Fighter Jets Chase UFO Over M5 Motorway in UK

Don't think this has been reported on ATS yet, so here goes... the photos and video is extremely good - see the link below.

TWO fighter jets are filmed whizzing over the M5 - apparently in pursuit of a UFO. A mystery cameraman took footage of the military aircraft chasing the shiny orb. The 30-second clip is believed to have been taken from a West Midlands service station car park. Expert Nick Pope, who probed UFO sightings for the MoD, said: "This is one of the best videos I've seen. It could be a new drone - that might explain the military jets. "But you don't normally test-fly secret projects in daylight. Alternatively, this could be the real thing - a UFO in our airspace and military aircraft scrambled to intercept, probably due to it being tracked on radar." The MoD refused to comment on the alleged sighting, but confirmed it would scramble jets to meet an air threat. West Midlands Police said: "We are not aware of any reports of unidentified aircraft near the M5."

Source: The Sun Newspaper

If this is a real video and not a fake, this is really impressive.

The biggest thing that makes me wonder though is the object for the most part looks stationary. The jets are moving fast, but they don't seem to be catching it. Unless the object really takes off right at the end of the video..

It looks impressive, but I just don't know yet.

isn't "the sun" basically a tabloid magazine?

wouldn't really be considered a creditable source, well that is unless I'm mistaken

Thats some good footage shame its only 30secs would have liked to see if the jets got close to it. Good find op s&f

reply to post by Alaskan Man


Its one of the UK's National Newspapers. Since the M.O.D Has Closed It's Books On UFO's The Sun Is Taking Any Sightings On the Subject And are Publishing Everything they Can.
I'd Say It's A Credible Source

reply to post by Venetian


The clip is at least 2 months old, the Sun seems to have a habit of rehashing old youtube videos



Edit to add: The Sun is the archetypical tabloid, they continually snatch videos off of youtube and present them as 'news'. They use Nick 'The stooge' Pope in an attempt to add credibility to their garbage. Whenever you see The Sun, Rense or Examiner as a source be prepared for garbage.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by cripmeister]

even the trucks look fake in that vid, almost like a cartoon. Plus the fake camera shake with no blur like you see on consumer-level mobile phones or cameras is a dead give-away.

the video looks real, but screams fake at me!

the main thing for me is that the jets are never in shot with the ufo, the shot zooms accross to the jets, which look to be on the same line, and then zooms back the ufo ... but doesnt have both in shot at the same time when that woudl have been very easy to do even by accident!

no go , if it happened there is no way there is only 30 secs of video and we don't get to see the jets in the shot with the object, too bad other than that it was not the worst video we have seen.

It looks real, but im betting its fake.

Why is it that most of the "real" looking videos are always really short?

Brutal! I'm a UFO believer and all but serious this video is lacking some serious skills in how it was filmed or is a nice dupey lil hoax done up.

Looks lame I'm calling fake just because it's the worst filming done by anyone in what would be one of the rarest most intense moment in a humans life. Fighter jet VS. UFO.... and then that dinky lil clip blahhhh....

Originally posted by igor_ats
even the trucks look fake in that vid, almost like a cartoon.

Oh that is good. Now they are using fake trucks in fake UFO vids. Filmed with a fake camera, and printed in a fake newspaper. This must be a fake website, and holy smokes this is a fake internet!!

HELP HELP...somebody stole the internet!! This one is FAKE!! The whole world is fake...oh..oh...oh..I am fake..someone faked me..come back here I want myself back!!

Yer i think it probably fake too, it seems rendered. But who knows. It all looks a little pristine for real life.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by MOTT the HOOPLE]

Hi Venetian

After looking at the Video :
I checked the Authors you tube and all her subscriptions on her page are to people who produce special effects and or imagery ..

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Id say the princessmarije is a UFO Hoaxer and a keen CGI student

Ocker

I once asked Nick Pop how he met his wife and he replied "This is one of the best UFO videos yet, I'd have to say that this is either a new top secret aircraft of a genuine UFO".

-m0r

Originally posted by m0r1arty
I once asked Nick Pop how he met his wife and he replied "This is one of the best UFO videos yet, I'd have to say that this is either a new top secret aircraft of a genuine UFO".

