It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by wtfigo
reply to post by Skywatcher2011
Skyfish has been debunked www.youtube.com...
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Thunda
WELL AND TRULY DEBUNKED !!!!!
Originally posted by Dashdragon
Well, the cigar shaped UFO mentioned for Kentucky has been officially explained and shown as a toy, so this would not be related.
For this video, we are also a victim of perspective.
It's quite possible to see something like this happen with no noticeable result from the volcano if the object in fact went behind it from our point of view instead of going inside it. It could even be that the object did not go down so much as across and away from the camera, but again from our perspective, it made it appear to go into the caldera.
Keep in mind that a UFO doesn't mean alien spacecraft, so this is a UFO currently until someone finds out exactly what it was. Given the lack of turbulence in the smoke from the volcano and lack of response after what would have had to of been the impact, I'd say it's highly likely that perspective is the key problem here.
Originally posted by sebHFX
reply to post by Hydrawolf
that scientist is trying to rationalize. She's saying that It could be from the video since the object is saturated. No! You see clearly an object getting into the volcano. It seems some people can't believe so they rationalize but their reasoning is stupider than the most far-fetched ufo theories. A flare doesn't have a tubular shape, it's not defined like that. Is it that hard to believe in the unbelievable?
I don't think the object entered the volcano.
Originally posted by fleabit
I don't think the object entered the volcano.
What does it matter if it entered the crater or not? Are you saying you believe it was an object then?
No matter if it entered the crater, or flew behind the volcano, it would be a huge video. Because going behind would indicate it was even larger than originally determined. Actually flying into the crater or flying behind is secondary to the fact a long bright object flew downwards and was caught on camera.
Question really is just: was it an anomaly due to the light as stated? That's the real question.
Originally posted by fleabit
I don't think the object entered the volcano.
What does it matter if it entered the crater or not? Are you saying you believe it was an object then?
No matter if it entered the crater, or flew behind the volcano, it would be a huge video. Because going behind would indicate it was even larger than originally determined. Actually flying into the crater or flying behind is secondary to the fact a long bright object flew downwards and was caught on camera.
Question really is just: was it an anomaly due to the light as stated? That's the real question.