NASA hides what it knows about the moon, UFOs and our TRUE history (aliens, pyramid)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Swamp gas? Give me a break. I didn't say it was swamp gas or a balloon. You asked why the Army would fire at a balloon, and I explained why. People were not in a mood to take any chances. There was a war going on.
Frankly, in the images I've seen of the LA incident, it's really hard to make much of anything out from it. The only photo I've seen of the event was from an LA newspaper headline article dating back almost 70 years which obviously doesn't make a very clear picture. It shows some spotlights shining upward which very likely could have been directed at overhead clouds. Sometimes clouds can product weird shapes, especially if you have several spotlights shining from different directions in the same general area. At the time the photo was taken, there could also have been quite of bit of smoke from the weapons fired. I'm not saying that's what it was, just that there are other explanations besides a UFO (ET controlled flying saucer). I dunno, were there any radar images of the UFO? Was it over land or was it over the ocean?
Here's the thing. Again, keep in mind that a war was going on at the time, and that Japan had launched balloon bomb attack at the USA mainland, a few hundred of which had actually reached the USA, some as far as Michigan (I think). The reason why the one in Oregon exploded killing several people, is because one of the kids found it hanging from a tree and tried pulling it down, and the bombs exploded. The point is that people were aware of the danger of these weapons.
With regard to the LA incident, it wouldn't take much to set off a wave of fear. Someone could have noticed a strange formation, resulting from various shadows from the lights, let out an alarm of a possible threat, and ground weapons fired at it. Since it didn't drop out of the sky, more rounds would have been fired to no avail. Why would they have stopped firing at some point? Clouds don't tend to hold any particular shape for long. Once the shape changed because of movement, the so-called UFO shape would have disappeared. Is that what happened? I don't know. But I've given a plausible example.
BTW, you didn't answer my first question. What laws of physics were defied that you were talking about?
experiments were done to re-create the spotlights and object and there clearly was an object in the sky and thousands of rounds couldn't bring it down?
experiments were done to re-create the spotlights and object and there clearly was an object in the sky and thousands of rounds couldn't bring it down?
I'm not sure what you mean by "re-create". Touching up the image? Or what?
I'm not sure what you mean by "re-create". Touching up the image? Or what?
No the LA Times news paper photo was not touched up. The same thing is found on the negatives. The big give away that there was an object in the sky is the fact that the spot light beams didn't continue past the convergence point. This was tested during the re-creation. If nothing was in the sky, the beams should have continued upward. The light reflecting off the object clearly reveals it was disk shaped.
No the LA Times news paper photo was not touched up. The same thing is found on the negatives. The big give away that there was an object in the sky is the fact that the spot light beams didn't continue past the convergence point. This was tested during the re-creation. If nothing was in the sky, the beams should have continued upward. The light reflecting off the object clearly reveals it was disk shaped.
Really......... you can't possibly be serious......... please tell me you're not
Something is seriously wrong with this picture.
And if I have to describe why this photo is doctored (yes that was possible in the darkroom and before Photoshop) then I'm at a loss to explain it to someone that cleaves to their willful stupidity with such tenacity.
Hey, Asheville, I just thought of this really crazy idea...
Suppose NASA isn't actually hiding anything at all, and this conspiracy business is completely off-base?
I know, I know--just for thinking such a thing I shouldn't be allowed to have cookies with my milk, and my allowance will be withheld this week. But I just had to throw the idea out there for consideration.
No the LA Times news paper photo was not touched up. The same thing is found on the negatives. The big give away that there was an object in the sky is the fact that the spot light beams didn't continue past the convergence point. This was tested during the re-creation. If nothing was in the sky, the beams should have continued upward. The light reflecting off the object clearly reveals it was disk shaped.
What exactly was the tested re-creation you keep talking about? You're wrong about the spot light beams by suggesting they'd continue upward if nothing was there, not if the 8 different beams all converged at the same point (as seen in the news clipping).
What exactly was the tested re-creation you keep talking about? You're wrong about the spot light beams by suggesting they'd continue upward if nothing was there, not if the 8 different beams all converged at the same point (as seen in the news clipping).
A re-creation was done with the same number of beam lights and the same kind of lights and arranged the same way. When there was no object in the air the beams continued. When the floated balloon in the air, the lights stopped at the convergence point
and Asheville why would anyone at the LA Times even doctor up the photo when flying saucers weren't even a major public subject until the late 1940s? Secondly the negatives show the same thing and there was no evidence of double exposure. Also no one at the time came forward to say it was an alien craft. Not to mention all the witnesses who saw it and the fact that thousands of rounds were fired at the object. Very unlikely that its a hoaxed photo. Because you have a hard to believing in aliens, you have to believe everything is a hoax.
A re-creation was done with the same number of beam lights and the same kind of lights and arranged the same way. When there was no object in the air the beams continued. When the floated balloon in the air, the lights stopped at the convergence point
and Asheville why would anyone at the LA Times even doctor up the photo when flying saucers weren't even a major public subject until the late 1940s? Secondly the negatives show the same thing and there was no evidence of double exposure. Also no one at the time came forward to say it was an alien craft. Not to mention all the witnesses who saw it and the fact that thousands of rounds were fired at the object. Very unlikely that its a hoaxed photo. Because you have a hard to believing in aliens, you have to believe everything is a hoax.
Ya know you post all this stuff without any evidence, and of course you have examined the negatives, plus I would be interested in hearing what your photographic expertise is to determine they have are originals and have not been tampered with.
These carbon arc spotlights are not lasers and the beam spreads with distance. If an object were present, much of the light would pass by as the beams widen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Swamp gas? Give me a break. I didn't say it was swamp gas or a balloon. You asked why the Army would fire at a balloon, and I explained why. People were not in a mood to take any chances. There was a war going on.
