Houston UFO sighting

245

Comments

  • SunnierSunnier Posts: 850
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    A very obvious question here...

    If so many people, including the 'experts' you have quoted above have stated that this footage is genuine...why therefore was this not reported widely in the media as proof of visitation by alien life?

    And please don't use the 'government cover-up/surpression' angle, because the footage is available on youtube and has been discussed freely on many forums, including this one.

    A good question,now if there had been say a one hour program on the BBC at prime time with top scientists etc,plus newspapers giving the fullest coverage it would be much more well known,as far as i know no coverage was given to this event by the uk media.(The Turkish ufo)
  • Toby LaRhoneToby LaRhone Posts: 12,916
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Sunnier wrote: »
    Am no expert but this clip achieved nearly 2000 'thumbs up' from viewer's on youtube,..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUEjeYn5Obg

    Supposed to be able to see the occupant's of this ufo!
    The final frame "This is not a hoax" does it for me.

    There are "stories" out there that Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan have personally seen them.
  • Ted CTed C Posts: 11,730
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Andrue wrote: »
    Oh I'd go further than that. I'm sure there is life elsewhere and sure that some of it is at least as intelligent as us. But space is vast and crossing between stars is difficult. Such a long and difficult journey is unlikely to be taken on a whim and certainly not just to wind up stupid humans. My own theory is that any life form capable of making that journey has probably moved beyond planetary living anyway. They might view planets as the cradle of life but the thing about cradles is that you don't spend very long in them.

    I think that once you have the technology to life in space you have far more options and resources available to you. Looking down at us now is probably akin to looking through the window of a creche. Kinda fun to see a young species playing childish games but there are more interesting things to do elsewhere.That's because CGI is known to exist. Your the ones claiming something extraordinary and as the saying goes - extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.


    Agree to a certain extent.

    But here is another thing that gets me about the multitude of supposed craft flitting about the skies...what exactly is their purpose?

    If they want us to know they are there, then why don't they just land and say hello?

    And if they don't want us to know they exist, they aren't exactly doing a good job of hiding, with millions of videos showing all sorts of supposed craft...and indeed reports of such happenings go back thousands of years...apparently.

    Considering that the whole UFO phenomenon is now a very lucrative, multi-million pound industry, does anyone wonder why the videos, claims, witness reports etc are always vague enough leave them open to interpretation? Thereby perpetuating the 'mystery' and ensuring that those who choose to believe are prone to lap up any available material and parephenalia, ie spend lots of money on such things?

    Just a thought...;-)
  • TrollHunterTrollHunter Posts: 12,496
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    A very poor attempt to rubbish the opinions of people who seek to use their common sense and question what is put before them, a quality that every person on the planet should possess.

    As I have stated elsewhere on here I don't discount the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe, but have yet to see the evidence that we have been visited.

    Oh yes, there are plenty of claims, videos, footage, testimonies etc...but frankly none can or have been proven conclusively.

    Ultimately it is all down to what a person chooses to believe based on what information is available. That a person chooses to believe does not in itself validate what they believe, merely that they have decided to draw their own conclusion from what they see.

    Frankly, the claims of such people hold no more weight or veracity than anyone else's. I never have and never will be convinced of such claims simply because someone points me to a youtube video, and TELLS me what it I am supposed to be looking at and then tells me to believe it.

    Similarly with these tired old apochryphal stories of old, like Rendelsham...people who are convinced of what they have seen, and have chosen to interpret what they have seen as extraterrestial. Fact is they don't know what they have seen and cannot explain it, and have drawn their own conclusions, They have effectively convinced themselves, but I am not bound by anything to believe what they say. Neither is anyone else.

    The thing is, if the footage is grainy and shot from some distance away, it's credibility is questioned in the first instance.
    If it's in HD filmed relatively close-up, it's going to be claimed as being CGI.
    If it's verified by a eminent scholar, it's going to be claimed that the scholar is impartial or 'in on it'.

    Occam's Razor would say that it being an alien craft is the last thing you'd believe it to be, so unless you actually saw it with your own eyes, you're not going to believe it anyway.

    Out of interest, what criteria would you have in place to actually accept that a UFO was in fact an alien craft rather than something more innocent?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 8,916
    Forum Member
    Looks like they have a problem.
  • SaturnVSaturnV Posts: 11,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    "Went mental on twittet" tells you this story is utterly inane.
  • coughthecatcoughthecat Posts: 6,876
    Forum Member
    Over 2 million people living in Houston, and by the looks of it three people managed to take one photo each.

    Impressive stuff! :cool:
  • SunnierSunnier Posts: 850
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'll leave the last word,because they are all important,to a UK national hero,Lord-Hill Norton,..

    "Since my name has become connected with UFO matters in quite a big way in this country, and in one or two other countries too, I have frequently been asked why a person of my background — a former Chief of the Defense Staff, a former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee — why I think there is a cover-up, or what the reasons may be for government’s wishing to cover up the facts about UFOs. A number of explanations have often been put forward. The most frequent, and perhaps the most plausible, is the government’s concern (which [is] primarily that of the United States, and that of my own country) over the public’s reaction if they [were] told the truth — which is that there are objects in our atmosphere which are technically miles in advance of anything that we can deploy, that we have no means of stopping them coming here, and that we have no defense against them, should they be hostile"

    :D
  • Ted CTed C Posts: 11,730
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The thing is, if the footage is grainy and shot from some distance away, it's credibility is questioned in the first instance.
    If it's in HD filmed relatively close-up, it's going to be claimed as being CGI.
    If it's verified by a eminent scholar, it's going to be claimed that the scholar is impartial or 'in on it'.

    Occam's Razor would say that it being an alien craft is the last thing you'd believe it to be, so unless you actually saw it with your own eyes, you're not going to believe it anyway.

    Out of interest, what criteria would you have in place to actually accept that a UFO was in fact an alien craft rather than something more innocent?


    Interesting points...

    Firstly, your first two sentences are flawed, because such is the level of technology and fakery these days, footage can be made to look grainy/old etc on purpose.

    And I never claimed that experts etc are 'in on it', just that their conclusions can be wrong based on the available evidence. They can draw a conclusion only that in their opinion it is real, but not state definitively that it is actually real.

    But your last point is the most interesting one - these days it would be possible for someone to actually build something that resembles a spacecraft, and even make it fly. And with animatronic/robotic and modern make-up techniques a convincing alien could be made.

    Therefore if you walked up to and actually touched one of these, would that make it real? Not nescessarily.

    It would actually be phenomenally difficult to convince people that such things are real...I could only say that you would probably need to actually go inside a spacecraft and be taken into space, or to an alien planet.

    And yes I know that sounds ridiculous, but then again isn't the whole premise anyway? ;-)
  • Ted CTed C Posts: 11,730
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Sunnier wrote: »
    I'll leave the last word,because they are all important,to a UK national hero,Lord-Hill Norton,..

    "Since my name has become connected with UFO matters in quite a big way in this country, and in one or two other countries too, I have frequently been asked why a person of my background — a former Chief of the Defense Staff, a former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee — why I think there is a cover-up, or what the reasons may be for government’s wishing to cover up the facts about UFOs. A number of explanations have often been put forward. The most frequent, and perhaps the most plausible, is the government’s concern (which [is] primarily that of the United States, and that of my own country) over the public’s reaction if they [were] told the truth — which is that there are objects in our atmosphere which are technically miles in advance of anything that we can deploy, that we have no means of stopping them coming here, and that we have no defense against them, should they be hostile"

    :D


    Two important things to note here...

    Despite his eminent standing, he is still only proferring a personal opinion. Using phrases like 'perhaps the most plausible' are hardly decisive, definitive statements.

    Also, if it is a 'prelude to an invasion'...what are they waiting for? We become more and more technically advanced every day, so why would they still wait? Surely we were more vulnerable in previous years, and much easier to conquer?
  • TrollHunterTrollHunter Posts: 12,496
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It would actually be phenomenally difficult to convince people that such things are real...I could only say that you would probably need to actually go inside a spacecraft and be taken into space, or to an alien planet.

    And yes I know that sounds ridiculous, but then again isn't the whole premise anyway? ;-)

    That's pretty much my take on it.

    My initial response would always be to call "Fake" purely because although the idea of aliens visiting our little planet is not impossible, it's so improbable, because there are so many possibilities of what it could be before the notion of aliens even enters my mind as being even the slightest possibility.
  • TheSilentFezTheSilentFez Posts: 11,103
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Sunnier wrote: »
    Am no expert but this clip achieved nearly 2000 'thumbs up' from viewer's on youtube,..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUEjeYn5Obg

    Supposed to be able to see the occupant's of this ufo!

    Interesting that the same man managed to see the same UFO twice, a year apart without anyone else seeing or recording it.
    Also interesting that he can't hold a camera steady.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,279
    Forum Member
    <snip>
    As usual, this idiotic journalist has attributed the term UFO with aliens, as well as the 'expert'. I've seen a few UFOs in my time, and I don't usually genuinely link them to aliens. I get a chill and think 'oh my God, what the hell is that' but I usually think military secret planes, drones, some weird thing from Russia etc. Why can't these people use logic? UFO means 'unidentified flying object', so that can refer to anything that we cannot identify that is flying. That saucer was no plane to me. So the ironic thing in this stupid Mail article is the journo looks like a fool.
    It amuses me the way one of the photos in that article has the caption "Potential UFO". They don't know what it is so it is a UFO.
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    Trouble is, these days the "innocence" is gone from all this stuff and, either out of an over-enthusiastic desire to believe of for more cynical reasons, you're often going to get people faking something in order to attempt to corroborate an initial sighting.

    When I was a kid, back in the 1970's we had one of THESE hanging over the kitchen table and I recall, one dull Saturday, I looked out of the kitchen window, saw the reflection from the lamp and, I swear, for a few seconds I really did think there was a UFO hovering above our garden shed.
    It even appeared to be moving around slightly as I moved and my perspective shifted.

    Thing is, if I saw that today (or, if I was feeling mischievous, I constructed a more complex thing to reflect in a window) and took a picture of it, claiming it was a UFO, I can almost guarantee that within a few days, by the power of Photoshop, other pictures of the same thing would be appearing, from other people who claimed to have seen the same thing.

    The people who do this kind of thing are actually doing huge damage to the credibility of legitimate sightings because, before you can even attempt to speculate on what it might be, you've got to apply a healthy dose of scepticism in order to decide whether it's actually a hoax or not.

    Anybody remember all the fuss over the "temple mount" video's a few years ago?
  • pfgpowellpfgpowell Posts: 5,347
    Forum Member
    Andrue wrote: »
    It is far simpler to apply Occam's Razor and conclude that it's human observational error and photographic artefacting.

    That about sums it up.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36,630
    Forum Member
    Si_Crewe wrote: »
    Trouble is, these days the "innocence" is gone from all this stuff and, either out of an over-enthusiastic desire to believe of for more cynical reasons, you're often going to get people faking something in order to attempt to corroborate an initial sighting.

    When I was a kid, back in the 1970's we had one of THESE hanging over the kitchen table and I recall, one dull Saturday, I looked out of the kitchen window, saw the reflection from the lamp and, I swear, for a few seconds I really did think there was a UFO hovering above our garden shed.
    It even appeared to be moving around slightly as I moved and my perspective shifted.

    Thing is, if I saw that today (or, if I was feeling mischievous, I constructed a more complex thing to reflect in a window) and took a picture of it, claiming it was a UFO, I can almost guarantee that within a few days, by the power of Photoshop, other pictures of the same thing would be appearing, from other people who claimed to have seen the same thing.

    The people who do this kind of thing are actually doing huge damage to the credibility of legitimate sightings because, before you can even attempt to speculate on what it might be, you've got to apply a healthy dose of scepticism in order to decide whether it's actually a hoax or not.

    Anybody remember all the fuss over the "temple mount" video's a few years ago?

    Indeed.

    I'm a firm believer that out there, somewhere, there is intelligent life. However I don't believe it is likely we have ever been visited, just because the distances are so vast and it seems (by our current understanding) that travel faster than light is not possible. I have a feeling they are also seeing optical illusions, weird cloud formations, weather balloons and other things and are arguing over whether they too have been visited. :)

    Some people just want to believe, similar to those who see dust particles in pictures and immediately conclude they are orbs, and refuse to accept any logical or scientific explanations to the contrary.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,279
    Forum Member
    Indeed.

    I'm a firm believer that out there, somewhere, there is intelligent life. However I don't believe it is likely we have ever been visited, just because the distances are so vast and it seems (by our current understanding) that travel faster than light is not possible. I have a feeling they are also seeing optical illusions, weird cloud formations, weather balloons and other things and are arguing over whether they too have been visited. :)

    Some people just want to believe, similar to those who see dust particles in pictures and immediately conclude they are orbs, and refuse to accept any logical or scientific explanations to the contrary.
    Not only that, but if all the alien intelligent life that surely is out there were somehow able to come here...where is everybody?
  • TerraCanisTerraCanis Posts: 14,099
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It is possible to construct a scenario in which we are being covertly observed by aliens - but there are some "teasers" who, if they're caught, a liable to have their saucer licence endorsed, or ven be bannen for a yarren or two.
  • Ted CTed C Posts: 11,730
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    TerraCanis wrote: »
    It is possible to construct a scenario in which we are being covertly observed by aliens - but there are some "teasers" who, if they're caught, a liable to have their saucer licence endorsed, or ven be bannen for a yarren or two.

    To paraphrase Lord Backadder himself...

    'Well it started badly...went downhill in the middle...and the less said about the ending the better' :D
  • Jennifer JayneJennifer Jayne Posts: 9,022
    Forum Member
    TerraCanis wrote: »
    It is possible to construct a scenario in which we are being covertly observed by aliens - but there are some "teasers" who, if they're caught, a liable to have their saucer licence endorsed, or ven be bannen for a yarren or two.

    Did I have a stroke half way through this post?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 6,279
    Forum Member
    *marv* wrote: »
    Did I have a stroke half way through this post?
    No, I think Terra did :D
  • RobinOfLoxleyRobinOfLoxley Posts: 27,040
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It is possible to construct many scenarios

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI6DTPjeG1Y
  • TremseTremse Posts: 864
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    dese_5757 wrote: »
    In the early 90's I was living in Vancouver British Columbia and for months all you heard on tv and radio was about the UFO being sighted in and around Seattle and Washington State. I was on my way to work one morning when the local radio station announced that if anyone wanted to witness the UFO then tonight would be the last time it would be seen as Boeing (theres a plant in Seattle) would be delivering the new Stealth to the US Airforce the next day. Apparently Boeing was doing nightly test runs.

    I live near an AFB and we get more than our fair share of UFO sightings here. It's pretty obvious they're testing new aircraft though. In fact, triangular craft were seen here in the early 80s, well before the Stealth F-117 made its appearance in the first Gulf War.
  • nobabydaddynobabydaddy Posts: 2,701
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    UFOs. What a load of rollocks.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,313
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I live in crop-circle-land, bang on the doorstep of henges and nice Wiltshire stuff. Every single year our town is overrun by what are mostly American tourists who come to see the aliens. They visit the crop circles, spend hours listening to people being paid to talk about it, and they're a pain. You go for a pint and they're shocked that while you live here you've never yet conversed with an alien and they think you're nuts for sitting in the crop circles that you know damn well the farmer paid someone to do, so that you can be at one with your spirit and do ommmm stuff to the aliens.

    There's a lot of money to be made in this, but there's nothing but people willing it to be true.
Sign In or Register to comment.