UFO photographed from plane over London

[kwin]

try this again.........

Edited June 1, 2014 by kwin

[kwin]

"To say that we cannot handle this situation because of a 1936 radio program that ambushed an unsuspecting, trusting, resource limited audience, is ludicrous".

Who exactly is saying that? President Clinton was on worldwide TV announcing they thought they found life in a meteorite. Anyone panic? Did society collapse? Any religions fall?

Nope..

. Really? You've never heard that some panic would probably ensue? Are you sure were talking about the same UFO phenomenon? Is there another real-life event (not fictional) here to consider, other than Wells? Nope .. Entertaining the thought that there is life out there, is not the same as having that realization hit home. One is a mind game, while the other is reality, up-close and personal.

Unexplained does not mean inexplicable nor is everything worthy of an explanation. If the evidence truly was as overwhelming as you say, we would not be having this conversation. A boatload of stories don't make a case for anything without some kind of hard evidence to back them up.

Who is being condescending? The discussion was actually quite polite and civil prior to your arrival.

. By definition, I am not condescending. As I have reviewed the material.

If you mean circus named "Disclosure project", then you have nothing - zero zilch nada.

Actually, the disclosure project would be an excellent place for you to start your research. Thanks, but just don't stop there, as you will have a rich and rewarding mind opening journey.

If you think that makes you sound smart... it doesn't. Many skywatchers are here, me too. Life remains the same for me/us I expect

. Yes, it is good advice.

And apparently you think that you do sound smart. Sky watching can be an exhaustive, rewarding, eye opening project. Rest assured that when the denial ends for you, life will no longer be 'the same'. However, I think you know that. So why not start looking now.

Of course, the obvious answer "they didn't find any evidence that they're alien spacecraft" is a lie.

Also, that's not an argument. That's a series of questions.

An argument would be "the investigation was shelved because the US government was contacted by the spacepeople and asked nicely to stop", because that's a statement of belief from which evidence can be offered, discussed and a counter-statement of belief can be offered.

Yes, No, Yes, What?

[MrBene]

I keep saying that for me the object is stationary and the plane is moving, it's just a matter of perspective and since it's just a bunch of photos together we will never know.

[sinewave]

. By definition, I am not condescending. As I have reviewed the material.

Interesting take

So humor me, what are you seeing that makes it not the top of a building poking through the fog?

Edited June 1, 2014 by sinewave

[kwin]

Interesting take

So humor me, what are you seeing that makes it not the top of a building poking through the fog?

. Sorry for the delay. Actually, I think that the notion of the top of the building poking through the fog is a very perceptive idea. However, I have a problem with that theory when I reached the fourth picture. At that point, it looks to me as though the object is a considerable distance above the cloud cover.

[kwin]

Interesting take

So humor me, what are you seeing that makes it not the top of a building poking through the fog?

As stated in previous posts, it does appear as though the plane is doing the majority of the movement. At the relatively flat angle of view between the third and fourth photos, the increased gap between the cloud base and the object would appear to be created by movement of the object. It would be helpful to know the time that elapsed between the photos so that a more accurate assessment could be made.

[sinewave]

. Sorry for the delay. Actually, I think that the notion of the top of the building poking through the fog is a very perceptive idea. However, I have a problem with that theory when I reached the fourth picture. At that point, it looks to me as though the object is a considerable distance above the cloud cover.

Of the many unknowns in this scenario there is the fact that we don't know what the time difference is between the images. Normal flow of the cloud could expose more or less of the building giving the illusion of movement. Given the low quality of the images there is also a strong possibility of CODEC noise distorting the details.

[kwin]

Of the many unknowns in this scenario there is the fact that we don't know what the time difference is between the images. Normal flow of the cloud could expose more or less of the building giving the illusion of movement. Given the low quality of the images there is also a strong possibility of CODEC noise distorting the details.

Point taken. I may be wrong, but it looks as though the distortions are present in the blowup. There is a lot of information that could make this process easier. However, the third, fourth and fifth photos do show that the object is in a different relationship with the clouds than it was in the first or second photo. As the fifth photo there is a wide expanse of blue sky between object and the top of the clouds. That is why I don't think that it was the building protruding from the clouds, but like I said, that was a good idea. Edited June 1, 2014 by kwin

[+DieChecker]

If this was taken OVER London, then doesn't that imply the plane was either taking off or landing?

If the plane is landing then the object could even have been stationary and appeared to go Up as the plane went Down.

If this is over London, then shouldn't the flight path be a known, and thus it should be relatively easy to deduce the tallest building on that approach path and see if the top of that building matches this UFO?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Yes, No, Yes, What?

Yes you think the conclusion that they found nothing is a lie.

Why do you think that? Please don't say something to the tune of "there's too much evidence otherwise" because that's an empty statement unless backed up with actually evidence referenced.

[kwin]

Of course, the obvious answer "they didn't find any evidence that they're alien spacecraft" is a lie.

Also, that's not an argument. That's a series of questions.

An argument would be "the investigation was shelved because the US government was contacted by the spacepeople and asked nicely to stop", because that's a statement of belief from which evidence can be offered, discussed and a counter-statement of belief can be offered.

("they didn't find any evidence that they're alien spacecraft" is a lie)

If I understand you correctly, I am saying that, if they claim to not have evidence of alien spacecraft, that is a lie, in my opinion. Is that right? I point to Roswell, Kecksberg & Rendellsham for starters.

[kwin]

If this was taken OVER London, then doesn't that imply the plane was either taking off or landing?

If the plane is landing then the object could even have been stationary and appeared to go Up as the plane went Down.

If this is over London, then shouldn't the flight path be a known, and thus it should be relatively easy to deduce the tallest building on that approach path and see if the top of that building matches this UFO?

. Maybe someone knows what the take off or destination was for this plane, but I don't. I do know that the map at the start of the video has a locater pin well north of London in n. Scotland. I can only guess that was the location of the incident. Edited June 1, 2014 by kwin

[seeder]

. Really? You've never heard that some panic would probably ensue? Are you sure were talking about the same UFO phenomenon? Is there another real-life event (not fictional) here to consider, other than Wells?

War of the Worlds caused less of a panic than you have been made to believe

quote:

Historical research has strongly suggested the panic was less widespread than newspapers had indicated at the time. "[T]he panic and mass hysteria so readily associated with The War of the Worlds did not occur on anything approaching a nationwide dimension", American University media historian W. Joseph Campbell wrote in 2003. He quotes Robert E. Bartholomew, an authority on mass panic outbreaks, as having said that "there is a growing consensus among sociologists that the extent of the panic ... was greatly exaggerated."

This position is supported by contemporary accounts. "In the first place, most people didn't hear [the show]," said Frank Stanton, later president of CBS. According to the C. E. Hooper company, the main radio ratings service at the time, only 2% of the people it called up while the program aired said they were listening to it. Many more people were listening to The Chase and Sanborn Hour, which had long been the most popular program in that timeslot. Further shrinking the potential audience, some CBS network affiliates, including some in large markets like Boston's WEEI, had pre-empted the broadcast in favor of local commercial programming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_%28radio_drama%29#Public_reaction

Besides, in 1938 there wasnt exactly a common belief in UFO's and aliens, unlike todays society, who have grown up with the best sci fi movies and the internet... Id say nowadays the public mind has literally been saturated with the notion of UFO's, to the point where, as seen in forums like this, most people dont give a fig and are simply curious about the subject

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

("they didn't find any evidence that they're alien spacecraft" is a lie)

If I understand you correctly, I am saying that, if they claim to not have evidence of alien spacecraft, that is a lie, in my opinion. Is that right? I point to Roswell, Kecksberg & Rendellsham for starters.

I'll give you Rendlesham and perhaps Kecksberg as being "something weird happened".

Roswell however was a Top Secret project that someone thought "hey, lets tell them it was aliens!" as a cover before someone who had more braincells then teeth realized that that would draw more attention rather then less.

However, I'm prepared to accept the "space debris" explanation for Kecksberg.

[dr no]

("they didn't find any evidence that they're alien spacecraft" is a lie)

If I understand you correctly, I am saying that, if they claim to not have evidence of alien spacecraft, that is a lie, in my opinion. Is that right? I point to Roswell, Kecksberg & Rendellsham for starters.

I would say Kecksburg was a meteor that people thought was a craft crashing,scientists tracked it across 6 states and Ontario,Roswell was sticks and pieces of foil until witnesses suddenly appeared 30 and 40 years later with tales of bodies and cover ups and Rendlesham boils down to mysterious lights.No hard evidence of a solid craft.

[bmk1245]

Actually, the disclosure project would be an excellent place for you to start your research. Thanks, but just don't stop there, as you will have a rich and rewarding mind opening journey.

I've seen many videos available - overgrown kids retelling stories about vewy vewy scawwy wabbit with consequential distinctive pants recoloring (in brown color) sounds.

[kwin]

War of the Worlds caused less of a panic than you have been made to believe

quote:

Historical research has strongly suggested the panic was less widespread than newspapers had indicated at the time. "[T]he panic and mass hysteria so readily associated with The War of the Worlds did not occur on anything approaching a nationwide dimension", American University media historian W. Joseph Campbell wrote in 2003. He quotes Robert E. Bartholomew, an authority on mass panic outbreaks, as having said that "there is a growing consensus among sociologists that the extent of the panic ... was greatly exaggerated."

This position is supported by contemporary accounts. "In the first place.............

http://en.wikipedia....Public_reaction

.I find the wiki article to be pretty good. I have no argument with it. My point is that the war of the worlds is the only measuring stick from a public venue that has linked panic with aliens. Within a 10 year period, that social experiment, I feel, caused the government to proceed down the slippery slope of secrecy, from which there has been no return. This 'panic' card has been played many times over the years, in fact, it was mentioned at the disclosure hearings last year. The only source I site for that is, war of the world's, 1938 It's been 75 years. The greatest generation has come and gone in that time. just sayin.......

I'll give you Rendlesham and perhaps Kecksberg as being "something weird happened".

Roswell however was a Top Secret project that someone thought "hey, lets tell them it was aliens!" as a cover before someone who had more braincells then teeth realized that that would draw more attention rather then less.

However, I'm prepared to accept the "space debris" explanation for Kecksberg.

. Well you are allowed to do that, but I have to say Roswell was admitted before being changed to the top-secret Mogul weather balloon project which the military admitted was started in 1952. Apparently, they were so delighted with the weather balloon explanation that they decided to use the same explanation for the Battle of Los Angeles.

As for the Kecksberg incident, the object was cited in Ontario, then Michigan and finally, Pennsylvania. Personally, I have never seen a meteor or space junk move in anything but a relatively straight line...........

[kwin]

I've seen many videos available - overgrown kids retelling stories about vewy vewy scawwy wabbit with consequential distinctive pants recoloring (in brown color) sounds.

Oh yeah, I can tell. Sounds like you've been watching a lot of cartoons. Didn't you see Bugsy go to Mars?

[kwin]

I would say Kecksburg was a meteor that people thought was a craft crashing,scientists tracked it across 6 states and Ontario,Roswell was sticks and pieces of foil until witnesses suddenly appeared 30 and 40 years later with tales of bodies and cover ups and Rendlesham boils down to mysterious lights.No hard evidence of a solid craft.

of course, you do realize that Ontario is on one side of Lake Erie in Pennsylvania is on the other side and Michigan is to the west of the lake. Maybe you could remind me of the names of the other four states?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

.I find the wiki article to be pretty good. I have no argument with it. My point is that the war of the worlds is the only measuring stick from a public venue that has linked panic with aliens. Within a 10 year period, that social experiment

It wasn't a "social experiment" it was a "scary story for Halloween" that a couple of people mistook for reality and a myth grew up around.

ell you are allowed to do that, but I have to say Roswell was admitted before being changed to the top-secret Mogul weather balloon project which the military admitted was started in 1952. Apparently, they were so delighted with the weather balloon explanation that they decided to use the same explanation for the Battle of Los Angeles.

