I think I saw a UFO tonight.

[photon]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

I would love all the debunkers and non believers out there to tell me what they think the Phoenix Lights were...oh let me guess, they were "flares"

Yeah, don't listen to the pilot of a the plane who dropped the flares or anything, he's obviously part of the cover-up.

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-05-21#feature

EDIT: Wow, way too late.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Planes..lol
Cool story bro.

Again, there were two sightings - first, planes, then flares.

Burden is on you bro, and you got nothing.

[FoxMulder91]

Originally Posted by troutman

Again, there were two sightings - first, planes, then flares.

Burden is on you bro, and you got nothing.

Where are the pilots that were flying in that formation over Phoenix?
Why did some witness's say the object blocked the stars?
Also I get a huge laugh at people listening to the "flare" story

[photon]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Where are the pilots that were flying in that formation over Phoenix?

Just getting home from work now I'd imagine, Phoenix is an hour behind us isn't it?

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Why did some witness's say the object blocking the stars?

Because eyes aren't cameras and people will get caught up in the story and embellish it, see things that aren't there and miss things that are there. This is well known and studied.

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Also I get a huge laugh at people listening to the "flare" story

You can clearly see the flares disappearing behind the mountains, and you can see them disappearing at different times depending on the elevation of the camera recording it.. so now you've got bright lights floating down slowly and disappearing behind a mountain range. That's pretty strong evidence there.

[CaptainCrunch]

would love all the debunkers and non believers out there to tell me what they think the Phoenix Lights were...oh let me guess, they were "flares"

Mitch Stanley's account through his 60x telescope

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...12.html?&wired

Flares caused the second sighting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix...and_skepticism

The second event has been more thoroughly covered by the media, due in part to the military's backing of the explanation. The USAF explained the second event as slow falling, long burning flares dropped by an A-10 Warthog aircraft on a training exercise over Luke Air Force Base. An investigation by Luke AFB itself also came to this conclusion and declared the case solved.[23]
Air National Guard pilot, Lt. Col. Ed Jones, responding to a March 2007 media query, confirmed that he had flown one of the aircraft in the formation that dropped flares on the night in question.[23] The squadron to which he belonged was in fact in Arizona on a training exercise at the time, according to the Maryland Air National Guard. A history of the Maryland Air National Guard published in 2000 previously asserted that the squadron, the 104th Fighter Squadron, was responsible for the incident.[24] The first reports that members of the Maryland Air National Guard were responsible for the incident were published in The Arizona Republic newspaper in July 1997.[25]
Military flares[26][27] such as these can be seen from hundreds of miles with correct environmental conditions.[1] Later comparisons with known military flare drops were reported on local television stations, showing similarities between the known military flare drops and the Phoenix Lights[2] An analysis of the luminosity of LUU-2B/B illumination flares, the type which would have been in use by A-10 aircraft at the time, determined that the luminosity of such flares at a range of approximately 50–70 miles would fall well within the range of the lights viewed from Phoenix. However, this was not brought forward until July of 1997, and the flares were reportedly dropped before the sightings took place.[22]

[FoxMulder91]

Originally Posted by photon

Yeah, don't listen to the pilot of a the plane who dropped the flares or anything, he's obviously part of the cover-up.

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-05-21#feature

EDIT: Wow, way too late.

The Phoenix lights case is not without its controversy, much of which originated from the Air Force. In May of 1997, Luke AFB Public Affairs Office stated that Air Force personnel had investigated the so-called "UFOs," and had solved the case. They claimed that flares dropped from an A-10 "Warthog" had caused the numerous reports of night lights. This explanation is totally unfounded for several reasons. First of all, flares do not move in unison, fall toward the ground, and then fly back up into the air, and move across many miles without changing their relative positions. Secondly, many witnesses had made reports of the giant lights hours before the reported time of the launch of the flares.

http://www.ufocasebook.com/phoenixlights.html

[photon]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

The Phoenix lights case is not without its controversy, much of which originated from the Air Force. In May of 1997, Luke AFB Public Affairs Office stated that Air Force personnel had investigated the so-called "UFOs," and had solved the case. They claimed that flares dropped from an A-10 "Warthog" had caused the numerous reports of night lights. This explanation is totally unfounded for several reasons. First of all, flares do not move in unison, fall toward the ground, and then fly back up into the air, and move across many miles without changing their relative positions. Secondly, many witnesses had made reports of the giant lights hours before the reported time of the launch of the flares.

http://www.ufocasebook.com/phoenixlights.html

See, exactly what the link troutman provided says.. the two separate reports got conflated. There's nothing showing the flares moved up and down, and witnesses of lights hours before the flares saw the formation of planes and later conflated the two reports.

This is so old and has been so done, it's boring.

Until some real evidence is brought forward it's all very tiring after a while.

[FoxMulder91]

Originally Posted by photon

See, exactly what the link troutman provided says.. the two separate reports got conflated. There's nothing showing the flares moved up and down, and witnesses of lights hours before the flares saw the formation of planes and later conflated the two reports.

This is so old and has been so done, it's boring.

Until some real evidence is brought forward it's all very tiring after a while.

Theres eyewitness reports, which are much more trustworthy then the airforce of government when it comes to discussing UFO's.

[CaptainCrunch]

but the videotapes taken that night by many people show without a doubt that this was a string of mundane lights that fell and disappeared behind the range, exactly as a string of flares dropped by the military planes would have.

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-05-21#feature

[FoxMulder91]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-05-21#feature

All these links from skeptic.com are not legit.
Would be nice if you guys could provide evidence from a trustworthy source.
Thanks

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Planes..lol
Cool story bro.

[Sliver]

Having fun, Fox? These guys are taking the time and interest to share some information with you and I think you're just trolling at this point. Very uncool.

[FoxMulder91]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Having fun, Fox? These guys are taking the time and interest to share some information with you and I think you're just trolling at this point. Very uncool.

Ive already got an infraction for trolling.
Im not trolling.
People seem to believe whatever the Government, Nasa and the Airforce, etc say, when its clearly obvious we have been lied to in the past by them and that we are still being lied to today.

[photon]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Theres eyewitness reports, which are much more trustworthy then the airforce of government when it comes to discussing UFO's.

Except the eye witness report of the guy who saw the planes through his telescope. And his mother. They must be more trustworthy too then right?

You can't have it both ways.

Eyewitness reports are very unreliable, much work and research has gone into it and there are specific ways that it is gathered by law enforcement that can increase its reliability.. something which UFO hunters don't do.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

Anyway, I'm not interested in going on and on about this with you. I posted my link more for other readers who would thoughtfully consider it.

Someone told me once that you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into, and I think that's good advice.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

Ive already got an infraction for trolling.
Im not trolling.
People seem to believe whatever the Government, Nasa and the Airforce, etc say, when its clearly obvious we have been lied to in the past by them and that we are still being lied to today.

Actually when your counter to an argument is "cool story bro" you are trolling.

Grow up.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

All these links from skeptic.com are not legit.
Would be nice if you guys could provide evidence from a trustworthy source.
Thanks

Do you know who Tony Ortega is? Look at his work on the church of scientology.

He's probably a lot more trustworthy then many of the witnesses that night. Plus you're ignoring the body of work including the telescope witness, the video tape evidence, the pilots coming forward.

I'd take the investigative reporting of this guy over someone who writes for UFO digest

[moncton golden flames]

any non-believers, skeptice, rationalists have any thoughts on the disclosure project?

[kenk-la]

Originally Posted by FoxMulder91

All these links from skeptic.com are not legit.
Would be nice if you guys could provide evidence from a trustworthy source.
Thanks

And the majority of the websites you linked earlier on in this thread were trustworthy?

One thing this thread proves is that no matter how level-headed you may find most people on this forum, there are still those who don't disappoint...

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

any non-believers, skeptice, rationalists have any thoughts on the disclosure project?

Yeah, its the typical conspiracy theory fueled ramblings of a Steven Greer or whatever his name is.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Yeah, its the typical conspiracy theory fueled ramblings of a Steven Greer or whatever his name is.

so you give no credibility to anyone on the panel?