We are not alone.... Maybe.

[ri Alban]

11 hours ago, maroonlegions said:

 

 

 

There's an illogical catch 22 from pseudoskeptics when it comes to U.F.O. pictures and video and this extends to anything labeled paranormal. The catch 22 is this:

Every U.F.O. video will either be too blurry so it's a bird, weather balloon or swamp gas. If the pictures and video are clear and can't be refuted, you then run up against logic and reason. They can't yell bird or weather balloon so everything is C.G.I. and fake now.

So, before they have even seen a picture or video posted, they have a built in answer as to what it is. It's either a bird or weather balloon if it's blurry and if it looks "too good to be true" they will yell C.G.I. and fake before the first page of the thread gets to 20 posts.

I don't know how you can live in such ignorance and say you have an open mind.

How can you limit your understanding of the nature of reality to your limited knowledge and understanding? We're a type 0 civilization and it's been like 54 years since we've been to the moon. We haven't even fully explored our own backyard, yet the pseudoskeptic knows all that can or can't be.

 You have pseudoskeptics saying, in which you are  one, i mean  you're  not a skeptic but  a  pseudoskeptic, i would be amazed if you could even comprehend the actual  difference  between the two , or even comprehend some of the scientific investigations into UAPs that show high strangeness and advanced flight characteristics  LOL.   

 

 

 

 "That's not a U.F.O."(but it is, its unidentified) ??

"That looks like a drone" ( yip could very well be, but flight characteristics say otherwise).

"Why are all U.F.O. pictures and videos blurry?" (true, but if we are dealing with extra dimensional or advance teck then maybe they either dont want exposed or the teck itself causes such dimensional warping).   

"That's obviously fake". (yip of course, but NOT all are).

"That's C.G.I.". ( yip its been the case for may UAPs, on Youtube, but not from declassified military videos).

"Those are a bunch of weather balloons". ( Yip a lot have been, but balloons do not suddenly behave like they are under intelligent control and display advance flight characteristics, like acceleration, stop and then disappears from radar ??) 

"The Pilot, Police Officer, High ranking government official, credible witness or witnesses are either idiots or liars" ( Some have been but again a good % of them are neither  of the two).

The way you can tell the difference between a skeptic and a pseudoskeptic is the skeptic will admit that the evidence is good and I have even heard compelling in a debate.The skeptic will keep an open mind the pseudoskeptic will not.

 

They just think there will be a natural explanation to explain it.

 

The pseudoskeptic or religious based bais  can't live with "I can't explain it" so everything has to be explained. So they set up this catch 22 where no matter what pic or video you post it will either be too blurry so a bird, weather balloon and now a drone is popular with them. If they know that they can't logically explain it away, then it's C.G.I. and fake or the eyewitnesses are idiots and liars.

This catch 22 isn't only with U.F.O's, /UAps  it's with anything labeled paranormal.

 

Some of these UAPS could very well be undiscovered natural phenomenon, or undiscovered natural paranormal phenomena ?

 

  Also, these things are labeled paranormal but they have more evidence to support them than many theories and hypotheses but someone calls them paranormal because it's not normal to their personal beliefs. It has nothing to do with the evidence.

There's overwhelming evidence i think  to reach the conclusion that  POSSIBLE extraterrestrial/extradimensional visitation has occurred. You may not have reached that conclusion but you can't say there isn't enough evidence for someone else to reach that conclusion. Or even say its NOT possible in our current understanding of the universe.. 

 

I take it you understand that point??

This is another distinction between the skeptic and pseudoskeptic. I have debated skeptics that are okay with the fact that I have used the evidence to reach the conclusion that extraterrestrial/extradimensional visitation has occurred. They just believe there isn't enough evidence for them to reach that conclusion and I respect that. You would do well to understand that instead of trying to impress others on here that you are a really funny guy..

 

I take you understand the term and meaning of respect?? 

 

You would do well to understand that point too. You have interests outside of a fitbaw forum and charging the case for a independent Scotland??  Well this subject has been my interest for years.. 

 

I can't respect the illogical position of the pseudoskeptic who acts like there isn't any evidence. It's like people are just reaching the conclusion that extraterrestrial visitation has occurred based on wishful thinking.

 

This is NOT the case. I have provided a small % of evidence of that so far.

Since I have been on JKB and also on other forums, I have seen some great threads that are very thorough in their research. So there's plenty of EVIDENCE that has accumulated over the years. Is it enough evidence for you to reach the same conclusions?

 

Nope. Because dudes like you are lazy, you want everything handed to you on a silver plate..

 

Do yer own homework, you wont because you have no real interest in what has and  still  is been witnessed and recorded by  those in positions of high credibility.

 

 

My main purpose is NOT to prove that we have been visited  but offer up evidence the ET hypothesis is a credible  one, and a possible explanation when all other  explanations have been exhausted, and there are 1000s of such UAP cases were all avenues have been exhausted by in depth credible investigation..    Like the findings and conclusions of Dr Allen Hynek who sat on the USAF UFO project Blue Book. And the late James .E . MacDonald who took apart most of Blue Books scientific methods of investigation and final conclusions..   

 

 

Logical people can disagree on this point. The illogical catch 22 of the pseudoskeptic has to act like there's no evidence at all and everything is explained as a bird, weather balloon or fake C.G.I. Or that the witnesses are all tin foil hat loonies.

 

I have provided enough evidence  to put forward the case that the ET hypothese is a  POSSIBILITY  and a credible one for SOME UAP cases  based on CREDIBLE sources and CREDIBLE  investigations and witnesses..   

 

 

Is the jury still out, of course it is, no way is the verdict coming anytime soon.

 

 

 

 

[ri Alban]

8 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

Hi ml.

 

Your second paragraph caught my attention, especially the part I've highlighted.  To be honest, I've never seen a picture or video that's "clear and can't be refuted", but I would certainly like to.

 

If you could post examples of these I would appreciate it.  Knowing the source of such material would also be useful. Thanks.

[ri Alban]

Something tells me @maroonlegions has a shed full of Tartan paint, Sky hooks, Glass hammers, Long stands and a recently acquired shipment of left handed screwdrivers. 

 

 

 

[JFK-1]

I'm up for irrefutable evidence because I want to be a believer, but I still don't don't believe such evidence actually exists. I'm thinking that if there were irrefutable evidence of aliens in our midst out there I wouldn't need to be discovering it on an obscure thread in a footy forum.

That would be career defining for some lucky journalist. Irrefutable evidence of aliens? He could be a multi millionaire and the most famous journalist in history. And that's exactly why I don't believe it. Because there are no headlines. Just footy forums and the like claiming irrefutable evidence of aliens.

It's conceded that if this were to be a reality these aliens would have to be in possession of remarkable technology possibly beyond our current understanding. So I decided think like an alien who is presumably trying to be invisible, but allegedly consistently fails to be so.

That got me thinking we have technology right now that could be pretty much invisible to the naked eye to do any type of observation you care to mention. Something tiny, and robotic.

Yet these aliens with their magical technology beyond our ken keep littering our skies with stuff big enough to be seen. Why sometimes they even allegedly put on lights. Their tech can't see in the dark?

I suspect that maybe inside a century, centuries at most, if our civilisation continues progressing at the present rate we will be capable of full blown nanotechnology. The ability to manipulate matter on an atomic scale.

 

If we can master nanotechnology we could build a spaceship like the starship Enterprise, which in the Star Trek universe was about as big as a city. Identical, even including absolutely all the machinery and fittings, everything inside the fictional Enterprise.

But so small you couldn't see it with the naked eye. And it could do anything the fictional Enterprise could. This nanotech Enterprise could send out a probe so small it would shoot right through the fabric of your clothing and right up your ass no matter how tightly clenched you are. No need for all that kidnap and anal probing they allegedly carry out.

And it occurred to me if I were an alien observing a less technologically advanced civilization this is what I would send. Something they would never know was there. Could litter the skies with them. yet these peculiar advanced aliens insist on sending big shit the sight impaired could see.

 

Am I overthinking this? Or are some not thinking enough?

[Jambo_jim2001]

2 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

I'm up for irrefutable evidence because I want to be a believer, but I still don't don't believe such evidence actually exists. I'm thinking that if there were irrefutable evidence of aliens in our midst out there I wouldn't need to be discovering it on an obscure thread in a footy forum.

That would be career defining for some lucky journalist. Irrefutable evidence of aliens? He could be a multi millionaire and the most famous journalist in history. And that's exactly why I don't believe it. Because there are no headlines. Just footy forums and the like claiming irrefutable evidence of aliens.

It's conceded that if this were to be a reality these aliens would have to be in possession of remarkable technology possibly beyond our current understanding. So I decided think like an alien who is presumably trying to be invisible, but allegedly consistently fails to be so.

That got me thinking we have technology right now that could be pretty much invisible to the naked eye to do any type of observation you care to mention. Something tiny, and robotic.

Yet these aliens with their magical technology beyond our ken keep littering our skies with stuff big enough to be seen. Why sometimes they even allegedly put on lights. Their tech can't see in the dark?

I suspect that maybe inside a century, centuries at most, if our civilisation continues progressing at the present rate we will be capable of full blown nanotechnology. The ability to manipulate matter on an atomic scale.

 

If we can master nanotechnology we could build a spaceship like the starship Enterprise, which in the Star Trek universe was about as big as a city. Identical, even including absolutely all the machinery and fittings, everything inside the fictional Enterprise.

But so small you couldn't see it with the naked eye. And it could do anything the fictional Enterprise could. This nanotech Enterprise could send out a probe so small it would shoot right through the fabric of your clothing and right up your ass no matter how tightly clenched you are. No need for all that kidnap and anal probing they allegedly carry out.

And it occurred to me if I were an alien observing a less technologically advanced civilization this is what I would send. Something they would never know was there. Could litter the skies with them. yet these peculiar advanced aliens insist on sending big shit the sight impaired could see.

