Do you believe in UFO's and Aliens?

Post Reply New Topic

Ball lighting is small, the orange object was large, and was not making natural movements, estimated size was 30'. Ball lighting is unknown in the Canadian prairies, and the area is not an active earthquake zone, so earthquake lights can also be ruled out, and lastly, swamp gas, well you would need a swamp for that, this sighting was along a busy road between two neighborhoods. Now I am not saying these were aliens flying these UFO's, since both these sighting occurred about 10km from RCAF Station Namao, During the Cold War RCAF Station Namao was used by the United States Strategic Air Command, strangely enough, the base was also at the epicenter of UFO sightings in this region of Alberta. I am sure what me and my mom and sister saw, was some sort of air force test, of what I have no idea.
I am curious how the catholic church and miracles was bought up on a totally off topic thing as that priests stigmata, this is considered a miracle, but so is the Miracle at Fatima, which to me is one of the most widely seen UFO sightings in history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Miracle_of_the_Sun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Fatima

You did not say what the date was or what time of day this sighting occurred, nor did you state what the weather conditions were. You also left out any indications of what made you think it was rotating. Since you did not report any stars or other objects in the sky, I could assume that there were none to be seen - indicating limited visibility. Since it occurred near a military based, I suspect that this sighting could well have been a targetting balloon, used for radar training.



First of all, at 2:00 am, a person's ability to visually determine the size and distance of an object is impaired by darkness. Thus, your estimates of range, altitude, and size of the objects are in doubt. Since you did not report any stars or other objects in the sky, I could assume that there were none to be seen - indicating limited visibility during this sighting as well. Since you also did not report any sounds, I can only assume that their were none of those, either.

My suspicion is that the second set of objects was a weather or radiosonde balloon, with its payload dangling below and nav beacons active. That it "blinked out" means only that it may have passed through or behind a cloud or fog bank. Another suspicion is the old "Chinese Lantern" trick - suspending a candle under a paper bag and forming a small hot air balloon.

It's too bad that you have no photographic evidence of either of these two sightings.

Well Fnord, the first one, I was only 5 years old, I knew it was Easter because it was we were having Easter dinner, the sighting also occurred at dusk between 5 or 7 pm, and having seen targeting balloons, I also have some experience with weather balloons, I can say without a doubt that this was no targeting balloon. You don't know this area, there is no gunnery ranges in this area, also the closest one is like 200km to the east, if a balloon managed to head to the location of this sighting, it would be a miracle, since the prevailing wind would take any balloon towards the east. Balloons also don't take off when followed, or make unusual maneuvers.
The second sighting was not a couple of chinese lanterns, those tend to move with the air currents, what I saw was stationary for most of the sighting, we thought it was a helicopter, but couldn't hear anything, it was also a very clear night, with no fog or clouds, now the neighborhood where this sighting occurred is also on a direct flight path for the municipal airport, and I am familiar with seeing aircraft at a 2000' elevation, on approach to the airport. I also did not give a size of the object, it was only 2 points of light, radio sonde balloons also don't blink out and reappear instantly in another part of the sky. I do have to mention on the second sighting, we couldn't hear any sound, we did hear a lot of frogs croaking, but when the lights reappeared over us, it went dead silent. But you were not there, so don't make half assed conclusions on what I saw. I am skeptical on most sightings, and have solved a few as natural or man made ones, I am also an amateur astronomer, and I am very familiar with the night sky, with over 35 years experience. If you want evidence then stand outside with a camera and wait to see one, and see who believes you. Some of these sightings don't have an explanation, and they don't tend to leave any evidence, except for the blurred out of focus picture, I don't believe alot of the picture I have seen to be genuine, but some to the video being captured is compelling.

Spudnik,

I'm not going to say that you saw nothing those two nights. And I'm not going to say that you saw something that was not of terrestrial origin, either. But I am going to critique your reporting style.

Not that I said 'critique' and not 'criticize'.

First, consider your time at the eyepiece. You are an observer. You see things and report them. You take note current conditions and of any changes to them. This is what you do.

Now consider the accepted form of reporting a new comet. First you check your optics to see that they're clean. You note precisely the time, your location, the elevation and azimuth of your equipment, and the seeing conditions, including any possible interference from nearby light sources. Then you note the relative or proper motion of the comet, its shape, color and magnitude, its position relative to nearby stars, any spikes from the head, the length of its tail (if any) in arcseconds, where the tail (if any) is pointed, and whether it is difuse, defined, straight, curved, or even bifurcated.

Then you check your reference material to see if it could be another, already-known comet.

If you are still convinced that you may be the discoverer, you send the report - including your name, address and other contact information - off to the International Astronomical Union (IAU) / Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams and hope that no one else got there ahead of you. With any luck, we could all be going outside at night to view Comet Spudnik, or staying inside to watch you get interviewed on the telly.

Now, imagine trying to apply the same standards you used in the reports from your blog -- imagine that you sent in a comet discovery using the same format and lack of vital detail that you used for those reports -- to the IAU. What would happen? Likely, they would be ignored in favor of another report written by someone who followed established protocol. Instead of Comet Spudnik, you could end up grinding your teeth over the name of Comet Fnord.

Granted, thirty years or more have passed since your sightings. Granted, you were only a kid or a teen. Granted, you did not have the training and discipline then that you do now. But you've reported something, and you expect others to believe that what you saw was completely out of the ordinary, and you seem to feel offended when they don't.

I was in the U.S. Navy. While at sea, I witnessed a few events that I'm not at liberty to discuss today; and yes, some may (or may not) have involved flying objects. So I know what it is like to turn over an exceptionally detailed report, only to be told, "You saw nothing ... there was nothing to see ... nothing to report ... don't talk about this to anyone." How much worse is it to post an incomplete report of what you think is an extra-ordinary event, only to be told that it was merely an ordinary balloon of some kind?

Not much worse, I'd wager. In fact, your sighting reports are likely to be filed along with reports detailing sightings of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and Elvis. There is nothing historically significant about them, so please don't take offense when someone else points out the holes where missing data should be, or the erroneous assumptions, or that there are other possibilities to consider, because for people (like me) who make a living by paying attention to and reporting the most minute details, your reports don't really warrant much attention.

I apologize, and I hope you understand.

Well writing is not one of my strong points, and I did leave a lot of information out, that I still have, so no offense taken, I will defiantly take what you said as constructive criticism. As I have said before, I am not a believer in aliens visiting us in ufo's, I think thats a load of nonsense, my father was also a witness to the first sighting, but never talked about it, he was also in the military at the time, and would not have been at liberty to say anything either. I have sort of assumed my sighting on march 26th 1967 was some sort of air force testing, as there was a similar sighting 9 days before on march 16th at Malmstrom AFB in Montana which was also part of United States Strategic Air Command, so there was something strange going on surrounding some of the AFB's.

that was my first thought too.


/used to run a crappy direct damage deck

I believe there's a strong chance that somewhere out there, there's intelligent life. It's a strong plausibility; all it needs is evidence.

it's entirely plausible but that's not really the question being postulated...i don't think.

Must delete

there is so much more
unfortunately you're all wrong and I cant help
if i do I will be demolecularized

Im not going out like that

Last edited by Fred2670 on 23 Jul 2008, 2:42 am, edited 2 times in total.

Pyramids on mars.

But you want proof , I have none just the pics nasa took.

But look at the statistics . Out of all the planets in existance do you really think this one is the only one with civilized life forms?

To think such things would be highly egotistical.

I am not bashing you, I just want you to think of it from that angle for a moment.

Feel free to disagree with me , your entitled to.

Mountains ... ordinary mountains.


None of your own? Pity...


What statistics?

We know of only one star with an Earth-like planet. Does this mean that 100% of all stars also have an Earth-like planet?

We also know of only one Earth-like planet that supports intelligent life. Should we then assume that 100% of all Earth-like planets support intelligent life?

A sample of one is not statistically significant.


Not at all. I'm just waiting for real evidence - not assumptions and wishful thinking - that demonstrate the existance of intelligent life originating on planets other than Earth.


I have, many times, and each time I come up with a new plot for a science-fiction story or role-playing game.

It's these things called "education" and "intelligence" that prevent me from looking at a grainy picture of a flying hubcap and thinking of anything other than "fraud."

Show me an extraterrestrial alien ... a real one ... not one made of polymer gel over a frame of metal and plastic.


Ooo ... I am SO glad that I have your PERMISSION. May I also think for myself, your grace?

Fnord, let me remind you and all of you folks here that UFO means UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT! I does NOT automatically mean alien spaceship . Furthermore, there's a very famous cause that took place in Belgium around 1989-1990
where a triangular craft was not only seen from the ground by literally thousands of witnesses, but it was Detected and Tracked by RADAR. Since RADAR cannot detect light the presence of positive returns from 3 NATO radar stations is Strong Evidence that there actually was something in the skies. Not to mention the fact that 2 NATO F-16s were scrambled to intercept this object....I have no proof tht such an object was from a distant world but in THAT case there are few other explanations that fit the evidence. I suspect a certain(albeit small)percentage of UFOs are autonomous robotic probes from far away planets rather than spacecrafts with actual Aliens on board.

Now, didn't I read a post stating this very thing? Ahh ... here it is:


That was back on the 16th of this month - exactly one week ago.

Yer preachin ta the choir here, rev'rund.

I believe in extraterrestrial life, but the myths about UFOs, cattle mutilations, abductions etc. are BS.

You're Wrong.