Creepy Green Light
Paranormal Adept
I'm not ashamed to say (well, maybe a little) that when I was in my late teens I thought the Billy Meier case was authentic. And Rex Heflin. And McMinnville.
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Also I thought the Belgian triangle sightings were genuine or are you saying it's just that photo which was fake?
Thanks for sharing. I've said it numerous times but I think all of us have been burnt by "....we ran the photo through the computer and the computer says that this object is 30 ft in diameter and a distance of 300-500 yards from the camera.....blah blah" (when in reality it's a model the size of a dinner plate about 6 ft from the camera).The Belgian Triangle photo. I’m still ticked at myself for that one. I never felt good about the witness story, but ignored that when a number of highly-credentialed photo analysts supported its authenticity. As you’ve said Creepy Green Light, you can’t just rely on the photo experts.
![]()
I'll admit my knowledge is not as good as many on here but I thought there were a lot of aspects of the Admaski case which were still unexplainable. I know there were a few things which caused some doubt but I remember reading about some leading film technicians saying the famous footage was genuine and would be hard to fake.
Also I thought the Belgian triangle sightings were genuine or are you saying it's just that photo which was fake?
I think some of these cases get convoluted because of confusing/erroneous information. An example would be the Phoenix Flares...I tend not to believe anything 100% so I'm rarely let down, and once in a while the reverse can happen, like I used to think the 1952 Washington D.C. flap was probably just misperceptions and lens flares, but then I delved into it more deeply and discovered that there is a lot more to that situation than had been told in the brief articles I had run across. Now I think it's one of the best cases on record.
Interestingly put. I've been duped by UFO cases, but the SWR is something that always sounded like a load of you know what. I think another non UFO thing that falls into the same category as SWR is Marley Woods.In contribution (?) to this “true confessions” thread ….
In the opinion of a possible sixth sense & unknowns traversing the heavens above, my beloved pet, out there near Ballard Utah, I no longer find companionship for. Yes, I’m referring to Skinwalker Ranch, i.e., the romantic getaway retreat that has lured so many to its demonic gates. You see, Mr. CGL, before groking the connections betwixt Ret. Col. John Alexander, Ret. Lt. Col. Michael Aquino, Jacques Vallee, Jack Sarfatti, Hal Puthoff, and possibly a few more with interests in the occult, (not in mentioning funding by Robert Bigelow & possibly the military) , I was simply overwhelmed with the alleged goings-on out there. Coupled with Chris O’Brien’s direct involvement, it was a no-brainer, or, slam-dunk, as they say, to the veracity of the plethora of alleged mind-bending narratives having taken place at that Disneyland of The Gods. As all good (and evil) things must eventually come to an end, and with this particular narrative in light of the latest NYTs faux disclosure movement, has struck a nerve, and that particular nerve just so happens to be the particular nerve of common sense. I could go on for pages and pages, on & on, and over, & over. Alas, life is to be enjoyed & not endured, as military intelligence (PSYOP) has exploited mythology in the past.
I was satisfied that the DC photos we're all familiar with are lens flares and that there were some misidentifications involved, so I set the case aside for years until I started the TRUFO project on the USI site, which is an online text of Ruppelt's The Report On Unidentified Flying Objects. In that book Ruppelt covers the '52 DC flap. Reviewing it rekindled my interest in the case. After doing some cross referencing it became apparent that there was a lot more evidence than a bad photo and a couple of misidentifications. There were multiple radar contacts from two separate radar stations ( civilian and military ), multiple attempts to intercept the targets by USAF jets, additional eye-witnesses, and in one instance one of the jets was able to establish a radar lock-on while ground radar vectored him to the target where the pilot observed glowing objects encircle his aircraft briefly before streaking off into the distance.I think some of these cases get convoluted because of confusing/erroneous information. An example would be the Phoenix Flares...
The entire debacle over that night is mainly the fault of the media. So (coincidently) on the same night as a UFO sighting...there are flares dropped from military jets. This is the famous footage we've all seen 18,000 times over since it happened, where they drop behind the mountain range. However...
...the eyewitnesses claim that there was a massive chevron shaped object skimming over rooftops/treetops traveling from the north headed south. So whenever the term "Phoenix Lights" get's mentioned - they automatically show the footage of the flares.
Maybe the Washington DC photos are the same? Maybe the pics ARE lens flares/birds but maybe the eyewitnesses and radar operators saw something different? I admit, I don't know much about the DC case but now I'm curious why you say it's one of your favorites/best.
Interestingly put. I've been duped by UFO cases, but the SWR is something that always sounded like a load of you know what. I think another non UFO thing that falls into the same category as SWR is Marley Woods.
Fascinating. I think his lithium is wearing off.The youngsters, the most impressionable are the easiest to convince, as glued to the History Channel’s, Ancient Aliens. Then again, there are highly educated individuals who will entertain extremely odd beliefs while on their face, are impractical. Take Paul Hellyer for example.
PENTAGON UFO BOMBSHELL: Former defence minister claims US IS storing 'ALIEN UFO parts'
Nobel disease - RationalWiki
I've always had this inner truth/lie detector built into me. It proll has like a 98% accuracy rate. Soon as I saw the Gulf Breeze photo's....the alarm went off. Something wasn't right....kinda looked goofy/transparent with the object. Can I say what Walter's technique was to pull off the hoax? No. But if anyone was on the fence over Walter's UFO being real....this should have been the one piece of evidence that made everyone laugh, then throw the case in the garbage; the pic of the guy who knocked on his door to come for him;Most of the time I don't have sufficient reason to believe any particular case. I do believe the '52 DC flap case described above, but most others are few and far between. It's not that I necessarily don't believe them either. There's just not enough evidence to say one way or the other with certainty. Two cases that briefly caught my attention back in the day were the Eduard Meier case and the Gulf Breeze Case. After I learned about Meier becoming a contactee I immediately became very skeptical. It all went downhill from there until it was finally proven sufficiently to be a hoax.
The Gulf Breeze case became suspect after I saw the first video where they went running over some dunes next to a beach to videotape an alleged UFO, but there was nothing there until the camera zoomed all the way in and all there was was a tiny bright dot that they later magnified. I thought to myself the whole scene was probably staged because nobody would have been able to see that with their naked eye. Then came the technical examination of the iris motor from that same model of camcorder, which turned out to be the cause. So there was actually no UFO observed, meaning the scene was definitely staged. Again it all went downhill from there.
Some of the space shuttle videos were interesting, but ultimately they were sufficiently proven to be either camera artifacts, reflections, or misidentifications of frozen particles associated with the shuttle that were propelled by the shuttle's maneuvering jets. I think Don still believes some of that stuff. But I haven't seen anything really convincing yet. I know Rutkowski regards the Michalak case as good, but I'm not convinced. I've never believed the Sitgreaves National Forest Incident ( The Walton case ) either. I think maybe some people did see re-entering space junk in the Falcon Lake incident, but not all accounts for that sighting can be explained by that. The Phoenix lights case is similar in that regard.