The Phoenix Lights... We Are Not Alone

[Astrophotographer]

Which one error are you referring?

I was referring to the point where I stated the 1/14/1998 drop had been preannounced.

The Macabee report doesn't contain the video you claim? The error Dilettoso saw it? The AF claim the sighting a result of multiple planes dropping flares? The non-investigation of the military? Or the investigation of the military. The flares the af official statement were LUU but now ....I forget. And may have been dispensed with todays technology. The eyewitnesses aren't credible, just mistaken, these AF exercises happen all the time, the AF doesn't have to report to anybody about where they're headed because it's none of our business, shall I continue? I got more

So many claims but many are not accurate.

1. I am not sure what video you are stating that I said was in the Maccabee report. I said the report contained stills from the videos. Maybe you need to elaborate.

2. I just posted the statement where Diletosso claimed to have observed the event and also determined that the 1/14/98 lights are the same as the 3/13/97 lights and that they are not flares.

3. You have not demonstrated they were from just one plane. Jones states they ejected flares and that one pilot had a lot. He did not state that only one pilot ejected flares.

4. The "non-investigation" had a lot to do with an unofficial inquiry by Bienz. I thought we ironed that out. Apparently, you missed it.

5. They still are Luu-2 flares. Nothing special about them as you had previously claimed.

6. "may have been dispensed". I did not claim this. I stated it could have been a certain dispenser and I then added they could have been loaded on the bomb racks.

7. Eyewitnesses are as credible as their stories. The more incredible, the more important it is to confirm their stories.

8. The Barry Goldwater test range is quite active. Exercises DO happen there quite a bit.

9. I am not sure where you got this one about the AF not having to report to anyone where they are going. I think you made it up but I could be wrong. However, the military aircraft does need to tell the FAA what they are doing because it is the FAA's business. If you want to know what the military is doing, you can ask and they may tell you. If not, you can file a FOIA request for the information.

Please go on, since I just explained all of them for you AGAIN!

 

[chuck4842]

1. There is no concrete evidence that they avoided radar. Only stories told weeks later and may have been concerning the 10PM event, which would not show up on radar. We have no radar data because UFOlogists chose not to obtain it. Therefore, the claim they were not on radar is not confirmed in any way. BTW, only one aircraft would need to have it's transponder active as long as the aircraft stated in a formation.

2. Training exercises take on many different forms. Some of them just involve flying time. I keep trying to emphasize is the planes were simply flying from Nellis AFB to Tuscon for proficiency. You exaggerate what I have stated they were doing.

I know damn well, there are testimonies of atc who say they saw the formation with their eyes but not on radar. That means they were flying lower than regulations at the least, should I spoon feed it to you? I'm getting tired of repeating myself.

 

[Astrophotographer]

ATC do not have records of the Tutors scheduled flight... I got a million reasons why you are a disinformant.

How do you know the FAA and ATC had no record of the flight? According to the Reader's digest article, the enroute controller knew about the formation. I will repeat it for you:

"There's a UFO!" co-pilot John Middleton said kiddingly to pilot Larry Campbell. They queried the regional air-traffic-control center in Albuquerque, N.M. A controller radioed back that it was a formation of CT-144s flying at 19,000 feet.

A million? Wow! I thought I told you a billion times not to exaggerate!

If you think I am planting false information, then that is your opinion, which I will never change but I must add that I have had numerous emails from people over the years telling me how much they enjoy the information. A former MUFON section director stated I was "dead on 100 percent correct on your articles and analysis on the Phoenix Lights incident". I also have had a few, like yourself, who strongly believe it was an alien spaceship or something else exotic that night. Their comments are usually rude and contain words like "disinformation agent" and "Debunker". So I am used to your comments and I consider the source.

You need to put away whatever you are drinking, eating, or taking buddy. You do yourself no favors by posting this way.

 

[Astrophotographer]

I know damn well, there are testimonies of atc who say they saw the formation with their eyes but not on radar.

