From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 11:02:48 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 07:46:00 -0500 Subject: Re: In the sky! A bird? A plane? A... UFO? - >Source: The Chicago Tribune - Illinois, USA >http://tinyurl.com/yn8krl >Published January 1, 2007 >In the sky! A bird? A plane? A... UFO? >by >Jon Hilkevitch >United Airlines denies its workers filed reports about >saucerlike object hovering at O'Hare >It sounds like a tired joke - but a group of airline employees >insist they are in earnest, and they are upset that neither >their bosses nor the government will take them seriously. >A flying saucerlike object hovered low over O'Hare International >Airport for several minutes before bolting through thick clouds >with such intense energy that it left an eerie hole in overcast >skies, said some United Airlines employees who observed the >phenomenon. <snip> >The sighting occurred during daylight, about 4:30 p.m., just >before sunset. >All the witnesses said the object was dark gray and well defined >in the overcast skies. They said the craft, estimated by >different accounts to be 6 feet to 24 feet in diameter, did not >display any lights. >Some said it looked like a rotating Frisbee, while others said >it did not appear to be spinning. All agreed the object made no >noise and it was at a fixed position in the sky, just below the >1,900-foot cloud deck, until shooting off into the clouds. <snip> >All the witnesses to the O'Hare event, who included at least >several pilots, said they are certain based on the disc's >appearance and flight characteristics that it was not an >airplane, helicopter, weather balloon or any other craft known >to man. >United denies UFO report <snip> >The object was seen to suddenly accelerate straight up through >the solid overcast skies, which the FAA reported had 1,900-foot >cloud ceilings at the time. >"It was like somebody punched a hole in the sky," said one >United employee. >Witnesses said they had a hard time visually tracking the object >as it streaked through the dense clouds. >It left behind an open hole of clear air in the cloud layer, the >witnesses said, adding that the hole disappeared within a few >minutes. >The United employees interviewed by the Tribune spoke on >condition of anonymity. >Some said they were interviewed by United officials and >instructed to write reports and draw pictures of what they >observed, and that they were advised by United officials to >refrain from speaking about what they saw. >Federal agency backtracks >Like United, the FAA originally told the Tribune that it had no >information on the alleged UFO sighting. But the federal agency >quickly reversed its position after the newspaper filed a >Freedom of Information Act request. >An internal FAA review of air-traffic communications tapes, a >step toward complying with the Tribune request, turned up the >call by the United supervisor to an FAA manager in the airport >tower, Cory said. >Cory said the weather might have factored into what the >witnesses thought they saw. >"Our theory on this is that it was a weather phenomenon," she >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. That's our take on it." This is the sort of 'analysis' that makes my brain boil over. I was at first going to say that this is a perfect example of 'junk science'. Then I realized that it doesn't even rise to the level of junk science. There is _no_ science in suggesting, without any details, that "atmospheric conditions... low cloud ceiling and a lot of airport lights" could explain the sighting: "When the lights shine up into the clouds sometimes you can see funny things. That's our take on it." Lights reflected from the clouds are hardly visible if at all during the daytime (4:30 PM before sunset). And light reflected from the clouds would not look like a greyish colored, well defined object which, itself, had no lights. And, of course, the only type of light reflected from the clouds which could move would be the light from a moving spotlight... which would appear as a bright area in the clouds, not as "dark grey". It would have been more "scientific" for Cory to simply say he didn't know what it was than to propose and off-the-wall explanation that makes no sense. Only a person of 'low intellect' or a debunker type (or the government) would accept such a ridiculous explanation.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp