UFO in Sydney Australia

G'day

This thread is now in the hoax forum.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by missfee


We know his UFO is a piece of dirt but not yours.
People must deny the UFO.
Some day you will find out why.

Originally posted by missfee
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

I dont now any investagaters that goes to collect evidence at the site
and then leaves it in the witnesses car THATS a JOKE of an investagater if you ask me,LOL what and now he wants a pat on the back for work well done,

There we go, the evidence is overwhelming so you attack his ability as an investigator. Sad. his work clearly debunks your story and the evidence is overwhelming, he spent hours on this subject and in no way called you a liar. He was just displaying his conclusions..

In my opinion theres only 2 explanations to your story, 1. Your a LIAR or 2. Your memory of the event is so vague that you genuinally don't remember that you were in a car taking the photos.




[edit on 31-3-2010 by Maxxximus187]

A few points...

Originally posted by missfee
i understand now what most of you were talking about, I have had seven seperate members of ATS email me so TWOPICH dont think were on our own its just they dont want to put them selfs in the MMN or wayaboveital firing line

There's this thing called 'hearsay'. And it seems sort of ironic that missfee is 'quoting' people that she says don't want to participate...

there are other members that are afraid if they debate with MMN

yes, he is pretty scary...

i would like the photos that i have given to this site handed back or distroyed as i now am obtaining a Copy Right on all five photos

You've always had copyright. No one here has falsely claimed credit for the images, they are posted here in a form that most certainly complies with 'fair use', and your initial consent. So, good luck with that request...

AND as for the so called Great field work done by MMN
I dont now any investagaters that goes to collect evidence at the site
and then leaves it in the witnesses car THATS a JOKE of an investagater

That sarcasm and ad hominem is rather unbecoming. I've worked for many years with some highly experienced scientists and researchers, and the number of times they have had similar 'moments' would require more than my hands and feet to count. I trust missfee has never done something similar..

I have Given Natational Geographic (GIVEN not SOLD) the five photos to do with what they wont

I look forward to seeing what becomes of that...

The photos if they were all taken from inside my car y has only one shown reflection and not the rest, the reflection is what some of you say was the give away that MMN thas made hes conclusion on

As stated above, all but one clearly shows the reflection, and even that last one shows a small trace of it in the trees at bottom left - the rest would be lost in the bright sky area.

It's all a bit of a mess this thread isn't it ?? A lot of raw emotion showing at times and on other occasions we have witnessed absolutely no emotion - thought or sensitivity AT ALL ?? But that is human nature isn't it - shown in all its diversity. In all fairness I have to agree with one of the other posters - I think MMN simply remained objective in his final analysis of the photos and regardless of his opinion and assessment at all times showed the greatest respect to Fiona.

But I have not necessarily drawn the same conclusion - so I am still looking through Fiona's accounts of the sighting with a VERY open mind in an attempt to find correlations with other witnesses testimony - HOAX OR NOT :- this excerpt is from Unexplained events -

Al Yorke, of Wollongong, reckons he saw the mysterious objects as well. "I saw three objects that match this description well enough," he said. "On Saturday night about 8.15pm in Woonona they were elevated at about 30 degrees off the coast horizon and moving slowly southeast and upwards.

"They were similar shapes to what has been described here but being at night, I could not identify any surface area - they were all emitting the same orange glow that resembled a naked flame viewed at distance. The furthest one began slowly descending and disappeared, the next two followed suite shortly after.

"I witnessed them for about two minutes. I mentioned it to my wife and a mate, and didn't think much of it until I see this in the paper today! What the? I can't explain what I was looking at."

And Marta, of Moorebank, added: "I live near there and I must admit you do see some strange things about in the night sky - and they're not planes landing. I'm not surprised by this lady's pics."

Add to this the account I posted earlier and it might add to Fiona's credibility ? and from what I can gather there were many sightings on the day in question. SO THERE !! and people are quite right to worry about posting on ATS some of you can be quite INTIMIDATING and sometimes these threads take on a real group / buddy or pack mentality - or at least they appear to.

missfee

ATS email me so TWOPICH dont think were on our own its just they dont want to put them selfs in the MMN or wayaboveital firing line

Im sorry I couldn't tell you what you wanted to hear Mrs Hartigan.

How Believing Can Be Seeing: Context Dictates What We Believe We See
ScienceDaily (Feb. 19, 2008) — Scientists at UCL (University College London) have found the link between what we expect to see, and what our brain tells us we actually saw. The study reveals that the context surrounding what we see is all important -- sometimes overriding the evidence gathered by our eyes and even causing us to imagine things which aren't really there.

www.sciencedaily.com...



[edit on 31-3-2010 by wayaboveitall]

reply to post by Bkrmn


My sincerest apologies to everyone, especially to Phage. I've just finished my third slice of 'humble pie' and about to finish the rest. This is of course the desert that was preceeded by crow I just ate as the main course. I went ahead and put my mouth in gear, before giving the engine a chance to warm up! Again Phage, I am sorry and am hoping the only one embarassed by my thoughtlessness is myself!

G'day

I've searched for James Novak, the "reporter from Nevada USA" mentioned by the witness as interviewing her yesterday.

I can't find any references to such a person.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by destiny-fate
It's all a bit of a mess this thread isn't it ?? A lot of raw emotion showing at times and on other occasions we have witnessed absolutely no emotion - thought or sensitivity AT ALL ?? But that is human nature isn't it - shown in all its diversity. In all fairness I have to agree with one of the other posters - I think MMN simply remained objective in his final analysis of the photos and regardless of his opinion and assessment at all times showed the greatest respect to Fiona.

Nice summary, I pretty much agree. Especially with MMN's fine effort to be civil, even when in strong disagreement.

But I have not necessarily drawn the same conclusion - so I am still looking through Fiona's accounts of the sighting with a VERY open mind in an attempt to find correlations with other witnesses testimony - HOAX OR NOT :- this excerpt is from Unexplained events -

I still have a few doubts but I think overall, MMN's summary is excellent and probably 90-100% correct.

With regard to what you found, the problem with any testimony that comes in after a report gets publicity, is that there are a lot of people who do not have much of a clue about what is up in the sky. Be it stars & planets, aircraft on approach, helicopters, etc. And as has been pointed out quite a few times, that concept of 'confabulation' comes into play. One's brain will quite readily twist the 'memories' to fit the story so that you can say "Hey, I saw that too!" In fact I'm a little surprised there weren't more hangers-on for this one, which I suspect is because neither the images or the story are particularly compelling/dramatic.

Before going on, it is worth noting that missfee did not capture an image of a bright orange ufo. What was captured in her images was a streetlamp - that is pretty much beyond dispute. I'm not absolutely saying she did not *see* one, but she certainly didn't capture it, so all we have is her story. The main object was the brown fuzzy thing.

Al Yorke, of Wollongong, reckons he saw the mysterious objects as well. "I saw three objects that match this description well enough," he said. "On Saturday night about 8.15pm in Woonona they were elevated at about 30 degrees off the coast horizon and moving slowly southeast and upwards.

Wollongong is 80km SW of Sydney. His description suggests something to the east, and then heading further away to the southeast. It makes me wonder how such objects could cover all those km over a couple of hours and not be seen or recorded by anyone else... I also note that his observation is strangely incomplete. Was it cloudy at the time? If it wasn't, then why didn't he mention the Moon, which was very prominent in the ESE at exactly that time? Also, there were several bright stars in that region of the sky then, including the Southern Cross..

Of course you never see such questions asked by a reporter, and very rarely even by people who claim to be UFO investigators... Can you think why? I can - ooh ooh, pick me!!

And Marta, of Moorebank, added: "I live near there and I must admit you do see some strange things about in the night sky - and they're not planes landing. I'm not surprised by this lady's pics."

??? Seriously..??? C'mon, that one just sounds like a reporter getting very desperate to pad out the story...

and people are quite right to worry about posting on ATS some of you can be quite INTIMIDATING and sometimes these threads take on a real group / buddy or pack mentality - or at least they appear to.

I can sympathise with that, and I've been quilty of it at times. But bear in mind it is a several-edged sword.

Firstly, there are a lot of hoaxsters and people who are desperate for fifteen minutes of fame, then there are the completely delusional folk who fling out ridiculous claims in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong, then there are those who really have no background whatsoever in the topics being discussed, be it moon landings, photography, CGI, physics, geometry, photogrammetry, etc. and simply will not accept when they are wrong or misinformed.

I'm *not* putting missfee into those categories (I'll refrain from speculating further). But when dealing with a constant stream of waste-of-time-postings with only one or two gems amongst them, it all adds up to frustration amongst folk like me who *do* believe that one day there will be a genuine extra-terrestrial visit. When that day comes, do you think it will be just another fuzzy video or out-of-focus blob, seen by just one, or a select few?

If we are talking about some earthly secret technology then perhaps such fleeting glimpses might be valid, but even then you have to eliminate the ordinary before assuming the extraordinary. Sometimes that pathway can be a tough one, so yes, claimants may need to get their hard hats on. But it's really not that scary - if you are prepared to listen, to discuss, to actually help with the investigation, to acknowledge that maybe your memories aren't as good as they could be...