-m0r

PMSL m0r!

IRM

This is Google's cache of www.pbs.org... It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Apr 1, 2010 08:16:06 GMT

Hello All,

like most of you, I am a strong believer that aliens exist; however, I am still on the fence regarding abductions and direct contact with humans. Therefore, I am always looking for both sides of the argument’ per se, in order for me to gather info. from both sides and come to my own conclusion The excerptbelow, by famous astronomer/scientist/ufo enthusiast Carl Sagan is a fantastic read for ALL who are also open minded. Please, take 5 minutes to read it if you are also an open minded, thinker like me.
Waem regards,

Brandon

Interview With Carl Sagan
Author, Astronomer

NOVA: Can you tell us how you feel if someone came to you with good evidence that there was, in fact, alien life trying to communicate with us? How would that make you feel as a scientist?

SAGAN: If someone came to me with compelling, bona fide evidence that we're being visited, my reaction would be "Whoopee!" And I'd want to play a role in analyzing the evidence. I would try very hard to bring in the absolute best scientists in the world to study it, depending on what the evidence is like. And I don't doubt that there would be a lot of cooperation from the scientific community. I don't think that scientists are prejudiced to begin with. Prejudice means pre-judging. They're post-judice. After examining the evidence they presumptuously decide there's nothing to it. There's a big difference between prejudice and post-judice.

NOVA: Speculate for a moment on the parts of human nature, the commonality of believing in abductions, or aliens anyway, and the part of human nature that wants to search for other life forms in the universe.

SAGAN: I personally have been captured by the notion of extraterrestrial life, and especially extraterrestrial intelligence from childhood. It swept me up, and I've been involved in sending space craft to nearby planets to look for life and in the radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence...

It would be an absolutely transforming event in human history. Precisely because it's so exciting, the stakes are so high on whether it's true or false, that we must demand the very rigorous standards of evidence... That's the circumstance in which our hopes may dominate our skeptical scrutiny of the data. So, we have to be very careful. There have been a few instances in the [past]. We thought we found something, and it always turned out to be explicable...

So, a kind of skepticism is routinely applied to the radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence by its most fervent proponents. I do not see [in] the alien abduction situation a similar rigorous application of scientific skepticism by its proponents. Instead, I see enormous acceptance at face value - and leading the witness and all sorts of suggestions. Plus, the contamination by the general culture of this idea.

It seems to me there is a big difference between the two approaches to extraterrestrial intelligence, although I'm frequently written to [to] say how could I search for extraterrestrial intelligence and disbelieve that we're being visited. I don't see any contradiction at all. It's a wonderful prospect, but requires the most severe and rigorous standards of evidence.

NOVA: Could you please comment on the part of the quality of the evidence that is put forward by these so-called "abduction proponents."

SAGAN: Well, it's almost entirely anecdote. Someone says something happened to them...And, people can say anything. The fact that someone says something doesn't mean it's true. Doesn't mean they're lying, but it doesn't mean it's true.

Although it may not seem ‘fair’ to all who have had extraterrestrial encounters, To be taken seriously, you need physical evidence that can be examined at leisure by skeptical scientists: a scraping of the whole ship, and the discovery that i

[edit on 10-4-2010 by iamopenpminded]

[edit on 10-4-2010 by iamopenpminded]

Although it may not seem ‘fair’ to all who have had extraterrestrial encounters, To be taken seriously, you need physical evidence that can be examined at leisure by skeptical scientists: a scraping of the whole ship, and the discovery that it contains isotopic ratios that aren't present on earth, chemical elements form the so-called island of stability, very heavy elements that don't exist on earth. Or material of absolutely bizarre properties of many sorts—electrical conductivity or ductility. There are many things like that that would instantly give serious credence to an account.

But, at the present time, there’s no scrapings, no interior photographs, no filched page from the captain's log book. All there are stories. There are instances of disturbed soil, but I can disturb soil with a shovel. There are instances of people claiming to flash lights at UFOs and the UFOs flash back. But, pilots of airplanes can also flash back, especially if they think it would be a good joke to play on the UFO enthusiast. So, that does not constitute good evidence, even if we can not PROVE what exactly was seen.

NOVA: I want you to comment on John Mack.

SAGAN: Many of the principle advocates of UFO abduction seem to want the validation of science without submitting to its rigorous standards of evidence. When John Mack talks about parallel universes or other dimensions, he's using scientific ideas. Those have long been in play in the Physics and Astronomy community. But, there is no evidence for them. He also criticizes the current paradigm that is the skeptical scientific method. But, this isn't validated. We don't believe it just out of prejudice; we believe it because it works.

NOVA: In the absence of hard physical evidence about alien abductions, what does science tell us about the plausibility of what these aliens are supposed to do?

SAGAN: Well, if you look at the advantages in human technology in just the last few hundred years, the Voyager spacecraft on its way to the stars, compared to what we knew in the time of Charlemagne, let's say, that's less than a thousand years. And the progress is simply stunning.

So, if you postulate the existence of highly technical civilizations, thousands, much less millions of years in our future, unless the hypothesis strongly contradicts known laws of physics, I think you have to say it's possible. So, travel at very high speeds between the stars that are by no means out of the question. Walking through walls is a little tough for me. I don't see how it could be done. And the basic reading program idea of the alien abduction, the paradigm, they seem strangely backward in biology for all their advances in physics, if you take it seriously. Why are they doing breeding one on one at such a slow pace? Why not steal a few humans, sequence our DNA, look at variations and make whatever genetic engineering changes they want. We almost have the ability to do that. It seems naive in terms of molecular biology.

...Precisely because of human fallibility, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Now, I know that Budd Hopkins responds that extraordinary claims require extraordinary investigations. And I have two kinds of responses to that.


First, to the extent that extraordinary claims require extraordinary investigations, those investigations must be true to the spirit of science. And that means highly skeptical, demanding, rigorous standards of evidence. And it's not a hint of that from alien abduction enthusiasts ... I think that the alien abduction enthusiasts understand the need for physical evidence. It's the pathway to some degree of respectability. And for 40 years, they've been telling us that real evidence is just around the corner, it's about to be released, it's being studied at this moment - and nothing ever comes of it.

And my second point is that if there is a claim that a brontosaurus is tramping through the jungles today in the republic of Congo. Should a m

And my second point is that if there is a claim that a brontosaurus is tramping through the jungles today in the republic of Congo. Should a massive expedition be mounted with government funds to find it, or it is so implausible as not to be worth serious sustained systematic attention?

NOVA: According to Hopkins and others, the main evidence for these stories—in the absence of other evidence—is the similarity of details. In your opinion, what other explanations might account for the similarity and the details of the stories or hallucinations of these abductees?

SAGAN: The culture contaminates movies, television programs, books, haunting pages of aliens, and television interviews with passionate abductees - all communicate to the widest possible community the alien abduction paradigm. So, it's not as if each abductee has been hermetically sealed from the outside world and has no input about what others are saying. It's all cross contaminated and it has been for decades. I think that's the clearest evidence for it not being good evidence—that many people tell the same story.

NOVA: If you could speak directly to the multitudes of people who believe they're going to bed and perhaps being abducted by aliens, what is it you would like to say to them?

SAGAN: If I were speaking to a group of abductees, I think the first thing I would do would be to tell them that I'm sure to many of them the pain that is expressed is genuine, that they're not just making this up.

As the scientific method suggests, I would also ask them to try to be as objective as they can and see if anything like that might, in fact, explain what they said happened to them.

I would try to simply ask them to adopt the scientific method of multiple working hypotheses. Right now, some believers of abductions, sightings, and contact, have only one hypothesis and their minds are, in many cases, closed to the alternative. I would ask them to do a serious consideration of the alternative, see if it makes sense. Than the decision is theirs – neither right nor wrong.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOVA Home | WGBH Home | PBS Home
Search | Feedback | Shop
© 1996 WGBH Corporate funding provided by

I don't think we should slam Nick Pope because he was taken in, Hell it really takes a keen eye too see the difference between real and CGI's these days.

Well personally I think we can't take any images as proof of anything anymore.

I think the truth lays in testimony of individuals who see these things. Like Charles Hall! I find in myself he to be an honest man.

But like the bible it all comes down to faith and belief.

But on the bright side the debunkers will never get relief!