Your favorite UFO case(s) - and why?

[Aaron LeClair]

Nope, as far as I know, no one had really documented Gulf Breeze before Ed Walters. Everyone thinks it began with him, and it absolutely did not. It had been going on for decades, including major sightings at Elgin AFB, and assorted wierdness.

I documented and wrote a paper on it in I believe it was the late 90's, that I posted at my current website before it was lost to the net of old stuff.

Bruce and Ed's book on Gulf Breeze is worth checking out, for those who are interested. Ufos are real: Here's the Proof. It deals with many other people. Has some impressive pics etc. too.

Buy it for a penny.
Amazon.com: Ufo's Are Real...and Her: Various: Books

 

[Aaron LeClair]

I just read this review of the book I just posted.

"This book is a work of fiction pretending to be science. Ed Walters continues where he left off in Gulf Breeze Sightings, trying to convince the reader the he was actually the witness to multiple UFO sightings, most occuring right at his house! How convenient. Maccabee tries to convince the reader that Walters is just too inept to be able to pull off a hoax while underplaying the fact that Walters was a successful building contractor in Florida. The camera he used to take the UFO pictures, a Polaroid, was the same camera he used everyday in his work. In addition, as a contractor he was familiar with measurement, size and distance; a talent that would facilitate creating a perfect UFO picture. There may have been UFOs in the Gulf Breeze area at the time..but the question begs to be answered...how did Ed Walters get 40, nearly perfect photos, of the UFO and no one else could manage to get one? UFOs Are real...but this isnt the proof."




Strange, the book has loads of other good photos by other witnesses.

 

[Gareth]

The Nellis AFB sighting. Not much of a 'case' I guess, but its fucking brilliant video of a clearly ant-gravity craft. Heres a direct quote of a post I made in a thread that got lost to the ether...

This is easily the best UFO footage I have ever seen. Some of the turns this thing does toward the end of the film are just mind blowing.



UFO - NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE - NEVADA TEST SITE - MAY 30, 1995 - (HIGH-QUALITY)

Some very thorough analysis by two separate people:

The Nellis UFO Video - Part One: Range Operations, Tracking Cameras and Location S-30

Nellis_discussion

 

[Aaron LeClair]

I've seen military stuff that looks identical to the Nellis object. Sorry, no reference though. I recall it was a remote controlled balloon.

 

[Gareth]

I've seen military stuff that looks identical to the Nellis object. Sorry, no reference though. I recall it was a remote controlled balloon.

What sort of propulsion did it use?

Also you cant really make out the shape of the Nellis thing. Unless you were told it was the same?

 

[marco]

Jacques Vallee hesitated before agreeing to be interviewed about the subject for which he's most famous: UFOs. It's not that he's reluctant to discuss the topic, or tussle with the skeptics. After all, he's written close to a dozen books on UFOs,

 

[Hoffmeister]

I just read this review of the book I just posted.

"This book is a work of fiction pretending to be science. Ed Walters continues where he left off in Gulf Breeze Sightings, trying to convince the reader the he was actually the witness to multiple UFO sightings, most occuring right at his house! How convenient. Maccabee tries to convince the reader that Walters is just too inept to be able to pull off a hoax while underplaying the fact that Walters was a successful building contractor in Florida. The camera he used to take the UFO pictures, a Polaroid, was the same camera he used everyday in his work. In addition, as a contractor he was familiar with measurement, size and distance; a talent that would facilitate creating a perfect UFO picture. There may have been UFOs in the Gulf Breeze area at the time..but the question begs to be answered...how did Ed Walters get 40, nearly perfect photos, of the UFO and no one else could manage to get one? UFOs Are real...but this isnt the proof."




Strange, the book has loads of other good photos by other witnesses.

Didnt somebody buy a house off Ed and then find one of the replica model crafts that he was using to fake the photo's with in the attic or something.
Thats what i heard somewhere

 

[skunkape]

The Nellis AFB sighting. Not much of a 'case' I guess, but its fucking brilliant video of a clearly ant-gravity craft. Heres a direct quote of a post I made in a thread that got lost to the ether...

This is easily the best UFO footage I have ever seen. Some of the turns this thing does toward the end of the film are just mind blowing.

I've personally witnessed objects, I won't go so far as to call them 'craft', maneuver in such a manner. It has crossed my mind that it may be possible for satellites to cross laser-beams from space and create interference patterns that look like 3-d objects from the ground. This would be an enormously powerful tool of mass-control for the powers that be.

 

[Kevin Daly]

I like the Socorro case, although it would obviously be better with multiple witnesses.
Zamoro described an insignia or design on the apparent craft, which makes it a very interesting case from my point of view (way up the information scale from lights in the sky).
That's assuming it wasn't a hoax or a prototype lunar lander or something, but AFAIK nobody's made a convincing case for that.

 

[schticknz]

What sort of propulsion did it use?

Also you cant really make out the shape of the Nellis thing. Unless you were told it was the same?

Doesn't it change its shape?? ... anyway whatever it does, its no balloon. Still one of my top ufo cases after seeing it on Sightings over here in New Zealand in the late 90s, and as far as I've seen has not been anywhere near being debunked.

