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!

Reply to thread

Message

I'm not really sure what I believe at this point.

On one hand, the Proctor video clearly shows (in my opinion) a formation of airplanes... there's no doubt about that. Here's why I'm still kind of skeptical that it's a catch-all explanation though: a lot of the eyewitnesses say that the alleged craft was apparently flying frighteningly low to the ground. This makes me skeptical that all of them would mistakenly identify airplanes. Further, in the Proctor video, the formation seems pretty high up in the air. Conversely, one of the witnesses in Phoenix said that she unfolded a newspaper and held it up in the sky, and yet the craft extended far beyond the edges and was still clearly visible. If it was only planes, they would've had to be flying pretty low for this scenario to have been possible, right? Again, how could the planes have been so-blatantly misidentified?

I'm still on the fence, but the Proctor video definitely has certainly swayed me more towards the skeptical side of things.

<blockquote data-quote="expo15" data-source="post: 135043" data-attributes="member: 5489">I&#039;m not really sure what I believe at this point.&nbsp;On one hand, the Proctor video clearly shows (in my opinion) a formation of airplanes... there&#039;s no doubt about that. Here&#039;s why I&#039;m still kind of skeptical that it&#039;s a catch-all explanation though: a lot of the eyewitnesses say that the alleged craft was apparently flying frighteningly low to the ground. This makes me skeptical that all of them would mistakenly identify airplanes. Further, in the Proctor video, the formation seems pretty high up in the air. Conversely, one of the witnesses in Phoenix said that she unfolded a newspaper and held it up in the sky, and yet the craft extended far beyond the edges and was still clearly visible. If it was only planes, they would&#039;ve had to be flying pretty low for this scenario to have been possible, right? Again, how could the planes have been so-blatantly misidentified?&nbsp;I&#039;m still on the fence, but the Proctor video definitely has certainly swayed me more towards the skeptical side of things.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="expo15, post: 135043, member: 5489"] I'm not really sure what I believe at this point. On one hand, the Proctor video clearly shows (in my opinion) a formation of airplanes... there's no doubt about that. Here's why I'm still kind of skeptical that it's a catch-all explanation though: a lot of the eyewitnesses say that the alleged craft was apparently flying frighteningly low to the ground. This makes me skeptical that all of them would mistakenly identify airplanes. Further, in the Proctor video, the formation seems pretty high up in the air. Conversely, one of the witnesses in Phoenix said that she unfolded a newspaper and held it up in the sky, and yet the craft extended far beyond the edges and was still clearly visible. If it was only planes, they would've had to be flying pretty low for this scenario to have been possible, right? Again, how could the planes have been so-blatantly misidentified? I'm still on the fence, but the Proctor video definitely has certainly swayed me more towards the skeptical side of things. [/QUOTE]

Verification