Witnesses and Corroborating Accounts

[Hankenhunter]

Good thread. To bad about the background noise.

[stereologist]

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I didn’t tell you any of that so that you would believe it. I knew that wasn’t the case. What I did suspect at least was that you would have some level of respect, and you didn’t disappoint. 

There are thousands of these personal stories of this sighting. All I was trying to get stereo to see, is that some respect was in order, even if he never believed a word of it. 

All I ever stated was that people were mistaken. I've also stated that was normal.

What I suspect is that you are aren't reading my posts and are simply being irrationally emotional.

[stereologist]

6 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Hu? You can question all you want, I’m not claiming to have anymore answers than I’ve already given. 

I told you all I know, and have nothing more to tell. Heck I didn’t even see the damn thing. 

You want me to try to convince you? Seriously? After all this time we both know that isn’t even close to possible. I wouldn’t waste my or your time trying, even if I could answer your questions of something I didn’t even see. 

My entire point in posting here was to say that people deserve respect, and don’t deserve to be talked down to, which I also knew you’d eventually begin to do. Again, you didn’t disappoint. 

Thanks for the repeated condescending tone.  Well done.

The problem is that people often make mistakes. Memories are malleable.

Witnesses often are so caught up in lights in the night sky they do not notice that there are stars passing between the lights. Some do, some don't. (Already pointed out a a classic case of that)

Later, their memories add in the detail of seeing stars blacked out as the lights passed by.  That is normal human memory. Memories are reconstructed. We rebuild them each time we remember something. That is why they change over time.

[preacherman76]

1 minute ago, stereologist said:

All I ever stated was that people were mistaken. I've also stated that was normal.

What I suspect is that you are aren't reading my posts and are simply being irrationally emotional.

Well if that’s the case, then I apologize stereo. I’m not going to go into why I felt you were being disrespectful, at this point it doesn’t really matter. 

One question though, are you aware of all the angles of this case? Have you ever read the testimonies of the security guards from Indian point power plant for example? 

[stereologist]

10 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Well if that’s the case, then I apologize stereo. I’m not going to go into why I felt you were being disrespectful, at this point it doesn’t really matter. 

One question though, are you aware of all the angles of this case? Have you ever read the testimonies of the security guards from Indian point power plant for example? 

When there are many people reporting we expect the wide range of differing stories that happened at other widely seen cases.

Maybe you are reacting because Vaz has been claiming stories trump whatever.  If Vaz wants to post well known hoaxes I will as well, except I am taking hoaxes that were planned to report human reactions.

I've reported some of my mistakes such as a simple accident and I thought the accident occurred after I got a green light. I was not involved in the accident. One other person was sure the light was still red.  I understand that my witnessing was prone to error and that over time my memory of that event possibly and probably changed.

Witnesses are not what Vaz thinks they are. Memories are not what Vaz thinks they are.

[preacherman76]

40 minutes ago, stereologist said:

When there are many people reporting we expect the wide range of differing stories that happened at other widely seen cases.

Maybe you are reacting because Vaz has been claiming stories trump whatever.  If Vaz wants to post well known hoaxes I will as well, except I am taking hoaxes that were planned to report human reactions.

I've reported some of my mistakes such as a simple accident and I thought the accident occurred after I got a green light. I was not involved in the accident. One other person was sure the light was still red.  I understand that my witnessing was prone to error and that over time my memory of that event possibly and probably changed.

Witnesses are not what Vaz thinks they are. Memories are not what Vaz thinks they are.

I don't think these guards story can be that easily dismissed. These boys said they came out guns in hand. Watched it hover over one of the reactors. Called Stewart air port to ask if they had anything in the area, then west point, who sent a helicopter to engage the target. Which of course would be exactly what they would do over federally protected air space. Then said this craft outran the helicopter. No way some ultra lights are outrunning a military helicopter. These boys are either telling the truth, or they are outright lying. I cant see how mistaken identity can apply with them.

[stereologist]

3 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I don't think these guards story can be that easily dismissed. These boys said they came out guns in hand. Watched it hover over one of the reactors. Called Stewart air port to ask if they had anything in the area, then west point, who sent a helicopter to engage the target. Which of course would be exactly what they would do over federally protected air space. Then said this craft outran the helicopter. No way some ultra lights are outrunning a military helicopter. These boys are either telling the truth, or they are outright lying. I cant see how mistaken identity can apply with them.

