• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

UFO over O'Hare

latent aaaack said:
"One United employee appeared emotionally shaken by the sighting and "experienced some religious issues" over it, one co-worker said."

Because if there's a God, how could he just sit back and allow something as horrible as a grey disc sitting in the sky to happen? Doesn't make sense.

Shouldn't that bolster a religious viewpoint, that crazy stuff can just be poofed into existence without needing any explanation? I would've thought that seeing a UFO would comfort a believer.
Click to expand...


This believer has seen UFO's (Literally: Objects flying in the air that he could not identify), and didn't lose any sleep over them. Those mechanics alledgedly saw something in the air that they were unable to identify. Whatever led them to leap from "Hovering disc-like object" to "Extra-terrestrial space craft" is beyond me.

Next they'll be seeing WMD's in every piece of luggage, the Loch Ness Monster off Navy Pier, and the Virgin Mary in a grease spot on the Dan Ryan expressway!

Commentary:

1) You'd think that after 911 people would be better skilled with Photoshop.
2) False data (Photoshopped images) detract from the validity of the original assertion.
3) They did not see anything because there was nothing to see.

-Fnord of Dyscordia-
 
Last edited:
baron said:
And I get annoyed with people who don't bother to research the facts and simply shout "liar!" or "stoned!" when someone reports what they saw. If someone saw something that looked like a structured craft then why on earth should they not say so? Is it a crime to be mistaken, or to honestly report an experience? Should they keep their interpretations secret for fear of offending those who are positively up themselves with righteous indignation at the thought of phenomenon they can't immediately explain.
Click to expand...
Nah, sorry, but that's just blatant rubbish.

As I said earlier, the problem is immediately jumping from, "What the hell's that!?!?" to, "Oh my god, it's a REAL UFO!"

I have no problem with people seeing strange objects in the sky - I've seen two myself which immediately appeared inexplicable, but study quickly resolved the issue in each case.

They needed to take a leaf out of Sherlock Holmes and eliminate the possible answers before jumping to the impossible ones.

As long as people are happy to jump to conclusions, I'm very happy to jump on them with equal amounts of scorn and ridicule.

Can you imagine what the first man to see an aurora thought? He probably thought the world was ending and his god arriving. When he still woke up the next morning and saw the same thing the next night, he probably started looking for other explanations.
 
SezMe said:
I think there are two separate events going on here. First, some people did see some unusual phenomenon over O'Hare and reported it. Fine.

Secondly, and quite separately, some UFO nutbar (or maybe a playful hoaxer) created some fake photos, sent them to MUFON and made the case that this was documentation of the O'Hare incident. MUFON bought it hook, line, and sinker.
Click to expand...

I agree. I bet this happens every time someone experiences an unusual phenomenom. One of the group of no-brains at MUFON think, "Wow, let's climb on board the bandwagon and post that old UFO pic again (again) [again].

Any crop circles or dissected cows found in the area?
 
TjW said:
The first picture looks nothing at all like the second picture.
The second picture looks very much like a lenticular cloud.
I have no idea what might create a low-level wave condition around O'Hare.
Click to expand...
I'd bet that the first pic is fake, the second shows what looks like a cloud or some other weather phenomena. In the fading light maybe could be mistaken for a UFO.
 
OTOH, it was election day and Cook County pols have been known to do whatever it takes to bring the votes in. Bringing in space aliens to vote for Todd Stroger I bet, how else did that incompetent idiot actually get elected after taking his stroke-addled fathers place in the Cook County Board President election?

This will be pretty easy to discover if true, I'll look out for space aliens working in high-paying do-nothing county jobs.
 
Huntster said:
Yup. Only a dozen.

Enough to convict someone of a capital crime..............



Define "solid", please.
Click to expand...

To me solid evidence, given the fact that there must have been several thousand possible witnesses in and around O'Hare airport at that time would have been more than a few testimonies. For example if several dozens (instead of just one) individual would have seen the object and given concording descriptions of it while being at different locations around O'Hare that would have given a lot more weight to the sighting. There was surely more than one plane on the tarmac at the time, why did no other passengers or crew reported seeing anything?

The fact that only a limited number of people claim to have seen something certainly suggest that what they saw is most probably an optical illusion of some sort who could be viewed only from the exact location where they happened to be at the moment. That would explained why the thing "suddently vanished". I am reasonably sure that they indeed saw something and that the report is an honest one. But the lack of supporting evidence certainly do not permit us to conclude that this was an extra-terrestrial craft.
 
MichelQC said:
The fact that only a limited number of people claim to have seen something certainly suggest that what they saw is most probably an optical illusion of some sort who could be viewed only from the exact location where they happened to be at the moment. That would explained why the thing "suddently vanished". I am reasonably sure that they indeed saw something and that the report is an honest one. But the lack of supporting evidence certainly do not permit us to conclude that this was an extra-terrestrial craft.
Click to expand...
I seem to remember some scattered light rain that day, anyone know where to look up past weather? Perhaps headlights from a plane, tanker truck, or some other vehicle on the tarmac reflecting off slick pavement onto a low-hanging cloud? It would appear to move very fast when the vehicle moved.

Just a WAG.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Uh oh! Move it to the Conspiracy Boards! The gubmint is trying to cover it up.
Click to expand...

Problem is the FAA is trying to cover up that they have no evidence there was anything there other than a call to the tower to see if there was anything there... the controllers said they had nothing on their scopes. So the FAA is covering up that there was nothing there.:boggled:

Surprising how fast a FOIA request was filed!

jbs
 
Patricio Elicer said:
Here are seemingly two independant pictures of the UFO. Too good to be true?. If these are true pics of the object, then the case may be worth paying attention.
Click to expand...

These people really need to come forward if they have real evidence. The top image has no context and is from an anonymous source. The second one looks pretty much as the taxi mechanic describes, a hazy gray object, but has been convincingly debunked in this thread.

I would love to discover we aren't alone in the universe, scared that they have the technology to cross the vast distances of the universe (or even our galaxy), but relieved again since they must have been visiting here for a very long time without destroying us (of course we might be a particularly interesting strain of fruit fly to them...);)

BUT - I seriously doubt the ET are here and the type of evidence UFO fans accept as proof seriously degrades their position and believability.

jbs
 
Well, I'll be d**ned. They accepted my registration over at uforesearcher.com. I guess we'll see how long this will last ;)
 
Who cares, it was to far to be sure in fading light, perhaps it was perhaps it was not, is it even worth a thread?
 
meg said:
Well, I'll be d**ned. They accepted my registration over at uforesearcher.com. I guess we'll see how long this will last ;)
Click to expand...

Well, if they're like most "true believer" sites, it won't be long, considering you're calling into question, albeit somewhat subtly, the veracity of their evidence.

Wonder what's they'd do if someone pointed out the O'Hare Wiki and the identical photo (from July apparently) sans saucer they have there?:D

jbs
 
MichelQC said:
Originally Posted by Huntster

Yup. Only a dozen.

Enough to convict someone of a capital crime..............

Define "solid", please.
Click to expand...

To me solid evidence, given the fact that there must have been several thousand possible witnesses in and around O'Hare airport at that time would have been more than a few testimonies. For example if several dozens (instead of just one) individual would have seen the object and given concording descriptions of it while being at different locations around O'Hare that would have given a lot more weight to the sighting.
Click to expand...

Okay.

Several dozen rather than one.

84 instead of 12.

What do you think of this?

There was surely more than one plane on the tarmac at the time, why did no other passengers or crew reported seeing anything?
Click to expand...

Who says they didn't?

The FAA?

The fact that only a limited number of people claim to have seen something certainly suggest that what they saw is most probably an optical illusion of some sort who could be viewed only from the exact location where they happened to be at the moment. That would explained why the thing "suddently vanished". I am reasonably sure that they indeed saw something and that the report is an honest one. But the lack of supporting evidence certainly do not permit us to conclude that this was an extra-terrestrial craft.
Click to expand...

I conclude nothing except that they saw what they described as an "unidentified flying object".

I certainly don't conclude that they saw an "extraterrestrial craft", however I also don't reject the possibility.

Call me "skeptical".
 
Last edited:
Well, I'm really darn skeptical, Huntster.

What are you saying with that link? Are you implying that these United mechanics were maybe chosen witnesses to Our Lady of O'hare?

