Best ufo photos ever taken

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Mar 6, 2016.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Actually we who have studied hundreds of cases of ufos AREN'T arguing whether ufos are alien space ships. We are simply studying the nature of the phenomena as it presents itself, which is that of a craft that travels and accelerates at tremendous speeds, is often tracked on radar, emits huge amounts of energy, and often lands leaving traces on the ground and vegetation as well as physical effects on eyewitness.

    With radar.

    Do I look like an alien? Ask them.

    I'm providing a plausible explanation within the confines of modern physics theory. It is all speculation at this point until we actually find one of these craft and reverse engineer it.

    Not all claims need to be testable. Sometimes the explanatory power of the theory is enough, like with Darwin and Einstein. Their theories weren't immediately testable. Yet look how we accepted them nonetheless.

    "The Belgian UFO wave began in November 1989. The events of 29 November would be documented by no less than thirty different groups of witnesses, and three separate groups of police officers. All of the reports related a large object flying at low altitude. The craft was of a flat, triangular shape, with lights underneath. This giant craft did not make a sound as it slowly moved across the landscape of Belgium. There was free sharing of information as the Belgian populace tracked this craft as it moved from the town of Liege to the border of the Netherlands and Germany.[1]

    The Belgian UFO wave peaked with the events of the night of 30–31 March 1990. On that night, unknown objects were tracked on radar, chased by two Belgian Air Force F-16s, photographed, and were sighted by an estimated 13,500 people on the ground – 2,600 of whom filed written statements describing in detail what they had seen.[2] Following the incident, the Belgian air force released a report detailing the events of that night.

    At around 23:00 on 30 March, the supervisor for the Control Reporting Center (CRC) at Glons received reports that three unusual lights were seen moving towards Thorembais-Gembloux, which lies to the southeast of Brussels. The lights were reported to be brighter than stars, changing color between red, green and yellow, and appeared to be fixed at the vertices of an equilateral triangle. At this point, Glons CRC requested the Wavre gendarmerie send a patrol to confirm the sighting.

    Approximately 10 minutes later, a second set of lights was sighted moving towards the first triangle. By around 23:30, the Wavre gendarmerie had confirmed the initial sightings and Glons CRC had been able to observe the phenomenon on radar. During this time, the second set of lights, after some erratic manoeuvres, had also formed themselves into a smaller triangle. After tracking the targets and after receiving a second radar confirmation from the Traffic Center Control at Semmerzake, Glons CRC gave the order to scramble two F-16 fighters from Beauvechain Air Base shortly before midnight. Throughout this time, the phenomenon was still clearly visible from the ground, with witnesses describing the whole formation as maintaining their relative positions while moving slowly across the sky. Witnesses also reported two dimmer lights towards the municipality of Eghezee displaying similar erratic movements to the second set of lights.

    Over the next hour, the two scrambled F-16s attempted nine separate interceptions of the targets. On three occasions, they managed to obtain a radar lock for a few seconds but each time the targets changed position and speed so rapidly that the lock was broken. During the first radar lock, the target accelerated from 240 km/h to over 1,770 km/h while changing altitude from 2,700 m to 1,500 m, then up to 3,350 m before descending to almost ground level – the first descent of more than 900 m taking less than two seconds. Similar manoeuvres were observed during both subsequent radar locks. On no occasion were the F-16 pilots able to make visual contact with the targets and at no point, despite the speeds involved, was there any indication of a sonic boom. Moreover, narrator Robert Stack added in an episode of Unsolved Mysteries, the sudden changes in acceleration and deceleration would have been fatal to one or more human pilots.

    During this time, ground witnesses broadly corroborate the information obtained by radar. They described seeing the smaller triangle completely disappear from sight at one point, while the larger triangle moved upwards very rapidly as the F-16s flew past. After 00:30, radar contact became much more sporadic and the final confirmed lock took place at 00:40. This final lock was once again broken by an acceleration from around 160 km/h to 1,120 km/h, after which the radar of the F-16s and those at Glons and Semmerzake all lost contact. Following several further unconfirmed contacts, the F-16s eventually returned to base shortly after 01:00.

    The final details of the sighting were provided by the members of the Wavre gendarmerie who had been sent to confirm the original report. They describe four lights now being arranged in a square formation, all making short jerky movements, before gradually losing their luminosity and disappearing in four separate directions at around 01:30."===

    "On the evening of May 25, 1995 America West Flight 564 was flying at an altitude of about 39,000 ft close to Bovina, Texas. While observing lightning outside the plane, the attendant noticed a peculiar set of flickering lights a little bit below the 757. The First Officer was alerted to the phenomena, he immediately saw the lights which he described as eight bright blue strobes. As the rest of the flight crew watched the flashing lights, they could discern the object as being cigar-shaped. The pilots estimated it to be between 300 and 400 ft long. The object could not be seen on the FAA’s radar. The following day the controllers checked with NORAD and discovered that they tracked an unknown object the previous evening that appeared to be stationary, but would accelerate and stop time and time again at high speeds. These quick sprints were estimated between 1,000 and 1,400 mph. The object was also seen by a US Air Force pilot manning an EF 111A. To date, the incident remains unsolved."====

    Here's a classic case of ufos tracked by multiple ground based and pilot radars:
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2016
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    These photos are created with an app on your mobile phone.
    These Indian photos were remarkably similar to other ones that were later exposed as hoaxes using the app Camera360.

    So consider these photos as anything but convincing, I'm afraid, MR.
    ajanta, Russ_Watters and exchemist like this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Now, what will he do? Will it be:

    a) yeah I knew all along and was just having a laugh at you guys' expense,

    b) I'm terribly sorry about this, I seem to have been taken for a ride,

    c) The Express is an unreliable newspaper so this camera app story is probably a hoax itself,

    d) well never mind that one, how about this and this and this (Gish Gallop)? Or...

    e) will he just go quiet?

    My money would be on (d) in an unperturbed system, but I realise my comment creates a perturbation which may alter the relative probabilities of each outcome. Anyway, time to open the popcorn......
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    So because the boy's image is saucer-shaped and there are pictures of saucers that are hoaxed the image must by hoaxed? That doesn't follow at all.
  8. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    The other pictures are not just saucer-shaped but of a saucer that looks exactly the same as the one the Indian boy supposedly took a photo of.
    Those other pictures are known to be fake (using the Camera360 app).
    So the same craft appears on the Indian boy's photos...
    ... and you don't think it follows that the Indian boy's photos are also likely to be faked using the same, or similar, app?
  9. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    No they aren't exactly the same. They're different pics of saucer shaped craft. It doesn't prove anything.

    On further examination, maybe so. I noticed the boy's saucer pics are more stretched out, which I suppose could be done on photoshop. Good catch.
    Last edited: May 18, 2016
  10. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Not on photoshop but in the app itself.
    You should try out the apps yourself and see what pics you can generate, and then see if you'd normally mistake them for "evidence".

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Does anyone else here recognize the absolute futility of trying to make headway with someone who, in regards extraordinary phenomena, freely admits to taking potential evidence at face-value?

    Look, here:
    This is a bald-faced admission that - unless proven otherwise - any photograph is just assumed to be reality. No skepticism at all. No shame; not a hint of sheepishness.
    Russ_Watters and Daecon like this.
  12. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    I think the term is "wilful ignorance".
  13. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    'Confirmation bias writ large' and 'self-fulfilling claim' also fit the bill.
  14. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Because it is now relevant to the "what evidence" thread, I need to comment on this:
    There is another, unspoken step there, which may or may not be obvious: reality of what? The obvious answer: aliens. That is, anything that comes across his vision has already been pre-connected to UFOS, and his default belief is aliens. That means that anytime anything unknown is seen in the sky, he assumes aliens and he requires solid proof otherwise. It's so absurd that it strains belief to think anyone could be like that, but it explains his behavior well.

    In the other thread, random stactic on a radar screen is assumed to be aliens and since static is a return from something that doesn't exist, it can't be prove -- hence: still aliens!

    The rest of us, when we see static on a radar screen, we never move past that step; it's just static on a radar screen!
  15. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Or a mist cloud above a car wreck that, to him, looks like a ghost, whereas to the rest if us, looks like a mist cloud.

    There is a definite strong consistency here, in general thought processes, regarding critical thinking and wishful thinking.
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Good work, Baldeee.

    Also, telling that Magical Realist was resistant to changing his mind even when all-but-conclusive evidence was presented to him.
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Right..I stick to my guns and I'm at fault. Then I admit it was photoshopped and I'm still at fault. Your personalized animus against me is blatantly obvious.
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Well yes. The fault lies in sticking to, and poorly defending something that, despite a lack of compelling evidence, just cannot be concluded as extant.
    There were myriad opportunities for you to cry uncle.

    But it's nothing personal, and its certainly not merely James R. Kind of silly to single James out after ten zillion posts from dozens of members.

    If the whole world tells you you're not thining straight, that should at least be pause for thought.

    I know you don't agree with that assesssment, but, well, yeah, sometimes people have irrational faith and simply cannot be reasoned with.
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    If I was at fault for not buying the photoshop claim, then I can't very well be at fault for admitting it later on. "MR admitted it, but only after more solid evidence was presented." lol! That's a criticism? Attacking me as a person in both cases exposes both intellectual dishonesty and emotional bias against me. Normal people would be praising me for my objectivity. But you can never please a disgruntled troll. They'll bitch no matter what. Because it's always personal for them.

    What are you talking about? 10 zillion posts where and about what? You mean all the other personal attacks from the 6 trolls who regularly hangout in this forum? What does that prove? That I'm hated by trolls here? So what? For me that's a badge of honor.

    Sounds like the old argumentum ad populum fallacy again. If the gang or mob around you tells you your stupid, or crazy, or a loser, or a fag, then that must be what you are.

    And you think insulting me as having irrational faith and being beyond reasoning with helps your credibility here at all? Oh more disgruntled troll that is ad homing me because he can never win an argument with me. Take a number...
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2016
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Well, let's wait and see if your contributions become more moderate and humble than they have been historically. That way, you won't find yourself quite so high to have quite so long a fall.

    After all, most of the forum has been very patient trying to talk you down to a less lethal height. But you call them trolls and liars. Now you want credit from them?
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    I don't want credit from trolls. I don't want credit from anyone. I'm just here to discuss and enlighten the ignorant, even when they fight tooth and nail against it.

    LOL! and no..most the forum hasn't been anything here. Most the forum totally ignores this subforum. You must be referring to the 6 trolls again who constantly flame and attack me for not buying their bullshit.
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Then what's with all the complaining?

    var cake = have || eat;
  23. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Ask James R. He's the one complaining about me not admitting photoshop until I had good evidence for it. Like when you swooped in to defend one troll for calling me a psychopath, again you swoop in to defend the complainer and then complain about me taking offense to it. Methinks the ladies doth complain too much.

Share This Page