http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=TD6MYZcucQA
I see no reason why this conversation should continue past that link.
I see no reason why this conversation should continue past that link.
The Phoenix Lights
- Thread starter EndLightEnd
- Start date
All that suggests is that the objects could have been moving over the mountain range themselves.
Also how do you explain the video and reports of the lights disappearing and then reappearing before they fell behind the mountain?
This is where the simple facts elude you.
Of course there were flares(happy now?). They were sent up to create a cover story for the prior event.
Another ignorant assumption.
This place hasn't gotten any smarter in the years I've been away.
How about "We don't know"? Why is that such a difficult thing for some of you people to grasp? :shrug:
What 'wild-ass' claims were made? Please, expound on this attack?
You know skinwalker...... your arrogance is embarrassing.
The "wild-ass claim" is that there is something significant or mysterious.
Nuts, crackpots and UFO believers come out of the woodwork anytime a flare is dropped or a plane flies past were planes don't usually fly.
While my arrogance apparently embarasses you, I've long learned to cope with it. But its your gulibility that should be more embarassing for you.
Again, this thread is about the flares. That's what was posted in the images of the OP and that's what the original poster went on about. The suggestion that the flares were a "coverup" suggests not only gulibility but ignorance. Perhaps these embarassing trends are what kept you away all these "years?"
Nuts, crackpots and UFO believers come out of the woodwork anytime a flare is dropped or a plane flies past were planes don't usually fly.
While my arrogance apparently embarasses you, I've long learned to cope with it. But its your gulibility that should be more embarassing for you.
Again, this thread is about the flares. That's what was posted in the images of the OP and that's what the original poster went on about. The suggestion that the flares were a "coverup" suggests not only gulibility but ignorance. Perhaps these embarassing trends are what kept you away all these "years?"
As noted by a poster that lives in Phoenix on page one, military flares are a common occurrence on the outskirts of the city. The notion of flares being dropped deep within the city was even referred to as "not surprising".
This begs the question: what about THESE flares would bring hundreds (maybe thousands?) of people to a near panic and furthermore DEMAND an investigation, press conference, etc. concerning the issue?
To make the issue worse, city officials entertained the idea of a large (ET, no less) craft flying horizontally over a section of the city.
My question the board is this: How can we, now, calm the panic associated with UFOs in general, when military and officials many times seem to be working towards the opposite?
Also, is it possible the UFO subject is perceived as advantageous to national security in the US?
This begs the question: what about THESE flares would bring hundreds (maybe thousands?) of people to a near panic and furthermore DEMAND an investigation, press conference, etc. concerning the issue?
To make the issue worse, city officials entertained the idea of a large (ET, no less) craft flying horizontally over a section of the city.
My question the board is this: How can we, now, calm the panic associated with UFOs in general, when military and officials many times seem to be working towards the opposite?
Also, is it possible the UFO subject is perceived as advantageous to national security in the US?
electrafixtion
Registered Senior Member
I don't honestly think, at least from my observation's vantage point, that there is any real "panic" incited by UFOs these days, as was the case in the 40s/50s.
The military, post the initial REAL studies conducted by the air force on the phenomenon, to which the ends concerning the phenomenon WAS attributed to unexplainable technology, has been to down play UFOs as explicable and mundane.
The later question is not one that I really understand. Could you give it a little contextual weight?
That is a very good question. I had never approached it from that angle before. Indeed this town would know what flares look like having witnessed several prior drops.
Excellent point cluster.
electrafixtion
Registered Senior Member
Yes, that is an EXCELLENT point. I really didn't consider that. I apologize if I misunderstood your post.
The skeptics seem to be ignoring that post, let me re-iterate.
Why would this particular flare drop send the residents of Phoenix into a frenzy, when the same citizens had witnessed several drops on earlier dates with no reaction?
Why would this particular flare drop send the residents of Phoenix into a frenzy, when the same citizens had witnessed several drops on earlier dates with no reaction?
Quite right, Oph - as if mass hysteria was something totally new.
Here's another thought that just occured to me: even if the military announced in advance that they would be conducting night exercises involving flares over some town, there would be some nuts STILL crawl out of the woodwork claiming it was some sort of alien activity!
electrafixtion
Registered Senior Member
So admittedly you both have no clue as to why the exact same event triggered a completely different reaction?
If in fact mass hysteria did manifest itself one time, wouldn't it make sense that it would do so prior rather than latter?
You both do realize that mass hysteria is not a fleeting event don't you?
If in fact mass hysteria did manifest itself one time, wouldn't it make sense that it would do so prior rather than latter?
You both do realize that mass hysteria is not a fleeting event don't you?
To re-emphasize what Oph said, it's clear that you haven't studied any psychology, otherwise you would not have said any of the above.
Out of simple curiosity and not trying to put you on the spot, but exactly what is your level of education - particularly in regard to the sciences?
Please elaborate on the principle in psychology which dictates why humans who have repeatedly observed an event have a sudden and new reaction to the same event.
You say things like that but I have an inkling your no psychologist either.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
You are absolutely correct. I am not a professional psychologist. I have had an interest in psychology since my early teenage years and so have almost five decades of reading both popular and professional works on the subject. My job related management studies have led me to read many further professional works. My interest in people coupled with a fascination with science have caused me to look closely at people's motives and behaviour in everyday situations. (Speaking of behaviour I have read a great deal about primate behaviour.) So although I have no professional qualification - and huge areas of ignorance - I feel I have a better grasp of the subject than most laypeople.
Is it sufficient to reach unambiguous conclusions? I trained as a geologist. We don't do unambiguous.
Is it sufficient to identify commonplace behavioural responses? I think so.
Humans rarely observe anything, they generally perceive it. If you understand the difference between these you will understand why your question is meaningless.