ufo sightings did you see a ufo

[oldrover]

I think that's the longest thing I've ever written that wasn't work related, or had the word 'thylacine' in it. 

[acute]

12 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

To be fair, some serious corroboration added to the video/s, would sway it for me.  That's not exactly a huge request, given most of these claims come from populated areas.

There have been corroborated sightings, with multiple videos, shot in neighbouring towns.

(Don't ask me where they were. They are famous incidents, but that's all I know. Maybe someone can chip in with a few links)

[ufoscan]

I think it's important to make a distinction between UFO reports and UFO sightings.  Most people do NOT report UFO sightings as they are very well aware of the ridicule that comes with it.  The number of people I have come across over my lifetime that revealed to me they had some type of UFO encounter when I brought the subject up but that never told anyone is substantial.

I have had UFO sightings of my own, at times with witnesses - up to nine at the same time.  But why bother reporting ?  Nobody takes it seriously anyhow.  And it doesn't help that there's a bunch of storytellers making up fake accounts and a bunch of people with cameras making fake pictures and videos...

So the only option UFO witnesses have nowadays is to keep their mouth shut and, in some instances, bring up the subject with people that may be receptive.

Edited September 29, 2018 by ufoscan

[ChrLzs]

On 9/28/2018 at 7:35 PM, acute said:

There have been corroborated sightings, with multiple videos, shot in neighbouring towns.

(Don't ask me where they were. They are famous incidents, but that's all I know. Maybe someone can chip in with a few links)

I'm asking you, OR ANYONE to post the best evidenced one, in your opinion.  That same simple request has been made a multitude of times here and elsewhere, and when the examples are posted, they fall down.  Not just a little, but horribly.  Jerusalem, perhaps? - an admitted hoax, the 'corroborators' were in on it, and at least one of the image sequences has been easily proven as a faked image (it's a still, with added effects, being passed off as a video).

So NO, Acute, you do NOT get away with unsupported claims.  Pick a 'best' example, then research it before wasting our time.

 

UFOScan, can you give us your reasoning on why, given the vast improvements in sky surveillance and huge advances in affordable amateur astronomy equipment, cheaper/better camera equipment with no film required, etc, that virtually no non-terrestrial UFO's are being reported?  Are you honestly suggesting it's from fear of ridicule?  I'd suggest it's from fear of (correctly) being identified as incompetent and completely unaware of the sky-borne possibilities...(cough-johncbdg-cough)  May I also suggest you drop by some astronomy forums, and join your nearest club.  These people aren't seeing stuff and keeping it secret - they are identifying it.  Virtually all of it, given all the readily available tools at their disposal..

Are you suggesting astronomers are scared or paid to keep quiet?

Are you suggesting everyone who *does* have better equipment (my hand is up) refuses to come forward through this same, claimed (but imaginary, imo) terror of being doubted?  Seriously?

May I suggest you look up recent sightings, (oldrover's springs to mind) posted by those willing to discuss and debate, and you'll note that those who genuinely report stuff and then listen to possibilities, do NOT get a hard time at all.  It's a lame copout.

[acute]

7 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

So NO, Acute, you do NOT get away with unsupported claims.  Pick a 'best' example, then research it before wasting our time.

Unless you're a very slow reader, I haven't wasted an awful lot of your time.

However, I shall endeavour to find the best example (the one I am thinking of) and post a link to it.

[ChrLzs]

18 hours ago, acute said:

Unless you're a very slow reader, I haven't wasted an awful lot of your time.

No, I didn't say you had.  I'm just asking that you don't post some horse that is long, long dead...

Quote

However, I shall endeavour to find the best example (the one I am thinking of) and post a link to it.

Before posting it, may I suggest that you google its name plus the word "debunked".  Or alternatively, add one of the following strings of text (as the Search function here doesn't work all that well):

" site:unexplained-mysteries.com"

" Tim Printy"

" Forgetomori"
...
" Ian Ridpath"

" James Oberg"

" Gary Posner"

... oops, that's way too many.  Stick to the top two/three, but I'll leave the rest of them in for later reference.

Edited October 2, 2018 by ChrLzs

[Horta]

I saw a couple of craft in the'60's that I can't explain. So to me they were ufo's, though probably not to the people that built them or were piloting them lol. Two huge shiny/grey metallic torpedo shaped craft (similar to shiny aluminium) at low altitude that made no sound. I remember noticing that the fuselage wasn't round, but made in a series of folds. No openings of any type, windows, portals etc. Experimental craft? No idea.

[L.A.T.1961]

35 minutes ago, Horta said:

I saw a couple of craft in the'60's that I can't explain. So to me they were ufo's, though probably not to the people that built them or were piloting them lol. Two huge shiny/grey metallic torpedo shaped craft (similar to shiny aluminium) at low altitude that made no sound. I remember noticing that the fuselage wasn't round, but made in a series of folds. No openings of any type, windows, portals etc. Experimental craft? No idea.

When you say huge roughly how big did you think they were ?  

[Horta]

Please don't laugh, rough estimation about 400 mts/ 440 yds in length. So quite a bit longer than the titanic lol. This is quite possibly misperception though and they simplycould have been a lot closer than I thought. I realise humans are poor observers. They were identical, I also remember they had a series of flutes or small fins around the tail. I didn't see them first, a friend pointed them out to me, we watched them for some time before they disappeared over the horizon.

I only brought it up because as an alien/ufo sceptic, I still do believe people see things they genuinely can't explain. Which doesn't mean there aren't logical explanations.