You are employing a false dichotomy here. Right off the top of my head I can think of a solution to this issue.

The ultralights pass close to the place. A helicopter is seen. They ultralights turn off their lights and disperse.

Nothing to catch - they outran the helicopter.

[stereologist]

Here is a believer site.

http://www.hudsonvalleyufos.com/1984-indian-point-nuclear-plant-ufo-visit-truth-or-fiction/

It is full of whiny commentary about the article. It reads like someone with no wit at all. Using the tactics of the site we could say " Complete and total lie " because some people heard sound.

The site comes from someone that thinks they could tell this:

" The craft emitted no sound and paused directly above the school at a height of about 2,000 feet. "

You can't tell altitude in the dark. But believers want to say things they cannot know and be adamant that they are correct.

They would like to pretend facts such as this:

" Obviously, kit airplanes make a racket, they wouldn’t be able to fly in such a tight formation and they can’t hover for more than 30 minutes. "

That's just them making up stuff to support their narrative.

But back to the nuke sites, there is nothing there out of the ordinary that couldn't be hoaxed.

[preacherman76]

54 minutes ago, stereologist said:

You are employing a false dichotomy here. Right off the top of my head I can think of a solution to this issue.

The ultralights pass close to the place. A helicopter is seen. They ultralights turn off their lights and disperse.

Nothing to catch - they outran the helicopter.

Accept that wasn’t even close to the only part of the story. 

[Vaz]

9 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

Good thread. To bad about the background noise.

Yes i quite agree.  To understand why you would have to understand his ulterior motives.  He has them that's for sure.

It's bad for the forum and will no doubt deter genuinely interested folk from contributing.  Much could be learned with more minds on the job working together without the unnecessary too a fro alternation.

No disrepect to the people who have been here for a loiing time but UM is known for it.   It's time it changed, and the people that are just here for a fight need to honourably withdraw imho.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Vaz

[stereologist]

As long as we are going to continue with the hoax of the Hudson Valley case let's continue to see what other hoaxes can teach us about witnesses.

Let's go back in time - over a century - to discuss the witnesses to the 1897 case of Hamilton and the aliens.

Hamilton reported that aliens were trying to steal one of his calves. That sounds like the cattle mutilation cases of today doesn't it? Humanoid aliens were prevented from taking the calf.

The story is true. How do we know? Well the townfolk stated he was a very honest person.

http://www.ufonut.com/alexander-hamilton-and-the-1800s-cattle-mutilation-incident/

Quote

Hamilton had signed an affidavit, notarized by 10 notable members of the community of LeRoy, Kansas, where they lived. The affidavit was dated April 21, 1897, and Hamilton staked his “sacred honor” on the truth of the event.

Quote

Last Monday night about 10:30 we were awakened by a noise among the cattle. I arose thinking that perhaps my bulldog was performing pranks, but upon going to the door saw to my utter astonishment that an airship was slowly descending upon my cow lot, about forty rods [600 feet] from the house.

“Calling my tenant, Gid Heslip, and my son Wall, we seized some axes and ran to the corral. Meanwhile the ship had been gently descending until it was not more than thirty feet above the ground and we came within fifty yards of it.

“It consisted of a great cigar-shaped portion, possibly three hundred feet long, with a carriage underneath. The carriage was made of glass or some other transparent substance alternating with a narrow strip of some material. It was brightly lighted within and everything was plainly visible-it was occupied by six of the strangest beings I ever saw. They were jabbering together but we could not understand a word they said.

 

[stereologist]

https://alienresearch.fandom.com/wiki/Hamilton's_airship_sighting

Quote

Hamiton's airship sighting concerns the real sighting of a UFO in 1897 at the Hamilton Farmstead, by farmer Alexander Hamilton ...

 

https://medium.com/@TheLastSisyphus/in-defense-of-strange-phenomena-1b4eed1603cd

Quote

Hamilton did not give the “hoax” up (if it was, indeed, a hoax). We have no evidence that he, in his own hand, admitted his story was a hoax. Also: There were others who witnessed this phenomenon. Hamilton even signed an affidavit (which is not something to joke about — no matter how elaborate the prank) and was practicing law in Leroy, Kansas.