To the extent that misfee tried to do those things, I applaud her.

May I also applaud ATS for being what must surely be the soundest testing ground that exists for claims like these - the cadre of highly knowledgable folk here is quite outstanding.. Comprehensive investigations like this one put most UFO-'investigative'-organisations to shame and, frankly, ridicule.

Originally posted by missfee
to all of you who are to afraid to post you comments here and dont want to U2U me on this site, i thank you for your suport
i have recived all your emaile sent to my hotmail account
i understand now what most of you were talking about, I have had seven seperate members of ATS email me so TWOPICH dont think were on our own its just they dont want to put them selfs in the MMN or wayaboveital firing line

You see missfee, sometimes certain things including UFOs need to stay hidden from the prying eyes. It is for the best.

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
People must deny the UFO.
Some day you will find out why.

But I want to know now, TeslaandLyne. Why? U2U me the answer please.

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
G'day

I've searched for James Novak, the "reporter from Nevada USA" mentioned by the witness as interviewing her yesterday.

I can't find any references to such a person.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

I also did a search for James Novak and found zero. I also tried searching for Jim Novak and yep.. you guessed it - Nada! The only person I found in my searches was a DUI Lawyer in Arizona and a computer game character.

Edit to Add:

John Novak? John ain't James. No wonder I came up dry on a search!

IRM

[edit on 1/4/10 by InfaRedMan]

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

Always got'a throw "ufo" into the search Try "John Novak" this matches up better
UFO Evidence by John Novak and UFO Digest by John Novak.

(John Novak [email protected]) and "John M. Novak" [email protected]

John Novak's ECETI James Gilliland


Zelong.

[edit on 1/4/10 by Zelong]

Originally posted by spender
Once again like countless many times my hat goes off to phage, whom basically solved this case on page 1...
well done mate....

Once again I see a poster wearing the lipstick of kissing up - an organic brown concoction with a most unpleasant smell.

The "witness" need not prove anything. She's not a trial. She did not volunteer to come into the public arena so people can help her determine whether she was a hoaxer or not.

She simply wanted to brainstorm with others (and perhaps receive some comfort) to help identify what she saw (flying in the sky) that night.
Was it man-made? Was it extraterrestrial? Not...whether it was a smudge on her windshield.


It's you people that took on this Prosecutors' position and felt compelled to discredit her based on (what I feel are) misinterpretations and circumstantial coincidences.

And by noting that her 'evidence' is everything BUT what she claims it to be IS calling her a liar/hoaxer. So give it up!

Like I stated 48 pages ago. There's no middle ground.
It either went down like she stated or......she made it all up.


As far as John Novak. Once again, some of you can't wait to pounce on Fiona (indirectly) so to help further your hoaxing-conclusion.
You are pathetic!
www.ufoevidence.org...

John Novak happens to be a known name in the UFO community as is James Gilliland.


And.....this made the hoax forum MMN? Well there ya have it! That is riveting information!!

I remind you, so did "the earth is round" theory not too long ago too.

reply to post by TwoPhish

Fair go TwoPhish, how bout you pull-up for a bit, I've read all your posts and your still swinging around like a dunny door in a westerly!
The whole idea I hoped was to let Fiona state here on ATS her encounter with these objects, First and Foremost, then let the research begin but even when Fiona was on-board you were bagging her! than standing by her
To me your just speaking out loud because thats who your are.

Zelong.

Originally posted by Zelong
reply to post by TwoPhish

 

Fair go TwoPhish, how bout you pull-up for a bit, I've read all your posts and your still swinging around like a dunny door in a westerly!
The whole idea I hoped was to let Fiona state here on ATS her encounter with these objects, First and Foremost, then let the research begin but even when Fiona was on-board you were bagging her! than standing by her

To me your just speaking out loud

because thats who your are.

Zelong.

Is this really necessary?

reply to post by Zelong



You are boring me and probably 3/4 of the readers!


At first, I was suspicious and confused as to who this missfee was when she first signed onto ATS.
So? Hang me!!!

I also got very confused later on too...as to what she was saying (and not saying) compared to what ATS-sleuths were suggesting.


Case in point:
The lamp-post.
Was it REALLY the lamp post she saw? Or was it an accidental (unfortunate) snap shot she captured when trying to capture this second UFO?
50-something pages later, I still don't know.


That was the ONLY part of this story I was having a hard time discerning and comprehending.

I don't know what she saw (not what you people are saying she saw) and I don't believe, from the bottom of my heart, that this woman is capable of hoaxing. And from what I walk away with, she does not appear to be a liar either.

For all we know, this could've been some psy-op experiment to further divide and confuse the masses. Who knows?

Originally posted by nomadros
First thought of course is that it's a photo through glass and that's why it's out of focus, but the shape changes between the 2 shots and it doesn't look like a blurd going passed. So pebbles being thrown? It's got me.

I overlooked this post from the first page, re-discovered it while giving it all a final going over , for the sake of the witness, in case I miissed some small detail that might be revealing.
A pebble thrown up by her tires from the loose scree on the shoulder might be a possibility.
Its not entirely outside the realm of physics, and might explain her beleif that this object crossed her line of sight.

However...The witness makes no mention of sound, infact she claims it was silent. The witness might have heard it hit the windscreen had it done so, though gravity would explain its 'dissapearance.'
I dont beleive the iphones shutter speed would capture such an object in fast motion, atleast without motion blur, but then such a small stone might be tossed up more slowly depending on the speed of the car.
Was there such loose scree noted by investigators at the site?

My own blowing leaf/debris theory, might also substantiate the witness testimony that she saw this shape move across her feild of vision,
however the witness has chosen not to respond to the suggestion directly, as with others proposed.

Rejecting all suppositions out of hand and immeadiately is NOT the hallmark of an open minded witness, capable of logic and rational thinking.
Rather it suggests the witness had already made her own
unshakeable conclusion/s before ever posting here, as evidenced by her general consistancy in her testimony in the paper, on tv, and two radio interveiws.

I conclude that the witness posted here, not 'to brainstorm with others', as claimed, but rather, given the nature of this website, in hopes of having her own convictions widely vindicated.
Sadly this did not happen, and her defensive behaviour stems directly from humiliation experienced as a result.
Nobody likes to be embarressed, but some have a greater capacity to accept and get over it, than others, to shrug it off with a grin, we all make mistakes.

As I said, it's no big deal, you are only human afterall. You cant laugh at others if you can't laught at yourself too.
If your convinced there is something to be captured, then why not buy a video camera and be ready next time something catches your eye?
who knows, you may capture something amazing.
If you do, I hope you will share it with us. Best wishes

Originally posted by TwoPhish
Like I stated 48 pages ago. There's no middle ground.
It either went down like she stated or......she made it all up.

You present a false dichotomy. I posted the results of a scientific study back on page 53 showing that in many cases, there can be and often IS middle ground:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you want to ignore the findings of scientists that there is a middle ground, feel free, but you do so at your own peril. If you are really as sympathetic with this witness as you claim to be, you would at least acknowledge that the scientists did in fact find there can be a middle ground, and if you are open minded you would not completely rule out that possibility in this case.

In this particular case I don't know and don't care to speculate on whether the discrepancies are caused by the middle ground revealed in that scientific study, or something else. The photographs seem to prove something was moving through the sky...the two orbs appear in one photo and not the others. While we can guess about what those orbs are, I find no reason to dismiss a hypothesis that they could be bats or birds, but this finding is not conclusive as there is insufficient detail in the picture. But the photos do seem to suggest that something was moving through the sky so if the witness states she saw something move through the sky, there is actually photographic evidence to support that possibility.

But the photos are are unambiguous regarding the reflections. I still have some small doubts about what the UFOs may be, but I have very little doubt that the photos show reflections.

Originally posted by TwoPhish
I remind you, so did "the earth is round" theory not too long ago too.

What you are reminding me of, is that I was taught false history, and most likely, you were too. My question is, if this was known to be false history in 1945, why were they still teaching it to us well after that?

Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

In 1945 the Historical Association listed "Columbus and the Flat Earth Conception" second of twenty in its first-published pamphlet on common errors in history.

Arbitrageur

In this particular case I don't know and don't care to speculate on whether the discrepancies are caused by the middle ground revealed in that scientific study, or something else. The photographs seem to prove something was moving through the sky...the two orbs appear in one photo and not the others. While we can guess about what those orbs are, I find no reason to dismiss a hypothesis that they could be bats or birds, but this finding is not conclusive as there is insufficient detail in the picture. But the photos do seem to suggest that something was moving through the sky so if the witness states she saw something move through the sky, there is actually photographic evidence to support that possibility.

But the photos are are unambiguous regarding the reflections. I still have some small doubts about what the UFOs may be, but I have very little doubt that the photos show reflections.

That seems to screw the lid on it!
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/867870bb924c.gif[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/61bf964e3a77.gif[/atsimg]
UFO in Sydney Australia


But we should keep an open mind, I'll be pretty embarressed
If the earth is invaded by amorphous blobs and flying streetlights!
I for one welcome our new indistinct and luminous overlords!
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6ae37c37c147.jpg[/atsimg]

[edit on 1-4-2010 by wayaboveitall]