Qorl said:
Looks like the flying bullhead is going to its OWN "Entity Reunion in the Sky"!
UFO Evidence so Real it's not Pseudo
- Thread starter Starman
- Start date
Looks like the flying bullhead is going to its OWN "Entity Reunion in the Sky"!
The Battle of Los Angeles
What was it?
A large bulletproof weather balloon, say imaginary skeptics.
On February 25, 1942, the lights of Los Angeles were blacked out, air raid sirens wailed, and anti-aircraft guns began firing, as searchlights locked onto a giant unknown object. Many people also claim that interceptors were scrambled.
"Searchlights scanned the skies and anti-aircraft guns protecting the vital aircraft and ship-building factories went into action. In the next few hours they would fire over 1,400 shells at an unidentified, slow- moving object in the sky over Los Angeles that looked like a blimp, or a balloon."
An eyewitness exclaims: "It was like the Fourth of July but much louder. They were firing like crazy but they couldn't touch it."
"An experienced Navy observer with powerful Carl Zeiss binoculars said he counted nine planes in the cone of the searchlight. He said they were silver in color."
Some people SWEAR it was multiple objects, and others conclude there was only one.
People assumed it was a Japanese blimp. Some blimp!
It managed to sustain what many eyewitnesses describe as direct hits from AA shells as it drifted slowly through the night. Nearly 2,000 shells were estimated to have been fired during the roughly half-hour that the "battle" lasted, and flak littered the ground over the surrounding areas.
Curiously, homes and other property were damaged, and humans and animals were injured or killed by the flak from the shells, but the magical "blimp" remained UNHARMED. The bulletproof balloon casually left the scene of its own volition at the conclusion of what must have been one hell of a joyride for the passengers!
This isn't a well known event. Why it has not been given the attention it deserves is unknown, but there has never been a satisfactory explanation for what the object was.
Of course, this is more proof that UFO believers are "nutters" who haven't a clue to the flak-impervious balloon technology of the sophisticated Japanese that just coincidentally has never been revealed in the 60+ years since WW2, and probably never will be. Hirohito apparently took that secret to his grave!
Larger image here
Link to Bruce Maccabee's photo analysis:
http://brumac.8k.com/BATTLEOFLA/BOLA1.html
Another photo analysis
More info here
And here
Some of those sights have the same info or quoted sources, but some of them have unique items as well. The last link I gave has pics of the actual LA Times front page.
p.s. I hope Coast-to-Coast AM doesn't mind me linking to that small pic!
What was it?
A large bulletproof weather balloon, say imaginary skeptics.
On February 25, 1942, the lights of Los Angeles were blacked out, air raid sirens wailed, and anti-aircraft guns began firing, as searchlights locked onto a giant unknown object. Many people also claim that interceptors were scrambled.
"Searchlights scanned the skies and anti-aircraft guns protecting the vital aircraft and ship-building factories went into action. In the next few hours they would fire over 1,400 shells at an unidentified, slow- moving object in the sky over Los Angeles that looked like a blimp, or a balloon."
An eyewitness exclaims: "It was like the Fourth of July but much louder. They were firing like crazy but they couldn't touch it."
"An experienced Navy observer with powerful Carl Zeiss binoculars said he counted nine planes in the cone of the searchlight. He said they were silver in color."
Some people SWEAR it was multiple objects, and others conclude there was only one.
People assumed it was a Japanese blimp. Some blimp!
It managed to sustain what many eyewitnesses describe as direct hits from AA shells as it drifted slowly through the night. Nearly 2,000 shells were estimated to have been fired during the roughly half-hour that the "battle" lasted, and flak littered the ground over the surrounding areas.
Curiously, homes and other property were damaged, and humans and animals were injured or killed by the flak from the shells, but the magical "blimp" remained UNHARMED. The bulletproof balloon casually left the scene of its own volition at the conclusion of what must have been one hell of a joyride for the passengers!
This isn't a well known event. Why it has not been given the attention it deserves is unknown, but there has never been a satisfactory explanation for what the object was.
Of course, this is more proof that UFO believers are "nutters" who haven't a clue to the flak-impervious balloon technology of the sophisticated Japanese that just coincidentally has never been revealed in the 60+ years since WW2, and probably never will be. Hirohito apparently took that secret to his grave!
Larger image here
Link to Bruce Maccabee's photo analysis:
http://brumac.8k.com/BATTLEOFLA/BOLA1.html
Another photo analysis
More info here
And here
Some of those sights have the same info or quoted sources, but some of them have unique items as well. The last link I gave has pics of the actual LA Times front page.
p.s. I hope Coast-to-Coast AM doesn't mind me linking to that small pic!
Last edited:
I have heard about something similar happening over Canada during WW1.
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
I only dismiss what cannot be verified.btimsah said:
I have read Oberg's articles for many years and have never noticed any signs of a "fanatical skeptic".
I have heard Friedman being interview along with richard C Hoaxland. They are both wackados IMO
Giambattista said:
If it WASN'T a large bulletproof weather balloon, then it must have been a large bulletproof electric goose. Or geese. Imagine a whole fleet of THOSE puppies!
Okay, that's a little outlandish.
Perhaps it was the largest, slowest moving orange-colored ball lightning on record. Now THAT would be something.
Or else, maybe the fleet of "airplanes" or the "blimp" WASN'T bulletproof, but instead it was being protected by a bunch of Japanese guardian angels!
Or else the flak from the 1400+ shells just COINCIDENTALLY missed the object(s) everytime? What are the odds of that?
James "The Amusing" Randi, skeptic extraordinaire, once told me about the "Law of Truly Large Numbers" which states that anything that is nearly statistically improbable, is probable at least once. Or if you're a skeptic, as many times as you need it to.
Simplified, I think this means that if a pig starts flying, and there aren't any high winds or flying vehicles to carry it off, it's still possible, somehow.
Felix Mendelssohn is pretty cool. But he wasn't there, now was he??? Sly devil!
Or else the flak from the 1400+ shells just COINCIDENTALLY missed the object(s) everytime? What are the odds of that?
James "The Amusing" Randi, skeptic extraordinaire, once told me about the "Law of Truly Large Numbers" which states that anything that is nearly statistically improbable, is probable at least once. Or if you're a skeptic, as many times as you need it to.
Simplified, I think this means that if a pig starts flying, and there aren't any high winds or flying vehicles to carry it off, it's still possible, somehow.
Felix Mendelssohn is pretty cool. But he wasn't there, now was he??? Sly devil!
Just having a little fun all by myself.
I'm alone. And in the buff. Why don't you come on over?
I'm alone. And in the buff. Why don't you come on over?
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
Considering that nearly 3000 rds of AA were fired to score a single hit ( not down a plane) during WWII I think the odds are very good. And no I don't want to come overGiambattista said:
First off, who knows what it was! Its rather drastic to jump to extra terrestials. On earth, when it could be.... god knows what to say, HMMM i think its something from an intirely DIFFERENT plannet! I find it difficult to jump to that conclusion especialy considering there isnt much information for either side of the debate. Also america was in a time of shock and fear (paranoia) after pearl harbor. Just like after 9/11 when thousands of people started calling it about snipers on roofs and planes circling cities.
Another point, they might not have been firing at the right altitude. You have to bracket an aircraft to hit it. They might have been hundreds if not a thousand feet short or to the side. I dont know what it is, and neither does anybody i see posting on here. There are however wild accusations as to what it could be without any real evidence to support it. Just because something doesnt "look" like something you havent seen befor doesnt mean its from mars or Alpa Centuri. There are a lot of things on this plannet that the public does not know about, and that could suprise us in even the most ideal conditions (light out, and close up). Then you take into acount it was dark out and people were paranoid.
Its possible, it could be anything really. But its such a large leap. When i see a light in the sky the first thing that cross's my mind is that its a light, not some super powerful spaceship from a distant solar system.
Another point, they might not have been firing at the right altitude. You have to bracket an aircraft to hit it. They might have been hundreds if not a thousand feet short or to the side. I dont know what it is, and neither does anybody i see posting on here. There are however wild accusations as to what it could be without any real evidence to support it. Just because something doesnt "look" like something you havent seen befor doesnt mean its from mars or Alpa Centuri. There are a lot of things on this plannet that the public does not know about, and that could suprise us in even the most ideal conditions (light out, and close up). Then you take into acount it was dark out and people were paranoid.
Its possible, it could be anything really. But its such a large leap. When i see a light in the sky the first thing that cross's my mind is that its a light, not some super powerful spaceship from a distant solar system.
snake river rufus said:Considering that nearly 3000 rds of AA were fired to score a single hit ( not down a plane) during WWII I think the odds are very good. And no I don't want to come over
Sure you do!
gregory85 said:
Your skepticism is fairly reasonable.
However, I don't quite agree that it could be "anything". Judging from the photograph and some of the descriptions, it wasn't just anything.
I never said it was a spaceship from Mars, or Alpha Centauri, or even Zeta Reticuli! There IS a possibility of that, though.
It is 99.999% certain, from all the reliable reports, that there WAS INDEED an object, or possibly objects.
And I am well aware that whenever UFOs are involved, every witness suddenly becomes unreliable. I don't know if this is a bonified law, or a convenience constructed by skeptics who deny that anything non-human could be flying around. And no, I'm not talking about clouds or birds or meteors when I say non-human!
A quote from a short article about the "battle" from NICAP ( National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena)
Any speculation about "jittery nerves" being solely responsible could probably be considered wild.
How many other instances of this kind of aerial attack are there on American soil during WW2? That fact alone makes me wonder why this event isn't known outside of what are probably war buffs or UFO "nutters".
After all, a handful of people were killed by Japanese balloon bombs, and many people know about that. Here we have AAA batteries firing at something for more than a half-hour, and we barely hear a thing about it. From all accounts, nearly the same number of people died or were injured as a result of the supposed air-raid as were killed by balloon bombs.
Was it REALLY not that important that it's been buried?
I'll have to say a little more later.
Thanks for being one of two people to respond to my post, though! :m:
snake river rufus said:Considering that nearly 3000 rds of AA were fired to score a single hit ( not down a plane) during WWII I think the odds are very good. And no I don't want to come over
Yes, I am aware that AA fire is not the most accurate.
I guess the chances of not scoring a hit depends on WHAT exactly the object(s) was.
The most likely reality for what it was Giambattista was a Japanese Balloon bomb.
During the Second World War a number were released and a Few mainland Fatalities were caused by them. You'll also find that after the Second World War the FBI continued to investigate Balloons being used to launch a number of different weapons, most of them you'd find in a sawmill (circular saws).
During the Second World War a number were released and a Few mainland Fatalities were caused by them. You'll also find that after the Second World War the FBI continued to investigate Balloons being used to launch a number of different weapons, most of them you'd find in a sawmill (circular saws).
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
Further, even if a hit was scored, it does not mean that a low pressure helium ballon would burst into flames or pop like a childs ballon struck with a pin.Giambattista said:
snake river rufus said:
How do you know it was a low-pressure helium balloon?
As far as I know, all the balloons that the Japanese sent over arrived towards the end of the war, not as early as the incident in question.
I can be a skeptic, too! Look how skeptical I am of your advances. What a fun game we're playing!
Alright, Mr. Anon. Here she is. In her faded glory:
Now, I don't quite remember what I was writing, but I'll try to reproduce it to the same effect.
I know that what we witnessed was not rotating. Now, maybe it was internally, but on the outside, I cannot say that it was. Especially since my brother and moreover, his friend, saw it closer than I did. There were two appendages on the sides that appeared to be engines, or arms. Something like that. If the entire outside of the craft were rotating, it would have been noticeable.
As to your description of a wavering or wobbling at slow speed, I don't know the extent of this effect, but these things were traveling about 30-40 mph tops, and doing it extremely smoothly. My brother and myself both agreed that it looked like they were kites. Or balloons. Because they were just floating along very serenely as if they were lighter-than-air. In a very straight line. Completely silently. Like I said, I can see NO WAY that those things would have stayed aloft if they WEREN'T lighter than air, because they were moving so slowly. Just crawling.
There WERE two of them, but the one didn't seem inclined to take part in the antics the other one was involved in. And that in itself is puzzling. Me and my brother both remarked how the one was doing all these crazy acrobatics, and the other was just hovering there. We didn't actually see what happened to the other, because it eventually faded from our sight. Especially since our attention was focused on that ONE.
As for the degrees it traveled along it's little frantic route: I ESTIMATE they were at LEAST two miles. That's the absolute minimum. I don't know the actual size of them, because I didn't see them up close. Based on the other two witnesses, and what I myself thought, they were probably anywhere from 3 to 5 miles away. I know that they were sometimes difficult to see, even with the binoculars.
I would say it covered about 45 degrees at the most between east and west, but even that's hard to say, given that it was VERY HARD to follow that thing with eyes or binoculars. It was zipping around in a mad manner! When I said that it was flying around like a housefly (very erratically) that's pretty accurate from what I remember.
I confer with my bro on this, because we were watching it intently. We both remember it distinctly moving UP and DOWN, multiple times. You seem to be saying that it would have been moving in more of a circular motion, if it was gaining inertia in order to move west. But we both concurred that this thing had bobbed up and down very rapidly, which to me doesn't seem to gaining itself any kind of directional momentum.
I can see where MAYBE that would have been an optical illusion, but from what I saw, this thing was doing whatever it wanted to, with no reason for it.
I've no idea either, believe me. I've seen many manner of aircraft in my day, and NOTHING can fly THAT fast, WITHOUT making a sound, unless it has something very different as its driving force.
I'm not necessarily implying anti-gravity, but it was NOT jet propulsion. Not anything normal, that is!
They went from floating along like balloons (the one did) to flying at what must have been extremely close to the speed of sound, judging by its size and the distance it traveled in the time allotted.
I'll give you credit for your electromagnetic propulsion, but I will also say that it could be something else. Unless there is an ULTRA quiet turbofan-whatnot that can push a craft that fast without making any noticeable noise (they were rather far away) then it has to be something else. And their rather "weightless" characteristics (floating at a very low speed for ANY aircraft, even a helicopter in flight) makes me think that a fan alone wouldn't do it.
Do you really think that they're all (provided that they're real) powered by magnetic force (and mysterious "thrusters")? Or is this just a "possible" theory that you've taken a liking to?
Well, that's all I have to say for now.
Toodles? What?!?!
Oh! That's poof-speak for later! I get it!
Now, I don't quite remember what I was writing, but I'll try to reproduce it to the same effect.
I know that what we witnessed was not rotating. Now, maybe it was internally, but on the outside, I cannot say that it was. Especially since my brother and moreover, his friend, saw it closer than I did. There were two appendages on the sides that appeared to be engines, or arms. Something like that. If the entire outside of the craft were rotating, it would have been noticeable.
As to your description of a wavering or wobbling at slow speed, I don't know the extent of this effect, but these things were traveling about 30-40 mph tops, and doing it extremely smoothly. My brother and myself both agreed that it looked like they were kites. Or balloons. Because they were just floating along very serenely as if they were lighter-than-air. In a very straight line. Completely silently. Like I said, I can see NO WAY that those things would have stayed aloft if they WEREN'T lighter than air, because they were moving so slowly. Just crawling.
There WERE two of them, but the one didn't seem inclined to take part in the antics the other one was involved in. And that in itself is puzzling. Me and my brother both remarked how the one was doing all these crazy acrobatics, and the other was just hovering there. We didn't actually see what happened to the other, because it eventually faded from our sight. Especially since our attention was focused on that ONE.
As for the degrees it traveled along it's little frantic route: I ESTIMATE they were at LEAST two miles. That's the absolute minimum. I don't know the actual size of them, because I didn't see them up close. Based on the other two witnesses, and what I myself thought, they were probably anywhere from 3 to 5 miles away. I know that they were sometimes difficult to see, even with the binoculars.
I would say it covered about 45 degrees at the most between east and west, but even that's hard to say, given that it was VERY HARD to follow that thing with eyes or binoculars. It was zipping around in a mad manner! When I said that it was flying around like a housefly (very erratically) that's pretty accurate from what I remember.
I confer with my bro on this, because we were watching it intently. We both remember it distinctly moving UP and DOWN, multiple times. You seem to be saying that it would have been moving in more of a circular motion, if it was gaining inertia in order to move west. But we both concurred that this thing had bobbed up and down very rapidly, which to me doesn't seem to gaining itself any kind of directional momentum.
I can see where MAYBE that would have been an optical illusion, but from what I saw, this thing was doing whatever it wanted to, with no reason for it.
I've no idea either, believe me. I've seen many manner of aircraft in my day, and NOTHING can fly THAT fast, WITHOUT making a sound, unless it has something very different as its driving force.
I'm not necessarily implying anti-gravity, but it was NOT jet propulsion. Not anything normal, that is!
They went from floating along like balloons (the one did) to flying at what must have been extremely close to the speed of sound, judging by its size and the distance it traveled in the time allotted.
I'll give you credit for your electromagnetic propulsion, but I will also say that it could be something else. Unless there is an ULTRA quiet turbofan-whatnot that can push a craft that fast without making any noticeable noise (they were rather far away) then it has to be something else. And their rather "weightless" characteristics (floating at a very low speed for ANY aircraft, even a helicopter in flight) makes me think that a fan alone wouldn't do it.
Do you really think that they're all (provided that they're real) powered by magnetic force (and mysterious "thrusters")? Or is this just a "possible" theory that you've taken a liking to?
Well, that's all I have to say for now.
Toodles? What?!?!
Oh! That's poof-speak for later! I get it!
The CIA was formed the same year they schemed up the roswell hoax. Also the same year the inventor of the electromotive flying machine died. (Nikola Tesla) Roswell was a coverup for secret technology which involves no extreterrestrials.
Many of the photos of flying saucers ("ufos") are real photos of actual manmade flying machines which are capable of "defying science of the day." (via their ability to fly right angles at extremely high speeds, where unclassified arcraft attempting such things would be obliterated by the G-force)
The reason the electropropulsive flying machine doesn't get destroyed by high speed right angle maneuvers is because it synthesizes inertia and momentum with high frequency high voltage electricity. (since all matter is made of electric charges, gravity , momentum and intertia are all electromagnetic in nature)
for more information go to:
http://www.pritchardschool.com/Teslas_Flying_Machine.pdf
or
http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Tesla's_Dynamic_Theory_of_Gravity
Many of the photos of flying saucers ("ufos") are real photos of actual manmade flying machines which are capable of "defying science of the day." (via their ability to fly right angles at extremely high speeds, where unclassified arcraft attempting such things would be obliterated by the G-force)
The reason the electropropulsive flying machine doesn't get destroyed by high speed right angle maneuvers is because it synthesizes inertia and momentum with high frequency high voltage electricity. (since all matter is made of electric charges, gravity , momentum and intertia are all electromagnetic in nature)
for more information go to:
http://www.pritchardschool.com/Teslas_Flying_Machine.pdf
or
http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Tesla's_Dynamic_Theory_of_Gravity
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
I have to say that I'm not too impressed with the 'facts" of your cut and pastes. IIRC Japanese ballons were found in the western U.S. and Alaska in 1942. After the Hindenburg blew up most nations went to helium.Giambattista said:How do you know it was a low-pressure helium balloon?
As far as I know, all the balloons that the Japanese sent over arrived towards the end of the war, not as early as the incident in question.
I can be a skeptic, too! Look how skeptical I am of your advances. What a fun game we're playing!
snake river rufus said:
What makes you so sure I was trying to impress?
Giambattista said:
snake river rufus said:
Yes, I am aware of the advantages of helium over hydrogen from a safety standpoint.
Why, though, do you insist that these bombs had helium?
And what is this about a balloon offensive BEFORE 1944?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balloon_bomb
http://collections.ic.gc.ca/balloons/mission.htm
I don't see any notion of any of these being filled with helium, nor do I see any talk about balloons having been launched prior to 1944. I'm not saying that there COULDN'T have been one or two instances, but obviously it's not a fact that is easily found. I assume this is NOT the same type of balloon?
From a newspaper article following the "battle". This doesn't support the theory that helium was the fuel of choice for balloons in Japan.
Of course, people WERE dumber back in those days!
snake river rufus said:
What about it was cut and paste? I just posted several quotes from several articles (as well as with links), and they all said basically the same thing.
Are you saying that all these sites are just spewing "facts" and not actually FACTS???
What does impress, you then? What ARE the facts? What are you even talking about here?
Puzzling.