Feel free to present the information. However, the enroute ATC had the formation of aircraft on radar.

You may be talking about Bill Grava, who was talked to by Tony Ortega (apparently another disinformation agent/debunker),

But a formation of a craft or crafts traveling at high altitude over Phoenix would have been monitored by FAA radar operators in Albuquerque, not at Sky Harbor Airport, says air traffic controller Bill Grava, who was on duty at Sky Harbor that night and witnessed the later, 10 p.m. lights. Grava says that if five planes in a vee passed over Phoenix at 8:30 p.m., they would have been represented by a sole asterisk on consoles at Sky Harbor -- not something that would have raised the curiosity of operators. As for the 10 p.m. event, Grava acknowledges that the North Tac range is beyond Sky Harbor's radar; if planes dropped flares over the range, it's no mystery why they would not have appeared on consoles at the airport.

Luke Air Force base has more powerful radar systems. But Luke's Captain Stacey Cotton says that radar operators at the base were asked if they had seen anything unusual that night, and answered no. She says that a formation of five planes -- traveling at high altitude above Sky Harbor's and outside of Luke's restricted air spaces -- would not have been considered unusual. Neither would a flare drop over the gunnery range.

-Tony Ortega "The Hack and the Quack".

That means they were flying lower than regulations at the least.

Actually, the enroute ATC said they were at 19,000 feet. Not too low at all. Do you have some proof they were flying much lower?

 

[chuck4842]

I don't care to go on with this any longer. If the average joe can't see my side of it , he never will. Your research and conclusion is suspicious to me, and I have to work for a living . If you care to pay me 15 an hour I would tear you apart, but I'm raising teenagers now and they're harder to figure than you, at nuthin an hour.

 

[chuck4842]

Feel free to present the information. However, the enroute ATC had the formation of aircraft on radar.

You may be talking about Bill Grava, who was talked to by Tony Ortega (apparently another disinformation agent/debunker),

But a formation of a craft or crafts traveling at high altitude over Phoenix would have been monitored by FAA radar operators in Albuquerque, not at Sky Harbor Airport, says air traffic controller Bill Grava, who was on duty at Sky Harbor that night and witnessed the later, 10 p.m. lights. Grava says that if five planes in a vee passed over Phoenix at 8:30 p.m., they would have been represented by a sole asterisk on consoles at Sky Harbor -- not something that would have raised the curiosity of operators. As for the 10 p.m. event, Grava acknowledges that the North Tac range is beyond Sky Harbor's radar; if planes dropped flares over the range, it's no mystery why they would not have appeared on consoles at the airport.

Luke Air Force base has more powerful radar systems. But Luke's Captain Stacey Cotton says that radar operators at the base were asked if they had seen anything unusual that night, and answered no. She says that a formation of five planes -- traveling at high altitude above Sky Harbor's and outside of Luke's restricted air spaces -- would not have been considered unusual. Neither would a flare drop over the gunnery range.

-Tony Ortega "The Hack and the Quack".





Actually, the enroute ATC said they were at 19,000 feet. Not too low at all. Do you have some proof they were flying much lower?

If I gave you the name of an ATC that was working that night and stated he saw the V and it wasn't on radar, you would explain him away like everything else I've given you. Or you'd file him in the wacko section with all of the other witnesses. So I know theres nothing you can't explain.

 

[chuck4842]

On your site you show the flight path according to the reports of witnesses, these witnesses are all calling the police and reports are coming into the airport, do we agree on this? Ok good. Now you want me to believe the V wasn't investigated by the military, and to this day no log or positive proof of any exercise was given to the public, because they don't feel the need to . Also it was your #91 post that got me started on the "special flares" term. You asked me when you said that.....

 

[chuck4842]

post #281 you asked "I was referring to the point where I stated the 1/14/1998 drop had been preannounced "
You claimed this on your website but it looks like you retracted it now......"This is showing more ignorance (or is it arrogance?). On January 14 1998, the Michigan Air National Guard performed the same event. They had announced to the press that they would do so. Still, Village Labs assumed that these lights were UFOs even with the notification. The test has been performed. Hamilton is just too incompetent to recognize it."

Heres the page http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/azflares.htm


It's the last sentence on the page before the yellow text reason of retraction.
Thanks for striking it out and admitting you made it up. I'm glad to see I've had a positive influence on you, and keeping you honest. You keep asking me to feel free and back it up when you can't do the same.

 

[TjW]

I don't care to go on with this any longer. If the average joe can't see my side of it , he never will. Your research and conclusion is suspicious to me, and I have to work for a living . If you care to pay me 15 an hour I would tear you apart, but I'm raising teenagers now and they're harder to figure than you, at nuthin an hour.

Well, my name's not Joe, but I believe I'm a fairly average TjW. I think I see your side of it. You want to believe. Okay.

But just to get this clear, are you suggesting Astrophotographer -- or anyone, for that matter -- is paid to lie about UFO incidents? Really?

And of course, if you want people to actually believe that you "don't care to go on with it any longer", you could always just... stop.

 

[chuck4842]

The AF drops flares like this all the time said Sulliven. So why AGAIN, God please tell me, WHY is it a bother to do it again? Just announce it. Why would this be such a bother? The government is always bothering me with their BS announcements. Why would this one be such a huge and tremendous expense if they're constantly doing it anyway? They constantly give public airshows, do we agree? So please do not throw this question in the can as meager. Feel free to research it yourself and find out what I know already.

 

[chuck4842]

Well, my name's not Joe, but I believe I'm a fairly average TjW. I think I see your side of it. You want to believe. Okay.

But just to get this clear, are you suggesting Astrophotographer -- or anyone, for that matter -- is paid to lie about UFO incidents? Really?

And of course, if you want people to actually believe that you "don't care to go on with it any longer", you could always just... stop.

Nope, I think he understands his side only, and lies for free.

 

[chuck4842]

I dont mean it astro, you definitely are not a liar ok. You probably did read it somewhere, but it didn't happen. It does show the extremes of both sides. I really am sorry.

 

[Astrophotographer]

It's the last sentence on the page before the yellow text reason of retraction. Thanks for striking it out and admitting you made it up. I'm glad to see I've had a positive influence on you, and keeping you honest. You keep asking me to feel free and back it up when you can't do the same.

I don't think I said "I made it up". I just could not produce the information. Apparently, I misunderstood what Tom King wrote just a few days later in his posting where he stated the media announced that evening it was the Michigan ANG. Since it was written 10 years ago, I can't recall exactly where I got the information and I struck it out when I could not produce the source. This is the ONLY time that I am aware of that I could not back up what I wrote.

 

[Astrophotographer]

On your site you show the flight path according to the reports of witnesses, these witnesses are all calling the police and reports are coming into the airport, do we agree on this? Ok good. Now you want me to believe the V wasn't investigated by the military, and to this day no log or positive proof of any exercise was given to the public, because they don't feel the need to .

They actually made most of the reports to the National UFO center (NUFORC) and the media. I am not aware if the police got any reports or recorded them. The same can be said for the airport. The only source that actually recorded information on a real time basis was the hotline for NUFORC and this is where most of the original reports I have on my website originated from. There are a few from newspaper stories and Bill Hamilton's MUFON summary. I am unaware of a flood of reports to the Police, and if there were, I have never seen the reports listed.

As far as I know, the military did not investigate the "V" formation. Since Bluebook closed down 30 years before the time of the event, there are no formal UFO investigations by the USAF (the two Roswell reports were mandated by the GAO). IMO, if Bluebook were still active, the mystery would have been solved a day or two after the event because they would have looked into it. Of course, nobody would have accepted the explanation. They would have taken your position that you would rather believe it was something extraordinary rather than something mundane.

 

[Astrophotographer]

If I gave you the name of an ATC that was working that night and stated he saw the V and it wasn't on radar, you would explain him away like everything else I've given you.

No, I am pretty sure it was Grava since he appeared in the media. It is funny that he told Ortega that it is possible that a formation of aircraft at high altitude would have probably been ignored by the ATCs at Phoenix.

 

[Astrophotographer]

Also it was your #91 post that got me started on the "special flares" term. You asked me when you said that.....

However, in that posting, I did not call them "special flares". I just pointed out that the video being displayed was one used for heat seeker missile avoidance and were not the LUU-2 types used for illumination.

 

[chuck4842]

"I am not aware if the police got any reports or recorded them. The same can be said for the airport. The only source that actually recorded information on a real time basis was the hotline for NUFORC and this is where most of the original reports I have on my website originated from. There are a few from newspaper stories and Bill Hamilton's MUFON summary. I am unaware of a flood of reports to the Police, and if there were, I have never seen the reports listed."

Are you aware of the governor of Arizona making the announcement on live tv that they couldn't find what caused it? Does the Governor of Arizona count as maybe part of a government investigation? Does his multiple media appearances sound a bit more than "a few from newspaper stories "?

 

[chuck4842]

Here's a video that contains one if not the only picture of the V, it's at 30 seconds of the vid. It's the Dr's pic. I'd like your opinion on its height, and how close to being over Phoenix it looks. It's a close formation also.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sONgzwxomLQ


Heres a vid describing the 1-14-98 vid you may have heard of but the Maryland NG flares don't come close to looking like the 3-13-97 event and the 1-14-98 vid was captured unnanounced by the same photographer(Mike Krzyston) from the same location of the 3-13-97 and this time (1-14-98) the lights appear in front of the range.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLD1MQUnH14

 

[Astrophotographer]

Here's a video that contains one if not the only picture of the V, it's at 30 seconds of the vid. It's the Dr's pic. I'd like your opinion on its height, and how close to being over Phoenix it looks. It's a close formation also.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sONgzwxomLQ

You are getting tiresome. The only real videos in this clip are of the military flare drop at 10PM, which you already agreed was the cause. This is the Kryszton video clip which was analyzed by Dr. Maccabee among all the others. The one still from the Doctor's clip was also analyzed by Dr. M. Look at Figure 16 in his report by witness "L". Then look at figure 18 where the lights really were. This has been hacked to death and, I thought, had been resolved.

BTW, the image on her website that was used in the video clip is dated September 16, 2002:

http://www.thephoenixlights.net/Images/10_lg.jpg

Therefore, that image was used incorrectly in the video and is not of the March 13, 1997 event! BTW, you can not determine altitude of an object from one still frame unless you have some very good reference points or know the physical size of the object and the type of lens system used. If you know another way, I am willing to listen.

Looking at the image, the object could be very close or very far away. Just because it has a low angle of elevation, does not mean it is physically low in altitude. This object is low in the sky:

If you look at the link, you will have a point of reference because you know what the object is. However, if I asked you what its altitude was, could you tell me if you did not look at the name in the link?

The other clip of a v-shaped boomarang is an animation. The only clip of these lights were taken in northern Phoneix and just showed five lights that shifted formation:

Try: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiBWBf08qmc

Watch from time 0:43 to 1:12. That clip does not show the entire video taken but it does show enough. This image (taken from the same show) here shows how the lights shifted during that time:

Notice the video shows no black V or triangle and watch the shifting pattern of lights. If sure behaves like a formation of aircraft.

 

[Astrophotographer]

Are you aware of the governor of Arizona making the announcement on live tv that they couldn't find what caused it? Does the Governor of Arizona count as maybe part of a government investigation? Does his multiple media appearances sound a bit more than "a few from newspaper stories "?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg6cGCAB2Ck

Watch the clip starting at 2:00. This was his investigation in 1997. I don't care what story he tells now. The actual investigation in 1997 was nothing more than a joke he used to divert attention away from his failed adminstration.

If there were an actual investigation, where is the report? Where are the mountains of data they would have gathered to analyze everything? The truth is there was no investigation.