They were not flares. The formation first appeared over Nevada, flew across Arizona, over Phoenix, and travelled all the way to Tucson. The flare explanation has been debunked numerous times. But I do give you props for presenting a video from a channel that professes to "discusses the falseness within science and focuses on logical interpretations of science, instead of believing in scientific illogic as "truth."" Well done.
They were not flares. The formation first appeared over Nevada, flew across Arizona, over Phoenix, and travelled all the way to Tucson. The flare explanation has been debunked numerous times. But I do give you props for presenting a video from a channel that professes to "discusses the falseness within science and focuses on logical interpretations of science, instead of believing in scientific illogic as "truth."" Well done.
The formation didn't travel far at all, pictures were faked to show them over other places.
The formation didn't travel far at all, pictures were faked to show them over other places.
Congratulations on watching the vid, well done!
This video is bull####. The formation traveled almost the entire length of the state. I know people who witnessed the lights, many of them law enforcement and ex-military. They all said it was not flares. I saw the 2008 lights myself and the same thing over the Superstitions in the same year. I lived not far from a military training reserves and have seen plenty of flare releases, these were not flares. The whole flare explanation is so lame as the lights did not behave like flares. Not flares.
Here's an equally compelling and highly scientific video that provides proof to the greatest conspiracy ever pulled on the human race.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
This video is bull####. The formation traveled almost the entire length of the state. I know people who witnessed the lights, many of them law enforcement and ex-military. They all said it was not flares. I saw the 2008 lights myself and the same thing over the Superstitions in the same year. I lived not far from a military training reserves and have seen plenty of flare releases, these were not flares. The whole flare explanation is so lame as the lights did not behave like flares. Not flares.
1) There were 2 sets of "lights"
2) The USAF has identified the second group of lights as flares dropped by A-10 Warthog aircraft that were on training exercises at the Barry Goldwater Range
3) A hoaxer went on TV 2 days later after a neighbor called the station and said he tied flares to helium balloons.
4) I don't believe you.
Two sets of lights now? First the lights didn't travel across Arizona, and now there are two sets of lights? This is almost as credible as your distillation of the Shag Harbour events. Doesn't jibe with any of the witness accounts, but why let that cloud the issue.
Quote:
2) The USAF has identified the second group of lights as flares dropped by A-10 Warthog aircraft that were on training exercises at the Barry Goldwater Range
Now we've gone to the point of stupidity. First, and we've covered this is the past, the flares used by military aircraft are not long burning flares. They are small and intense sources of heat meant to mask the heat signatures of jet engines and fool the guidance system of heat seeking missiles. The burn time on these types of flares is no more than a few seconds, and the smoke trails make them extremely easy to detect.
The type of flare that could possibly have been mistaken for this are starburst flares, and they are ground deployed flares which use a parachute to keep them deployed. The problem with this theory is they have a max ceiling use of 1,000 feet, a quick descent time, a burn time of 30 seconds, and do not travel in formation. They also leave a very obvious smoke trail as the chemical burn takes place. These flares are used to light the battle field.
Second, the Barry M. Goldwater range is between Gila Bend and Yuma, no where near where the lights were first seen, nor in a location where anyone could have possibly mistaken them for the lights in question. There are these big things, called mountains, that get in the way, and then there is the curvature of the earth that makes this impossible as well. The fact that the Goldwater ranges (east and west) are 60+ miles away, to the northern edge, also means that flares from a jet would not be visible. Even the 75,000 candle power ground deployed starburst flares would not be visible from that distance.
Quote:
3) A hoaxer went on TV 2 days later after a neighbor called the station and said he tied flares to helium balloons.
Sounds like bull#### from an attention whore. Let's just chew this up and see if it passes the smell test.
Those would have to be massive helium balloon to lift a 250 gram flare. That would require 239 litres of helium just to lift one flare, or about 21 fourteen inch balloons, to get an object to 10 feet off the ground. To get to 10,000 feet you would need 345 litres of helium. To get to 20,000 feet, that becomes 527 litres of helium, or the equivalent of 46 balloons. An industrial compressed gas cylinder can fill about 285 of these balloons. So considering the constraints of getting the needed lift, the hoaxster would have needed an industrial warehouse to stage this type of deployment. You need to have these balloons pre-filled and ready to fly since it takes 40+ balloons to lift the object in question.
Next, you have to wonder how would a flare be attached to these balloons? Flares burn at 1,400 degrees C or 2,650 degrees F, so you aren't just tying these to a balloon with a string. What contraption would be used? How much does that weigh? How much more helium does that require?
How did this person get the balloons airborne without first lighting the flares? If the flares were released from the ground they would have been completely visible as they rose from the ground. Why were they not visible?
Balloons are very much at the whims of the elements. How would these released balloons with flares attached manage to fly in a perfect formation? Because they were supposedly done using balloons, how do you get the balloons to maintain the same flight levels and not suffer drift? This is an impossibility.
This hoax scenario doesn't hold water. Could the hoaxster present evidence of their involvement? Could they replicate even one launch? Were they able to present the industrial cylinders required to fill all those balloons? Those that claim to have done something still have to prove they have done so. That is the only way a hoax stands up to scrutiny.
Quote:
4) I don't believe you.
That's okay. I didn't expect you to. I expected you to use critical thinking skills and test the validity of the explanation. None of the explanation presented holds water. The slightest bit of critical analysis would punch holes in these explanations.
Two sets of lights now? First the lights didn't travel across Arizona, and now there are two sets of lights? This is almost as credible as your distillation of the Shag Harbour events. Doesn't jibe with any of the witness accounts, but why let that cloud the issue.
Yes, there were two events that night, for someone who was supposedly there you should know this, and the Shag Harbour event is a big pile of I know this for a fact!
It took me 5 seconds to find numerous articles on the Phoenix Lights event
Quote:
In case you aren't familiar, the Phoenix Lights refers to a pair of U.F.O sightings in Arizona in 1997
On the evening of March 13, 1997, thousands of people across Arizona and parts of Nevada reported witnessing two separate incidents of unidentified flying objects. The earlier event involved a lit-up V-shaped object that witnesses reported first appeared in the northern Arizona towns of Prescott and Dewy around 8:00 p.m.
The second incident occurred a few hours later at 10 p.m. and involved a smattering of lights that appeared to hover over the Phoenix area in a boomerang pattern. Hundreds of people reported seeing the lights turn on and off at regular intervals, and various eyewitnesses quoted in an old USA Today article agreed that the object was enormous (potentially 6,000 feet), silent, and slow moving.
Making matters even more mysterious, nearby air traffic controllers said that even though they could see the lights, nothing showed up on their radar screens. The controller on duty that night, Bill Grava, described the experience as “weird” and “inexplicable” to the USA Today reporter. “I have no idea what it was,” said Grava. “Something military I guess.”
But the military denied any involvement, at least at first. A bit later on, the U.S. Air Force took responsibility for the events, saying the lights were leftover high-intensity flares that were dropped by a fleet of A-10s during a training routine at the nearby Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range.
You can choose to believe in UFO's,aliens or the Easter bunny for all I care but don't call me names for being skeptical.
The Following User Says Thank You to Snuffleupagus For This Useful Post:
Yes, there were two events that night, for someone who was supposedly there you should know this, and the Shag Harbour event is a big pile of I know this for a fact!
Actually, I stated I saw the return of the lights in 2008, not the 1997 lights. While there were "two events" that night, they were considered a contiguous event, starting over Nevada, traveling across the majority of Arizona to Tucson, and then a return over Phoenix later that night. I did not see the 1997 event but know many people that have (law enforcement officers and ex-military) and their impressions of the events.
Still waiting for this incredible information that would discredit the events at Shag Harbour. So far we only have you saying to you KNOW why it's BS, but you present NOTHING evidentiary or argumentative to counter the story. Please do so.
Quote:
It took me 5 seconds to find numerous articles on the Phoenix Lights event
Congratulations. You've learned to use google. Now you can work on reading comprehension and critical thinking.
Quote:
You can choose to believe in UFO's,aliens or the Easter bunny for all I care but don't call me names for being skeptical.
First, where did I call you names? Second, you can be as skeptical as you want, but apply skepticism to all situations. Skepticism means you are critical of everything and apply that same distrusting gaze at all information.
And yes, I do believe in UFOs, because they are real. Unidentified flying objects are just as they are named. Unidentified-flying-objects. Most are later identified, but a lot are not. Some just have no explanation. They remain unidentifed.
To aliens, like most scientists I do believe in alien life. The vastness of the universe and the number of stars and planets out there make it almost a certainty that there is life out there, including intelligent life. The question is whether these other life forms have visited is a different story and one you are conflating as the same thing. They are different questions. The latter is much more complex and I do not rule out the possibility because I think our understanding of the universe is at the infant to toddler stage and we have just scratched the surface taking on challenges such as space travel. Jesus, we are finally starting to understand that burning dinosaur farts is a bad thing for our planet, but some how we are masters of the universe? Doesn't add up. I'm not not saying an alien or extraterrestrial intelligence is visiting our planet, but I'm also not ruling it out.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus
Yes, there were two events that night, for someone who was supposedly there you should know this, and the Shag Harbour event is a big pile of I know this for a fact!
You've said on a number occasions the Shag Harbour is a big pile and yet you have not produced your evidence for this.
I know this for a fact! 