As for the Kecksberg incident, the object was cited in Ontario, then Michigan and finally, Pennsylvania. Personally, I have never seen a meteor or space junk move in anything but a relatively straight line...........

Something was seen over Ontario, something was seen over Michigan and something was seen over Pennsylvania.

Was it the same something though?

I've not heard of crashing aircraft moving in anything other then a straight line either.

As for the Battle of LA, as has been pointed out to me the radar detected something otherwise the guns wouldn't have fired.

Do you detect weather balloons on radar?

[kwin]

It wasn't a "social experiment" it was a "scary story for Halloween" that a couple of people mistook for reality and a myth grew up around.

Something was seen over Ontario, something was seen over Michigan and something was seen over Pennsylvania.

Was it the same something though?

I've not heard of crashing aircraft moving in anything other then a straight line either.

As for the Battle of LA, as has been pointed out to me the radar detected something otherwise the guns wouldn't have fired.

Do you detect weather balloons on radar?

Yes, it was a bungled Halloween joke. The 'social experiment' was basically, how the final results were viewed. A large enough sample to basically determine the alien/panic connection and the lesson was taken from it.

Kecksberg has a huge number of witnesses, but no wreckage.

Battle of LA, there was no radar involved as the object was spotted then illuminated with searchlights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angeles

Edited June 1, 2014 by kwin

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

The guns, so I remember so forcefully being told here, were radar controlled. They would not have fired unless there was a radar return to fire at. If there was nothing on radar, they guns wouldn't have fired no matter what they illuminated with searchlights.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=261314&st=60

Look for Lost_Shaman schooling me on flippancy, wing nuttery and 1940s AA batteries on page 5.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Sir Wearer of Hats

[dr no]

of course, you do realize that Ontario is on one side of Lake Erie in Pennsylvania is on the other side and Michigan is to the west of the lake. Maybe you could remind me of the names of the other four states?

Have a look at this

G. W. Wetherill, a professor of geophysics and geology at UCLA who investigated the incident, is quoted: "The fireball was observed by many people in Ontario, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and to a lesser extent in neigboring states. In newspaper accounts, a great many supposed impact sites were reported, both in southwestern Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio. Fragments were claimed to have fallen in Ohio and Michigan.

These imagined happenings arose from the impossibility of estimating the distance of an object in the sky. Almost everyone who saw the fireball thought it was much closer than it really was. When it disappeared behind a house or a tree many people thought it had fallen only a few hundred yards beyond."

http://debunker.com/Kecksburg.html

[Mr. ET]

Nice picture and video, personally I cant tell what it is. Weather its fake or not I cannot say but as much as I have messed around with Photoshop it seems to me that if it had been doctored by someone the artifacting would be substantially worse. Who knows it could be an ET but then again it could be some aircraft project or some other weird anomaly.

Edited June 1, 2014 by Mr. ET

[JesseCuster]

Nice picture and video, personally I cant tell what it is. Weather its fake or not I cannot say but as much as I have messed around with Photoshop it seems to me that if it had been doctored by someone the artifacting would be substantially worse. Who knows it could be an ET but then again it could be some aircraft project or some other weird anomaly.

I disagree. A good photoshop job can leave very little visible evidence. Sometimes with a bit of playing around with the gamma you can see the tell tale marks of the use of the clone and repair tools, but at first glance a good photoshop job leaves no visible traces. Obvious traces of photoshopping is evidence of a poor job.