(of course I'm entitled to be wrong on anything and everything that I spout on a day to day basis )

 

[111uminate]

JAL1628. (Link is to Bruce Maccabee's analysis.)

Multiple radar, multiple observer.

Well, it's certainly one of my favorites.

That'd be a favorite of mine as well. Just about anything covered by Maccabee is worth looking at in my opinion, regardless of the conclusion. Beyond that, I'm still fascinated by the Belgium Wave. Colonel Wilfred De Brouwer's commentary on it is very interesting to me, particularly when he mentions the possibility of the craft being of US origins, and that if it were, it shouldn't be in Belgian skies.

 

[Bixyboo]

Interesting vid. Whether it's real or fake, still interesting.....

 

[macavity]

Doesn't it change its shape?? ... anyway whatever it does, its no balloon.

I forget the name of the show (some debunking type show on Discovery or the History Channel) but they had a recent episode looking at witness claims of similar objects (i.e. similar in size, shape, movement). They did a test with a bunch of balloons and if I'm honest it was very, very reminiscent of what we see in the Nellis video, although that particular video was not referred to in the show.

I was a bit disappointed to tell you the truth, the Nellis vid is a really interesting one in many ways, but having seen how similar balloons bunched together were to the shape and movement of the object portrayed it's pretty much case closed for me :frown:

 

[Gareth]

I forget the name of the show (some debunking type show on Discovery or the History Channel) but they had a recent episode looking at witness claims of similar objects (i.e. similar in size, shape, movement). They did a test with a bunch of balloons and if I'm honest it was very, very reminiscent of what we see in the Nellis video, although that particular video was not referred to in the show.

I was a bit disappointed to tell you the truth, the Nellis vid is a really interesting one in many ways, but having seen how similar balloons bunched together were to the shape and movement of the object portrayed it's pretty much case closed for me :frown:

But it would have to be radio controlled balloons. They way object stops and turns and all the rest.

 

[fitzbew88]

But it would have to be radio controlled balloons. They way object stops and turns and all the rest.

Watch the Nellis film and the radar ranging information at the bottom of the video and ask yourself: does the range information seem to reflect what the unknown object is actually doing?

If we determine that the radar ranging information is not actually tracking the object, then the anomalous nature of its "stops and turns" need to be reassessed.

All of the analyses of this film that I have seen (and by no means am I claiming to have seen all of them!) presume that the object is moving in tandem with the range readings, thus establishing very anomalous capabilities.

I have never been able to adequately rule out the possibility that the camera is looking at one object, but the radar is tracking one or more objects downrange.

 

[Gareth]

Ive never thought that the readings at the bottom were tracking the object. Particularly because you can hear people in the background asking questions and generally not seeming to have any idea what it is. I got the impression they were out doing something else and saw this thing and started filming it.

Not sure what the data at the bottom of the screen is.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

What sort of propulsion did it use?

Also you cant really make out the shape of the Nellis thing. Unless you were told it was the same?

I'm not privy to what propulsion was used. All I know is I've seen remote balloons years ago that look like the "ufo" at times in the Nellis vid. Something to keep in mind. Maybe you'll run into it someday.

 

[skunkape]

It's pretty hard to top the 'battle of Los Angeles'. I can't think of another case that involved civilian casualties. The Spielberg film '1941' is loosely based on the incident.

Wikimedia Error

 

[Noanswers]

While there are a ton of good cases out there (and even more bad one's) the one that continues to stick with me, and astound me, is the case of the school children in Ruwa, Zimbabwe.
I certainly don't adhere to late John Mack's theories as to what enounters and/or abductions are, I do think he was credible and did good work in documenting the phenomena. It was his ideas about the origins and motovations of the "aliens" that I might take exception with.
That said, the hair still stands up on the back of my neck when I watch the old videos of those children recounting what happened to them. Who knows what it was. . .what is evident, at least to me, is that the children experienced something beyond their comprehension.
The Mack Foundation website makes note that a man is making a documentary about the event and tracking down the children, now young adults, and they are sticking by their collective story.
Come to think of it, the film-maker would be a great guest for the Paracast. I'll bet he could get through the whole thing without mentioning Rosewell.

 

[Gareth]

While there are a ton of good cases out there (and even more bad one's) the one that continues to stick with me, and astound me, is the case of the school children in Ruwa, Zimbabwe.
I certainly don't adhere to late John Mack's theories as to what enounters and/or abductions are, I do think he was credible and did good work in documenting the phenomena. It was his ideas about the origins and motovations of the "aliens" that I might take exception with.
That said, the hair still stands up on the back of my neck when I watch the old videos of those children recounting what happened to them. Who knows what it was. . .what is evident, at least to me, is that the children experienced something beyond their comprehension.
The Mack Foundation website makes note that a man is making a documentary about the event and tracking down the children, now young adults, and they are sticking by their collective story.
Come to think of it, the film-maker would be a great guest for the Paracast. I'll bet he could get through the whole thing without mentioning Rosewell.

Are those interview vide floating around the Net somewhere?