Bolding mine

[Vaz]

21 hours ago, Vaz said:

 

This approx a year after the famous Brewster sighting.  Why did this flap last for so many years?  What was it about this particular area?  How do these craft not feel vulnerable flying so low and so slowly?  Did the airforce have a rule by then not to engage them?  Say after the earlier failed attemps?  Can the airforce even detect them?  Lots of questions.

The more I research this UFO flap, the more I feel it's perhaps the most important one in the entire history of the phenomena.

I mentioned in previous posts the flap that occurred in Brazil in the 1970's.  Bob Pratt's book 'UFO Danger Zone' covers these cases extremely well, obtaining first hand witness accounts.  In this particular flap we have cases of people being chased followed by attempted capure of innocent people.  The accounts literally make your hair stand on end.  It deals with Colares as well if I recall.

The Hudson Valley flap was different and more an attempt at establishing communication whereas the Brazilian flap was more about capturing people.  To what end I don't know and neither does the author.

Due to the limited sources available on the Brazilian cases I don't plan to cover them here. I recommend the book which can be read in it's entirety on line.

Vaz

Edited November 4, 2019 by Vaz

[stereologist]

We see that there are corroborating witnesses to Hamilton's story.

But is it as widely discussed as some would like to claim? You bet just take a loo at all of the UFO books that mention it.

http://www.isaackoi.com/ufo/18970419-hamilton-calf-napping.html

 

 

 

[toast]

30 minutes ago, Vaz said:

Much could be learned with more minds on the job working together without the unnecessary too a fro alternation.

This note should be addressed to the believers only. History has shown that nearly all of them lack knowledge in the related fields like astronomy, space flight, physics, photography and others, especially when its about claims about extraterrestrials and "UFOs".

[stereologist]

Do UFO cases get alll messed up in the telling and retelling? YOu can be certain of that.

https://verytopsecret.info/2016/02/18/alexander-hamilton-and-the-1897-ufocattle-mutilation-incident/

Quote

Did Alexander Hamilton one of the Founding Fathers of the United States personally experience a UFO sighting which escalated into one of our first documented cattle mutilation case?

( Yes this story is not new, but it’s still interesting, fun, and worth mentioning. )

On April 23, 1897, the Kansas, Farmer’s Advocate published a story about a phenomenal event experienced by one of our most phenomenal Founding Fathers in US history, Alexander Hamilton.

Wrong Hamilton. Was this an attempt to do an appeal to authority?

The Hamilton that was a founding father of the US was long dead.

Here is more fairy tale changes to the original tall tale.

Quote

“The next morning when Ben took his dog Cappie and went out to the pasture to bring up the milk cows, as he always did, he came running back to the house scared out of his wits.”

– “In a large patch of burned grass were three of our steers lying dead on the ground.”

The father then examined the steers and noticed they were completely drained of blood.

 

[stereologist]

3 minutes ago, toast said:

This note should be addressed to the believers only. History has shown that nearly all of them lack knowledge in the related fields like astronomy, space flight, physics, photography and others, especially when its about claims about extraterrestrials and "UFOs".

I believe what you quoted was an appeal for censorship almost certainly due to the poor nature of the material being presented. At least it is not as laughable as the claims in the construction of the GP

[Vaz]

The thread now leaps over to Australia 1966 and another very famous and well supported case where a UFO makes itself known to a group of school children.

Many years on, witness Terry Peck describes the craft hovering above the school and later she observed it on the ground.  Then it raised up to 12 feet, tllted and shot off at high speed.  She described two other craft already in the air.  Joy Clarke also gives her account saying that she also saw 3 saucers.  Jacquie Argent on the other hand saw only one saucer doing a strange manouevre and one of her friends Tanya actually touched it  Tanya was apparently taken away and was not seen again at the school.  She described the craft as able to move very fast and also hover totally still.

Altogether 96 witnesses saw the saucers and a lot more saw the patches on the ground that they left behind.

Detailed desciptions of the saucers are given in the clip along with the involvement of the air force.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPHVvg-dXOs&t=113s

[stereologist]

Continuing on with hoaxes we learn how easy it is to fool people with simple props.

