I just wondered how 130 groups worldwide and countless other like Stanton Friedman and. All of them share the same photos the same videos and all of have proven eaxactly nothing. Nothing you could hang in the Smithstonian Air and Space museam and say yup, thats a UFO. Stanton Friedman and people like Bill Birnes from UFO hunters spent a great portion of their lives trying to prove UFO existance and proved exactly nothing. Stanton every one of his lectures he badmouths SETI. This guy has made a fortune and has been to all 50 states and 16 countries. Hes made a fortune by declaration by proclaimation < his favorite line. Now when they go probing classified area like dugway and Area 51 the government draws the line and slams the dor on any disclosure of anything. All these people do is try to sell books and maintain on the lecture circut $195.00 off the street Students 145.00. Im in the wrong line of work dont havta prove anything.

I think we need to re-visit what a UFO is. It is an Unidentified Flying Object. i.e.an object that has been observed but cannot be explained or identified. It does not necessarily HAVE to be of extraterrestrial origin just because it cannot be explained, it could be a secret government project.

But of course in everyday use the term UFO is synonymous with ET's and always will be.

Heck, they were calling a drone on a flatbed truck a UFO a couple weeks ago. Not even flying.

I still remember a news clip from TV some year back. A UFOlogist was saying this group of three lights jerking around the sky in perfect formation was proof of ET visiting. Well at one spot the TV engineer when playing the clip "uncrushed the black" or "made it brighter" and you could then see the outline of the airliner. It was a hand held shot of a airliner using a long telephoto lens. Yet this expert kept on with this as proof positive of us being visited by ET. All I could think of is con man. Perhaps better he steal this way than using a Nigerian scheme.

---

All I could think of is con man. Perhaps better he steal this way than using a Nigerian scheme.

No worse than any cleric, priest, minister or other holy man.

These individuals tend to be well educated so I think that they really do know better, and that what they are putting down is pure and utter nonsense for which there is a huge market and monetary reward.

People want to believe in something more than what is factually or perceptably "real".

You totaly right:) some year's before in the 80-90's are a wave of BLACK TRIANGLE sightings,
today we know that was from Lockheed Martin TR-3/b Astra,
by typing it by google your will find some informations about it.
Greetings :)

---

And why people ignore these credible military officers' claim on the phenomenon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUU4Z8QdHI

Either these military officers are shameless liers or the debunkers are shameless ignorant sheep.

---

Mandtugai!

And why people ignore these credible military officers' claim on the phenomenon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUU4Z8QdHI

Either these military officers are shameless liers or the debunkers are shameless ignorant sheep.

What makes them credible? Just because they're in the military? Even intelligent people are not immune to delusions or being fooled.

Don't be an ignorant sheep; don't fall for the worst kind of evidence: eye-witness reports.

And why people ignore these credible military officers' claim on the phenomenon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUU4Z8QdHI

Either these military officers are shameless liers or the debunkers are shameless ignorant sheep.

What makes them credible? Just because they're in the military? Even intelligent people are not immune to delusions or being fooled.

Don't be an ignorant sheep; don't fall for the worst kind of evidence: eye-witness reports.

Yeah from every military branches especially from Air force and Nuclear ICBM Command officers all at same time get haluscinating is very interesting isn't it?!

Compare to other job sectors military personnel is supposedly most mentally toughened breeds to survive extreme conditions so I'd prefer not to ignore them.

---

Mandtugai!

And why people ignore these credible military officers' claim on the phenomenon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jUU4Z8QdHI

Either these military officers are shameless liers or the debunkers are shameless ignorant sheep.

What makes them credible? Just because they're in the military? Even intelligent people are not immune to delusions or being fooled.

Don't be an ignorant sheep; don't fall for the worst kind of evidence: eye-witness reports.

Yeah from every military branches especially from Air force and Nuclear ICBM Command officers all at same time get haluscinating is very interesting isn't it?!

Compare to other job sectors military personnel is supposedly most mentally toughened breeds to survive extreme conditions so I'd prefer not to ignore them.

Well then that's your first mistake. Just because they're trained to be mentally tough, doesn't mean they can't suffer from delusions. If the military were as tough as you suggest, then none of them would ever suffer PTSD after war. The military are not super-humans, they're ordinary people.

This cool Star Wars movie can Tulio translate it for curious viewers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KExx_T4SSds Sounds like italian. :)

---

Mandtugai!

No, I think it is Spanish.

---

Yes.

It is a general assumption that so-called "credible" witnesses are being ridiculed when being approached or confronted with the subject of UFO's and extraterrestrials.

I guess this will continue to be so.

There is another latest multi witness Ufo incident was one at Chicago O'Hare Airport incident which pilots and airport workers like around 10 people at least saw and unanimously said seeing something saucer hanging on top of one terminal in the sky.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT3uGJQZuBg

And that giant Arizona flying V shaped thing that has thousands of witnesses which even harder case to be ridiculed than military mens claims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtXuG4bsYfY

---

Mandtugai!

There is another latest multi witness Ufo incident was one at Chicago O'Hare Airport incident which pilots and airport workers like around 10 people at least saw and unanimously said seeing something saucer hanging on top of one terminal in the sky.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT3uGJQZuBg

Right, because any Unidentified Flying Object must be of alien origin. The very fact that O'Hare officials weren't told about a government project must mean an alien cover-up.

Please re-read the links posted to Penn and Teller's Bullshit episode on Area 51.

And that giant Arizona flying V shaped thing that has thousands of witnesses which even harder case to be ridiculed than military mens claims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtXuG4bsYfY

Why are these videos always at night? These people are chasing flares at night and trying to insist they're alien UFOs. Again, this has already been debunked or explained in the Penn and Teller videos linked elsewhere.

Eye witness reports of seeing "lights in the sky" are not evidence of alien UFO visitations.

[Edit] For your convenience, the Penn and Teller Bullshit episode dealing with alien conspiracy theories (they talk about Area 51, but it applies equally to all claims):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvLDdItltRo Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ptyKgp84hk Part 2

That's CGI...,or any kind of photoshop to show an Saucer...,the Jet's&Heli are real.

Now I suspect ozzfan is some form of Disinformation agent from CIA or NSA or some extreme Catholics church group.

Especially that Arizona case has even former Arizona governor bravely came forward to support Phoenix ufo case along with its thousands of residents.

Whatever powerful disinformation agent out here it is just meanengless to debunk a hard case with thousands of witnesses.

---

Mandtugai!

Now I suspect ozzfan is some form of Disinformation agent from CIA or NSA or some extreme Catholics church group.

I'm a skeptic Atheist. I prefer hard evidence rather than eye-witness reports.

Especially that Arizona case has even former Arizona governor bravely came forward to support Phoenix ufo case along with its thousands of residents.

Yeah, no shortage of people looking for attention. I guess that's why he's a "former" governor.

Whatever powerful disinformation agent out here it is just meanengless to debunk a hard case with thousands of witnesses.

That's not really a "hard case". Lights in the sky means absolutely nothing. I live near Chicago O'Hare International and I know exactly what lights they're talking about.

I suppose with all the eye-witness reports of ghosts and spirits, that each one of those cases must be real too, right?

If some of those UFO sightings were of alien origin then clearly they
do not wish to have any contact with us, so it seems. If they wish to learn something
about this planet Earth they certainly wont learn much by landing in obscure
remote regions devoid of any populous. If aliens do exist and they have been
regularly visiting this planet then I suspect then that as yet we don't know
about it. What we have seen so far under the banner of UFO'ism is not alien
in origin. For if some were, then they will know they have been seen so by now
will have fessed up to us/it.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Time to put this one to bed: The lights in Phoenix were caused by OPFORS training from Luke AFB. Now to prove it at the start of the film where the lights first start appearing. As the lights appear count seconds at each light is a flare in a f16 magnesium flares on parachutes the amount is set by the pilot in 2 second intervals. Count them and prove me wrong. Too many excellant radars in that area to be anything else. Some can burn for quite some time. The flares are on a switch 2/4/6 second intervals on a F16 which they were using.
\Again just unidetifyiable lights at a distance at night.

Time to put this one to bed: The lights in Phoenix were caused by OPFORS training from Luke AFB. Now to prove it at the start of the film where the lights first start appearing. As the lights appear count seconds at each light is a flare in a f16 magnesium flares on parachutes the amount is set by the pilot in 2 second intervals. Count them and prove me wrong. Too many excellant radars in that area to be anything else. Some can burn for quite some time. The flares are on a switch 2/4/6 second intervals on a F16 which they were using.
\Again just unidetifyiable lights at a distance at night.

That flare explanation is the most retarded explaining ever. If flare was thrown from the plane or shot then it supposed to fall down not be stationary. There is no any on air hanging stationary flare on this planet. Even with parachute hanging flare hanging stationary is simply against physical law well for corporate debunkers every physical law is breachable anyways.

Another big logical breach is anything unexplainable happens on top of big city then it is usually some military top secret drill thing. But to any common sense all military drills supposedly take place as far away as possible from civilian residences to avoid any lethal accidents.

So for Phoenix case there are 2 major illogical explanations presented by debunkers versus 1000s of witnesses. Well this multi witness cases happen many places just in case of Phoenix there were more people happen to hold few cameras so documentation trails managed to exist.

There is another retarded explanation is for any other crimes or events an eye witness credit is acceptable but for unexplained events any eye witness credit is un-acceptable even the witnesses count in 1000s is still un-aceptable what kind of super retardation is that.

---

Mandtugai!

That flare explanation is the most retarded explaining ever. If flare was thrown from the plane or shot then it supposed to fall down not be stationary. There is no any on air hanging stationary flare on this planet. Even with parachute hanging flare hanging stationary is simply against physical law well for corporate debunkers every physical law is breachable anyways.

The flare is shot from a predetermined location on the ground. There is a small parachute attached which is deployed once the flare reaches it's position. The heat from the flare reduces the drop time since heat rises.

Another big logical breach is anything unexplainable happens on top of big city then it is usually some military top secret drill thing. But to any common sense all military drills supposedly take place as far away as possible from civilian residences to avoid any lethal accidents.

Yes, because the U.S. Government would never develop any secret military testing where it could be lethal to civilians. It's not like the first atom bomb wasn't being developed virtually under the bleachers of a University here in Chicago, IL.

So for Phoenix case there are 2 major illogical explanations presented by debunkers versus 1000s of witnesses. Well this multi witness cases happen many places just in case of Phoenix there were more people happen to hold few cameras so documentation trails managed to exist.

There is another retarded explanation is for any other crimes or events an eye witness credit is acceptable but for unexplained events any eye witness credit is un-acceptable even the witnesses count in 1000s is still un-aceptable what kind of super retardation is that.

Ask any lawyer how easy it is to discredit an eye witness.

An August ruling by the New Jersey Supreme Court will make it easier for defendants to question the credibility of eyewitness testimony in criminal cases. The decision is part of an ongoing debate about the role eyewitness testimony plays in criminal proceedings.

New Jersey aren't the only ones. There is widespread agreement among researchers that the correlation between identification accuracy and confidence in identification judgments is weak. For this reason, many experts caution against heavy reliance on confidence when evaluating identification accuracy. The authors present a meta-analytic review of 30 studies using staged-event methods that include target-present and target-absent lineups. Although the overall confidence–accuracy correlation in these studies corresponds to that reported in previous reviews, including choice as a moderator variable leads to a somewhat different conclusion. For choosers (those making positive identification), the confidence–accuracy correlation was reliably and consistently higher than for nonchoosers. In addition, the mean confidence level for correct choosers is higher than that for incorrect choosers in every study.

In most courts of the 21st century, eye-witness testimony has been proven to be less than optimal.

C'mon Orgil, try using some critical thinking. Or at least raise your IQ by about 20 points.