UFO/OVNI Shapes.

originally posted by: draknoir2

A friend and I were witness to something that looked like E-2 through binoculars.

Hi mate do seem to recognize that one but can't seem to place it -might be from Farmington and David Marler has done some good work on that case.


Charts:

It's always been a subject of conjecture as to why there are so many different shapes of UFOs. One would think that if they use a similar power source and performed the same function they would all kind of eventually evolve into a similar, most efficient shape. Convergent evolution. Kind of like how our cars/trucks or airplanes mostly kind of have the same basic shapes. But such is not the case with UFOs.

They also seem to mostly be the same size. Except for a few rare exceptions, UFOs tend to be the size of a human conveyance. Not huge, but not super tiny either (although those would definitely be harder to spot). We don't see mountain-sized UFOs flying over major cities in broad daylight. The smaller size would seem to indicate that they didn't come from a long way off, but rather someplace close by.

It all adds up to just more puzzlement. Is each UFO from a different planet/time/reality and they each have their own designs? And if it's truly the case that we're being visited by hundreds of different kinds of "aliens," then why aren't they more forthcoming about what they are and where they're from? At least a few of them anyway. It's unlikely they all belong to a Federation and agree to the Prime Directive. It's more likely that they don't even know each other.

It just doesn't make any logical sense. What are they doing that requires such "hands on" contact? Most of them fly around but don't appear to actually be doing anything. Collecting samples? How many samples do they need? We have libraries, and the Internet now. Would it really be necessary to send all those different ships to find out about us when they can just watch and listen to our broadcasts?

No sense at all.

a reply to: Blue Shift


Maybe a small diameter, scout-looking starship, is the only typical size that is functionally able to traverse interstellar space at faster than light speeds.

If one source of finite fuel is available as an alternative to it's possible infinite fuel source --- Could it be that the deuterium in our seawater...could possibly make our planet so appealing too them?

Not to mention the new varieties of fruit, grown here on Earth, that could make them hungry enough to graft samples from our various orchards --- with utmost curiosity.

originally posted by: Erno86
a reply to: Blue Shift


Maybe a small diameter, scout-looking starship, is the only typical size that is functionally able to traverse interstellar space at faster than light speeds.

If one source of finite fuel is available as an alternative to it's possible infinite fuel source --- Could it be that the deuterium in our seawater...could possibly make our planet so appealing too them?

Not to mention the new varieties of fruit, grown here on Earth, that could make them hungry enough to graft samples from our various orchards --- with utmost curiosity.

Maybe. Maybe. It's all maybes. It just strikes me as odd that as different as they all seem to be, they all ACT pretty much the same. Skulking around. Vanishing. Never making themselves or their intentions clear to the general public. You'd think out of the hundreds of types that show up, at least a few of them would say to themselves, "To hell with it. I'm landing right in the parking lot of that WalMart over there." But they never do.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Honestly...I think that the otherworlders who occasionally visit our planet, have already given us a rare look at the technological achievements, that have obviously occurred with their starships.

Imho...them giving us anything more --- technological wise --- might possibly be a breach in their security.

a reply to: Erno86
We have many eyewitnesses that claim to have seen cigars and giant *motherships* disgorging smaller craft in the air, which leads me to believe that the small scout ships only fly short distances.

That may be as short as from under ocean bases to dry land and back again – but that may also be to moon bases and back.

I agree with your seawater and security thoughts.

originally posted by: Erno86
I think that the otherworlders who occasionally visit our planet

I half agree with that. I think there are permanent bases under the ocean and on the Moon and Mars. Like humans in Antarctica, these bases would have certain groups who live there and others who come and go.

Since we are told that there are MANY Visitors visiting us all the time - Earth could be on a trade/exploration route.

Like Columbus bringing Native Americas back to Spain, advanced space fairing civilizations could move from star system to star system, not just studying but also gathering life forms to return to their home planets. Water planets could be like Oasis' in space. They travel through the desert of space to get to each life bearing Oasis.

Some of those explorers could be on permanent residence at each Oasis, while some merely stop by for shore leave.

originally posted by: draknoir2

A friend and I were witness to something that looked like E-2 through binoculars. Orientation was 90 degrees from the chart and it was traveling horizontally. This was back in the 80's.

The info on this photo is this

1966 - Australia. A Polaroid photograph of a UFO tipped vertically on its side taken by a businessman from his garden a few minutes after 2 PM on April 2 above the Melbourne, Australia, suburb of Balwyn. The Victorian Flying Saucer Research Society (VFSRS) of Moorabbin, Australia, carefully studied the photograph and environment and concluded the photo showed "no sign of multiple exposure, montage or any other tampering." The photo, copyrighted in 1979 by David C. Knight has been published on page 138 of the book "UFOS: A Pictorial History from Antiquity to the Present."

a reply to: Blue Shift

I agree mate, absolutely no sense at all - lots of different occupant shapes too.

Regarding their behaviour thought this was a good breakdown by Jose Antonio Caravaca.

The following aspects that we are going to list appear in almost every classic book you have read about UFOs, but obviously no researcher has pointed out their obvious disparity and counterpoint to extraterrestrial theses:


1.- From the first to the last page of many ufological books, it is clear that there are infinite different types of flying saucers and occupants. As diverse and picturesque as they are different, they are witnesses to each other. Have you looked at the number of different aliens that appear on the pages of these books?  Why didn't any researcher distrust this issue? Is it possible we were being visited by a legion of alien races? Why so many kinds of UFOs, different in size and shape? 


2.- Before the study of the same facts; proximity of a UFO, landing on a soft ground, impact of a light on the witness, etc., the same effects, tracks, traces or injuries were not recorded, why? That is, sometimes UFOs leave traces and sometimes they do not (even if it is the same type of terrain). Sometimes they cause electromagnetic interference in cars and electrical appliances and sometimes they do not (even though the distance to the UFO is the same for vehicles). Sometimes they cause harm to people and sometimes they do not (even if they are exposed to the same factors). 
Therefore, it is very obvious that the effects caused by the interaction with the phenomenon are produced by causes other than the simple presence sine qua non of the paradigm in front of the witness. Otherwise, these different consequences would occur as long as we had the same factors in play.


3.- Another circumstance that is very clear, after reading dozens of books, is that UFO cases are not connected to each other. We cannot follow or weave a plot that leads us to a single great common history. The only thing UFO events share is their basic structure. The witness will report: 1. that he has seen a "thing" flying in the sky, 2. later, that this "thing" has landed, and 3. from this "thing" some beings have descended. But, incomprehensibly, these aspects, which should have greater homogeneity, are highly malleable and in each case, the elements "thing" and "beings" will be surprisingly different in size, shape and colors. And this has been noted in an overwhelming and revealing way, why has this particular fact not given rise to more debate?


4.- The behaviour of the occupants of the flying saucers is absurd and lacking in logic. And this does not happen because, as most scholars explain, we are incapable of interpreting or elucidating the actions of an advanced civilization in millions of years of evolution. Let's not be fooled. Simply put, the actions of the ufonauts are a set of nonsense, one after the other. The actions developed by extraterrestrials are very similar to those recorded in dream experiences. Therefore, all the gratuitous and unsubstantiated speculation about the absurd factor, an important key for many researchers of something sublime and extraordinary inserted inside the UFO encounters, is wrong. These circumstances are due to an effect caused by the interaction/communication of the witness's unconscious with an unknown external agent, which creates a projection following similar processes of creativity to that displayed by our psyche during the sleep phases. And we all know that dream experiences are signified by their absurd character...


5.- The information obtained from the "extraterrestrials" is a compendium of nonsense and, at best, the witness's own knowledge, "distorted" by the paradigm (the external agent). After decades of analyzing the communications of the alleged aliens, there has been no evidence of any truly novel knowledge, either at the scientific, philosophical, social or religious level.


6.- UFO crews do not influence or manipulate large sectors of society. Although it is insisted that the ufonauts interfere with our belief systems and act as a sort of spiritual catalyst, all of this takes place in a very small setting, and has more to do with how witnesses, let alone everyone else, react to these phenomena than in other circumstances.


7.- The UFO phenomenon does not adapt to society by changing its external appearance over time. It does not use any kind of sublime psychic camouflage. Simply put, the staging we observe has to be synchronous with the advances, thoughts, beliefs or myths of the time.


Conclusion:

All these factors indicated, practically since the late 1950s, that the witness was a vital and substantial part of understanding and decoding the meaning and nature of close encounters with UFOs. However, most researchers have chosen to ignore all of these signals and continue to speculate free of charge, far removed from the casuistry they had in their hands. It should be borne in mind that in subsequent years the incidents only corroborated these initial assessments of the first reports recorded by the UFO pioneers research.

Link

a reply to: IMSAM

Nice one mate glad someone's on the ball

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Blue Shift

I agree mate, absolutely no sense at all - lots of different occupant shapes too.
Regarding their behaviour thought this was a good breakdown by Jose Antonio Caravaca.
[snip]

There certainly appears to be some kind of direct collusion between the UFOs and the witnesses as to how they appear. There are actually plenty of cases on record where different people see what must be the same UFO but describe it radically differently without it being explained as the witnesses viewing from different angles. Stephensville, Texas is a good example of this. The multiple police witness chase in Ohio was also this way. Everybody described something different. However, there are also plenty of cases where people do describe the same thing, like the Ruwa, Zimbabwe mass sighting.

It's a puzzle, however, to figure out how someone can take a photograph of the UFO even though their own perceptions might be influencing how it appears and yet it shows up on the photo as what they saw. Weird. I wonder if there are many instances where somebody sees a UFO and takes a picture of it but the photo in no way looks like what they saw with their own eyes. There are certainly plenty of cases where a person takes a photo but it "didn't turn out," or they "got nothing." Maybe they're related, or part of the same thing.

It's an odd, interesting curiosity. I sometimes suspect that it has to do with a person being exposed to a dense field of some kind. Maybe electromagnetic, maybe "psychic" for lack of a better word.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Couldn't agree more - time is a factor as well

Abductions also have parallels with Fae lore: ghost hitchhikers, Bigfoot, Cattle Mutes, MIB, Missing 411 and UFO occupant antics

The Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis does seem to stand up in certain cases like this one.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
There are certainly plenty of cases where a person takes a photo but it "didn't turn out," or they "got nothing."