[Horta]

On 9/22/2018 at 3:33 AM, acute said:

It's ridiculous when non-believers say that the distances are too great for us to have been visited by aliens.

Whether or not you believe they exist, the notion that an advanced civilization (capable of interstellar travel) would still be using our primitive propulsion methods is laughable.

That's fair enough, the only problem seems to be with the amount of assumptions required. Firstly assuming there is such an advanced civilisation that does have the technology. Then the assumption that they would know we exist. It's a big universe, it would surely amount to a fluke of astronomical proportions that they found our little planet with us on it. We have only been sending out signals for about a century and a bit. So they would need to be within 120 or so light years to detect it? That's a pittance in terms of our galaxy, let alone the universe. Not to mention that much of the signals we spew out would indicate that we are a demented species and worth avoiding lol.

[Horta]

This puts it into some perspective. The blue dot is how far our transmissions have reached into our little galaxy alone.

 

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2012/3390.html

[acute]

@Horta

They could have watched the Earth for a long time, in the same way that we actively seek out planets similar to our own.

[L.A.T.1961]

59 minutes ago, Horta said:

Please don't laugh, rough estimation about 400 mts/ 440 yds in length. So quite a bit longer than the titanic lol.

Apparently you are not the only one. 

https://youtu.be/RyjHxG6CUsQ

[badeskov]

On 10/2/2018 at 9:42 AM, Horta said:

This puts it into some perspective. The blue dot is how far our transmissions have reached into our little galaxy alone.

 

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2012/3390.html

And our broadcasts would be undetectable simply because they would have dispersed to the extend where any detectection was possible. 

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited October 4, 2018 by badeskov

[Erno86]

I personally visited & investigated this (CE2 rating by both Hynek and Vallee) U.F.O. landing site (three weeks after it occurred)...that happened on the night (7:30 pm) of March 8, 1977, Gatchellville, Pennsylvania, USA, next to an apple or peach orchard. I'm speculating that the foo fighter landed there, so that the otherworlders could collect graft specimens from the orchard.

http://www.thecid.com/ufo/uf09/uf2/092742.htm

Here is one of the pictures that I took of the purported U.F.O. landing site: (A company surveyor was hired to put a  wooden guard stake by each of the three tripod landing marks in the ground.)  --- You can see new grass growing in the possible burnt-out landing site of the fiery balled foo fighter.

https://postimg.cc/34QXGDXc/7127ff22

Close Encounters of the Second Kind (CE2) definition:

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

Edited October 10, 2018 by Erno86
added a few words

[Erno86]

I believe I had a Close Encounter of the Third Kind (bloecher subtype "E")...but I did not see the purported creature when I took the picture; during the summer of 1972 at Calvert Cliffs, Maryland. located on the Western Shore of the Chesapeake Bay.

https://postimg.cc/hXFgCdR0

Edited October 10, 2018 by Erno86
added a few words

[Erno86]

You just have to be in the right time at the right place...

[Rlyeh]

2 hours ago, Erno86 said:

I believe I had a Close Encounter of the Third Kind (bloecher subtype "E")...but I did not see the purported creature when I took the picture; during the summer of 1972 at Calvert Cliffs, Maryland. located on the Western Shore of the Chesapeake Bay.

https://postimg.cc/hXFgCdR0

Of course you wouldn't see it as it's invisible.

[Erno86]

18 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Of course you wouldn't see it as it's invisible.

The possible helmeted humanoid hiding behind that Miocene fossil rock in the picture I took, when I waded out in the water of the Chesapeake Bay --- Is possibly wearing a metallic helmet, that uses some advanced form of "mirror camouflage."

Some scientists say...that a close encounter of the third kind, would most likely start out with the space alien hiding behind something; instead of standing out in the open.

My photo of the possible otherworlder fits the bill...

Edited October 11, 2018 by Erno86
added a few words

[Dejarma]

23 minutes ago, Erno86 said:

that uses some advanced form of "mirror camouflage."

what's advanced about it do you think?

[Rlyeh]

2 hours ago, Erno86 said:

The possible helmeted humanoid hiding behind that Miocene fossil rock in the picture I took, when I waded out in the water of the Chesapeake Bay --- Is possibly wearing a metallic helmet, that uses some advanced form of "mirror camouflage."

Some scientists say...that a close encounter of the third kind, would most likely start out with the space alien hiding behind something; instead of standing out in the open.

My photo of the possible otherworlder fits the bill...

Or in your case hiding in your head. You have quite the imagination.

[Erno86]

5 hours ago, Dejarma said:

what's advanced about it do you think?

The mirror camouflaged helmet

[Erno86]

3 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Or in your case hiding in your head. You have quite the imagination.

It's not only the creature hiding about in the photograph...Its a whole slew of geoglyph carvings and pictoglyphs displayed on the cliiff face; probably performed/executed by the said alien.

Would you like for me to point out the said locations of the geoglyphs/pictoglyphs in my photograph  --- or even the location of the ET alien hiding behind the Miocene fossil rock itself? Or do you know that already?

I'm talking about communication attempts by this otherworlder to an Earthling, what with the creature's use of displaying art forms on the cliff face and the presence of the otherworlder himself.

I guess you can understand... that I've already made communication attempts towards this ET. Are you interested in finding out what those attempts were?

[ChrLzs]

no

[ChrLzs]

... but Dan can probably help you, over here: