and again and then I have seen other analyses done that refute them. I understand that one set of analyses say one thing. That's nice. But unless one only listens to one and not any other, one is left with the realization that these analyses are just opinion and not fact. And to latch onto them as if they are fact is a very much incorrect thing to do if one actually wants to approach the subject in a logical manner... Would you mind pointing me to any of the analyses which you believe have successfully refuted the Maccabee analy... [More]
Comment icon #30 Posted by AlienDan on 30 April, 2011, 1:17
I copied several frames from the video and put them together, did some stabalizing in photoshop to keep the ground level, and you can clearly see that the "lights" are descending and moving just like flares. They are not staying in one place like people seem to think. Flares.
Comment icon #31 Posted by booNyzarC on 30 April, 2011, 3:55
I copied several frames from the video and put them together, did some stabalizing in photoshop to keep the ground level, and you can clearly see that the "lights" are descending and moving just like flares. They are not staying in one place like people seem to think. *Awesome Animated GIF snipped but linked because that's how awesome it is!* Flares. Very impressive AlienDan! Further analysis which confirms the flare conclusions previously made. Why is it that when people actually take the time to analyze this stuff they come up with the same conclusions and the people that try to perpetuate t... [More]
Comment icon #32 Posted by mcrom901 on 30 April, 2011, 4:26
I'm not aware of anyone claiming that the earlier sightings on March 13, 1997 were of flares. Aside from one bit of video ( ... tell me that doesn't look like planes in formation...), all we have to go on for the earlier sightings is witness testimony. Comparing the video with the testimony demonstrates a pretty compelling discrepancy. Add to that mix the fact that Mitch Stanley viewed the earlier sighting through his Dobsonian telescope and reported that it was planes flying in formation and one has to wonder about the accuracy of the other eye witness testimony related to the earlier events ... [More]
Comment icon #33 Posted by booNyzarC on 30 April, 2011, 5:05
cheers boon.... i don't think your initial video link is re the '97 sighting.... check here.... link n here is mitch stanley with his scope... http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/azconc.htm Awesome information mcrom, thanks man. I've seen clips from that Terry video before, but I've never seen this Discovery piece and to see him describe it helps quite a bit. And the picture of Mitch Stanley with his telescope is awesome too, I'm tired of linking to the wiki images. Oh, and by the way, I still haven't seen any waterfall in that other picture. I couldn't find Waldo either, but I really looked ... [More]
Comment icon #34 Posted by Wookietim on 30 April, 2011, 5:23
Would you mind pointing me to any of the analyses which you believe have successfully refuted the Maccabee analysis? Because I haven't seen one yet. Or perhaps you can share with me what is incorrect about Maccabee's analysis? I am only quoting portions of these pages, however there is other points to consider on the links as well. http://www.skywatch-research.org/ufo/plvideo.htm : Dr. Macabee does not adequately address the differences between the observed mystery lights and the type and color of flares used by the Maryland ANG. The flares allegedly dispensed by the A-10s is called LUU-2 and ... [More]
Comment icon #35 Posted by booNyzarC on 30 April, 2011, 6:21
I am only quoting portions of these pages, however there is other points to consider on the links as well. http://www.skywatch-research.org/ufo/plvideo.htm : This link of yours is to the Bill Hamilton and Tom King analysis. Maccabee responded to this analysis here. In particular, the quote you extracted has to do with the coloration of the lights as seen by the naked eye (but ironically, not captured on video...) which were of a golden or orange hue. Maccabee responded as follows: H&K point out that the colors of the lights seem to be too orange to be magnesium flares of the LUU-2 type, si... [More]
Comment icon #36 Posted by Wookietim on 30 April, 2011, 16:52
This link of yours is to the Bill Hamilton and Tom King analysis. Maccabee responded to this analysis here. In particular, the quote you extracted has to do with the coloration of the lights as seen by the naked eye (but ironically, not captured on video...) which were of a golden or orange hue. Maccabee responded as follows: Maccabee offers the possibility that light traveling through the atmosphere could be reddened by dust and moisture in the atmosphere. Certainly, depending on what is in the atmosphere, this is definitely possible. That doesn't mean it happened that particular night, but i... [More]
Comment icon #37 Posted by booNyzarC on 30 April, 2011, 17:54
So, to sum up your response : While you admit to response Maccabee made to the questions is complex you have essentially decided that only Maccabee is correct and there are no possible arguments against him. May I point out that you are treating his analysis the same way that extremely religious people treat the bible? "Only his analysis is correct, only he can be listened to, everyone else is wrong" in other words... You are familiar with the term falsification, yes? For Maccabee's analysis to be disconsidered, it would need to be adequately falsified. It hasn't been. Not by anyone that I'm a... [More]
Comment icon #38 Posted by booNyzarC on 30 April, 2011, 18:35
Interestingly, neither seems to actually match the picture I presented. And I could composite a few pictures together to show an alien spaceship from betelguese... but that doesn't prove much either... You could composite some pictures to show an alien spaceship from betelguese, funny how sarcasm swings both ways. But just to add a little more clarity on this particular point... the picture you presented includes more of the lights from the K video array than my animated GIF because the animated GIF only includes the last part of the video showing 6 of the 9 lights as they disappear from view ... [More]


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Last updated forum topics
Forum icon 
Recent news in this category
'Broad Haven Triangle' house goes up for sale
Posted 7-13-2016 | 6 comments
A house at the center of the 1977 Broad Haven Triangle UFO mystery has recently gone on the market.
 
Have UFOs been monitoring nuclear sites ?
Posted 7-11-2016 | 90 comments
For decades, military personnel at US atomic weapon sites have reported sightings of strange objects.
 
Video shows 'UFO' being carried by a truck
Posted 7-9-2016 | 26 comments
Footage has surfaced online of a truck hauling what looks like a flying saucer along a US highway.
 
UFO enthusiasts celebrate 'World UFO Day'
Posted 7-2-2016 | 9 comments
Today marks the anniversary of the famous UFO crash that occurred in Roswell, New Mexico in 1947.
 
Disclosure advocate releases NORAD UFO files
Posted 6-30-2016 | 11 comments
Victor Viggiani released the documents to the public during the Alien Cosmic Expo event on Saturday.
 
Scottish UFO plaque replaced after 24 years
Posted 6-25-2016 | 8 comments
The plaque is located at the site where Bob Taylor famously encountered a strange object back in 1979.
 
Woman films UFO over Detroit neighborhood
Posted 6-13-2016 | 16 comments
Vanessa Oliver had already witnessed the object several times before finally recording it on her phone.
 
Former USAF aircraft mechanic films two UFOs
Posted 4-3-2016 | 43 comments
A man with over 30 years of aviation experience has recorded footage of two unknown objects over Ohio.
 
 
Top   |  Home   |   Forum   |   News   |   Image Gallery   |  Columns   |   Encyclopedia   |   Videos   |   Polls
UM-X 10.7 Unexplained-Mysteries.com © 2001-2015
Privacy Policy and Disclaimer   |   Cookies   |   Advertise   |   Contact   |   Help/FAQ