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

The photographs show a car mirror hanging by a thread from a power line and quite a few "experts" bought into it. Thankfully some people took the time to do an analysis and realize that his was a hoax.

The nearby UFO festival was where Fravor told the audience that Kevin Day was telling fiction and that his comments were not to be trusted.

[stereologist]

Here is the hoax photo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMinnville_UFO_photographs#/media/File:Trent2_UFOA_600dpi.jpg

Pretty unconvincing isn't it?

 

 

[Vaz]

19 hours ago, stereologist said:

Here is the hoax photo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMinnville_UFO_photographs#/media/File:Trent2_UFOA_600dpi.jpg

Pretty unconvincing isn't it?

 

 

So why are you looking into it?  Your 'witnesses' are in no way independent.  Mine incorprate a wide cross section of people in society.

Police do not collude with the public for example.  My cases aere ten times more powerful because of the independent nature of the witnesses.  Also case to case they corroborate each other.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Vaz

[Vaz]

20 hours ago, Vaz said:

The thread now leaps over to Australia 1966 and another very famous and well supported case where a UFO makes itself known to a group of school children.

Many years on, witness Terry Peck describes the craft hovering above the school and later she observed it on the ground.  Then it raised up to 12 feet, tllted and shot off at high speed.  She described two other craft already in the air.  Joy Clarke also gives her account saying that she also saw 3 saucers.  Jacquie Argent on the other hand saw only one saucer doing a strange manouevre and one of her friends Tanya actually touched it  Tanya was apparently taken away and was not seen again at the school.  She described the craft as able to move very fast and also hover totally still.

Altogether 96 witnesses saw the saucers and a lot more saw the patches on the ground that they left behind.

Detailed desciptions of the saucers are given in the clip along with the involvement of the air force.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPHVvg-dXOs&t=113s

Pulling together more witnesses.

It was Australia’s largest mass UFO sighting.

More than half a century later and a select group of witnesses will share their story at Victorian UFO Action’s event Westall — The Witnesses Speak.

Sue Savage, who now lives in Springvale North, was 13 at the time of the encounter; she was in science class at Westall High School when a fellow student ran into the class room shouting “there is a flying saucer outside”.

Mrs Savage said she and her classmates went out to the corner of the schoolyard and looked up in awe.

“(The UFO) was like two saucers … one on the bottom and one turned upside down on the top,” Mrs Savage said.

“Some people say there was just one but I reckon there were three.

“They were hovering over the trees and then went down into the trees and disappeared for a minute or two then rose back up, sort of banked on its side and then took off at a 1000 miles per hour.”

 

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/inner-south/westall-ufo-sighting-witnesses-to-speak-about-the-1966-alien-encounter-at-clayton-south/news-story/ba54dbec1130e3df8715c728e65bc028

 

In one interview a witness claimed that the airforce were trying to catch one of the craft, and it played cat and mouse with them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stereologist]

1 minute ago, Vaz said:

So why are you looking into it?  Your 'witnesses' are in no way independent.  Mine incoprate a wide cross section of people in society.

Police do not collude with the public for example.  My cases aere tenn times more powerful because of the independent nature of the witnesses.  Also case to case they corroborate each other.

All you have are stories. Stories are nothing but stories.

You have nothing. 

You even have wasted your time posting hoaxes such as the Hudson Valley hoax.

It is also false that the story telling corroborates itself. It doesn't.

[Vaz]

Just now, stereologist said:

All you have are stories. Stories are nothing but stories.

You have nothing. 

You even have wasted your time posting hoaxes such as the Hudson Valley hoax.

It is also false that the story telling corroborates itself. It doesn't.

Same question. Which of the Hudson Valley sightings are you referring to?  They spanned even with a conservative estimate a decade.

Pick your sighting 

You will find that the majority of them are well supported buy multiple witnesses.

[Vaz]

3 minutes ago, stereologist said:

All you have are stories. Stories are nothing but stories.

You have nothing. 

You even have wasted your time posting hoaxes such as the Hudson Valley hoax.

It is also false that the story telling corroborates itself. It doesn't.

Just one more point. This thread is for people interested in UFO's.  I refuse from this point on to debate with you because it's like a turkey shoot.  It's no contest and no fun.