Satellite Reentries -- One Possible Source of 'Mothership UFO' reports?

Introduction – Witness Reactions to Fireball Swarms from Satellite Reentries.


www.satobs.org...

THIS PRESENTATION IS NOT ABOUT WHAT “TRUE UFOS” ARE, OR ARE NOT.

NSTEAD, USING THE OCTOBER 24, 2020 HAWAII EVENT, IT WILL FOCUS ON ONE SPECIFIC SPACEFLIGHT-RELATED VISUAL STIMULUS WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCING UFO REPORTS FOR MANY YEARS, REPORTS WHICH HAVE BEEN WIDELY ACCEPTED AS UNEXPLAINABLE

IT WILL SEEK TO GENERALIZE WHAT THIS EVENT CAN TEACH RESEARCHERS ABOUT HOW TO ASSESS SIMILAR REPORTS OF THIS TYPE IN THE FUTURE [AND FROM THE PAST]

ALONG WITH THE EXTENSIVE EVIDENCE EXPLAINING THIS EVENT, IT WILL EXTENSIVELY [EVEN EXHAUSTIVELY] DOCUMENT THE NATURE AND THE VARIETY OF GENERAL PUBLIC REACTIONS TO IT, IN ORDER TO CREATE A RELIABLE ARCHIVE FOR FUTURE RESEARCHERS


‘Classic’ satellite reentry fireball swarm mass misinterpretation

Perfect time to maximize witnesses – late evening, Saturday night

Clear local weather

Dozens of videos posted within hours

Majority of posters saw a structured hull with mounted lights, although a significant minority correctly reported separate lights [which some interpreted as a ‘fleet’ of UFO orbs]

Many off-the-cuff explanations such as Starlink launch or Orionid meteor shower, or drones or balloons or secret military aircraft

Distance estimates ranged from a few hundred feet to several miles.

Many observers reported maneuvering including course and altitude changes, as well as hovering

Vehement attacks [worst ever seen] on the idea it was only a reentering satellite, with nasty personal insults to proponents of that explanation.

a reply to: JimOberg

Come on, Jim! Everybody knows motherships do not enter the atmosphere. They stay orbiting around the target planet vomiting orbs that do enter the atmosphere and hover over lakes silently.

a reply to: JimOberg

I always found it strange that the Rendlesham Forest affair was also just a few hours following a Soviet rocket re-entry.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: JimOberg

I always found it strange that the Rendlesham Forest affair was also just a few hours following a Soviet rocket re-entry.

You must not have read up on the Rendlesham Forest affair. Even base commander Charles Halt, Seargent Jim Penniston, and other personnel saw the object moving around and hovering in the trees next to them for minutes then slowly rise up into the upper atmosphere at remarkable speed. Highly unlikely a rocket re-entering the atmosphere would do that.

SOURCE

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: JimOberg

Come on, Jim! Everybody knows motherships do not enter the atmosphere. They stay orbiting around the target planet vomiting orbs that do enter the atmosphere and hover over lakes silently.

Pretty much spot on yet the motherships sometimes do follow the ufo orbs to the Planet Earth's surface if a little crop spaying of Manna is deemed necessary.

a reply to: NightVision

I know the Rendlesham case well, it was just odd about the re-entry timing, nothing more.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: JimOberg

I always found it strange that the Rendlesham Forest affair was also just a few hours following a Soviet rocket re-entry.

but stranger still the reentry doesnt correlate with the sightings.

hell you even prove so by saying "a few hours after the sighting"

especially over TWO DAYS

it went back up and came down AGAIN?

really?


were have i heard this claim/excuse/coverup before

hmmmm
oh thats right , Kecksburg PA incident

where it was claimed it was another soviet craft... claimed "case solved"

but sadly the agency responsible for tracking such things STATED CLEARLY the flightpath and maybe even date (might be wrong on this) was WRONG

You know FACTS available even back then

but hey if swamp gas, hysteria, and "mis identifying a light house " dont work go with space junk

smh

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

The 'lighthouse' perhaps shows that there is something else going on there. I can conjecture a few scenarios but hey if aliens are your' first go to default, knock yourself out.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: scrounger

The 'lighthouse' perhaps shows that there is something else going on there. I can conjecture a few scenarios but hey if aliens are your' first go to default, knock yourself out.

sigh

when you take into account ALL OF THE FACTS then discount the theories what your left with is plausible.

the biggest thing that blows my mind is this claim the base security confused a "lighthouse" .

if one cares to do research the base was storehouse of NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
they just dont send just any airman out of basic there, hand them a rifle and say "go to it"
they were trained in delay and denial .
along with practicing for threats to include russian regular and special forces.
along with the BASE COMMANDER isnt just handed out to any smuck for nukes.

but hey if you think these stationed and highly trained security forces can confuse a STATIONALY lighthouse that everyone in the area KNOWS ABOUT, then by all means do so

smh

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

Then why did the time stamps on the halt audio recordings about the light flashes match the frequency of the lighthouse exactly ?

So yes, that is what happened.

Whether that is the explanation for the entire sequence of sightings is doubtful but at some point at least these highly trained personnel confused the lighthouse for something else.

a reply to: JimOberg

Jim, why are you trotting out the same old link that has been referenced numerous times before in several other threads - is there a specific reason for this post ?

Do you have a source for the "worst ever seen" vehement attacks or is that your own personal opinion ?

Also while you are around do you know whether NASA, or some other agency, has the ability to monitor the upper atmosphere to detect something entering and if so is it looking in a specific area at a specific time or is there continual coverage ?

originally posted by: JimOberg
Distance estimates ranged from a few hundred feet to several miles.

That was not surprising. Distance estimates to UFOs have always been unreliable without some kind reference, which is almost always absent.

Many observers reported maneuvering including course and altitude changes, as well as hovering

I was a bit surprised by the claims of maneuvering and course changes, since re-entering satellites generally don't do that.

Vehement attacks [worst ever seen] on the idea it was only a reentering satellite, with nasty personal insults to proponents of that explanation.

I wasn't surprised that people misunderstood what they saw, but I thought they would be more accepting of the explanation offered...I didn't expect to see such vehement denials.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: JimOberg

I always found it strange that the Rendlesham Forest affair was also just a few hours following a Soviet rocket re-entry.

originally posted by: NightVision
You must not have read up on the Rendlesham Forest affair.

I thought the one thing that everyone agreed on was that atmospheric entry of some bolides is what started the whole chain of events. There was an atmospheric re-entry of a Cosmos rocket launcher that night but the timing is off for that to be the trigger. I think the timing of the bolide just before 3am matches the initial investigation event at 3am that started the entire sequence of events.

Then there is wide disagreement about what exactly happened after that bolide sighting, especially if you don't pay attention to the original accounts versus the way the story grew and was embellished over the years. So to try to bring you guys up to speed on the bolide just before 3am, here is the newsletter about the bolides (which also mentions the Cosmos rocket launcher), timing is right for the 2:50 am bolide starting the initial 3am investigation event that started the whole chain of events after that:

British Astronomical Association’s Meteor Section Newsletter no. 4 (1981 February)

The British Astronomical Association’s Meteor Section Newsletter no. 4 (1981 February) summarized the various events of the night of 1980 December 25–26, including a brilliant fireball at 02.50 on December 26. The timing of this fireball matches the appearance of the bright object in the sky seen by security guards at Woodbridge air base that sparked off the Rendlesham Forest UFO chase.

So it was apparently an atmospheric entry of bolides that started the whole thing, with the bolide just before 3am timing coinciding perfectly with the Rendlesham forest investigation starting at 3am:

Rendlesham Forest 1980 Pt II - Will There Be An Answer?

originally posted by: mirageman
Christmas Night 25th into 26th December 1980 (3am) – after reports of strange lights in Rendlesham Forest, England, three USAF security policemen are sent to investigate a possible downed aircraft from the nearby twin NATO bases of Woodbridge and Bentwaters.

What happened after that and all the various accounts and embellishments should be discussed in the RFI thread, since only the atmospheric entry events are relevant to this thread. I suggest reading the thread first, because it has posts proving that some witnesses are lying (not lying in their initial accounts, but in their present exaggerated or misrepresented/conflated/fictitious accounts).

note: If the Cosmos Rocket Launcher third stage had anything to do with RFI (It may not have), people might have heard about that event earlier that night and as a result they could have been paying more attention to the sky than usual, when they noticed the bolide just before 3am. But aside from such a possible indirect relation, I don't think the Cosmos debris re-entry had any direct connection to the RFI incidents.

originally posted by: JimOberga significant minority correctly reported separate lights [which some interpreted as a ‘fleet’ of UFO orbs]

When you see one of these fleets of UFO orbs there can be no confusion, when you have one of the golf ball white types come at you like a bullet and stop 12" in an instant in front of your eyes, there can be no confusion. When you have proper groups above your head in a perfect circular pattern of same coloured pairs maybe 24 of them, there can be no confusion.

The reality is these UFO Orbs exist.

So NASA must be hiding the truth from us. They must know they exist!

Now that freaks me out. They must be in on it with some other power / intelligence. They are hiding the truth and it might be too freaky to admit why or what the UFO Orbs want from Planet Earth, yet NASA must be in on it and that is so amazing. Are they in collusion with a group of UFO Orb that seem to be mapping our Planet? Why? For an invasion?

It genuinely freaks me out far more than the reality of UFO Orbs and motherships. A segment of our population are in on keeping the truth from us. That's rather concerning.

a reply to: JimOberg

What with my own meager eyewitness evidence, that I have seemingly gathered on a (purported) double nighttime foo fighter sighting that happened in November of 1976, approximately 40 miles west of Washington D.C.: Both in it's two power color phases (bluish-white & fiery red-orange), fully functional foo fighters don't discernably display a fiery or smoky trail trailing behind it; according to my own naked human eyes.

originally posted by: Erno86
fully functional foo fighters don't discernably display a fiery or smoky trail trailing behind it; according to my own naked human eyes.

Back you up 100% there Erno a spot on observation

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

And may I add: These fiery balled foo fighters, should have the wherewithal to quench forest wildfires, since they purportedly have the ability to extinguish fires when they land in brushy, forested areas; despite the starship being shrouded with a magnetically contained fiery plasma.

That can certainly be a harbinger for things to come --- that is ---- if they ever decide to help us out in a much needed way. Otherwise...they've shown us the path for our asses' to follow --- We just need a way to figure out how the hell they can perform such fantastical deeds of airmanship.

Certainly some UFO reports could be a result of space junk coming back in hot. But just as certainly not all of them, particularly the ones where people are interacting with strange beings doing strange stuff. I doubt something like the Falcon Lake Incident was a satellite re-entry.

So what percentage? One or two percent, perhaps less?

originally posted by: Erno86
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

And may I add: These fiery balled foo fighters, should have the wherewithal to quench forest wildfires, since they purportedly have the ability to extinguish fires when they land in brushy, forested areas; despite the starship being shrouded with a magnetically contained fiery plasma.

Nice and something that wouldn't surprise especially from the white type, also the green type. Personally I feel pretty good around those two types. It feels good, yet never actually being honest and realistic about it experienced the UFO Orbs extinguishing fires, would love to and had my first CE with a pair a basketball size white types over a shallow river where four or even five valleys met and stepping stones just beneath them. Thing is and little did I know at the time, one of our favourite English comedians Kenny Everett had his ashes scattered from those same stepping stones following his ascendancy from an illness called Aids. Now I'm not saying it was Kenny at all as he dies three years later but a coincidence or something who knows yet it's all wondrous stuff and something to have faith in that this life experience is something more than the birth, mind control brain wash education, economic slavery (lragely this period to something called debt), then death with nothing more. Once you've experienced the UFO Orbs you just know there's far more to this experience than what they tell us

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Certainly some UFO reports could be a result of space junk coming back in hot. But just as certainly not all of them, particularly the ones where people are interacting with strange beings doing strange stuff. I doubt something like the Falcon Lake Incident was a satellite re-entry. So what percentage? One or two percent, perhaps less?

Well, that's progress.

Which 'Falcon Lake' incident?

originally posted by: chunder
a reply to: scrounger

Then why did the time stamps on the halt audio recordings about the light flashes match the frequency of the lighthouse exactly ?

So yes, that is what happened.

Whether that is the explanation for the entire sequence of sightings is doubtful but at some point at least these highly trained personnel confused the lighthouse for something else.

first i can find no reports the "flashes " he stated on the tape corresponded to the lighthouse
second... since on the tape you can CLEARLY HEAR the light WAS MOVING..
how does a "lighthouse" (btw fixed in place and quite heavy) move so the flashes can move locations?
third... he is the base commander right?
he is well aware of the land around the base right?
so how does he "forget" the lighthouse exists and "confuses" flashes from it?
something that has happened how many times over the MONTHS if not year or more of his command?

im sorry but while people make mistakes those are few and far between when GUARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

again when you take the TOTALITY of the whole incident over the two days the claim of light house is at best laughable.
at worst a poorly attempted deflection and smear campaign of the airman and officers guarding nuclear weapons.

scrounger