Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FAA blames UFO report on weird weather
CNN ^ | 01.02.07

Posted on 01/02/2007 10:03:56 PM PST by Coleus

Federal officials say it was probably just some weird weather phenomenon, but a group of United Airlines employees swear they saw a mysterious, saucer-shaped craft hovering over O'Hare Airport in November. The workers, some of them pilots, said the object didn't have lights and hovered over an airport terminal before shooting up through the clouds, according to a report in Monday's Chicago Tribune.

The Federal Aviation Administration acknowledged that a United supervisor had called the control tower at O'Hare, asking if anyone had spotted a spinning disc-shaped object. But the controllers didn't see anything, and a preliminary check of radar found nothing out of the ordinary, FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory said. "Our theory on this is that it was a weather phenomenon," Cory said. "That night was a perfect atmospheric condition in terms of low (cloud) ceiling and a lot of airport lights. When the lights shine up into the clouds, sometimes you can see funny things."

The FAA is not investigating, Cory said. United spokeswoman Megan McCarthy said company officials don't recall discussing any such incident from November 7. At least one O'Hare controller, union official Craig Burzych, was amused by it all. "To fly 7 million light years to O'Hare and then have to turn around and go home because your gate was occupied is simply unacceptable," he said.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: UFO's
KEYWORDS: artbell; chicago; faa; ohareairport; ufo; ufos
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last
To: Candor7; Coleus
[Occurred : 11/7/2006 16:30 (Entered as : 110706 16:30)

Reported: 11/21/2006 4:08:16 PM 16:08 Posted: 12/7/2006

Location: Chicago O'Hare Airport, IL]



These dates tell us a lot. As is typical of UFO sightings, the person giving the interview describing the object as "metallic" or "moving at high speed" or "not like a natural object" only does so after days or weeks pass after the actual sighting.

One would think that if the observer really saw what he described, then he would rush to tell everyone about it right away and describe it the same way right from the start but, for some reason, they always wait.

It's almost as if, in the weeks that follow his sighting of some unusual and impressive weather movements in the stratosphere, his memory of the event slowly begins to change as he plays it over and over in his mind, and maybe it DID move a lot faster, and maybe it DID have a metallic look, and maybe it DID look like something artificial, and just MAYBE I should tell everyone all about it because it sure would make an interesting story and the public will want to hear what I have to tell them......


Reality check: This is how people think and it's part of being human! It doesn't mean there is something wrong with a person's brain or that someone is stupid or being deceitful. People just love to tell a good story (even more than they enjoy hearing one) and it's natural for all of us to B.S. ourselves in order to create and perpetuate a good story.
41 posted on 01/03/2007 12:49:37 AM PST by spinestein (Remember to follow the Brazen Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Why don't people just get used to the idea that the military is always testing new stuff they can't talk about?


42 posted on 01/03/2007 12:59:16 AM PST by Terriergal (All your church are belong to us! --- The Purpose Driven Church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
I have been looking at the UFO phenomeon for decades. My father and our neighbor saw one. They rarely talked about it, they just shrugged it off, no big deal. A good friend of mine saw one fairly close, a couple of hundred yards from him, in the Gaspe Peninsula, as a field geologist.He only told a few friends about it, and rarely speaks about the sighting.He was alone at the time and took a picture of it at twilight, after he put a couple of miles distance between him and the object. It was glowing a deep scarlet color.

The real fact is that we have a consistent unexplained phenomenon, which is really tied up in a lot of emotional hoo haw, and denial. Perhaps you one day will get to see one yourself. The individuals I just spoke of were ordinary salt of the earth people, not blow hards, not people who " like to tell a story." If anything they are masters of understatement in my experience, knowing them as I do.

So the old, "you didn't see what you thought you saw" $hit really doesn't work anymore. It simply proves how invested such people are in their own world view. Alvin Toffler talks a lot about this phenomenon in his work about paradigm shift. And if you pretend they are not there hard enough, they will just go away.

Sorry, they have not gone away for centuries, and the history of UFO sightings is well documented for thousands of years, if you include the corpus of Indian works in Sanskrit.

So keep talkin your talk, while the rest of us try to figure out what these things are as phenomenon. But please, stop telling people that trained observers do not see what they thought they saw, especially if you yourself did not see it as an observer. Its just an insult to ordinary human intelligence.

43 posted on 01/03/2007 1:11:49 AM PST by Candor7 (Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Move along, there's nothing to see here.


44 posted on 01/03/2007 1:25:26 AM PST by thegreatbeast (Avenge Curt Weldon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spinestein

The news says it was around 4:30PM. Sunset for Chicago on Nov. 7 was 4:38PM, so my surmise is that it was some sort of lighting effect at sunset, of which there are many examples.


45 posted on 01/03/2007 1:34:42 AM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Candor7
[I have been looking at the UFO phenomeon for decades.]

So have I.

[My father and our neighbor saw one.]

In the past twenty-five years I've seen three things in the sky that were 1)very unusual 2)impressive 3)beyond my ability to specifically explain 4)would each be something that if I wanted to make a good story out of I would embellish just a liiiiiittle bit and have others believing a "credible" witness who has thousands of hours experience looking at the sky and observing all types of weather phenomenon and aircraft activity that he saw an alien spacecraft. I've also seen dozens of things that were very unusual, impressive, and would make a great UFO story, except that I knew what they were because of my years of experience in watching the sky. For example, every few years or so, I witness a "fireball" meteor that is brighter than the full moon, travels across the sky very quickly, sometimes breaks into different pieces and lights up the sky all around for several seconds leaving a glowing trail behind it. It is hugely impressive, and to people who don't know what it is (it's a small chunk of rock falling to the earth from space) they WANT to believe it's aliens. There are people I know who swear that the bright meteor they witnessed with me, and others, was really an alien spacecraft, in spite of being told otherwise. Why? Because they'd rather believe that trained astronomers are wrong or mistaken, because that means they really did see aliens.

[The real fact is that we have a consistent unexplained phenomenon, which is really tied up in a lot of emotional hoo haw, and denial.]

The emotional part is right, but it is in the area of gullibility, not denial.

[So the old, "you didn't see what you thought you saw" $hit really doesn't work anymore. It simply proves how invested such people are in their own world view.]

Actually, the old "witness testimony is usually credible and accurate unless proven otherwise" doesn't work anymore. Witnesses to interesting or unusual events, sincere though they may be, have proven to be unreliable in recounting critical details of that event. Normal people (salt of the earth people, as you called them) DO make errors when recounting details of an event and they tend to make those errors on the side of MORE sensationalism. Example: I used to be an EMT, and at accident scenes I've been at, there is no shortage of witnesses who each tell different versions (many contradictory) of what happened. What do they have to gain? Seemingly nothing, but human psychology being what it is, witnesses seem to remember accidents having more vehicles involved and greater numbers of fatalities and more gruesome injuries, and it's common to talk to witnesses weeks or months after an accident, and what they remember is more like a sensational movie crash scene than what the more reliable public record shows happened on that day.

[Sorry, they have not gone away for centuries, and the history of UFO sightings is well documented for thousands of years]

Up until about 100 years ago, "alien sightings" were always described in terms of devils and angels, complete with horns and fire and brimstone, and wings and halos and messages from God. As soon as science fiction stories of aliens and their spacecraft became widely popular, those incidents went away to be immediately replaced by pale, noseless, almond shaped head aliens with huge eyes who ride around in flying saucers and who bring messages of warning from the great galactic civilization.

[So keep talkin your talk, while the rest of us try to figure out what these things are as phenomenon. But please, stop telling people that trained observers do not see what they thought they saw, especially if you yourself did not see it as an observer. Its just an insult to ordinary human intelligence.]

Please stop assuming that only the people who claim to have seen flying saucers are the only credible witnesses, and that other trained observers who have alternative explanations are not worthy of being listened to. That is a real insult to people's intelligence.
46 posted on 01/03/2007 2:37:11 AM PST by spinestein (Remember to follow the Brazen Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
That would be my best guess. I've seen a lot of impressive lighting effects at sunset and sundown.


BTW. Venus has moved into the evening twilight again and will be getting brighter and brighter for the next few months. 911 calls of UFO's after sunset (right where Venus is!) always dramatically increase when this happens. :^)
47 posted on 01/03/2007 2:42:09 AM PST by spinestein (Remember to follow the Brazen Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: babygene
As far as what these people saw, I have no clue... However neither do you, so why don't you stop pretending to be such an expert.

Because leftist moonbats like Rense.com are pushing this story, without one named person on record claiming they actually saw anything. Claims of the exceptional require exceptional proof, and right now all we really have are some writers from typically leftist newspaper reporting a very questionable story.

48 posted on 01/03/2007 5:15:46 AM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: babygene
the FAA statement adds or subtracts nothing from the wittiness accounts. Zero, Zilch... For you to suggest that it does is laughable.

Well at least they have gone on record, with names, of those claiming there is no physical evidence of anything other than clouds in the sky. Even United's official position is nothing happened. Claims of the extraordinary require extraordinary proof, there's simply too many kooks and false sightings for anything else to fly.

49 posted on 01/03/2007 5:19:58 AM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

It was just Calypso Louie driving by in his mother ship looking for Barak's house. Nothing to worry about.


50 posted on 01/03/2007 5:27:32 AM PST by Fresh Wind (All we are sa-a-a-ying, is give Beast a chance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

The issue here is that since the 60's, the FAA's credibility is starting to fray on this. They treat these things like the parent of a 7-year old explaining away questions they have about Santa.

I think most people, at this point, can surmise that we might not be alone, and that from a technology standpoint, two things are clear:

1. If these aliens wanted us dead, they probably could have taken care of that by now.
2. As such, they have superior technology to our own, and will for the foreseeable future.

At least on that basis, our scientific community can begin to devote well-directed attention on the issue without fear of compromising a life's work in doing so.

Maybe that's the biggest price we are paying at this point, is that we have yet to unleash the best minds available only to maintain a very thin mythology at this point.

I have a classmate who's an astronaut, and she'll tell you most have seen some sort of 'non-ballistic flight characteristics' from unidentified objects in space. That's about as much as you'll get out of any of them on the matter.


51 posted on 01/03/2007 11:03:10 AM PST by RinaseaofDs (Ignorance should be painful)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs
think most people, at this point, can surmise that we might not be alone,>>>>>>>>>>>

You may be right here, but there is no credible evidence on the origin of these phenomenon, or what they contain. What there is available is anecdotal.

Taking an empiracal approach is all I advocate.

And if someone observes a UFO, we need to carefully get thr details of the observation. It would be good to capture one, or shoot it down.I would have no hesitation to taking a well aimed rifle shot at one, just to see if it would stop or become disabled.

52 posted on 01/03/2007 12:17:29 PM PST by Candor7 (Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
Good well thought out response. But a minor flaw:

Up until about 100 years ago, "alien sightings" were always described in terms of devils and angels, complete with horns and fire and brimstone, and wings and halos and messages from God. As soon as science fiction stories of aliens and their spacecraft became widely popular, those incidents went away to be immediately replaced by pale, noseless, almond shaped head aliens with huge eyes who ride around in flying saucers and who bring messages of warning from the great galactic civilization.

This power of suggestion applies to non-fantastic explanations as well. If a real angel or space alien were observed, many in our culture would undoubtedly think "there must be a rational explanation..."

53 posted on 01/03/2007 1:31:17 PM PST by AndyTheBear (Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs
I have a classmate who's an astronaut, and she'll tell you most have seen some sort of 'non-ballistic flight characteristics' from unidentified objects in space. That's about as much as you'll get out of any of them on the matter.

Which is the exact right approach to take. What else can be said, matter of factly? She is wise to retain her standing as a true scientist, and not fall off into the world of overreaching speculative fantasy.