And there are lots where the person takes a photo of something else and later sees a UFO in it. Which must mean, if legit, that they can travel in a light spectrum that we humans cannot see. So we may be over-flown by alien craft on a daily bases but cannot see them. And since they make no noise, we might only see their fleeting shadow.

originally posted by: karl 12
a reply to: Blue Shift

Couldn't agree more - time is a factor as well

Abductions also have parallels with Fae lore: ghost hitchhikers, Bigfoot, Cattle Mutes, MIB, Missing 411 and UFO occupant antics

The Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis does seem to stand up in certain cases like this one.

Definetly Karl, just like ufologists have researchers throw out cases that dont fit their notions of what the phenomenon should be or behave, so do bigfooters have researchers who throw cases that have bigfoot that go into water,or bigfoot followed by ufos. There was an indian saying "where bigfoot walks a lantern follows"

On the same note i asked an infamous colonel about the relation of water and the phenomena,if water acts as a conduit of sorts. He said there is research that supports this data.

Lets leave it at that. Too much woo will draw flak from the nuts and bolters

Never posted on ATS before, but the pics of the multiple shapes had me think, that maybe someone that has the time to go through all the reports, from various countries, to see if there is a trend from country to country that see more of a specific type of UFO shape.....then we could rule out it just being a deep embedded cultural thing to do with a countries history etc......for example if the cigar shaped ufo's are mostly seen in say Outer Mongolia, then it could be something deeply imbeded within that culture to see shapes of a certain aspect

Hi, by the way!!!

originally posted by: TechnoAssassin1
Never posted on ATS before, but the pics of the multiple shapes had me think, that maybe someone that has the time to go through all the reports, from various countries, to see if there is a trend from country to country that see more of a specific type of UFO shape.....then we could rule out it just being a deep embedded cultural thing to do with a countries history etc......for example if the cigar shaped ufo's are mostly seen in say Outer Mongolia, then it could be something deeply imbeded within that culture to see shapes of a certain aspect

I believe researcher Jacques Vallee found that very thing in his early studies. Different countries and cultures saw different shapes. However, I suspect that if you did a study these days with more recent reports, those differences would likely be smaller due to the overwhelming influence of the Internet and other media.

Again, this doesn't make this stuff less real. It's just means that there is probably something unknown going on that influences the sightings and reports.

a reply to: IMSAM

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Important time stuff mate - people do report this with 'weird encounters' .and other reports of UFOs being connected with cryptids (and MIBs) -sometimes poltergeists



Kudos to all the research - Stan Gordon makes some good points in this vid about strange goings on in Chestnut Ridge forests ( Marley Woods is also active).

I tend to agree...that a red-orange, fiery plasma shrouded foo fighter, can light up the night sky as if it were daytime --- Much like the one I possibly saw in it's landing phase, about a mile away. --- back in 1976 --- Which lit up the whole mountain valley in front of us...including a mountain peak. It was a huge looking, monstrous plasma sphere, Karl --- With no fiery tail, and going like only 30 miles per hour.


"Foo fighters of World War II"

source:

www.history.com...

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

originally posted by: Blue Shift
There are certainly plenty of cases where a person takes a photo but it "didn't turn out," or they "got nothing."

And there are lots where the person takes a photo of something else and later sees a UFO in it.

Unfortunately, if you look at examples of those on the MUFON site, 99.99 percent of the time they've captured a lens flare, or a blurred bug/bird, or some other out of focus piece of garbage that happened to float by when they were taking the photo that they just didn't see. It's rare that somebody will take a picture of a landscape and have a nice, clear UFO appear in the image that they didn't see.

originally posted by: Erno86
I tend to agree...that a red-orange, fiery plasma shrouded foo fighter, can light up the night sky as if it were daytime --- Much like the one I possibly saw in it's landing phase, about a mile away. --- back in 1976 --- Which lit up the whole mountain valley in front of us...including a mountain peak. It was a huge looking, monstrous plasma sphere, Karl --- With no fiery tail, and going like only 30 miles per hour.

Was reminded of this case mate - plenty more out there tho!

a reply to: Blue Shift

Karl12 ---

Interesting video that you so graciously supplied us with --- Thanx

Blue Shift ---

I tend to speculate...that most foo fighters that are possibly flying about in our atmosphere at times --- are extremely hard to capture on film --- especially one that is flying at a seemingly ludicrous speed, in it's high-power (bluish-white) mode.

My ballpark speed estimate of the first of my double nighttime sighting of a possible foo fighter I saw in 76 --- 17,000 miles per hour --- Booking east to west...coming from the direction of Washington D.C..

If you're lucky enough to see that kind of speed from a UAP like that --- if possible --- whip out your camera...and be ready for a possible camera shot of a foo fighter in it's low-power reddish-orange fiery plasma mode --- Like the possible second sighting of the UAP, that I witnessed back that same night in 76. With one or two minutes that elapsed between each sighting.