Merged Their Return

[King of the Americas]

The LA Times never claimed that the picture showed enemy aircraft, weather balloons, or UFOs.

The caption under the photograph clearly identifies the blobs of light pictured to be bursting AA rounds.

Having never seen the original, I don't know what is or isn't in the picture.

At my first glance, it look like a saucer, with a nipple at the top, with smaller blob/lights surrounding it.

I didn't say what the LA Times claimed.

I asked questions.

What was 'tracked', and what were we shooting at?

Was it a balloon, aircraft, or something else/intelligent non-human U.F.O.?

My point in asking is that ALL the evidence points toward there being 'something' that caused the alarm, rather than nothing.

Something, as of yet unknown, caused our military to open fire over civilians, leading to several deaths.

What were the search lights pointing toward?

---

ETA:

http://www.theairraid.com/

Here's an excerpt from an article written for the Daily News by reporter Matt Weinstock. After the war he was talking to man who had served in one of those Army batteries and the gentleman recounted the following story.

"Early in the war things were pretty scary and the Army was setting up coastal defenses. At one of the new radar stations near Santa Monica, the crew tried in vain to arrange for some planes to fly by so that they could test the system. As no one could spare the planes at the time, they hit upon a novel way to test the radar. One of the guys bought a bag of nickel balloons and then filled them with hydrogen, attached metal wires, and let them go. Catching the offshore breeze, the balloons had the desired effect of showing up on the screens, proving the equipment was working. But after traveling a good distance offshore and to the south, the nightly onshore breeze started to push the balloons back towards the coastal cities. The coastal radar's picked up the metal wires and the searchlights swung automatically on the targets, looking on the screens as aircraft heading for the city. The ACK-ACK started firing and the rest was history."

Personally, I think claiming 'wires' being picked up on radar is bullbutter.

 

[EHocking]

Having never seen the original, I don't know what is or isn't in the picture.

Yet asserted that it was a real occurance....

Personally, I think claiming 'wires' being picked up on radar is bullbutter.

So as well as being a master stonemason and an expert on comparative religion, are you telling us that you are a qualified radar operator as well?

Or is this yet another of your beliefs disguised as unenlightened assertion?

For reference:

This is the root of the problem.

You have a tendency to accept things told to you or read by you at face value with little critical analysis, and then argue the point here as though the story you've heard or read is "true fact".

You then accuse anyone who disagrees with your "facts" as being ignorant.

 

[King of the Americas]

Yet asserted that it was a real occurance....So as well as being a master stonemason and an expert on comparative religion, are you telling us that you are a qualified radar operator as well?

Or is this yet another of your beliefs disguised as unenlightened assertion?

For reference:

I stated that 'something' caused the event.

I am a novice lapidarian, and an amateur granite letterer.

I have not studied any one religion with any real zeal. I have however, seen and heard of many similarities, when I speak to those of different religions and backgrounds, when it comes to their belief in 'heavenly agents of god'...

This is what I know about radar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_cross-section

...now, that is.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Having never seen the original, I don't know what is or isn't in the picture.

At my first glance, it look like a saucer, with a nipple at the top, with smaller blob/lights surrounding it.

I didn't say what the LA Times claimed.

I asked questions.

What was 'tracked', and what were we shooting at?

Was it a balloon, aircraft, or something else/intelligent non-human U.F.O.?

My point in asking is that ALL the evidence points toward there being 'something' that caused the alarm, rather than nothing.

Something, as of yet unknown, caused our military to open fire over civilians, leading to several deaths.

What were the search lights pointing toward?

Well, if you feel that it MUST be an extraordinary explanation, then assuming that explanation is "heavenly agents" or ET's or whatever you want to call it is completely arbitrary.

As long as we're positing strange things with no basis in reality, why not say that it's an undiscovered species of whale that lives in the upper atmosphere?

In fact, I'm going to assume, for the sake of argument, that all these sightings were, in fact, strato-whales.

You're welcome to prove me wrong.

 

[King of the Americas]

Well, if you feel that it MUST be an extraordinary explanation, then assuming that explanation is "heavenly agents" or ET's or whatever you want to call it is completely arbitrary.

As long as we're positing strange things with no basis in reality, why not say that it's an undiscovered species of whale that lives in the upper atmosphere?

In fact, I'm going to assume, for the sake of argument, that all these sightings were, in fact, strato-whales.

You're welcome to prove me wrong.

You can call them flying purple people eaters, but that won't mean they answer when called...