At 4:30pm on a tuesday afternoon they would have been entering the "dinner rush", meaning they would have been pulling United aircraft into the airport as fast as possible. A typical rate would have been a little over 1/min (1.3) per runway. With two runways in operation, (typical) it would have been about 2.6/minute. About one every 24 seconds. While all the reports state that "up to a dozen people" saw the thing "for several minutes", when they get down to the quotes, the most they can come up with quotewise is one guy says that he saw the thing for about two minutes. So, at the BARE MINIMUM, in two minutes, at least 5 aircraft were coming in. At an average of 120 passengers and 3 crew in the cockpit per jet that comes to about 615 people entering that concourse area in that 2 minutes. If it was indeed in the air for "several" minutes, let's say 10, that would mean about 3075 people entered that particular space in that time.

Add at least 15 people in the tower, so in a 2 minute window there would be around 630 possible witnesses. In a 10 minute window, there would be around 3090 potential witnesses to the miraculous event. This would be a minimum, not counting planes departing or people in the concourse awaiting their loved ones.

So, if the maximum reported (about a dozen) saw the event, that would mean at the small side 1.9%, and at the big end .4% (.0039 rounded up)

So let's compare that to the "Miracle of the Sun", shall we? According to your wikiwedia link, the estimated crowd size ranged from 30,000 to 100,000, depending on reports, however according to John De Marchi, who stayed at Fatima for years and interviewed people, he had "hundreds" of witness testimonies.

Let's really give him the benefit of the doubt and say that "hundreds" means 700. If 700 out of 30,000 attested to the event, that's 2%. If 700 out of 100,000 attested to the event, that means .7%

So, if we compare the two, we find that it is MORE likely that in 1917 the sun spun on its axis, danced and, "whirling, seemed to loosen itself from the firmament and advance threateningly upon the earth as if to crush us with its huge fiery weight." than it is that on Nov 7, 2006, twelve United employees saw a disc shaped thing in the sky that kind of suddenly disappeared.
 
meg said:
Well, I'm really darn skeptical, Huntster.

What are you saying with that link? Are you implying that these United mechanics were maybe chosen witnesses to Our Lady of O'hare?
Click to expand...

That depends on how you look at it.

It's rather humbling to be among a few to witness something spectacular while thousands sat on their asses nearby in complete ignorance.

It can also be damned frustrating.

At 4:30pm on a tuesday afternoon they would have been entering the "dinner rush", meaning they would have been pulling United aircraft into the airport as fast as possible. A typical rate would have been a little over 1/min (1.3) per runway. With two runways in operation, (typical) it would have been about 2.6/minute. About one every 24 seconds. While all the reports state that "up to a dozen people" saw the thing "for several minutes", when they get down to the quotes, the most they can come up with quotewise is one guy says that he saw the thing for about two minutes. So, at the BARE MINIMUM, in two minutes, at least 5 aircraft were coming in. At an average of 120 passengers and 3 crew in the cockpit per jet that comes to about 615 people entering that concourse area in that 2 minutes. If it was indeed in the air for "several" minutes, let's say 10, that would mean about 3075 people entered that particular space in that time.

Add at least 15 people in the tower, so in a 2 minute window there would be around 630 possible witnesses. In a 10 minute window, there would be around 3090 potential witnesses to the miraculous event. This would be a minimum, not counting planes departing or people in the concourse awaiting their loved ones.

So, if the maximum reported (about a dozen) saw the event, that would mean at the small side 1.9%, and at the big end .4% (.0039 rounded up)

So let's compare that to the "Miracle of the Sun", shall we?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Let's.

According to your wikiwedia link, the estimated crowd size ranged from 30,000 to 100,000, depending on reports, however according to John De Marchi, who stayed at Fatima for years and interviewed people, he had "hundreds" of witness testimonies.

Let's really give him the benefit of the doubt and say that "hundreds" means 700. If 700 out of 30,000 attested to the event, that's 2%. If 700 out of 100,000 attested to the event, that means .7%

So, if we compare the two, we find that it is MORE likely that in 1917 the sun spun on its axis, danced and, "whirling, seemed to loosen itself from the firmament and advance threateningly upon the earth as if to crush us with its huge fiery weight." than it is that on Nov 7, 2006, twelve United employees saw a disc shaped thing in the sky that kind of suddenly disappeared.
Click to expand...

Neat math. Real science there.

And so?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom