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.
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).
no this test was done the beams go straight through when nothing is there
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.
oh I post evidence your mind is just too closed to see it
no this test was done the beams go straight through when nothing is there
I'm skeptical there was any ET flying saucer or spacecraft involved.
- Who conducted this "test"?
- When and where was it conducted?
- Were the conditions the same as the original event?
I can see your point about light being reflected off of an object. However, using your hypothesis, some of those beams would not necessarily be dead on. At least one of those beams would still show up as partially continuing to extend beyond the "object". That doesn't seem to be the case in the newspaper image.
In addtion, I assume the bright oval shape is suppose to be the UFO. The problem is that there are too many other possible explanations that have nothing to do with ET flying saucers.
- Where is the original negative of the photo?
- Does the caption below the image even hint at it being an ET UFO? (The print is too small for me to read.)
The headline doesn't say anything like that. Regardless, the country was nervous about an attack by the Japanese. There had already been a Japanese sub firing off the coast of Monterey (I think that's where it was) as well as off the coast of NW Oregon, not far from Astoria, and there were the balloon bombs which had made it to the US mainland. The whole point of the panic defense at LA was concern that the Japanese may have been trying to attack, even if that wasn't the case. Panic can do strange things to people. As I said before, all it would take is one person to sound an alarm to set off a shooting frenzy.
oh I post evidence your mind is just too closed to see it
First I see no evidence, just old photo's published in a newspaper (you don't suspect to sell papers and increase circulation ) Sensational headlines do increase sales.
Your defination of "evidence" is seriously flawed. Evidence can withstand scrutiny, yours can't.
First I see no evidence, just old photo's published in a newspaper (you don't suspect to sell papers and increase circulation ) Sensational headlines do increase sales.
Your defination of "evidence" is seriously flawed. Evidence can withstand scrutiny, yours can't.
Its not just the photo. Its the other facts. The army was firing at the object in the photo and they were firing thousands of round with direct hits and it wouldn't come down. Yes experiments were done and the results of the test were conclusive. An object was indeed in the sky.
Well it is some amazing stuff. Can't be from this world!
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.