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS IN THE AIR:

-Over L.A. in 1942
-Over D.C. in 1952

I only know that it was 'something', advanced and non-human.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You can call them flying purple people eaters, but that won't mean they answer when called...

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS IN THE AIR:

-Over L.A. in 1942
-Over D.C. in 1952

I only know that it was 'something', advanced and non-human.

You are confusing "know" with "believe".

 

[King of the Americas]

You are confusing "know" with "believe".

We KNOW that our jets and anti-aircraft fire didn't do much against them...

 

[GeeMack]

Well, if you feel that it MUST be an extraordinary explanation, then assuming that explanation is "heavenly agents" or ET's or whatever you want to call it is completely arbitrary.

As long as we're positing strange things with no basis in reality, why not say that it's an undiscovered species of whale that lives in the upper atmosphere?

In fact, I'm going to assume, for the sake of argument, that all these sightings were, in fact, strato-whales.

You're welcome to prove me wrong.

I always wonder why UFOlien believers are so closed minded. If their accepted explanation is something that has never been shown to exist and which can't be supported with anything other than pleas to their own incredulity, why stop with aliens? It could be anything for which there is an equal amount of, or more accurately, an equal lack of evidence.

I ask my pal, a believer in outer-spacelings, if sightings might be some extra-dimensional intelligent pigs beaming visions directly into the brains of the "witnesses" as a simple practical joke on those individuals. My pal says that's silly. I ask him if there's more evidence to support his idea, the notion that they're some kind of craft being piloted by an advanced technology. He says, "No, but..."

But what? Come on, guys. Be open minded. Be creative!

 

[King of the Americas]

...

... Be open minded. Be creative!

"How much stone can you move in an hour, and what techniques do you employ?"

 

[Sean84]

We KNOW that our jets and anti-aircraft fire didn't do much against them...

All of our most advanced weaponry is pretty useless when there's nothing to shoot at.

Since you don't know what was in the air it might as well have been nothing. No amount of wanting to believe it was super advanced alien whosawhatsits will make it so or magically become evidence of that.

Now if you'll excuse me, there are some squirrels in my backyard that demand the howitzer.

 

[Correa Neto]

We KNOW that our jets and anti-aircraft fire didn't do much against them...

Jets?
In LA Battle?

As for the AAA, what part of the maximum range x baloon altitude you are having problems understanding?

And what if I posted a picture of searchlights very similar to that one from the LA battle?
Would you be convinced the picture shown by UFOlogists as evidence shows nothing but the beams on clouds?

Heck, I can show you pics of a huge mothership floating within the clouds of Rio de Janeiro night sky...

 

[RoboTimbo]

Heck, I can show you pics of a huge mothership floating within the clouds of Rio de Janeiro night sky...

If you were to post that picture today, tomorrow KotA would remember having gone to Rio de Janeiro himself to take the picture.

You know what his memory is like.


Note: the preceeding was gentle mockery.

 

[EHocking]

I stated that 'something' caused the event.

No. You defended a story that you incredulously believe, even after being shown that it was merely a story.

To whit;

...The photograph WAS front page news, and clearly shows several lightes focused an a U.F.O...

I am a novice lapidarian, and an amateur granite letterer.

Besides the fact that I was being sarcastic, don't try to over egg your expertise, since we have better memories than yourself;

...I've only worked stone at two points in my life, in high school I used a forged steel chisel to split several hundred concrete patio stones. ...And in the past year or so, I've been lettering a piece of granite...

...Oh, and I've carved several figures out of white marble with a drumel tool.

There's that memory of yours and your fine grasp of fact tripping you up again. Only worked stone twice in your life, and gave three examples of doing so....

I have not studied any one religion with any real zeal. I have however, seen and heard of many similarities, when I speak to those of different religions and backgrounds, when it comes to their belief in 'heavenly agents of god'...

Of course you have.

This is what I know about radar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_cross-section

...now, that is.

But still asserted that anomalous radar signals are proof of aliens over Washington - even though you know nothing about radar. I suggest you widen your education from merely Wiki, but if you must, at start at first principles with Radar^WP

 

[aggle-rithm]

I always wonder why UFOlien believers are so closed minded. If their accepted explanation is something that has never been shown to exist and which can't be supported with anything other than pleas to their own incredulity, why stop with aliens? It could be anything for which there is an equal amount of, or more accurately, an equal lack of evidence.

I ask my pal, a believer in outer-spacelings, if sightings might be some extra-dimensional intelligent pigs beaming visions directly into the brains of the "witnesses" as a simple practical joke on those individuals. My pal says that's silly. I ask him if there's more evidence to support his idea, the notion that they're some kind of craft being piloted by an advanced technology. He says, "No, but..."

But what? Come on, guys. Be open minded. Be creative!

Exactly what I was thinking. There is no attribute of Heavenly Agents that I can't just as easily find an explanation for in strato-whales.

All the ancient stories about gods? The exhaust of strato-whales stimiluates a very specific part of the brain and causes god-like hallucinations.

Impervious to anti-aircraft fire? Strato-whales are tough.

Flying in a way that defies the laws of physics? That's just how strato-whales roll.

It doesn't matter what the argument is. "But how do you explain...?" can always be answered by revealing yet another magical property of strato-whales.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I only know that it was 'something', advanced and non-human.

How do you know it was advanced?

Strato-whales aren't advanced. They are actually quite primitive (I've just decided). They can simply do things that humans can't.

Think of the starfish. Chop it into little pieces, and each piece grows into a new starfish.

Try that with, say, an amateur granite letterer. Makes a big mess, and no new granite letterers emerge.

Does that mean the starfish is more advanced?

 

[Stray Cat]

The newspaper photograph, in the 1942 publication was airbrushed, and or featured a "balloon" flying at 30,000 feet, whereas the flack and smoke was at a mere 25,000 feet.

That's what you are saying?

No, what I'm saying is that as there no record of what the photograph actually shows and there are quite obvious signs of it being heavily airbrushed, there is no way of knowing what it shows, or when it was taken. It may for all we know have been taken during the opening night of one of Hollywood's film premieres. It could well show the movie stars arriving at the Chinese Theater in the Goodyear Blimp and the AA fire could be added on top of the search light beam enhancements. There are so many other things it could be that are more likely than aliens in space ships.

So if, when we produce a picture of the weather balloon(s) in question, and they look NOTHING like the image with all the lights pointed toward it, will you then argue that the photograph itself was alter to NOT look like the balloons?

Why not set yourself the task of doing some real research and tracking down the original photographer and seeing if you can obtain the original unaltered negative and then we can talk about the photograph.

Or is that your argument to start, that a newspaper ran a picture of a balloon, doctered to look like a U.F.O., during a war...?

No, my argument is that you nor I know what has been doctored on that photograph and so there's no point speculating about it in order to support our pet theories. Personally I would go with the possibility that the photo originally showed a few very faint beams of light and a quite bright disc where the searchlight hit a cloud layer, but without the original unaltered photo, I wouldn't want to build a case on that speculation.

In summery, you think we shot 1,400 anti-aircraft at balloons that were tracked coming in from the Pacific...?

No.

 

[King of the Americas]

All of our most advanced weaponry is pretty useless when there's nothing to shoot at.

Since you don't know what was in the air it might as well have been nothing. No amount of wanting to believe it was super advanced alien whosawhatsits will make it so or magically become evidence of that.

Now if you'll excuse me, there are some squirrels in my backyard that demand the howitzer.

You are ignoring the jets' inability to catch the "D.C." U.F.O.'s...I never said anything about jets over L.A.

 

[bruto]

We KNOW that our jets and anti-aircraft fire didn't do much against them...

"I shot into the air and nothing happened" is at best a very very weak argument for the thing you shot at being substantial! I don't know whether there's a fallacy named for Martin Luther's inkpot, but this is its equivalent. Spoiler for those whose religious education might be lacking....

Martin Luther is said once to have reported seeing the devil in his study. He threw his inkpot at him. When later questioned about the reality of his vision, he said it was proven by the inkstain on his wall.

 

[Nonpareil]

We KNOW that our jets and anti-aircraft fire didn't do much against them...

 

[Correa Neto]

If you were to post that picture today, tomorrow KotA would remember having gone to Rio de Janeiro himself to take the picture.

You know what his memory is like.


Note: the preceeding was gentle mockery.

Oh, well, its possible. But its also possible that someone will look at the pics and say "****! How foolish I was! Those were just spotlights and not an alien spacecraft!"

So, I present you The Battle of Rio de Janeiro!

And now, behold one of the humongous Mother ship I photographed!

See? I can summon the aliens. No need for a moment upwards, or world peace initiative. Just send me money.

Of course, UFO creduloids may claim the LA Battle pic shows no UFO but they were actually there. Or maybe pull a Rramjet and lie, saying I adultered the pictures without ever caring to back the claim. Copies of the original files are available for whoever wants to check for photoshopping or Lightwaving.

Edited by LashL: 

To conform to Rule 10 re: the auto-censor.