 

Am I overthinking this? Or are some not thinking enough?

Quantum mechanics? It's there but it isn't,and behaves differently if observed. WTAF?

[Maple Leaf]

8 hours ago, ri Alban said:

 

I'm not trying to be a smart arse.  For years I've wanted to see one clear picture, from a reliable source, of a flying object that has no earthly explanation.  With the proliferation of good quality cameras in the world, and the numerous "sightings" by reputable people, one would think that would be easy.

 

the post by maroonlegions stated that they exist.  I'm genuinely hoping that he can produce one.

[maroonlegions]

13 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Nope do it yourself..

 

 

I really wonder if you have the capability to read and understand that post i made to you..

 

Your attention span is like that of a child, your rather personal attack on me proves it..

 

The "irrefutable proof" you are demanding you will never get. Remember my "the jury is still out" comment?? 

 

Or did you skim past that comment.

 

 

 

 

 

You really need to make your demands and piss takes waterproof, you are coming across as a bit silly and very lazy in your approach to this ongoing phenomenon in my eyes.

 

 

 My "irrefutable proof" was in relation to the "proof" that  SOME UAPs  from the US military do show "irrefutable proof" that there are and have been objects witnessed and recorded by the US Navy ,that are classed as real contenders as genuine unknowns...    And that when ALL other avenues of POSSIBLE natural or logical   explanations have been exhausted then the ET hypothesis must be considered as a POSSIBILITY.   

 

That their  final conclusions reached after investigations ruled out all other avenues . 

 

Then there is "proof"  that a ET hypothese is irrefutable at present.

 

Why should it not be considered as a POSSIBILITY..

 

I will reiterate  this point to you ,because i do believe i need to, as you clearly are at it ,or have a genuine limited attention span and attention to detail. 

 

The point is that what i have posted on this thread ,is from  highly credible sources ,and was me NOT providing evidence of wee green men in flying saucers anal probing hillbillies. I was providing  evidence that the ET hypnosis is a very credible POSSIBILITY just like unknown natural "atmospheric phenomena" . 

 

In that regard i believe i have  provided "irrefutable evidence"   that this is the case.

 

You really must stop trying to skim read , pay attention and  concentrate less on the childish jokes.

 

Maybe you could have enrolled in this course;

 

From the university of Michigan , its free tae..

 

You still avoiding doing your homework on this subject ..

 

There's also this, from University of Michigan's Michigan Online:
UFOs: Scanning the Skies Teach-Out

 

 

 

 

About this Course

8,708 recent views

People across the world are gripped by the history of UFOs and the stories told by those who have witnessed them. Following the release of the U.S. Pentagon report on unidentified flying objects, there has been a surge of interest. In this Teach-Out, learners will hear from multidisciplinary experts about possible explanations for phenomena, what makes a UFO report compelling, and the position of UFOs within the larger conversation of science and culture.

 

 

Description

Unpack the myths and facts surrounding UFOs

Following the release of the U.S. Pentagon UFO report, there has been a surge of interest in unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs). People across the world are gripped by the history of UFOs and the stories told by those who have witnessed them.

 

On this two-week course, you’ll hear from multidisciplinary experts to understand the importance of investigation and possible explanations for UFO sightings.

Understand what makes a compelling UFO report

The course will guide you through various UFO reports – a crucial aspect of the study of UFOs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by maroonlegions

[Jeffros Furios]

6 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

Nope do it yourself..

 

 

I really wonder if you have the capability to read and understand that post i made to you..

 

Your attention span is like that of a child, your rather personal attack on me proves it..

 

The "irrefutable proof" you are demanding you will never get. Remember my "the jury is still out" comment?? 

 

Or did you skim past that comment.

 

 

 

 

 

You really need to make your demands and piss takes waterproof, you are coming across as a bit silly and very lazy in your approach to this ongoing phenomenon in my eyes.

 

 

 My "irrefutable proof" was in relation to the "proof" that  SOME UAPs  from the US military do show "irrefutable proof" that there are and have been objects witnessed and recorded by the US Navy ,that are classed as real contenders as genuine unknowns...    And that when ALL other avenues of POSSIBLE natural or logical   explanations have been exhausted then the ET hypothesis must be considered as a POSSIBILITY.   

 

That their  final conclusions reached after investigations ruled out all other avenues . 

 

Then there is "proof"  that a ET hypothese is irrefutable at present.

 

Why should it not be considered as a POSSIBILITY..

 

I will reiterate  this point to you ,because i do believe i need to, as you clearly are at it ,or have a genuine limited attention span and attention to detail. 

 

The point is that what i have posted on this thread ,is from  highly credible sources ,and was me NOT providing evidence of wee green men in flying saucers anal probing hillbillies. I was providing  evidence that the ET hypnosis is a very credible POSSIBILITY just like unknown natural "atmospheric phenomena" . 

 

In that regard i believe i have  provided "irrefutable evidence"   that this is the case.

 

You really must stop trying to skim read , pay attention and  concentrate less on the childish jokes.

 

Maybe you could have enrolled in this course;

 

From the university of Michigan , its free tae..

 

You still avoiding doing your homework on this subject ..

 

There's also this, from University of Michigan's Michigan Online:
UFOs: Scanning the Skies Teach-Out

 

 

 

 

About this Course

8,708 recent views

People across the world are gripped by the history of UFOs and the stories told by those who have witnessed them. Following the release of the U.S. Pentagon report on unidentified flying objects, there has been a surge of interest. In this Teach-Out, learners will hear from multidisciplinary experts about possible explanations for phenomena, what makes a UFO report compelling, and the position of UFOs within the larger conversation of science and culture.

 

 

Description

Unpack the myths and facts surrounding UFOs

Following the release of the U.S. Pentagon UFO report, there has been a surge of interest in unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs). People across the world are gripped by the history of UFOs and the stories told by those who have witnessed them.

 

On this two-week course, you’ll hear from multidisciplinary experts to understand the importance of investigation and possible explanations for UFO sightings.

Understand what makes a compelling UFO report

The course will guide you through various UFO reports – a crucial aspect of the study of UFOs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mug 

[Unknown user]

25 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

I really wonder if you have the capability to read and understand that post i made to you..

 

Your attention span is like that of a child, your rather personal attack on me proves it..

 

[Tazio]

Word salad. 

[Greedy Jambo]

The UAP that splits in 2 and flies in and out of the water is pretty interesting. 

Can't seem to find the video. 

[Greedy Jambo]

Ah, it's on here. 

 

[Bigsmak]

 

[Ulysses]

11 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

I'm not trying to be a smart arse.  For years I've wanted to see one clear picture, from a reliable source, of a flying object that has no earthly explanation.  With the proliferation of good quality cameras in the world, and the numerous "sightings" by reputable people, one would think that would be easy.

 

the post by maroonlegions stated that they exist.  I'm genuinely hoping that he can produce one.

 

He seems to have you on ignore.

 

For the complete avoidance of any doubt, I AM trying to be a smart arse, and to my eternal glee I seem to be succeeding. 

[ri Alban]

9 hours ago, maroonlegions said:

Nope do it yourself..

 

 

I really wonder if you have the capability to read and understand that post i made to you..

 

Your attention span is like that of a child, your rather personal attack on me proves it..

 

The "irrefutable proof" you are demanding you will never get. Remember my "the jury is still out" comment?? 

 

Or did you skim past that comment.

 

 

 

 

 

You really need to make your demands and piss takes waterproof, you are coming across as a bit silly and very lazy in your approach to this ongoing phenomenon in my eyes.

 

 

 My "irrefutable proof" was in relation to the "proof" that  SOME UAPs  from the US military do show "irrefutable proof" that there are and have been objects witnessed and recorded by the US Navy ,that are classed as real contenders as genuine unknowns...    And that when ALL other avenues of POSSIBLE natural or logical   explanations have been exhausted then the ET hypothesis must be considered as a POSSIBILITY.   

 

That their  final conclusions reached after investigations ruled out all other avenues . 

 

Then there is "proof"  that a ET hypothese is irrefutable at present.

 

Why should it not be considered as a POSSIBILITY..

 

I will reiterate  this point to you ,because i do believe i need to, as you clearly are at it ,or have a genuine limited attention span and attention to detail. 

 

The point is that what i have posted on this thread ,is from  highly credible sources ,and was me NOT providing evidence of wee green men in flying saucers anal probing hillbillies. I was providing  evidence that the ET hypnosis is a very credible POSSIBILITY just like unknown natural "atmospheric phenomena" . 

 

In that regard i believe i have  provided "irrefutable evidence"   that this is the case.

 

You really must stop trying to skim read , pay attention and  concentrate less on the childish jokes.

 

Maybe you could have enrolled in this course;

 

From the university of Michigan , its free tae..

 

You still avoiding doing your homework on this subject ..

 

There's also this, from University of Michigan's Michigan Online:
UFOs: Scanning the Skies Teach-Out

 

 

 

 

About this Course

8,708 recent views

People across the world are gripped by the history of UFOs and the stories told by those who have witnessed them. Following the release of the U.S. Pentagon report on unidentified flying objects, there has been a surge of interest. In this Teach-Out, learners will hear from multidisciplinary experts about possible explanations for phenomena, what makes a UFO report compelling, and the position of UFOs within the larger conversation of science and culture.

 

 

Description

Unpack the myths and facts surrounding UFOs

Following the release of the U.S. Pentagon UFO report, there has been a surge of interest in unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs). People across the world are gripped by the history of UFOs and the stories told by those who have witnessed them.

 

On this two-week course, you’ll hear from multidisciplinary experts to understand the importance of investigation and possible explanations for UFO sightings.

Understand what makes a compelling UFO report

The course will guide you through various UFO reports – a crucial aspect of the study of UFOs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[maroonlegions]

Below are a mix of UAP /UFO photos over the years. 

 

The first one  dates from the late 1800s .

 

These photos have been investigated and show no signs of tampering or fakery or models.

 

 In fact some pre date CGI..

 

While i make no claim that these are ET in source, its still proof that for a long time there have been  objects of unknown design entering and leaving restricted air space...  If NOT millitray , fakes, weather balloons, swamp gas at high alttitudes , unknown natural atmospheric phenomenal, meteors  then what??  

 

The case for the ET possibility when all other avenues  are exhausted cannot be ruled out just now.

 

Why ? because below is  proof that SOME UAPs are indeed of the "high strangeness category", not only in design but by their "flight manoeuvers" and signs of  advanced technology .. 

 

Click on link in description for photo.

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/mountwashington1870small.jpg

1870 - Mt. Washington, New Hampshire. This photo is dubbed, "the oldest UFO photograph ever taken." This item was the subject of bidding at Ebay in 2002, when finally the photo was purchased for $385.00 by Samuel M. Sherman, who was the president of Independent-International Pictures Corp. This was originally a "stereo" photograph. Certainly it was difficult to manipulate photos at that time, and remember, there were no flying objects then; at least, not from this world. Thanks to a reader, we now have the original "stereo" photo.

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/mountwashington1870small.jpg

1870 - Mt. Washington, New Hampshire. This photo is dubbed, "the oldest UFO photograph ever taken." This item was the subject of bidding at Ebay in 2002, when finally the photo was purchased for $385.00 by Samuel M. Sherman, who was the president of Independent-International Pictures Corp. This was originally a "stereo" photograph. Certainly it was difficult to manipulate photos at that time, and remember, there were no flying objects then; at least, not from this world. Thanks to a reader, we now have the original "stereo" photo.

 

 

 

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/washingtondc1952small.jpg	1952 - Washington D. C. During the dawn of Ufology in the United States, unidentified flying objects made themselves known to the leaders of the free world in 1952, buzzing over the White House, the Capitol building, and the Pentagon. Seemingly the unknown objects were defying the very governmental agencies sworn to protect the United States from foreign powers. Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base picked up a number of UFOs on their radar screens on July 19, 1952, beginning a wave of sightings still unexplained to this day.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/seprasmall.jpg	1952 -Lac Chauvet, France, July 18. A collection of pictures that have been filed and studied by the French GEPAN, then SEPRA state financed investigation committee, and considered genuine. The photograph was taken by André Fregnale. The image underwent an investigation by Claude Poher, director of the GEPAN, and he deemed that the photograph was not a fraud, but a genuine UFO. A very good picture.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/salem1952t.jpg	1952 - Salem, Massachusetts. July 16, 1952. During the peak of the 1952 UFO Flap, Shel Alpert, a USCG seaman on duty in the Coast Guard Weather Office at the Salem Coast Guard Station, saw four brilliant lights in the sky. He called another Guardsman to see the lights, but in those few seconds the lights had become more dim. When they brightened again, he quickly took a single photograph through the window of the office. This photo has been published in many books, newspapers and magazines. An excellent piece of evidence.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/passiacnj1952small.jpg	1952 - Passaic, New Jersey. George Stock was working in his yard on July 28, 1952, when this dome-shaped saucer appeared. Because it hovered over transmission lines before heading for him, he was able to get five photos. Only one is included here, but all of them are similar. A great early photo!
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/moumraitaly12011953t.jpg	1953 - Moumra, Italy. Italian specialist Giuseppe Stilo explained that this alleged photo case was first known when the Italian weekly L’Europeo released on February 3, 1957, an interview with diplomat Alberto Perego, who had a nonphotographic UFO sighting in the Vatican City. In order to better describe his visual observation he provided photomontages to this end (the magazine made it clear that that’s what they were). This started a widely-reproduced mistake. There were previous sighting by Perego over Santa Maria Maggiore’s church (Rome) on October 30, 1954 and these were also published in the same way. The actual photos are available here: http://fotocat.blogspot.com.au/ (in the 1954 photos section).
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/eiffeltower1953small.jpg	1953 - Paris, France, Eiffel Tower. Double discs are seen passing over Eiffel Tower at 3:45 AM, in 1953 as M. Paulin took this picture. The photograph is from the Michael Mann collection and was published in TRUE Magazine at the time. A very interesting photograph, and not a bad one considering the time period, and the distance from camera to object. Look at the original image to see the two objects over the Tower.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/australia1954small.jpg	1954 - Australia. This very compelling photograph of a clearly defined round UFO with top and antenna was taken by sheep farmer W. C. Hall in 1954. If you look real closely, you might see another unknown object in the distance just above a mountain. An excellent photo, and for a newspaper clipping, it is in excellent condition. Here is additional information provided by a reader: August, 1954 - Australian Sheep Grower W. C. Hall saw six petrol tank-shaped UFOs land on his ranch in North Queensland, Australia. His chickens, cattle and even the jack rabbits on his farm were affected by an oddly colored exhaust fumes of the UFOs, which he believed brought about a change in the genes of animal life on his ranch, due to Atomic Radiation, as various freaks were born afterwards. An update on the W.C. Hall case. This has always had me a bit perplexed because of the location i.e. North Queensland. The thing is in Australia that is not sheep country. After a fair bit of investigation I have found out that this photo was actually taken in Victoria and first published in a magazine owned by Time.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/sicilyitaly1954small.jpg	1954 - Sicily, Italy, December 10. Four men are staring upward at two very odd shapes in the sky. The photographer was questioned about his photograph, and he claimed that the objects were actually in the sky, as opposed to a film or camera anomaly, and that the objects simply stood still for several minutes.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/belgium1955asmall.jpg	1955 - Namur, Belgium - (1) Three photographs were taken on June 5, 1955, at about 07:30 PM, near Namur. The witness indicated that he had visually seen a sharp gleam moving high in the sky without any noise and at high speed. He indicated that the gleam accompanied an object of discoidal shape leaving a white trail behind it.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/belgium1955bsmall.jpg	1955 - Namur, Belgium - (2) The second photograph taken on June 5, 1955 in Namur. The witness continued by indicating that the object lost altitude, made a turn, and then went upwards to reach its own trail. See larger image to see dimension of the clouds, and get perspective of the object's size. An excellent photo.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/belgium1955csmall.jpg	1955 - Namur, Belgium - (3) The third photograph taken on June 5, 1955 in Namur. The witness continues by explaining that when the object joined its trail, the trail was disspating, the UFO then accelerated and left, while luminous particles were ejected behind it. Be sure to see the full-size image to appreciate the long trail behind the object, and dimension of the photo itself.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/southafrica1956small.jpg	1956 - Rosetta/Natal, South Africa. July 17. These two photographs from South Africa were taken by alleged contactee Elizabeth Klarer. She claimed that she was impregnated by a tall, white-haired alien who piloted a UFO in one of her many contacts. Almost unbelievably, MUFON representative Cynthia Hind who was Africa's most respected Ufologist, found several eyewitnesses to her contact cases. Klarer was also... see file below.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/southafrica1956bsmall.jpg	1956 - Rosetta/Natal, South Africa. July 17... a well respected member of South African society. Her husband was a major in the South African Air Force, and Elizabeth worked for Air Force Intelligence. Seven photographs were taken in all, two included here. There were also two witnesses to the taking of the photos. Taken in the foothills of the Drakensburg Mountains, and so-dubbed the Drakensberg photos. If these are real, they are extremely impressive. She never changed her story. She died in 1994, at the age of 83.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/childerhosesmall.jpg	1956 - Canada - A Royal Canadian Air Force pilot, while flying at an altitude of about 11 km saw and photographed a very bright, disc-like object that was remaining stationary near a thunderhead. An analysis of the photograph suggests that it would have been radiating in excess of a gigawatt of power within the spectral range of the film. At about 7:20 PM, MDT (about 20 minutes before sunset), on Aug. 27, 1956 a Royal Canadian Air Force pilot was flying nearly due west over the Canadian Rockies near Ft. MacCleod, Alberta (49.5 degrees latitude, 113.5 degree longitude). He was flying at 36,000 ft (about 11 m) in the second position (far left side) of a formation of four F-86 Sabre jet aircraft. While approaching a large thunderhead (cumulonimbus) at a ground speed of about 400 kts (740 km/hr) he saw, at a much lower altitude, a "bright light which was sharply defined and disc-shaped" or "like a shiny silver dollar sitting horizontal." Photograph © Childerhose - source-excerpted from article by Dr. Bruce Maccabee-http://brumac.8k.com/RJC/RJC.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/brazil.jpg	1956 - Summer, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. This clearly defined round disc was photographed by one A. Stizak. The photo was taken on a clear day. If you look closely, you can see three white dots underneath. Its authenticity was confirmed by ICUFON director Colonel Colman VonKeviczky.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/life1957smallx.jpg	1957 - December - S. S. Ramsey. Taken in December 1957, by the radio officer aboard the naval ship S. S. Ramsey. It was seen on deck, hovering in the sky. The radio officer grabbed his camera and took this picture before the object disappeared. I think the picture was first published in Flying Saucer Review. I wrote to them twice in 1996, but never got a reply. photo © Life Magazine. New Information Received in April, 2008: I received the following information from Woods M. "Here is the data inscribed on the back of the photo after he (Paul Cerny) gave it to me: 'Picture taken by a Naval Officer aboard a US. Navy ship-S. S. Ramsey-off Southern California in 1957.' (My copy of this photo is an 8" by 10" glossy enlargement.) 'The device at the base of the UFO (landing gear?)as shown in several other photos (that Paul had, and which I saw at KGO) - had rotated around the craft.' 'Paul gave no other explanation to me about the craft, but I am certain he had the sighting and the photos under investigation.' 'Although the photo I have is a reprint and an enlargement of the original, I doubt it was ever subjected to computer analysis, because the photo was taken during the 1950s about 45 years ago (in 2002). I also strongly doubt that the photo was computer generated, since that technology, as far as I know, did not exist then.' Additional information received on December 27, 2010. Paul Cerney was Chairman for the San Francisco Bay Area Subcommittee of NICAP. I knew Paul and when I worked at KGO-TV, San Francisco, invited him to appear on "The Golden Gate Story" which I produced August 23, 1964 (Mel Swope directed). Paul was an expert investigator. We broadcast this photo and at least one other photo from the sequence taken: the lower landing gear(?) rotated from shot to shot. This information is from my historical records and is deemed correct. Thanks, Rev. B. Woods Mattingley Additional Info Received on January 9, 2011. I was going through your fine collection of UFO photos and came across one I believe is a well known hoax that you imply in the description is legitimate. The photo in question is one labeled S.S. Ramsey photo from 1957. I recall seeing this photo written up in Flying Saucer Review magazine, probably sometime in the mid to late sixties when I was a kid. However, in the article the man who supposedly took the photo was named “T. Fogel†and he admitted the photo was a hoax.   I would direct you to a statement made by noted UFO investigator Kevin Randle found at http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com/2007/06/ufo-photo-hoaxes.html in which he writes in June of 2007 that the Fogel admitted to the hoax. In the larger photo he includes in the article you can clearly see what appears to be a rod of some kind in the upper right corner of the photo, which was later cropped out of the picture. I am surprised you haven’t uncovered this well-known hoax during the course of your research. Take care, J. Allan Danelek Author of UFOs: The Great Debate
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/lakeisabellasmallx.jpg	1957 - Lake Isabella, California - Deemed authentic by Kodak Labs. This photograph was taken by one B.C. He and his fiancee were riding their Harley Davidson through the southern Sierra Nevadas, in what is now Lake Isabella, California. They found an old dirt road that led down to the dry lake bed and they pulled off the main highway to take some random scenic shots. Neither of them saw anything out of the ordinary at the time.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/hollomanafb1957small.jpg	1957 - Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. Taken on October 16. This photo was taken by Ella Louise Fortune, a nurse at the Mescalero Indian Reservation near Three Rivers, N. M. She took the picture while driving Highway 54 about 1:30 PM. She stated that the UFO was motionless over Holloman AFB.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/japan082057small.jpg	1957 - August, 20 - Fujisawa City, Japan. Taken by Shinichi Takeda near Enoshima Miami Beach at 11:28 AM. The object reportedly was also seen by his sister, who called his attention to it. UFO is silvery in color, giving off a brilliant glow at an estimated altitude of 3000-4000 feet, traveling N to S. The object made a 90 degree left turn, sped up, and disappeared in clouds. A few minutes later, 15 people on the beach reported a similar object which passed over at high speed. No camera data available. Picture shows capsule-shaped image near bank of cumulus clouds.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/edwardsafb1957small.jpg	1957 - Edwards Air Force Base, California. Taken by a test pilot in September of 1957. The UFO is following a B-57 twin jet. The UFO was not discovered until the photograph was developed. An excellent photo for that time period.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/fortbelvoirvirginia1957small.jpg	1957 - Fort Belvoir, Virginia - Taken in September. This photo was investigated by the Condon Report. A private was called from his barracks by his friends to see the unusual object. He grabbed his camera and took six pictures of the strange ring-shaped object. Soon, the object was engulfed in white smoke.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/norway1957t.jpg	1957 - Norway - Taken in July of 1957, this photo was sent to Project Blue Book for analysis. Wright Patterson determined that what we are seeing is a reflection of light on the camera lens. That is easy enough to say, I suppose, but I am not sure that is the case here. Be sure to see full size image. Credit "UFOs at Close Sight."
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/rouenfrancesmall.jpg	Rouen, France, 1957. Flying to intercept a mysterious radar reflection, an unknown French Air Force pilot photographed this craft in March 1957 over Rouen with his gun-sight camera. The UFO paced the plane for several minutes before speeding off past the maximum velocity of the French airplane. This UFO appears to be of the same type that appeared in McMinnville, Oregon, over the farm of Mr. Paul Trent. It was first published in the Royal Air Force Flying Review in July, 1957, and also in Flying Saucer Review in July, 1957.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/edwardsafbsmall.jpg	1957-1958 - Edwards AFB. This photo is said to come from an "instructive-film" of a UFO landing at Edwards AFB. The film is said to have been "leaked." This film has been referred to by more than one person, including the late astronaut Gordon Cooper, who claims to have seen the entire event. He says that the film did exist, but we cannot be certain that this is from that film.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/trindade.jpg	1958 - January 16 - The Trinidade Island Photographs. Trindade is a small rocky island in the middle of the South Atlantic Ocean 600 miles off the coast of Bahia, Brazil. Professional photographer Almiro Barauna would take a sequence of pictures of this UFO off of a Naval vessel. More than 50 witnesses saw the UFO, including the ship's Captain. Some of the best know early photos of a UFO.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/1958KaizukaJapansmall.jpg	1958 - Japan - One of the many UFO photographs taken in Japan. This one shows an object over Kaizuka in 1958. No other information is presently available.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150103235841im_/http://www.ufocasebook.com/waikikihawaiijune181959small.jpg	1959 - Waikiki, Hawaii, June 18. This photograph was one studied by Project Blue Book. Photo taken by Joseph Sigel of Bellevue, Washington. Blue Book stupidly identified it as a sun glare on lens. The photo was studied at the UFO symposium for the Congressiona Hearings of 1968 by Dr. Robert N. Sheppard.

 

 

Yes grainy are some, some not so much.  

 

Some come with authenticity  from FOIA declassified  documents..

Its important to point out the dates of these, CGI or more tecky photoshopping was not at its best and some pre date it, like CGI.

 

 

 

Edited March 25, 2022 by maroonlegions

[maroonlegions]

Photos from previous post.

 

Concentrated on the older photos because CGI and photoshopping was so much harder to do. CGI was not there or available to the public. 

 

First photo is remarkable, man had no means of flying ??? 

 

 

Edited March 25, 2022 by maroonlegions

[Jeffros Furios]

[Jambo_jim2001]

A mock up of one that was taken in 1990,rumour has it,it was/is an American stealth drone 

The story here. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/secret-ufo-dossier-1990-scottish-22824456.amp

[Gizmo]

Here's a recent ufo shot for Maroonlegions. 

Can't see any photo manipulation in this one (the first two you posted are very obvious and readily debunkable fakes). 

What you reckon?







 

[adambraejambo]

2 hours ago, maroonlegions said:

Photos from previous post.

 

Concentrated on the older photos because CGI and photoshopping was so much harder to do. CGI was not there or available to the public. 

 

First photo is remarkable, man had no means of flying ??? 

 

 

Did you read the description next to 1956 Rosetta (South Africa) made me laugh. Many contacts ... she can take a pic of the ship but not her man! 

 - Rosetta/Natal, South Africa. July 17. These two photographs from South Africa were taken by alleged contactee Elizabeth Klarer. She claimed that she was impregnated by a tall, white-haired alien who piloted a UFO in one of her many contacts.

[maroonlegions]

1 hour ago, Gizmo said:

Here's a recent ufo shot for Maroonlegions. 

Can't see any photo manipulation in this one (the first two you posted are very obvious and readily debunkable fakes). 

What you reckon?







 

 

The first too are easily debatable and fakes..??

 

Did you mean, the one from 1879??

 

When there was no flying objects of that kind ???

 

 

Can you provide your easy debunkable and fake evidence??

 

I am more impressed with very credible people like this man, so sorry if i refute your bias.

 

When anyone on here even comes close to this mans credentials and credibility then i will take note/

 

He came to the conclusion that an so called meteor that entered our solar system was ET in origins.

 

 

This object that was naturally thought to be a meteor suddenly behaved in a way that meteors dont behave ,

 

It accelerated away, asin speed up??

 

The photos i posted was a brief summary.. 

 

And as you know they were from an era  of NO CGI.

 

The Mysterious Case of Interstellar Visitor ‘Oumuamua.

 

 

 

Abraham (Avi) Loeb is the Frank B. Baird, Jr., Professor of Science at Harvard University and a bestselling author (in lists of the New York Times,

 

 

Wall Street Journal, Publishers Weekly, Die Zeit, Der Spiegel, L'Express and more). He received a PhD in Physics from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel at age 24 (1980-1986), led the first international project supported by the Strategic Defense Initiative (1983-1988), and was subsequently a long-term member of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton (1988-1993).

 

Loeb has written 8 books, including most recently, Extraterrestrial (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2021), and nearly a thousand papers (with an h-index of 118) on a wide range of topics, including black holes, the first stars, the search for extraterrestrial life and the future of the Universe. Loeb is the Director of the Institute for Theory and Computation (2007-present) within the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics , and also serves as the Head of the Galileo Project (2021-present).

 

He had been the longest serving Chair of Harvard's Department of Astronomy (2011-2020) and the Founding Director of Harvard's Black Hole Initiative (2016-2021). He is an elected fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the American Physical Society, and the International Academy of Astronautics.

 

Loeb is a former member of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) at the White House, a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies (2018-2021) and a current member of the Advisory Board for "Einstein: Visualize the Impossible" of the Hebrew University.

 

He also chairs the Advisory Committee for the Breakthrough Starshot Initiative (2016-present) and serves as the Science Theory Director for all Initiatives of the Breakthrough Prize Foundation. In 2012, TIME magazine selected Loeb as one of the 25 most influential people in space and in 2020 Loeb was selected among the 14 most inspiring Israelis of the last decade. Click here for Loeb's commentaries.

 

 

 

I'm adding the link to a recent article and interview with Loeb:
 

Physicist Avi Loeb thinks there's a 'serious possibility' that 'Oumuamua was an alien spacecraft

 

Which can be found at: www.alternet.org...

 

He found that  Aspect ratios of that  object  only gave him  a two dimensional picture of the object which is actually a three dimensional target. In which he later found out. The object was more DISK shaped that cigar shaped..

 

Take this academic conclusion below;

 

 

We present the first attempt to fit the light curve of the interstellar visitor ‘Oumuamua using a physical model that includes optional torque. We consider both conventional (Lommel–Seeliger triaxial ellipsoid) and alternative (‘black-and-white ball’, ‘solar sail’) brightness models.

 

With all the brightness models, some torque is required to explain the timings of the most conspicuous features – deep minima – of the asteroid’s light curve. Our best-fitting models are a thin disc (aspect ratio 1:6) and a thin cigar (aspect ratio 1:8) that are very close to being axially symmetric.

 

Both models are tumbling and require some torque that has the same amplitude in relation to ‘Oumuamua’s linear non-gravitational acceleration as in Solar system comets whose dynamics is affected by outgassing. Assuming random orientation of the angular momentum vector, we compute probabilities for our best-fitting models.We show that cigar-shaped models suffer from a fine-tuning problem and have only 16 per cent probability to produce light-curve minima as deep as the ones present in ‘Oumuamua’s light curve. Disc-shaped models, on the other hand, are very likely (at 91 per cent) to produce minima of the required depth. From our analysis, the most likely model for ‘Oumuamua is a thin disc (slab) experiencing moderate torque from outgassing.
academic.oup.com...

 

 

 

I wanted also to share Loeb's bio with you, it includes links to other articles as well as videos of his work which I find impressive. 

 

It also makes it easier to see why astrophysicist Loeb is proposing an Extraterrestrial origin for the object , whether it's a relic from an ancient ET craft or  "Solar sail"  sent to check out who's making all that noise the oddities of Oumuamua single it out for special consideration.

 

I believe there is now enough circumstantial and physical evidence to opine on the nature of this object.

I believe this object could very well be an advanced probe. The acceleration as it was leaving the sun's gravity well is another aspect of this that can't be ignored.

It could very well have been a scout??

 

I've polished my tinfoil hat today so...

Is it possible that something along those lines did occur and we are yet (if ever) to find out?

Just a passing thought. But I feel we are ill informed about lots of things these days.

 

If you want to stretch what many believe to be reality, then certain people in the world know exactly what Oumuamua is.
That is because E.T. may have been concerned about what it was as well, investigated it, and then told us. Hey, we might have even asked.

As far fetched as it all sounds, when you consider the thousands of unexplainable phenomena that have happened to people and certainly observed by many millions... I think the conjecture has a reasonable possibility of being true.

Even still.... would "they" ever tell the rest of us?
 

Still a very important point to  remember ,( i am getting all geeky i know), but its this.. And i agree with Avi Loe about this crucial point.

 

That this  'independent' object entered our System from the direction of Lyra constellation and left  our System in the direction of Pegasus constellation

The  'cigar' shape or a 'discus' shape that was displayed is only the result of the angle of the anomaly and our position here on planet Earth while viewing on land based telescopes (i bet the SPY satellites out in space, took a handful of still photos of the 'visitor' and those will never be published to the public)??

 

 

 

 

 

The truth is out there , sadly heading away from our Planet.

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

[maroonlegions]

23 minutes ago, adambraejambo said:

Did you read the description next to 1956 Rosetta (South Africa) made me laugh. Many contacts ... she can take a pic of the ship but not her man! 

 - Rosetta/Natal, South Africa. July 17. These two photographs from South Africa were taken by alleged contactee Elizabeth Klarer. She claimed that she was impregnated by a tall, white-haired alien who piloted a UFO in one of her many contacts.

So what, they found NO evidence of tampering or forgery with that photo..

 

Did you know that..

 

And who are you to refute  her claims??  God lol..

 

Your bais has obviously made you laugh??

 

And what of the other photos , that dont have sensational claims??

 

No comment i suspect..  You choose one photo and try to make out the rest are the same, sneaky but  predictable.. LOL 

 

 

[Jeffros Furios]

1 minute ago, maroonlegions said:

So what, they found NO evidence of tampering or forgery with that photo..

 

Did you know that..

 

And who are you to refute  her claims??  God lol..

 

Your bais has obviously made you laugh??

 

And what of the other photos , that dont have sensational claims??

 

No comment i suspect..  You choose one photo and try to make out the rest are the same, sneaky but  predictable.. LOL 

 

 

[il Duce McTarkin]

Holy shit.

 

WTF is this place?

[Boab]

1 minute ago, Dirk McClaymore said:

Holy shit.

 

WTF is this place?

Walk away, mate !

Seriously, get the hell out !

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, Dirk McClaymore said:

Holy shit.

 

WTF is this place?

 

Well I suppose it's a bit like Roswell, but in the Heart of Midlothian - Rosewell?

[Dawnrazor]

11 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Well I suppose it's a bit like Roswell, but in the Heart of Midlothian - Rosewell?

**** all wrong with the big city, a great place to grow up, some of us were the 4th generation to go to Rosewell Primary and Lasswade. 

[Lord Montpelier]

3 hours ago, maroonlegions said:

Photos from previous post.

 

Concentrated on the older photos because CGI and photoshopping was so much harder to do. CGI was not there or available to the public. 

 

First photo is remarkable, man had no means of flying ??? 

 

 

The first one from 1870 is surely the millennium falcon cruising through the Bespin clouds 

[maroonlegions]

29 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said:

The first one from 1870 is surely the millennium falcon cruising through the Bespin clouds 

 

 

 

Love it.

 

A bit of respectful banter.

 

My last post concentrated on  the very odd object named "Oumuamua" .   

 

 

Below are FACTS about the number of discrepancies discovered about this so called interstella comet/meteor ?

 

In short it did not behave like a meteor. 

 

 

On October 19, 2017, the first interstellar object, ‘Oumuamua, was discovered by the Pan-STARRS survey. The experience was similar to having a surprise guest for dinner show up from another country. By examining this guest, we can learn about the culture of that country without the need to travel there—a good thing in this case, given that it would take us a hundred thousand years to visit even the nearest star using conventional chemical rockets.

 

Surprisingly, our first interstellar guest appeared to be weird and unlike anything we have seen before. By the time we realized it, the guest was already out the door with its image fading into the dark street, so we did not have a chance to get a second look at its mysterious qualities. Below is a list of six peculiarities exhibited by ‘Oumuamua:

 

Assuming that other planetary systems resemble the solar system, Pan-STARRS should not have discovered this or any other interstellar rock in the first place. In a paper published a decade ago, we predicted an abundance of interstellar asteroids that is smaller by many (two to eight) orders of magnitude than needed to explain the discovery of ‘Oumuamua, assuming it’s a member of a random population of objects.

 

Put another way, ‘Oumuamua implies that the population of interstellar objects is far greater than expected. Each star in the Milky Way needs to eject 1015 such objects during its lifetime to account for a population as large as ‘Oumuamua implies. Thus, the nurseries of ‘Oumuamua-like objects must be different from what we know based on our own solar system.

 

‘Oumuamua originated from a very special frame of reference, the so-called local standard of rest (LSR), which is defined by averaging the random motions of all the stars in the vicinity of the sun. Only one star in 500 is moving as slowly as ‘Oumuamua in that frame.

 

The LSR is the ideal frame for camouflage, namely for hiding the origins of an object and avoiding its association with any particular star. The relative motion between ‘Oumuamua and the sun reflects the motion of the sun relative to the LSR. ‘Oumuamua is like a buoy sitting at rest on the surface of the ocean, with the solar system running into it like a fast ship. Could there be an array of buoys that serves as a network of relay stations or road posts, defining the average galactic frame of reference in interstellar space?

 

Most interstellar asteroids are expected to be ripped away from their parent star when they lie in the outskirts of their birth planetary system (such as our solar system’s Oort cloud, which extends to 100,000 times the Earth-sun separation), where they are most loosely bound to the star’s gravity.

 

At these outskirts, they can be removed with a small velocity nudge of less than a kilometer per second, in which case they will maintain the speed of their host star relative to the LSR. If ‘Oumuamua came from a typical star, it must have been ejected with an unusually large velocity kick. To make things more unusual, its kick should have been equal and opposite to the velocity of its parent star relative to the LSR, which is about 20 kilometers per second for a typical star like the sun.

 

The dynamical origin of ‘Oumuamua is extremely rare no matter how you look at it. This is surprising, since the first foreign guest to a dinner party should be statistically common (especially given the larger than usual population inferred in the first point above).

 

We do not have a photo of ‘Oumuamua, but its brightness owing to reflected sunlight varied by a factor of 10 as it rotated periodically every eight hours. This implies that ‘Oumuamua has an extreme elongated shape with its length at least five to 10 times larger than its projected width. Moreover, an analysis of its tumbling motion concluded that it would be at the highest excitation state expected from its tumultuous journey, if it has a pancake-like geometry.

 

The inferred shape is more extreme than for all asteroids previously seen in the solar system, which have an length-to-width ratio of at most three.

 

The Spitzer Space Telescope did not detect any heat in the form of infrared radiation from ‘Oumuamua. Given the surface temperature dictated by ‘Oumuamua’s trajectory near the sun, this sets an upper limit on its size of hundreds of meters. Based on this size limit, ‘Oumuamua must be unusually shiny, with a reflectance that is at least 10 times higher than exhibited by solar system asteroids.

The trajectory of ‘Oumuamua deviated from that expected based on the sun’s gravity alone. The deviation is small (a tenth of a percent) but highly statistically significant.

 

Comets exhibit such a behavior when ices on their surface heat up from solar illumination and evaporate, generating thrust through the rocket effect. The extra push for ‘Oumuamua could have originated by cometary outgassing if at least a tenth of its mass evaporated. But such massive evaporation would have naturally led to the appearance of a cometary tail, and none was seen.

 

The Spitzer telescope observations also place tight limits on any carbon-based molecules or dust around ‘Oumuamua and rule out the possibility that normal cometary outgassing is at play (unless it is composed of pure water). Moreover, cometary outgassing would have changed the rotation period of ‘Oumuamua, and no such change was observed. Altogether, ‘Oumuamua does not appear to be a typical comet nor a typical asteroid, even as it represents a population that is far more abundant than expected.

 

 

The extra push exhibited by ‘Oumuamua’s orbit could not have originated from a breakup into pieces because such an event would have provided a single, impulsive kick, unlike the continuous push that was observed. If cometary outgassing is ruled out and the inferred excess force is real, only one possibility remains: an extra push due to radiation pressure from the sun. In order for this push to be effective,

 

‘Oumuamua needs to be less than a millimeter thick but with a size of at least 20 meters (for a perfect reflector), resembling a lightsail of artificial origin. In this case ‘Oumuamua would resemble the solar sail demonstrated by the Japanese mission IKAROS or the lightsail contemplated for the Starshot initiative. An artificial origin offers the startling possibility that we discovered “a message in a bottle” following years of failed searches for radio signals from alien civilizations. Reassuringly, such a lightsail would survive collisions with interstellar atoms and dust as it travels throughout the galaxy.

 

 

So in hindsight this object should NOT have had any means of PROPULSION to accelerate??

 

Unless it was harvesting power from our sun, solar wings ?? Or some sort of hi teck means??

 

NASA are working on solar like wings.   

 

https://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/research/Pan-STARRS.shtml

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2515-5172/aa9bdc/meta

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/733/pdf

 

 

 

Artist's impression of 'Oumuamua. Credit: Goddard Space Flight Center Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

Edited March 25, 2022 by maroonlegions

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Dirk McClaymore said:

Holy shit.

 

WTF is this place?

 

Outer space.

 

It's like Lochend, but with better boozing. 

[Greedy Jambo]

You should watch the film/documentary Phenomenon. 

Whether you think it's all pish or not, it's a really good watch. 

[maroonlegions]

 

 

This one of my favorite UAP caes .

 

It was debunked years ago as nothing more that the lights and front deck of a cruise ship??

 

But below there is new evidence to suggest that this cruise ship explanation is not correct..

 

Below is a complete in depth  break down of the debunking of the "cruise ship" explanation..

 

New Evidence Suggests The Turkey UFO Was Not A Cruise Ship Or Yacht

 

 

 

 

Somewhere between 85% to 95% of UFO sightings can usually end up being explained by misidentification or other causes with a fraction remaining highly unusual. The events in Turkey have generated some theories and speculation. One of the most popular hypothesis results from an article on the website www.alcione.org which purports to show a comparison between the May 13th, 2009 video and the deck of a cruise ship.

 

Eventhough alternative theories should be examined, after reviewing the evidence, this one does not appear to be the likely answer. Below is an examination, that resulted in several factors, which raises doubts about the cruise ship theory.

 

1. New Evidence Suggests The Object Was Too High In Above The Horizon To Be A Ship

 

Measuring Angular Elevation Of Aerial Objects In The Night Sky

 

The moon as a reference point is often used by astronomers to estimate the angular elevation of objects in the night sky such as airplanes, helicopters, and celestial objects. The standard rule is "the moon always equals 0.5 degrees in the sky at any given time" or two moon widths would be 1 degree. The angular diameter of the Moon is proportional to the ratio of the Moon's physical diameter (3476 km) to its distance from Earth (about 384,400 km from the Earth's center on average). Using the small angle approximation, this angular diameter as measured from the center of the Earth works out to be about 0.5 degrees.

 

During the May 17th, 2009 segment the moon and the unknown object are filmed the same frame for several minutes. This can be used to see how far the object was above the horizon. It could theoretically decide if it was too high in altitude or, if the object was on the horizon, it could support the cruise ship theory. The results are posted below.

 

 

When the moon and the object are filmed together it can be used to estimate the
angular elevation above the horizon (see below).

 

 

Step #1

 

Determine The Moon's Lunar Position At The Time of The Video.

 

The planetarium software Stellarium displays star and planet alignments from any place on Earth past or present and is widely used by astronomers. I entered the coordinates of the camera location for May 17, 2009. It appears the moon was 12.3 degrees above the horizon at the time of the footage when viewed from the camera location at 3:06 a.m. (UTC+3). Yeni Kent, Kumburgaz, Turkey rests on (Latitude 41.041 - Longitude 28.420)

 

 

Next Step: Triangulate with the moon to determine the unknown object's degree of elevation
above the horizon.

 

 

The standard astronomy rule is that 2 moon diameters will equal 1 degree and this can be used to measure various things in the sky. As illustrated below, this shows that the unknown object was approximately 7.9 degrees above the horizon in the video.

 

 

A distant ship beyond the curvature of the Earth, as Alcione claims, would appear much lower to the horizon than it actually was.

 

 

Now that the angular elevation of the moon is known a frame from the video also shows the unknown object 7.9 degrees above the horizon. (See Example)

 

 

Now that these measurements have been determined, below are recreations of what the unknown object would look like at the time if you were standing there. It definitely appears too high above the horizon to realistically be considered a cruise ship or yacht.

 

Recreation #1

 

 

 

NOAA Weather Conditions For May 17, 2009:

 

Normal sea level pressure (no fog), light wind, maximum temp 87 - low 62, and clear skies. This indicates that the object wasn't obstructed by fog.

 

Recreation #2

 

 

If the object was the bridge of a cruise ship as Alcione claims it was extremely close to the shore and too shallow which would not happen. The measurement seems to show that the unknown object was too high above the surface for the theory to be correct.

 

 

Video in reference to: 2009 Original Footage

 

General Summary:

 

A triangulation method using the moon shows that the May 17th, 2009 object was too high above the horizon and not consistent with the height of a cruise ship or yacht.

 

 

2. The Nearest Cruise Ship Marina Is Hidden From View

 

Alcione's article incorrectly labeled the location of the cruise ship marina.

 

 

The marina used for visiting cruise ships is the Port Of Karakoy, but that is in the Bosphorus Strait which cannot physically be seen from the witness location.

 

 

3. Marine Tracking AIS Data Does Not Show A Cruise Ship

 

What Is The Automatic Identification System?

 

The Automatic Identification System (AIS) is an automatic tracking system used by vessel traffic services worldwide for identifying and locating vessels by electronically exchanging ship data. AIS transponders automatically transmit the position of ships at regular intervals via a VHF radio built into the AIS. The position and velocity originate from the ship’s GPS.
 

 

Websites like www.marinetraffic.com, www.vesselfinder.com, and others use the "Automatic Identification System" to track daily ship movements worldwide. Note: access to historical AIS data required purchasing a premium membership.

 

Will The Reports Contain A Cruise Ship Or Yacht?

 

Below are AIS vessel traffic reports for the Sea of Marmara from May 13 and May 15 of 2009. The information includes the vessel's call sign, date/time, lat and long, and wind speed. Listed first is May 13th between 2:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m.

 

If a cruise ship or yacht was in the sighting location it should be listed.

 

May 13, 2009 Traffic Report

 

 

Next Step:

 

Plot each ship's coordinates into a map to determine if a cruise ship or yacht was in the area of the sighting at the time. The first visual recreation is below. Will it confirm the presence of a ship?
 

What Will The Traffic Map Explain?

 

Vessel positions and movement in the Sea of Marmara when the video was taken and A depiction of ship traffic at the time of the sighting. Each vessel found in the AIS report was labeled in a visual recreation using each ship's latitude and longitude.
 

May 13, 2009 Vessel Traffic Map

 

 

More information such as vessel type and are available in public databases, www.vesselfinder.com is one example. Posted below are the vessel details for each call sign in the AIS report.

 

The details of each listed ship are as follows. 2BZE6 (yacht), out of view 2 am - 4 am, stationary, V4EL (cargo), obstructed, 2 am - 4 am, stationary, TC2642 (tanker), land obstructed, 2 am - 4 am, stationary, TCAJ4 (passenger), too far West, 3 am - 4 am, headed northwest, YMA2010 (sailing), too far West, 4 am, headed northeast, 9HA3009 (bulk carrier), out of view, 2 am - 4 am, stationary. In the Bosphorus Strait and Black Sea VREG7 (bulk carrier), 3ERE3 (gas tanker), TC4796 (passenger), SZLD (fishing). Each ship listed was either obstructed by land or not visible from the camera's location at the time and none were cruise ships.
 

What Does It Say Exactly?

 

Several ships were in the Bosphorus Strait, some were in the Black Sea while others were out of range to the west or east. There is not an indication that a cruise ship or yacht was in the range of the camera at the time.

 

The object was filmed at 3:58 a.m. in the circled area. (Pictured Below)

 

 

General Findings For The May 13, 2009 Video

 

According to the Automatic Identification System, which is required for larger vessels globally by international maritime regulations:

 

1. There is no evidence that a cruise ship or yacht was in visual range of the camera at 3:59 a.m. on May 13, 2009.

 

2. Secondly, other vessels (i.e. tankers, fishing, or bulk carriers) were either out of view or not visible in the sighting area while the footage was taken.

 

 

The Same Steps Were Repeated For The May 15th, 2009 Segment.

 

Below is the ship traffic report for 5-15-09 including call sign, lat/long, and time code.

 

May 15, 2009 AIS Ship Traffic Report

 

 

The May 15th sighting took place between 4:59 a.m and 5:32 a.m.

 

Again the AIS data was entered into a map to determine if a ship was in the sighting area.
 

May 15, 2009 Traffic Map

 

 

For more information on each vessel in the report, the same steps were repeated and yielded the following findings for May 15th, 2009. Similar to May 13th there was zero indication of a vessel present in the camera's direction between 4:59 a.m. and 5:32 a.m. Ship details are listed below.
 

In the Marmara Sea: TCA2390 (passenger), land obstructed 4 am - 6 am, stationary, SY2442 (fishing), too far west, 5 am - 6 am, headed west, 5BNH3 (tug Supply), obstructed, 4 am - 6 am, stationary, TC7866 (tanker), too far south, 4 am - 6 am, stationary, LAHZ6 (gas tanker), too far south, 4 am - 6 am, stationary C6TZ9 (passenger), too far west, 4 am - 5 am, headed southwest, PHWN (service ship), obstructed, 4 am - 6 am, stationary, 2HEP7 (bulk carrier), land obstructed, 4 am - 6 am, stationary. In the Bosphorus Strait and Black Sea: C6FR5 (passenger), VRAU5 (cargo), 9HZR7 (oil tanker), VQGL (fishing). On May 15, 2009 there was no active cruise ship in the area.

Was There A Cruise Ship Or Yacht In The Sighting Area?

 

There exists no evidence of a boat or yacht within the vicinity of the witness, for May 13, 2009. It also appears that no active cruise ship or yacht was in the area between 4 a.m and 6 a.m.

 

The May 15th, 2009 unknown object was located in the circled area. (Pictured Below)

 

 

 

General Findings For May 15, 2009 Video

 

We have learned the following for May 15, 2009 thanks to the Automatic Identification System, which is required for larger vessels, by the International Maritime Association:
 

1. AIS reports for May 15th do not contain any evidence of a cruise ship or yacht in the unknown object's direction between 4:59 am and 5:32 am on May 15, 2009.

 

2. Similar to the previous report there was also no indication that other ships (tankers, fishing, or bulk carriers) were in the vicinity of the witness.

General Findings For Both Dates:

 

AIS Ship Traffic Reports Contain No Evidence Of a Cruise Ship or Yacht In The Sighting Area At The Time.
 

More reasons continued below....

 

4. There Are No Eye Witnesses To Confirm A Cruise Ship Or Yacht Was Filmed.

 

No residents in the country of Turkey have come forward who witnessed a cruise ship or yacht in the area. Where is the captain and passengers? Following widespread media coverage in Turkey someone to confirm the presence of a cruise ship should have come forward by now.

 

 

Nobody has come forward who remembers seeing a cruise ship in the area.

 

5. 95% Of The Objects Don't Match Alcione's Cruise Ship

 

Speculation that a cruise ship explains the Turkey footage is based entirely on a single frame from just one date out of twenty three. Alcione did not include 2007, 2008, and most of 2009.

 

The entire cruise ship theory is based only on the following photo.
 

If there was only one incident the cruise ship theory would be seriously considered. But there were actually 23 different dates of footage over 3 years of which the majority does not fit Alcione's image. When all the footage is considered the unknown objects do not match Alcione's cruise ship.
 

July 2, 2008 and June 8, 2008

 

When the outline and shape of both these dates are compared to Alcione's cruise ship the configurations are not similar.

 

Shape And Outline Do Not Match

 

There are additional anomalies not mentioned in Alcione's article of footage showing objects that don't match the outline of a ship.

August 10, 2007 and August 1, 2007

Overlays Do Not Match
 

 

May 23, 2008 Unknown Object

 

Another unusual domed object that visually has a different shape than Alcione's photo was witnessed early during of the events of 2008.

 

 

June 12, 2008 Sighting

 

The June 12th, 2008 video is one of the more interesting. It is yet another example that Alcione did not include which doesn't match the bridge of a ship.

 

 

The May 15, 2009 Sightings

 

May 15, 2009 was one of several occasions when the objects were captured
both during the daytime and also at night.

 

 

When comparing with the cruise ship, pictured on the left, the shape and
features have different shapes.

 

Do Not Match

 

The Majority Of The Objects Filmed Actually Don't Match The Outline,
Of The Cruise Ship.

 

More single frame slides here.

 

 

23 different dated segments were not mentioned in Alcione's article.

 

 

Summary:

When all the footage is considered most of the unknown objects do not match the shape of the cruise ship in Alcione's photo.

 

7. Some Of The UFOs Were Filmed Over Land

 

According to Turkish researchers and statements made by Yalcin Yalman, the July 30, 2007, August 31, 2008, and May 14, 2009 videos were not taken by the sea, but instead over land. The May 14th, 2009 video is just one example. It shows an unknown object moving at cloud level in front of a large group of people outside a conference miles away from the ocean.

 

When UFOs were filmed over land it would seem to rule out the cruise ship theory
for these instances. Below are examples of the video taken over land.

 

May 14, 2009 Sighting

 

 

The May 14th, 2009 sighting took place miles away from the ocean.

 

July 30, 2007 Footage:

 

This footage of a glowing ball of light eventually became a dome shaped craft. It was filmed several blocks away from the waterfront at a condominium owned by Yalcin's father which is a good distance away from the sea.

 

 

The sightings that filmed objects over land and not the sea theoretically rule out the possibility of a cruise ship in these instances.

 

8. The Light Ball Phenomenon Does Not Resemble A Cruise Ship Or Yacht

 

Throughout history orange balls of light have been routinely spotted in the presence of unidentified flying objects. Why they are present remains unknown. Again this is the case with Yalcin's film, which curiously contains multiple sequences of lights that are seen during, just before, or just after the other objects. Witness accounts also describe these being present. Multiple straight forward reasons make a cruise ship extremely unlikely to be the cause of these orange light balls

 

Example #1 June 9, 2008

 

During the 2008 wave of sightings, on June 9th, Yalcin and other witnesses observed a motionless glowing ball of light above the water while leaving a bright reflection. Whatever the light is remains unknown, however for clear reasons Alcione's theory fails to explain the cause. (More Below)

 

 

June 9, 2008 Video Segment

 

The ball of light is not likely a cruise ship or yacht.

 

 

In most instances the orange light phenomenon happened at the same location, during, just before, or just after the other objects. (Continued Below)

 

Example #2 July 4, 2008

 

Almost exactly a month later another identical ball of light was sighted in the same spot.

 

 

During the 2008 wave, unidentified objects were being seen by local residents routinely. On July 4th, 2008, this unexplained light was filmed beginning at 5:21 a.m. until 5:53 a.m. There are various visual reasons a cruise ship or yacht is unlikely to be the cause.

 

The unexplained light is too far above the horizon to be a boat.

 

July 4, 2008 Video Segment

 

 

The same day earlier that morning at 2:43 a.m. local time in Turkey the following circular or disc shaped object was present above the sea. Yalcin was filming from the same general vantage point on the beach and facing in the same direction.

 

 

Curiously both sequences were filmed in the same location during the events of July 4, 2008. It might be considered possible that it's the same object.

 

There is a possibility we looking at the same object.

 

Example #3 July 30, 2007

 

According to recent interviews Yalcin Yalman stated that the July 30, 2007 segment was filmed from the outdoor balcony at his father's condo several blocks away from the Yeni Kent facility on the beaches of Kumburgaz. First he noticed a dome shaped anomaly in the distance.

 

 

Only 25 minutes later that morning at 5:15 a.m.

 

The sun is now starting to rise as he again observes something moving across the sky from left to right eventually going behind a chimney.

 

 

 

 

These anomalies are not addressed in Alciones article which raises questions about the alleged "cruise ship theory".
 

July 30, 2007 Video Footage

 

 

Example #4 June 16, 2008

These instances do not display characteristics of a boat.

 

 

June 16, 2008 Unexplained Lights

 

 

June 16, 2008 Video Segment

 

 

Example #5 July 2, 2008

 

Curiously the formation of orange lights have a distinctly similar shape to the anomalies only a couple weeks earlier.

 

 

July 2, 2008 Unexplained Lights

 

There does not appear to be any visual evidence of a boat.

 

 

 

One hour earlier:

 

At 3:53 am that morning this unidentified craft was filmed and witnessed hovering over the sea in the same area as the lights. (Pictured Below)

 

 

The Physical Craft And Orange Lights Remain Unknown.

 

July 2, 2008 Video Segment

 

 

Example #6 May 15, 2009

 

May 15, 2009 Unexplained Light Phenomenon

 

 

21 minutes earlier this craft hovered in the same location.

 

 

In Conclusion:

There is no sufficient evidence to support the theory that a distant cruise ship is responsible for the objects captured on film in Turkey between 2007 and 2009.
 

1. Triangulation shows the unknown object was too high above the horizon to be a ship or yacht.

2. Alcione incorrectly labeled the cruise ship marina's location.

3. AIS ship traffic reports do not list a cruise ship in the area.

4. No eyewitnesses can confirm seeing a cruise ship in the area at the time of the sightings.

5. Alcione only compared one frame from May 13, 2009, but 23 different video segments from 2007, 2008, and most of 2009 are not similar to the cruise ship photo.

6. Cruise ships have a lot of lights at night not seen in the Turkey video.

7. Some of the UFOs were filmed above land areas.

8. Instances of light ball phenomenon are too high above the horizon to be cruise ship.
 

More Blog Posts

 

A Look Behind The TUBITAK Report
JPEG Single Frame Images
Turkey UFO Witnesses Interviewed With Translations
Checking Moon Phases - Do They Match?
Yalcin Yalman Interviewed
About Historic Turkey
Cities of Cappadocia, Turkey
May 15, 2009 Sighting
May 17, 2009 Sighting
July 2, 2008 Sighting
June 12, 2008 Sighting
Possible Occupants

 

 

 

 

 

 

[maroonlegions]

On 25/03/2022 at 22:30, Ulysses said:

 

Outer space.

 

It's like Lochend, but with better boozing. 

 

The only seemingly pished  from boozing  are the ones thinking they are in any credibility league with those i have provided on this thread.

 

Utter cringeworthy patter  to ignore and brush aside highly credible sources who ARE after all, in so much more better positions of experience and know how than yer fitbaw punter cracking jokes  aboot wee green men and anal probing.. 

 

Thats all they have in their rebuttals to highly credible evidence, investigation methods carried out, that  reach a possible ET hypothesis as being credible  for SOME highly strange UAP cases involving the military.. 

 

I have shown that not all cases involve tin foil hat loonies oan U tube. Posting CGI UAP vids..

 

 

 

[Jambo_jim2001]

Turkey UFO one is freaky as anything😮 I done a lot of investigation into that one over the years,sadly turns out to be a ship in the Mediterranean viewed from a great distance away,still looks awesome though👍 There are others though this far that are unexplainable.

[Gizmo]

Is it possible to sue a forum member for RSI of the middle finger? 

All that scrolling...

[Ulysses]

49 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

Is it possible to sue a forum member for RSI of the middle finger? 

All that scrolling...

 

And not one useful and undoctored photo in the whole lot.

 

The most hilarious one was the 1870 fake.  The clinching argument is that it sold on eBay for $385. ANY genuine picture from that age - ANY genuine photo of ANYTHING at all - would sell for a multiple of that, and would probably be snapped up (pardon the pun) by a museum.

[Gizmo]

15 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

And not one useful and undoctored photo in the whole lot.

 

The most hilarious one was the 1870 fake.  The clinching argument is that it sold on eBay for $385. ANY genuine picture from that age - ANY genuine photo of ANYTHING at all - would sell for a multiple of that, and would probably be snapped up (pardon the pun) by a museum.

I was going to debunk the first two photos but I thought, why bother when the poster in question makes claims to a higher authority every time. 

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, Gizmo said:

I was going to debunk the first two photos but I thought, why bother when the poster in question makes claims to a higher authority every time. 

 

What?  He's in direct contact with Starfleet HQ? 

[Gizmo]

37 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

What?  He's in direct contact with Starfleet HQ? 

I couldn't possibly comment on whether he's a Space Cadet. 

[maroonlegions]

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

And not one useful and undoctored photo in the whole lot.

 

The most hilarious one was the 1870 fake.  The clinching argument is that it sold on eBay for $385. ANY genuine picture from that age - ANY genuine photo of ANYTHING at all - would sell for a multiple of that, and would probably be snapped up (pardon the pun) by a museum.

Really then offer your scientific PROOF that any of the OTHERS i posted  of those photos were doctored..

 

1870 fake?? 

 

Hilarious?? 

 

You will of course ignore my post when i said they had passed , after inspection that they were not tampered with.. 

 

You are offering a straw man like argument that just because that 1870 photo went on e bay for  a measly amount it has to be doctored .. LOL

 

Utter cringeworthy rebuttal ..

 

That 1800 photo was genuine..   

 

You focus on ONE photo but remain SILENT on all the others, WHY??? 

 

No real means of photoshopping or CGI means in the 1800s, was man even flying in the 1800s??

 

 Also could you supply ANY museum that has a UFO section in it.. LOL

 

You really think that any museum would display a photo of a UFO , no matter the credibility of it  .

 

And yes i see the picture now ,credibility and credible sources ONLY count when they are from a anti ET hypothesis or from physoskeptics .

 

No matter the credibility, position or privileged to actual investigations carried out they dont count.. That is not science or a scientific way  conduction a FAIR analysis of all available evidence is it.

 

To go away unconvinced, after looking at ALL the available evidence, no matter how old, is one thing but to go away unconvinced after NOT looking  at all available is just not science..

 

Which bracket are you in, no way you have looked at ALL available evidence... The credible ones i mean and their sources.

 

If a proof of alien existence would exist, then this matter would have been handled in the universities rather than here, and then threads like these  would have been  on a forum whatsoever rather than the best conspiracy one in the world.

No, there's NO proof of an alien civilization visiting us, at least NOT known by us mere mortals.

BUT??
We have clues, heavy ones, very important ones.THere is NO question of that.
BUT we miss the smoking gun, WE MISS it, no matter what we believe or what we don't.

All we can do is to put EFFORTS in order to find out as much as we can, no matter how long it will take, no matter if many of us will be called crazy just because they're studying a matter rather than another one.

 

Anyway, i'll repost one of the most convincing cases: in my humble opinion, of course.
Flying UAP , Belgium UFO wave.


1) Object witnessed at Eupen, Wavre, Leige and Brussels
2) Reported in over 2,600 statements to police
3) Photographed by many people on both Video and Camera
4) Detected and Confirmed by radar stations on the ground
5) Detected, Confirmed and photographed on aircraft radar screens
6) Pursued for over an hour by two F-16s.
 

Glons radar confirmed the sighting of an unidentified object at an altitude of 3,000 meters. Semmerzake radar confirmed the Glons detection and passed its confirmation onto the Air Force. The radar scans were compared with the previous Eupen radar sightings (see Eupen Case) by Semmerzake and Glons and were found to be identical.
Several police patrols had witnessed the same phenomenon before. It was a massive triangular shape with the same lighting configuration as seen at Eupen four months earlier.

 

Colonel Wilfred De Brouwer, Chief of the operations section of the Air Force, said: "That because of the frequency or requests for radar confirmation at Glons and Semmerzake - and as a number of private visual observations had been confirmed by the police - it was decided that as these parameters had been met, a patrol of F-16 aircraft should be sent to intercept an unidentified object somewhere to the south of Brussels"

As a consequence, two F-16 aircraft of the Belgian Air Force - registration
numbers 349 and 350 = flown by a Captain and a Flight-Lieutenant, both highly qualified pilots, took off from Bevekom.

Within a few minutes - guided by the Glons radar - both pilots had detected a positive oval-shaped object on their on-board radar at a height of 3,000 meters, but in the darkness saw nothing. This oval configuration, however, caused the pilots some concern. It reacted in an intelligent and disturbing way when they attempted to 'lock-on' with their on-board radar.

Changing shape instantly, it assumed a distinct 'diamond image' on their radar screens and - increasing its speed to 1,000km/h - took immediate and violent evasive action.

This is what has been disclosed by the military 

 

 

Photographs of the actual on-board radar of the F-16s recorded a descent of this object from 3,000m to 1,200 in 2 seconds, a descent rate of 1,800km/h. The same photographs show an unbelievable acceleration rate of 280km/h to 1,800km/h in a few seconds. According to Professor Leon Brening - a non-linear dynamic theorist at the Free University of Brussels - this would represent an acceleration of 46g and would be beyond the possibility of any human pilot to endure.

It was noted that in spite of these speeds and acceleration times there was a marked absence of any sonic boom. The movements of this object were described by the pilots and radar operators as 'wildly erratic and step-like', and a zigzag course was taken over the city of Brussels with the two F-16s in pursuit. Visual contact was not possible against the lighting of the city.

This same procedure was repeated several times, with this object - whenever an attempt at radar 'lock-on' was made - pursuing a violently erratic course at impossible speed and losing its pursuers.

Colonel De Brouwer added "Immediately after the operation, the pilots said they had never seen anything like it. Certainly the flight pattern and echo on their screens was in no way that of a conventional aircraft"

The Belgian Minister of Defence in the Belgian parliament stated that "The Government did not know what they were".???

Acceleration data?? Have you even looked at any UAP cases that ARE backed up with it??

 

Radar data is also evidence not just a photo that did not end up in a museum?? 

 

"The 990K is the speed of the object in knots.

990K = 1830 kilometers per hour = 1.5 Mach."
 

Clearly, some radical maneuvers are occurring..??

Speed changes of up to 410 knots in one second.

Heading changes of up to 70 degrees in one second.

Altitude changes of up to 3000 feet per second (1,777 knots) maintained for one second or less and typical ascent / descent rates of 1000 feet per second (592 knots).

That these maneuvers are radical can be seen by comparing them to some representative figures for commonly available fighter aircraft. For instance, the F-4 Phantom is known be able to turn at only 11.5 degrees per second, less than 1/6 as fast as the observed UFO profile.

The nature of these maneuvers and their coincidence in time is also visible and highly important , which only shows the value of the changes  this UAP was able to perform.

Sources, more infos and references:

www.ufoevidence.org...
www.ufoevidence.org...
ufos.about.com...
www.ufoevidence.org...
www.geocities.com...
ufologie.net...


Debunk this one.

 

The answer is that there is no proof, just like there's none about God. Just like that though the belief in aliens has become it's own religion, with "believers" and "non-believers". 

Believers take bits and pieces of information and put it together to saying it's enough evidence of aliens, and that we must show faith and belief to fill in the holes.

Non-believers will not buy it until the proof is there.

I mean, think about it. If planets and solar systems which inhabit the Goldilocks zones have life then we are NOT alone. 

THE DRAKE EQUATION is NOT based on the universe. It's only talking about our Milky Way galaxy.

I think it would benefit people who talk about it to actually read up on itl.

It only talks about the potential to communicate or to send signals out there that could be received by the teck we have.

 

Easy to take the piss bit much harder to own up???

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

[maroonlegions]

Just now, Gizmo said:

I couldn't possibly comment on whether he's a Space Cadet. 

That all you have isit it.. Character assassination..

 

 

 

 

[Gizmo]

4 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

That all you have isit it.. Character assassination..

 

 

 

 

At least I have a sense of humour. 👍

[Unknown user]

4 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

That all you have isit it.. Character assassination..

 

 

 

No, he also has the fact that aliens haven't landed

[Ulysses]

5 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

At least I have a sense of humour. 👍

 

 

CAN you OFFER scientific PROOF...that YOU have a SENSE of humour?!?

[Ulysses]

6 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

No, he also has the fact that aliens haven't landed

 

 

[Ked]

I accept that ML posts are long and not exactly ....exact.

 

But cmoan posters take it easy .

 

[Gizmo]

31 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

CAN you OFFER scientific PROOF...that YOU have a SENSE of humour?!?

I laughed at Billy Connolly who is THE authority on comedy. So yeah. 

[Greedy Jambo]

Is the American Government at it then? when they've admitted that there's objects in their sky that they can't explain?

And the pilots that seen them with their own eyes? and witnessed them doing maneuvers 'out of this world' Also at it?

[Greedy Jambo]

I would post videos of the military pilots and the radar operators that have backed them up, but you wouldn't even watch them.