I too have seen many unexplained aerial phenomenon, including as part of a large group that had pulled off the road and originally alerted my attention upward. But what I've learned in years of studying the topic is, those who make claims of the extraordinary without substantiative evidence are helping no one, and are instead hurting those who wish to see actual scientific study. The bar should be set high, so that the leftist kooks like Jeff Rense don't gain in any way off false, unprovable sightings. Bring us something with credence, bring us hard physical evidence, as most 'sightings' are easily debunked by true scientists, and the closest thing to scientists in this story is the named officials at the FAA, not some supposed somebody the liberal rag refuses to even ID. The best U F O scientists worthy of that title will tell you the same exact thing.

54 posted on 01/03/2007 1:40:17 PM PST by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear
[This power of suggestion applies to non-fantastic explanations as well. If a real angel or space alien were observed, many in our culture would undoubtedly think "there must be a rational explanation..."]

Sure, but if real angels appeared and started flying around on their wings at shopping malls and at sporting events, talking to people and allowing themselves to be touched and videotaped with a glowing halo floating above their heads, there would be no choice but to be convinced; the evidence would demand that. Something similar is true for aliens. Surveys show that about a million people in America alone believe that they, personally, have seen aliens up close and may even have been abducted by aliens. Many of these people have video cameras, so why aren't there any videos of aliens visiting these people? The usual explanation seems to be that some kind of mind control or geas is put on them so that they don't think to get the video camera and start recording. Maybe. But I would ask why there are no videos taken by any the NEIGHBORS of these people as they're being abducted and led away from their houses by aliens in their pajamas in the middle of the night. You'd think that at least a few people would notice and grab the video camera. Or are all of the neighbors being put into trances as well?

At some point Occam has to step in and say that it's just not plausible to believe that aliens have been browsing here among us for so long, making themselves so obvious to the ones who want to believe in them, yet not once leaving a scrap of evidence to convince the skeptical.
55 posted on 01/03/2007 3:06:36 PM PST by spinestein (Remember to follow the Brazen Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
Sure, but if real angels appeared and started flying around on their wings at shopping malls and at sporting events...

Which would make them non-fantastic to the next generation, as such fantastic things as horseless carriages, man made flying machines, and missions to the moon are now.

56 posted on 01/03/2007 8:17:23 PM PST by AndyTheBear (Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear

[...horseless carriages, man made flying machines, and missions to the moon...]

...are all examples of things created by humans through a lot of hard work and ambition; they didn't fall on us from the sky by accident. But I get your point. It's a fact that there have been countless reports of stones falling from the sky dating back to antiquity, but scientists didn't accept that idea (and most openly ridiculed it) until perhaps a little over a century ago. Now, everyone accepts that stones fall from the sky as commonplace. Still, it took compelling evidence to bring about that widespread acceptance and there is no compelling evidence that supports the idea of aliens visiting Earth in spaceships.


57 posted on 01/03/2007 11:00:04 PM PST by spinestein (Remember to follow the Brazen Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
are all examples of things created by humans

I noticed that in retrospect. I thought afterward of the example of sea monster stories being mostly bogus, but the giant squid ones being true (albeit probably exaterated). But your rocks from the sky example works.

...and there is no compelling evidence that supports the idea of aliens visiting Earth in spaceships.

Don't tell Art Bell, but I agree there is no compelling collective evidence of this (i.e. verifiable to the public at large). However I do allow that there might be some private experience some individuals have that constitutes compelling personal evidence.

58 posted on 01/03/2007 11:24:39 PM PST by AndyTheBear (Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear

[However I do allow that there might be some private experience some individuals have that constitutes compelling personal evidence.]


I confess that I'd pay good money to see some of it. :^)


59 posted on 01/03/2007 11:40:51 PM PST by spinestein (Remember to follow the Brazen Rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
I confess that I'd pay good money to see some of it. :^)

Hopefully some greedy space aliens can take you up on that.

60 posted on 01/04/2007 12:36:26 AM PST by AndyTheBear (Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson