'Ray Bowyer Airline Captain reports Two Mile Long UFOs'

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

'Ray Bowyer Airline Captain reports Two Mile Long UFOs'

Postby zplix » Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:59 pm

please see 'Ray Bowyer Airline Captain Reports Two Mile Long UFOs'' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHtpz7PwMUY Where Ray Bower claims he, and passengers, saw massive saucer-shaped luminous yellow craft.

Also interesting is his comparison between UK and U.S. authorities' treatment of Airline pilots, etc., who report unexplainable phenomena.

I tried to post this in the 'best evidence' forum, but its only for those with a special pass 8)

But, anyway, tell us what you think of this case please
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act~~George Orwell
zplix
Banned
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: manchester UK


Postby Chorlton » Thu Dec 27, 2007 4:19 pm

I think pilots are just as capable of misinterpreting things and mistaking things as anyone else. They arent gods you know.

I mean just look at a certain John Lear.
I have become that which I always despised and feared........Old !

My greatest wish, would be to own my own scrapyard.
User avatar
Chorlton
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:02 pm

Postby zplix » Thu Dec 27, 2007 5:31 pm

Chorlton wrote:I think pilots are just as capable of misinterpreting things and mistaking things as anyone else. They arent gods you know.

I mean just look at a certain John Lear.


Oh please. that is a bit lame. I mean that is just speculating away . IMO

I never even implied they were gods. But for gods sake if an experienced pilot, and apparently passengers see something so odd, and this is connected with the Chicago airport experience, i find it very tedious when the response is such as yours. Sorry but I do. I mean what exactly does your dismissive response bring to the table of inquiryexactly. What are we supposed to do with it? Where do we go from here?
it also disenfranvcises people persceptive abilities. remember i am not saying it is ET or anything like that. But highly unusual. But I admit as of yet we only have his words. We dont know or hear these 'other passengers'.
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act~~George Orwell
zplix
Banned
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: manchester UK

Postby lost_shaman » Thu Dec 27, 2007 7:00 pm

zplix wrote: But I admit as of yet we only have his words. We dont know or hear these 'other passengers'.


I believe another Aircraft in the vicinity also reported the same UFO to ATC. Although that Pilot or Aircrew reporting has not come forward publically as Bowyer has done as far as I know.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti ... article.do

http://www.thisisguernsey.com/code/show ... egory=news
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Postby IgnoreTheFacts » Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:10 am

What would be the point in having a mile long ship anyway? I mean, if your using it for interstellar travel then you would not risk entering the atmosphere of a planet with something of that size, you would use smaller "sports models" or something to go down to the surface.
IgnoreTheFacts
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:37 am

Postby lost_shaman » Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:57 am

IgnoreTheFacts wrote:What would be the point in having a mile long ship anyway? I mean, if your using it for interstellar travel then you would not risk entering the atmosphere of a planet with something of that size, you would use smaller "sports models" or something to go down to the surface.


Who knows?

If the 'Mile long' UAP(?) wasn't an 'Interstellar' Space Ship then the question is totally irrelevant.
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Postby Access Denied » Fri Dec 28, 2007 3:44 pm

zplix wrote:I mean what exactly does your dismissive response bring to the table of inquiry exactly. What are we supposed to do with it? Where do we go from here?

A better question might be exactly what new evidence does this alleged sighting bring to the table of “UFO inquiry”? Why was this guy trotted out as one of James Fox’s NPC witnesses besides hype for his new movie? What makes this so compelling?

There’s no data here… no photographs, no independent witness confirmation from the ground… he’s not even sure if it was the size of a 737 (as initially reported) or a mile wide. Among other things could it have been some sort of rare natural atmospheric phenomena? For example a writer who lives on the island where the alleged sighting occurred suggested the lights might have been sundogs, created by reflections from ice crystals in the atmosphere…

http://www.alderneyjournal.com/ufo-photos.php

[click on the picture for an enlargement]

There’s nothing here that I see to indicate this was a “craft” of “unknown” origin… supposedly it wasn’t even moving so how did it get there?

[pictures Klingon Bird of Prey decloaking]

More importantly what is there to “investigate”?

[shrug]
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby zplix » Fri Dec 28, 2007 5:49 pm

"Why was this guy trotted out as one of James Fox’s NPC witnesses besides hype for his new movie? What makes this so compelling? "

Ok, how you mean? I wasn't aware of this. You mean it could be merely some hype for a film?

Also, if you say 'sundog'. I personally am not familr with such as that--bein from UK an all :? Are you suggesting a middle aged experienced pilot might make that mistake? as well as his passengers, he claims also saw this.

( by the way surely this onverstation is investigation. in its way in that we are feelin this case out)

I would like to personally contact the pilot. can you provide me with contact. hear it from horses mouth?
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act~~George Orwell
zplix
Banned
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: manchester UK

Postby Access Denied » Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:11 pm

zplix wrote:Are you suggesting a middle aged experienced pilot might make that mistake?

Are you suggesting he knows what it was he saw? :wink:

Also, I forgot to ask what leads you to believe "this is connected with the Chicago airport experience" as you say?
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby Chorlton » Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:52 pm

zplix wrote:
Chorlton wrote:I think pilots are just as capable of misinterpreting things and mistaking things as anyone else. They arent gods you know.

I mean just look at a certain John Lear.

Oh please. that is a bit lame. I mean that is just speculating away . IMO

No it isnt speculation. I would suggest that Pilots being human, are as able to misinterpret things they see and be just as devilish in inventing things as anyone else. That was all I meant by my remark. Im not questioning what he says he saw but in the world of Ufology there seems to be a belief that pilots are more able to report things than other people and I doubt that.

*** mod edit *** fixed quotes
I have become that which I always despised and feared........Old !

My greatest wish, would be to own my own scrapyard.
User avatar
Chorlton
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:02 pm

Postby Access Denied » Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:04 pm

Chorlton wrote:Im not questioning what he says he saw but in the world of Ufology there seems to be a belief that pilots are more able to report things than other people and I doubt that.

Actually, there appears to be some evidence to suggest that the opposite may be true...

Case Studies In Pilot Misperceptions Of "UFOs"
by James Oberg
http://www.zip.com.au/~psmith/pilot-ufos.html

Experienced UFO investigators realize that pilots, who instinctively and quite properly interpret visual phenomena in the most hazardous terms, are not dispassionate observers. Allen Hynek wrote: "Surprisingly, commercial and military pilots appear to make relatively poor witnesses..." The quote is from "The Hynek UFO Report", page 261 (Barnes and Noble reprint). (271 in original Dell, Dec 1977) He found that the best class of witnesses had a 50% misperception rate, but that pilots had a much higher rate: 88% for military pilots, 89% for commercial pilots. the worst of all categories listed. Pilots could be counted on to perceive familiar objects -- aircraft and ground structures -- very well, Hynek continued, but added a caveat: "Thus it might surprise us that a pilot had trouble identifying other aircraft, but it should come as no surprise that the majority of pilot misidentifications were of astronomical objects." Dell page 271

Not saying that's the case here but one should not immediately assume pilots are any better witnesses (and therefore "more credible") than the rest of us.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby lost_shaman » Sat Dec 29, 2007 7:49 am

Access Denied wrote:A better question might be exactly what new evidence does this alleged sighting bring to the table of “UFO inquiry”?


You mean UAP inquiry?

If we are talking about UAP then any given sighting (of UAP) is potentially valuable as data from UAP. It's only when people start confusing 'UFOs' with 'Aliens visiting Earth' do we encounter an intellectual impasse. JUST LOOK at your average Forum... "UFOs and Aliens"!!!

Would you consider that a suggestion to the suggestible? If so t hat's too bad because that's the norm.


Access Denied wrote: Why was this guy trotted out as one of James Fox’s NPC witnesses besides hype for his new movie?


I'm not convinced that a guy who makes Documentaries about the UFO Phenomena is doing something wrong by making another Documentary about the UFO Phenomena.

Also why are you focused on the most minor player involved when representatives of CNES where there on the Panel?



Access Denied wrote:What makes this so compelling?


Nothing because we already know UAP exist in the atmosphere! You got that 'Memo', Right?



Access Denied wrote:There’s no data here… no photographs, no independent witness confirmation from the ground…


What? So ATC doesn't count?

Access Denied wrote:he’s not even sure if it was the size of a 737 (as initially reported) or a mile wide.


You're right AD, his first impression was that the object was closer thus much smaller. When the Pilot realized the object was much further away the size estimate changed! Imagine that!!!

Also another Airline witnessed that UAP and placed it in the same vicinity even though being tens of miles away.



Access Denied wrote: Among other things could it have been some sort of rare natural atmospheric phenomena?


Well you sure are quick to catch on! I bet we'd call that kind of thing UAP, and suggest these explain many if not a majority of 'Unknowns'.

That's just my educated guess.

Access Denied wrote: For example a writer who lives on the island where the alleged sighting occurred suggested the lights might have been sundogs, created by reflections from ice crystals in the atmosphere…


Phil Klass?


Access Denied wrote:There’s nothing here that I see to indicate this was a “craft” of “unknown” origin… supposedly it wasn’t even moving so how did it get there?


Last I checked you are the only one talking about "craft", while I'm talking about UAP in the atmosphere.

There is a huge difference between the two.

Access Denied wrote:More importantly what is there to “investigate”?


UAP!
User avatar
lost_shaman
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:56 am

Postby zplix » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:53 am

Access Denied wrote:
zplix wrote:Are you suggesting a middle aged experienced pilot might make that mistake?

Are you suggesting he knows what it was he saw? :wink:

Also, I forgot to ask what leads you to believe "this is connected with the Chicago airport experience" as you say?


No I think he is just being straight up by claiming he saw something very strange, and got fearful and was glad to land. And I really dont trust that Hynek stats at all. Also he says passengers saw it too.

Now you ask why I connect what happened with the Chicago airport experience?
Well, first off, it happened in an airport environment, and with more than one witness, and the sighting was very dramatic. Also the guy talking about his present experience mentions it, and compares how the authorities in U.S deal with such reports like this with their UK counterparts.

Now, in reading Lost_shaman's reply, i wasn't too sure what UAP means. Let meguess, 'unexplainable aerial phenomena'? ...Anyhow I did a google to try find out and found this video, which i have seen in the past, but i would like to expand the inqury in this thread to include this also. Please help us explain this. A UFO which is seen by a very diverse cross section of people in different places, and apparently, according to a journalist featured in it, 'hundreds' of people phoning in.
I am not trying to lead debate away from main inquiry. But I feel it necessary to bring in more 'definate' sightings that may NOT be explained away as 'sundogs', 'UAPs' and/or faulty perception: Australia's spectacular UFO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvPaklWI ... ufo-video/
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act~~George Orwell
zplix
Banned
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: manchester UK

Postby Access Denied » Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:21 pm

lost_shaman wrote:You mean UAP inquiry?

If we are talking about UAP then any given sighting (of UAP) is potentially valuable as data from UAP. It's only when people start confusing 'UFOs' with 'Aliens visiting Earth' do we encounter an intellectual impasse. JUST LOOK at your average Forum... "UFOs and Aliens"!!!

Would you consider that a suggestion to the suggestible? If so that's too bad because that's the norm.

Unfortunately I don’t think changing the name from UFO to UAP is going to change the perception much… at least not anytime soon. Remember our recent conversation about guilt by “foggy association”? ;) I would agree it’s a step in the right direction though.

The reality I’m afraid is anybody who claims to have seen a UFO/UAP is pretty much automatically associated with a belief in Aliens… as I said you have the hoaxers, charlatans, "there's no question" Friedmans, assorted nut jobs like Greer and Co. (= all of the above) and otherwise incredulous folks to thank for that... NOT the CIA. :)

lost_shaman wrote:I'm not convinced that a guy who makes Documentaries about the UFO Phenomena is doing something wrong by making another Documentary about the UFO Phenomena.

Even if it’s to push the Alien “reality” as fact when in reality there is ZERO data to support such a conclusion… and worse using known bad “data” to do it?

lost_shaman wrote:Also why are you focused on the most minor player involved when representatives of CNES where there on the Panel?

I didn’t bring up this case, “zplix” did. If you haven’t already I would do some research to find out who all is REALLY behind the latest “disclosure” effort and what their agendas REALLY are… I would venture to guess that the CNES representatives weren’t aware.

lost_shaman wrote:
Access Denied wrote:What makes this so compelling?

Nothing because we already know UAP exist in the atmosphere! You got that 'Memo', Right?

Assuming it’s not a hoax then yes, I would tend to agree with that hypothesis. :D

lost_shaman wrote:
Access Denied wrote:There’s no data here… no photographs, no independent witness confirmation from the ground…

What? So ATC doesn't count?

You mean they saw it too? :shock:

[no it doesn't]

lost_shaman wrote:
Access Denied wrote:he’s not even sure if it was the size of a 737 (as initially reported) or a mile wide.

You're right AD, his first impression was that the object was closer thus much smaller. When the Pilot realized the object was much further away the size estimate changed! Imagine that!!!

Give me ambiguity or give me something else! :lol:

lost_shaman wrote:Also another Airline witnessed that UAP and placed it in the same vicinity even though being tens of miles away.

And you’re 100% sure the other pilot wasn’t “in on it” or equally misinterpreted the “object” because?

lost_shaman wrote:
Access Denied wrote:Among other things could it have been some sort of rare natural atmospheric phenomena?

Well you sure are quick to catch on! I bet we'd call that kind of thing UAP, and suggest these explain many if not a majority of 'Unknowns'.

That's just my educated guess.

One must keep in mind though that no matter how plausible such a hypothesis may seem it’s just one of a number of theories… all unfortunately untestable for the most part due to the rare and fleeting nature of the phenomena. To this day we still do not have one single conclusive piece of evidence one way or the other… a definitive photograph or movie would be nice… multispectral imaging even better. :D

lost_shaman wrote:Last I checked you are the only one talking about "craft", while I'm talking about UAP in the atmosphere.

There is a huge difference between the two.

You’re kidding right? Do you honestly think this guy doesn’t believe he saw an alien spaceship? Otherwise why bring it up? You know he’s claimed to have seen UFOs before right? Call me jaded but I suspect he has an agenda… promoting his personal belief in aliens and a "massive coverup".

lost_shaman wrote:
Access Denied wrote:More importantly what is there to “investigate”?

UAP!

How? Since you brought up the French (CNES/GEIPAN) they have been investigating UAP reports since 1977… the result? 28% Unidentified… what’s the point? Nothing new has been learned since Blue Book closed up shop.

zplix wrote:Now you ask why I connect what happened with the Chicago airport experience? Well, first off, it happened in an airport environment, and with more than one witness, and the sighting was very dramatic.

Well, I’m fairly convinced that the Chicago/O’Hare “experience” was a hoax in order to promote the idea that air safety was a risk… i.e. an attempt to create evidence where none existed so I guess in that respect I would agree they’re connected. :D

zplix wrote:Also the guy talking about his present experience mentions it, and compares how the authorities in U.S deal with such reports like this with their UK counterparts.

Right, the US doesn’t deal with UFO reports… they came to the conclusion a long time ago that there is nothing to be gained from it.

zplix wrote:Now, in reading Lost_shaman's reply, i wasn't too sure what UAP means. Let meguess, 'unexplainable aerial phenomena'?

Right, it’s a term the UK MoD and French CNES have adopted based on the evidence…

http://www.cnes.fr/web/5038-geipan.php

UFO stands for unidentified flying object.

Analysis of eyewitness accounts and the results of investigations show that this term is usually inappropriate. In most cases, observers describe a known or unknown phenomenon, typically involving lights in the sky, but with no evidence pointing to an actual physical object.

The generic term UAP (for unidentified aerospace phenomenon) is therefore more accurate.

i.e. There is no evidence that UFOs are Alien Spaceships… there is however evidence of a real phenomena.

zplix wrote:...Anyhow I did a google to try find out and found this video, which i have seen in the past, but i would like to expand the inqury in this thread to include this also. Please help us explain this. A UFO which is seen by a very diverse cross section of people in different places, and apparently, according to a journalist featured in it, 'hundreds' of people phoning in.

I am not trying to lead debate away from main inquiry. But I feel it necessary to bring in more 'definate' sightings that may NOT be explained away as 'sundogs', 'UAPs' and/or faulty perception:

Australia's spectacular UFO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvPaklWILrA

Unfortunately there’s nothing “definite” in that video to explain this and I couldn’t find any additional information about these sightings except this…

http://www.uforq.asn.au/about/updates.html

AUSTRALIA'S UFO FLAP

During the period from December 1995 to January 1996, a spate of UFO sightings had locals from the Central Coast area in New South Wales quite baffled. Many witnesses reported seeing a huge shiny ball-shaped UFO which had lights underneath. On occasion the object would hover over various water sources and seemingly suck water up into the air and into the UFO. Despite enquiries with local airports, air traffic control and the airforce, Australian investigators Bryan Dickeson and Moira McGhee could not find an explanation for what witnesses had seen. They collected the reports and published them in a book entitled the Gosford Files.

Apparently you have to find and buy the book. :roll:

I’m glad you brought this up though… IMO this video represents everything that’s wrong with UFOlogy. The “artist’s representation” of the witness’s subjective interpretations leaves very little to the imagination. Could it have been a helicopter? That’s the first thing that came to my mind… probably because of all the wild fires we’ve been having here in California lately. :) The firefighters use helicopters to fill up with water from people’s pools in the area.

When did these “inquiries” with local officials occur? Were radar tapes requested etc. etc.. Did this video only show the few out of the “hundreds” of witnesses who descriptions matched (or were easily influenced?) and leave out the ones that didn’t?

Although this may seem compelling to you on the surface I urge you to read the entire article I linked to earlier about pilot misperceptions… it illustrates the point that even a known object can be interpreted by witnesses (even “expert” ones) in all kinds of “spectacular” ways…usually spectacularly wrong. :) Bottom line is eyewitness testimony alone is notoriously unreliable so all I can say for sure is I have no idea what these people saw… and neither can you. :D

Anyway, Happy New Year all! I've got a broken water line from the cold that needs fixing out in the yard... :x

Later,

AD
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby zplix » Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:33 pm

"Well, I’m fairly convinced that the Chicago/O’Hare “experience” was a hoax in order to promote the idea that air safety was a risk… i.e. an attempt to create evidence where none existed so I guess in that respect I would agree they’re connected"

What fairly convinced you? where are the sources please?
and why would they choose such an outlandish story to do such a thing as you claim?

"...so all I can say for sure is I have no idea what these people saw… and neither can you. Very Happy" --ie., in regards to the Australian 'UFO' sightings.
Yes that is central. we do_not_know! period.

What i DO know is how upset people get who have experienced such phenomena, when others claim they musta seen , 'a,b,c'...ANYthing but the remarkable experience they say they have had.
I do understand the need for investigation, otherwise anyone can start off any old cult for the gullible. Yet at same time, I can understand peoples frustration and sense of being made to beluieve they cannot see right. For people usually know when they are witnessing non-ordinary experience, on various levels.
In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act~~George Orwell
zplix
Banned
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: manchester UK

Next

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests