digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

'Mile-wide UFO' spotted by British airline pilot

thisislondon.co.uk — One of the largest UFOs ever seen has been observed by the crew and passengers of an airliner over the Channel Islands. An official air-miss report on the incident several weeks ago appears in Pilot magazine. Aurigny Airlines captain Ray Bowyer, 50, flying close to Alderney first spotted the object, described as a cigar-shaped brilliant white light

show profanity settings
expand all
  • mrbradg, on 10/11/2007, -58/+21ok. that ***** is scary. I believe in this ***** but not a mile wide mother load. damn it they are going to kill us all soon.
    • dziban303, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3you mean "lode"
      • Monstradamus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2no, he means "load"
        • insecuregirl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1(FLashin a neuralizer to digg users) All right, DIGGers, there was no alien. The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
    • DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -9/+58exactly a mile wide? looks like America isn't the only one in the Universe not using metric after all
      • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+24yea the UK uses our measuring system... this is news to you? We use what the british invented.

        BTW in America we use both our standard, and the metric system, and we have to learn how to convert between the two....
        • DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2yeah its kinda silly... though with imported products becoming more common, I feel like a lot of Americans are becoming literate in metric (need a set of metric wrenches to work on all those Nissans and Hondas) we should just go official metric though, so you're drivers license is in meters and kg instead of feet and pounds. Don't force it onto the industry, but gradually over 2-3 generations you can start to make more and more things metric.
        • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Britain doesn't use imperial generally though it's still common in some areas.
        • DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2Also check this out Kuz and everyone digging him up... you are wrong about the UK (even the English don't use the English system anymore)
          http://digg.com/general_sciences/Nations_who_have_not_yet_adopted_the_metric_system_pic
        • Godlesswanderer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8@DrDragun

          Actually, we use both systems. It's a bit confusing at times but that's the way we roll.
          • DrDragun, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3ahh well, thanks for clearing that up. glad we got something productive done in a thread about UFO sightings
        • selrahc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2We are just honest about not using it.
      • crazybrit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Some countries use a mix. They mostly use metric in the UK, but they still use miles.
      • mikeman8905, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yeah, Americans don't use the metric system...That's why I'm American I know how to convert from metric to Imperial units and Imperial units to Metric. That's also why I've been taught the metric system in every math and science class I've had.
    • TheAkolyte, on 10/11/2007, -5/+32The mile wide club.
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15Let's assume you are right for a moment and these are aliens. If the conspiracy theories are correct they have been penetrating our atmosphere for decades in their thousands and have left so little evidence that the only sane thing to do is deny their existence. If their goal was our destruction then given this capability don't you think they could have done so a thousand times.

      Of course this is if you believe in all the alien conspiracy theories which I don't. My patience with conspiracy theorists ended when some of them said the reason the B2 looks like some reported 'alien spacecraft' is because it was based on a crashed UFO rather than the obvious reality that the UFO's seen were damn well B2 prototype's. When dealing with this level of stupidity there can be no hope of any reasoned argument.
      • pitlord, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9They haven't destroyed us yet because they haven't gotten approval from the galactic planning commission to clear the region for their space highway development project. Those Vogons are sticklers for proper bureaucratic process.

        X^P
      • feebie, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Maybe their ultimate plan ISN'T to destroy us.
        Maybe they found us and were interested. I'm sure if we found a planet with life on it, we wouldn't start destroying it. We'd probably take samples of their elements, capture one of their beings, and put it to the test. Try to teach it our ways. Or something.
        • 4UIDigg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1they don't want to destroy us because they want our women
          • ScottMaximus1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1"Take us to your Jessica Alba"
      • smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Maybe that's what the time travel device we create in the future looks like, and in reality we're just seeing our future selves.
    • BESTenemy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12They'll kill us all, cause they hate our freedom!
    • themastersb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4What about the Phoenix lights? That was supposed to be 1 big craft.
    • ajrahim, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Obviously it;s part of the Halo3 ARG...
    • AgileHeadCogs, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0After the Brits bag the mile-wide fiery sucker and perform some genetic experiments on it they'll just confirm it is a remnant fart cloud released from Churchill's butt in 1942.
  • Newportbeachguy, on 10/11/2007, -19/+67*****, I have do get on a plane at 1:45 this afternoon.

    • Matteos, on 10/11/2007, -9/+6I would be less worried about a UFO attacking your plane and more worried that the Flying Spaghetti Monster will surround your plane with his noodley appendages.
    • oxdeltaxo, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4Remember your tin foil hat!
    • paisakiller, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0funny *****
    • keeganspeck, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Don't worry about it, beachguy. It was probably a bird. Or a weather balloon. Or a bush plane. A simple explanation. Common sightings, of course, those mile-wide birds/balloons/planes.....
    • DeathBorn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The invasion has begun.
  • gmc74, on 10/11/2007, -18/+13I am sure they aren't plane eating monsters, you should be fine...
    • Rileyper, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2I will eat your heart

      -little nicky
      • catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10You made me click 5 times to read that crap?
        • crgnetworks, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1You had to click 6 times to read this :)
  • Avataren, on 10/11/2007, -0/+71Here's an interview with the pilot about the sighting http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQLNblZNDEA
    • Kranklin, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5Havent clicked it yet, but looks like a rick roll! good thing no one is going to get to read my comment first though cause of the comment system....

      edit: couldn't resist... and no, it wasn't a rick roll!
    • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -3/+20And here's a video of military response: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95be_Ob1I4U
    • zatrix, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15why can't we ever see a clear picture of a UFO. It would simplify this whole thing so much. Would it have space lasers installed, or maybe some crazy ass propulsion system?
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5There are some clear pictures and videos out there. The problem is knowing which ones aren't fake. Peopel still believe the helicopter footage near the WTC is real even AFTER the creator if the clip came forward on teh SCI-FI channel. Someone people simply want to believe regardless of the facts. Many peopel was to disbelieve regardless of the facts as well.
    • Satanael, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Why is the video dated two months earlier than this article? Is this not the first time it's been sighted?
  • Al3x, on 10/11/2007, -28/+4This is very interesting. I'm going to ignore this article for the most part until CNN and some other news outlets pick this story up. If they do, it could be really big news.
    • Rsardinia, on 10/11/2007, -3/+20you are honestly retarded. plz stop watching network news. they are more fascinated with paris hilton or whatever kidnapping story will get them viewers. If the govt dont want us to watch it the network news aint puttin it on. there's a reason there have been many "cover ups" in the past for UFO type stuff, Roswell got in the newspapers because that was back when journalism was still a real thing. now they only report what they are told to report and all other news gets swept under the rug.
    • Avataren, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/guernsey/6591365.stm
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Al3x
      No this is not the first time a major sighting is ignored. You would obviously not know about the huge triangles seen in Belgium by thousands and chased by the Belgian Airforce for weeks in the 1990s. I could list at least twenty equally credible and significant sightings in the last few years and I have myself had a couple of close encounters., The most recent of which was atriangle also and was about the size of two football fields and a half kilometer away, over our city. Yes there were numerous reports of it, though not in the MSM. I made a report through HBCCUFO and have seen three separate reports from others from the same night since on other sites as well as there being at least two people who rang in with sightings on local radio stations. The silence on UFOs in the media is deafening.
      Did anyone else notice about some parts of the reports being redacted? Not that I would ever be suspicious of the government or dream they would try to hide anything of import from us.
  • AegisGFX, on 10/11/2007, -41/+13Why can't people just admit, "I saw a cloud and for a second I thought it was something else, because I'm a retard."?
    • Avataren, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15Clouds usually arent picked up by radar
    • SerifTheRobot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24I think a 50 year old professional pilot can tell the differense.
    • Estaris, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Never say Never...
      I hold a grain of salt to things as this because everyone was pretty sure the world was flat also..
    • lazyrussian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The cosmological principle, as loose as it is, and as much as I am reading into it right now, it gives enough reason for other life-forms to exist. I;m not saying I believe it, but hey, why not? Wouldn't humans be doing the same thing if we found other life-forms and ahd the technology that enabled us to go through deep-space travel?
    • erissiva, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Did you read the article?
      3 pilots (at least) saw it, and a few passengers. Also, the main pilot has been flying for years. I think they would recognize a cloud when they saw one - mostly from seeing so many of them...up close.
  • DaveV, on 10/11/2007, -13/+162Quick! Call Will Smith, Bill Pullman, and Jeff Goldblum
    • tnvwboy, on 10/11/2007, -5/+40Don't forget the Mac with the cable that can plug into alien technology! ;)
      • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -6/+19When Steve Jobs says "It just works" he means "It just works"!
        • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -9/+9Yeah we are going to unleash Safari on them. Damn aliens don't know what's going to hit them. They'll spend years in pain with it's rubbish interface and limited functionality MWAHAHAHAHAHA!
        • tnvwboy, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Damn...there needs to be a way to delete comments when you F up. Add that to your to-do list Kevin.
      • cmburns69, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1You mean firewire, right? Nobody on earth uses that...
    • Nougat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4You totally forgot about Richard Dreyfuss. He's gonna be pissed.
    • venson, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Today is our Independence Day!
    • absolutroot, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3don't worry. I heard it on the downlow that that aliens use Windows Vista, and we all know how vulnerable Microsoft products are right after release.... thank god for bill gates, if they had waited for the 2nd service pack to attack, we'd had been done for.
    • smackhero, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3i thought i'd heard something about an intergalactic overpass being built...
    • Aharoni, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Someone get me X-COM on the phone! stat!
  • fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -30/+5If it was a mile wide, I'm pretty sure someone else would have noticed it.
    • Monk22, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9you mean the passenger they quoted as also seeing it? RTFA
      • pitlord, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4You mean the two 74 year old passengers who reported a large orange cigar while the pilot reported seeing two separate crafts that were white with a small "green area?"

        Yeah, those sound like corroborating testimonies from reliable witnesses to me. -_-

        NOT!
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4Erm, they did. There were numerous witnesses reported already. More will possibly turn up and the truth is most people never do report because of the kneejerk ignorant debunkers. It is no easy thing to admit and in truth even the most astounding sighting soon feels dream like when the world stays the same the next day and the next. A close encounter sighting is one of the loneliest experiences I know. Speaking out does not do more than bring a lot of ridicule, but it also gives succour to others who are feeling alone with it themselves so that is why I bother and take the rap as i must from the dummies who think that our science is the laws of the universe and we have it all more or less figured out but for some minor adjujustments in theories. Having seen a football field sized craft almost silent and almost hovering a couple of hundred meters after having apparently come in obliquely from space, it began as a star. I have seen another craft quite small and wedge shaped in broad daylight less than twenty meters from my car and it went from hovering to an incredible rate of speed which saw it turn into a black line which blinked out over the horizon in about three seconds from hover. That means it travelled at least 80 kilometers in less than a tenth of a second. The black line meant my eye couldn't percieve the movement only its path. That might not be lightspeed but I don't doubt that thing could do it. What do I care if some puny human tells me that their science does not allow this. I guess someone forgot to tell the visitors who are from various races it would seem and I witnessed at least two completely elien technologies. I do not think they were remotely related to be honest they just did not move in anything like the same way. If one goes by the thousands of reports worldwide, then the picture is of a dozen or more types and many of them are buzzing about this planet more or less continually. It seems apparent some at least are able to leave and return within a very short space of time across what are no doubt impossible distances to us.

      I have seen enough to know without any doubt there are ET races in contact with our planet. The things I saw were not of earth and I am probably more credible than most about what technology of the rumours we might have.

      BUT not these babies mate, they were gods as far as you and I are concerned and it doesn't much surprise me they are not saying much, Would you think to ask the zebras or the lions in the wild if they mind while you observe them and run some tests for science?
      • covertbadger, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Hilarious. The UFO nuts who dribble and froth and gesticulate are very funny indeed, but the pseudo-serious cretins like you are just something else. Bravo!
    • pitlord, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Agreed, if the two objects he saw were that large and one was hovering near the town he was about to land his airplane in, someone who wasn't in the plane would've seen something.
  • mandarin, on 10/11/2007, -9/+94Dont blame me! I voted for Kodos!
    • petereality, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2dude you clearly saw someone else use this line in a thread days ago and were just waiting for the opportunity to make it seem like you were originally clever.
  • neuralzen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+36Someone else did notice it....
    'The sightings were confirmed by passengers Kate and John Russell. John, 74, said: "I saw an orange light. It was like an elongated oval."'
  • waluum, on 10/11/2007, -22/+82Actually, it was a mile-wide instance of ball lightning - very common! No, wait, it was swamp gas! No, a weather balloon! No, no, wait, it was a top-secret government project that the government insisted on flying near a commercial airliner so that people could see it and report it and potentially photograph it and leak it to the public!

    Wake up people!

    The Disclosure Project - Two-hour Disclosure Witness Testimony (1 of 2)
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6552475158249898710
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -14/+7so tell me.. Why do they work so hard to keep a secret from us. That whole movie is a load of BS in my opinion. No advance civilization is interested in us.
      • darkstar949, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12I don't, maybe not the civilization as a whole, but human anthropologists go out and study primitive societies to get better understanding of how other societies evolve, if we are being checked out by any alien lifeforms that isn't interested in our planet then maybe they are just the equivalent to graduate students working on their thesis.

        Either than they are undergraduates out for a good time.
        • mgriswold, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2"maybe they are just the equivalent to graduate students working on their thesis."

          That's so awesome. Dugg.
        • mgriswold, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2"maybe they are just the equivalent to graduate students working on their thesis."

          That's so awesome. Dugg.
          • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Ummm what's so special about the Disclosure Project? It's just more pf teh same stuff. More stories w/o any hard evidence to back them up. We have decades of this stuff. A mountain of stories is not evidence. The Exopolitics stuff is really funny. Yeah we should worry about starting a war against aliens. Any civilization who can cross the huge distances to reach us doesn't have a whoel lot to fear from us. It's not like in ID4 where we can infect their cycems with a computer virus. A more realistic depiction how conflict between us and an advanced alien race would play out is seen in War Of The Worlds. It wouldn't be much of a fight. More like a slaughter. If you want to be taken seriously stop pointing to stories as proof of anything and focus on bringing us hard evidence which can be scientificly and objectively analyzed.
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Since when is a bunch of stories teh same as proof? You can listen to as many stories as you like but in the end it prooves nothing. I know lots of people want every unknown object in the sky to be an alien craft but lets be honest. Just because you can't identify something in the sky doesn't mean it's an alien craft. They just as easily can be exotic experimental technology.
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2oops!
    • Neodeusx, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3It so was a ball lightning, check it out!
      http://www.mtgfanatic.com/Store/Magic/ViewCard.aspx?I=MTG-MS-033005
    • Jimgress, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12burden of proof lies with those who make the claims:

      also looks like you need to brush up on your logical fallacies...
      http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
      • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Except there is no Grey that's getting out and handing us the keys to their saucer.

        Nor are the pilots of an experimental aircraft going to do the same. You know there wasn't a F-117 until they crashed one? Funny how you can crash something that didn't exist.

        Yes, we do not claim to have PROOF. But the EVIDENCE certainly suggests a visual phenomenon at the least, and at the most a fast-moving flying object.

        Of course, you can close your mind and ignore the people who don't want to deceive you. They just want to tell you what they saw, honestly. I'm sorry if what they saw doesn't fit into your neat and tidy world.
    • EbilPhish, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I love how with all the bloody digital cameras around no one has any decent high resolution pictures of anything yet. That picture in the article isn't the one talked about in the article and it looks terrible.

      There would also be heaps more people taking similar pictures on cell phones and UFO's that wander into view of CCTV cameras. even if they avoided populated places there would still be remote areas with security cameras.

      Why is it that when all the farmers run inside to grab their camera, none of them also grab a telephoto lens at the same time.
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Nice way to over generalize. There are some clear photos and videos of UFOs out there. Let's be clear about what UFO means. UFO does not mean alien craft. UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object. Please take note of the Unidentified portion of this. Toomany people use UFO when they really mean alien craft. Which is BS since unless the thing landed and the "aliens" came out and said "Hi!" you have no clue what it is. The US has been researching exotic propultion systems for a long time. Keep that in mind.
        • waluum, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Anti-gravity propulsion was around a lot longer than the earliest reports of research into verticle lift-off conventional propulsion technology. Thing is it was not ours, as we were not even into the first stages of building jet engines in the early part of the last century that there were a flurry of accounts of craft that maneuvered unlike anything that the public is even aware of today.

          In the most technical terms, UFO is the acronym for an Unidentified Flying Object, that being an aerial object that is, at the time of association, not known in type or origin. Thinking logically, why would a government-made anti-gravity propulsion craft, that surely has the most advanced radar systems imaginable, risk flying within clear view of a civilian aircraft, or even a heavily populated area like a city, when there is an overwhelming risk of exposure. I don't know if you're familiar with the procedures of maintaining secrecy within the government and military, but they would strictly forbid such activity.

          Of course you could just call me, and anyone else to testifies to the same, a liar and forget all about it.
      • omgbanana, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2A 200 dollar camera can't take a clear picture of anything much more than 200 yards away. A picture, yes, but not nearly as clear as something sitting 10 ft away. You can't see faces or read license plates from that kind of distance. When you're talking miles in the air, what do you expect?
    • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Since when is a bunch of stories teh same as proof? You can listen to as many stories as you like but in the end it prooves nothing. I know lots of people want every unknown object in the sky to be an alien craft but lets be honest. Just because you can't identify something in the sky doesn't mean it's an alien craft. They just as easily can be exotic experimental technology.
      • smackhero, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2do you know what UFO stands for?
        • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yep keep reading below and you will see the definition spelled out for you. And please stop pretending these people are not implying the thing is an alien craft.
        • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1They aren't implying it's an alien craft.

          I've seen one. I think it was the US replacement of the SR-71 Blackbird Spyplane. You know the one they "retired" and never replaced *cough*******cough*.

          Keep your ***** broad brush to yourself, generalizations have no place here.
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Read my reply to EbilPhish for my explination of what UFO stands for.
    • spawnfree, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6who cares about aliens, yet.
      the US military have lots of projects that even the US president cant get clearance to know about. And the private sector is involved.
      Potentially powerful technology in private individual's hands=not good.
      This could be Dick Chaneys private floating fortress for all we know.
      • waluum, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Thinking logically, why would a government-made anti-gravity propulsion craft, that surely has the most advanced radar systems imaginable, risk flying within clear view of a civilian aircraft, or even a heavily populated area like a city, when there is an overwhelming risk of exposure. I don't know if you're familiar with the procedures of maintaining secrecy within the government and military, but they would strictly forbid such activity.

        Also, consider this analogy: many electronics companies maintain a level of secrecy behind their upcoming products even when the original ideas are not their own. In the practice of corporate espionage they steal corporate secrets and reverse engineer technology that they acquire by legal means. More often than not what you buy off the shelf is similar to the product next to it because it was originally based off it. Reverse engineering is one of the keys to successful research and development in a competitive world, and it's not always as traditional as we see it in the corporate world.
      • spawnfree, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2exactly. its like it wanted to be seen. i have read alot about this, there is a con being brewed and they are laying the foundations.
        the fact that this has been reported in mainstream media, after years of silence on ufo sightings, is real fishy.
    • topace3000, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1You heard the paranoid delusional poster! We need to WAKE UP and stop digging ***** like this!
      • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Paranoid delusions do not coincidentally manifest in multiple members of the same flight crew. Or multiple flight crews.

        To believe so, is well, delusional.
    • diggn_it, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2Yeah, Aliens who are advanced enough to travel through space but never show themselves or their mile wide ships to more than 3 or four people (and only when they have terrible blury cameras) is a MUCH more likely scenario than some sort of natural occurrence or a military project. WAKE UP PEOPLE!
      • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I think that most people here are saying it's probably a military project.

        It's closed minded people like you that get off on always being right who want to badger "Alien seekers" back into silence.
    • obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I'd never heard of this Disclosure Project, but I thought it was pretty cool. Thanks for posting the link!
  • The_Dude, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4It's the thing that mad the crater lake (some other story here today, via cnn) disappear!
  • ictimer, on 10/11/2007, -12/+106ufo != extraterrestrial life
    • mgriswold, on 10/11/2007, -8/+0That's like seeing a swastika and assuming it means the Nazis have re-risen to power, when really, all it means is some ***** defaced some random surface.
    • mc7winkie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6A UFO could just be some trash bag caught on a thermal.
    • texpundit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"ufo != extraterrestrial life"

      I agree....but even though, if you think we're the only life in the universe, you're deluding yourself... (and I was raised Christian....we're not all morons.)
  • eviltuxking, on 10/11/2007, -23/+0Someone must've been flying high...

    And by 'high' I mean on drugs.
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2That was so rational, we can see why you don't need drugs.
  • Philodox, on 10/11/2007, -35/+28There's a perfectly rational answer for this. It was god's penis.
    • EPH99, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9So what does that make the clouds? Wait, don't answer that.
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3no God's penis is larger than this solar system.
    • noexistence, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Once again, God has teabagged the planet.
    • spawnfree, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1what does god need with a starshi...i mean penis?
  • jamesallen74, on 10/11/2007, -9/+36I love the comment on the actual site, that they are in town to pick up Tony Blair and take him home, since he is resigning in a couple of days. GREAT comment, :)
  • Ramble, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1Evidence as well? Interesting, very interesting.
  • mgriswold, on 10/11/2007, -8/+91Guys, relax. It was just Tom Cruise and John Travolta taking their rental saucers out for a little cruise over Europe. Those guys loan them from Xenu all the time.
    • Neodeusx, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Just watch out they like to drop hydrogen bombs into volcanoes...
    • spawnfree, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1and take all of your moneys
  • chrisinsocalif, on 10/11/2007, -16/+3The pilot also said his plane was made of cheese, and his son is the ruler of Siam.
  • DarkReign16, on 10/11/2007, -11/+25Lord Xenu strikes again.
  • orangester, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2Criss Angel is amazing! What will he do next?
  • knifesideleft, on 10/11/2007, -16/+22I'm really sick of all the same old cigar shaped space ship crap. Call me when you see a flying banana or donut, then I'll take you seriously.
    • ajchavar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1flying bananas are old news: http://www.zoilus.com/documents//2007/000954.php
      http://eatourbrains.com/EoB/2006/12/30/not-plane-nor-bird-nor-even-a-bandanna/
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1It gets me too. I have seen three kinds and none of them were cigars. SO they cannot be that common. Still they have been seen in specific time periods which I later learn correllated with others of that type around the same time.
      • sabach, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Rabbit, you've seen all these different UFOs, I'm an amateur astronomer and have spent many, MANY nights with my eyes to the skies and have never seen anything I couldn't identify. Nobody would like to see one as much as me and there have been numerous opportunities, but no objects have flown past me that were anything more exotic than a transversing satellite. Where are you that you so frequently get buzzed by flying saucers?
        • MachoGrande, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Bach you got a point, but just cause YOU haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

          You've heard of DNA right?
        • sabach, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2For some reason there's no Reply link below your comment (goddam comment system). So you're saying he gets "visited" because of his DNA? I have seen electron microscope photos of DNA, if that's what you mean.
    • BGFeltenink, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Well, I am not going to speculate on what it could be, but I see a cylindrical shape in that image. The idiots in the media look at a picture like that and see the flat 2d image which is a cigaresque shape but taking perspective into account it looks more like a 'saucer' to me.
  • quakerorts, on 10/11/2007, -9/+31No one on the plane had a cell phone camera or other camera? Why are airliners not required to have video cams? Seems to me it could be quite handy for many situations. (This is a verbose 'Pics or it didn't happen.')
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Rubbish. Pictures and videos tell very little as a rule and the debunkers do not even lose step, they just debunk on through. I will take a good credible witness over a typical and not suprisingly hazy and ill defined photo any day.
    • penguinofhonor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2but still, if there is a credible witness, a picture helps even more.
      • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Honestly Penguin I am not sure it does. Or at least it has not done yet. A glance at Youtube, the many UFO videos which turn up there is a good example. Not that I am arguing for the veracity of any of them, but I see the most irrational attempts to come up with every concievable effort to debunk and often the obvious non-sequiter of the point is lost on the creator of the grand debuniking theeories. A series of lights for example which come twaords the camera then vear away to dissapear at the same point in the mountains for example issome of them must be hovering above the gr4ound at least as they dissapear at different heights. Others swear hehilcopters without accepting the rather extreme idea that several dozen helicopters seem to be involved in a strange and unexplainable night exercise, IN CHILE. Why is it so hard for people to say I don't know what it is?

        The most close up picture of an ET craft even with occupants will be written off as a fake by most I am sure.
    • LMaxey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"All portable electronic devices must be powered off and stowed at this time."
      Flash photography is probably a bad idea on an airplane
  • MikeonTV, on 10/11/2007, -9/+21Why does the photo still look like it was shot in the 50's?
    • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3It probably was. That's not a picture of the object referred to in the article. Besides, it looks like a rare type of cloud...
  • OKeric, on 05/12/2008, -6/+30A plane full of people and nobody had a camera?
    • SignorDildo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Owning a camera AND pointing It at something - particularly Government offices, law enforcement offices, bus, train and airport terminals and quite possibly public transport compartments, fast-food franchises, public support systems, street lighting, major public highways and any number of apparently 'sensitive' matter - can land you in trouble. If I was on a plane, last thing I'd do is whip out my Olympus - God knows what folk would think I'm up to. Could be even worse if I was unshaven and olive-skinned.
      • OKeric, on 05/12/2008, -1/+1I've taken video before on a plane and the crew didn't seem to mind. If I remember right, in the American Way Magazine, it says that you can record as long as you don't record the crew.
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Actualy in the moment of astonishment which accompanies even a distant UFO sighting, trying to find your camera or turn on a seldom used phone function then find what is going to be a much smaller object in the viewfinder and will be even less impressive once it is produced is NOT as easy as it seems. In a five minute sighting up close a few years ago, my son and I were so mesmerised for a few minutes I never even thought of it. That was while we are looking, talking and comparing and deciding we are definately seeing this. By the time I had the phone out I could not concetrate enough to recall the procedure and then gave up because I did not want to miss a moment of the craft. SO no picture. I have seen them before also and am less surprised than most even.
  • Cyberen, on 10/11/2007, -13/+66A sighting is CONFIRMED by multiple military sources and some asshats still say people are being delusional.
    What is going to satisfy you?
    • grumpychris, on 10/11/2007, -11/+20Evidence.
      • darkstar949, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Bah, either all of these people delusional, or something is happening. That isn't to say that spaceships from another world are visiting, but what about something more mundane like some odd form of atmospheric phenomenon.
        • diggn_it, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I think that is what grumpyChrist is saying. You have all these crazy people on digg saying that OBVIOUSLY it's aliens, and he is saying that maybe they should get some actual proof before crying wolf.
        • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Except for there's not many crazy people saying it's OBVIOUSLY aliens.

          There's just a lot of people that say there's SOMETHING happening. That's why it's called a Unidentified Flying Object.

          Geez....
    • Jimgress, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6Tsk, tsk You argue with Ad hominem, and Appeal to Authority.

      What will satisfy me? A UFO on my front lawn. Something I can see, measure and test. Not some ***** blurry photos and "witness" reporting.
      • MachoGrande, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Meh. And when that UFO lands on your lawn, what do you think the public reaction is going to be? What exactly are you going to "measure and test" when it does? And how exactly do you plan on doing those measurements?

        Don't get me wrong. ***** if I've ever seen a UFO. But would I be shocked at the premise of extraterrestrial life? Hell no.

        It's people like you (projecting here, you seem to be a "denier," please correct me if I'm wrong and I'll apologize) is why, if there is any REAL credible evidence, it'll never see the light of day. Can you imagine the ***** Bible Belt if that started happening? The "UFOs" wouldn't have to do *****, humans would burn the ***** place to the ground out of sheer hysteria.

        It's naive to think we're alone in this universe. It's stupid to think that if we do discover them, then it'll be something you can "measure and test" for proof.
      • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Wouldn't that just make you a "witness" to the UFO on your lawn?

        Sometimes you have to take the observations of others, since this phenomena hasn't happened to you. Kind of like the moon landings...unless you want us to fly you to the moon to satisfy your impossible burden of proof?

        Asshat.
    • enicholas, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8I don't seriously doubt that they saw a light of some kind. But it's an enormous leap from "light of some kind" to "mile-wide object in the sky, possibly from another world".
    • namezod, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8a single ***** picture
    • tnvwboy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I'm waiting for the aliens to preempt some TV show and say, "Hey, just wanted to let you know. 'WE'RE HEEERRREEE!!'", in that creepy Poltergeist voice. That'd be freaking sweet. Then the big ass ships would start appearing all over like in Independence Day or V. Let's just hope they are friendly. I have little desire to be food.
    • keraneuology, on 10/11/2007, -6/+13Two mile-wide objects only 2,000 feet off the ground and the only people who saw it were two pilots and a couple of passengers on a flight that serves alcohol? Think for a minute here... what kind of shadow would be cast on the ground by a MILE-WIDE OBJECT only 2,000 feet off the ground? Don't you think for even a second that *SOMEBODY* in the country owns a freaking camera? The complete and total lack of photographic evidence of two miles' worth of flying saucers is fairly convincing evidence that there was *NOTHING* there. Sun, reflection, temporary retinal overload. Compare this theory with "nobody among the 162,000 residents of the channel islands ever look up to see what is causing abnormal shadows and nobody has a camera" and "none of the 65,573 people living on Guernsey pay any attention to mile-wide cigars, either". Which seems more plausible?
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Hmmmm would YOU report seeing somethign like this? I sure as hell wouldn't. I like not being thought of as unstable. My ex gf and I saw something odd but we kept it to ourselves.
        • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Once again... Take. A. *****. Picture.

          Also, at up to a mile wide, you can be pretty sure that you wouldn't be the only one who saw it. And if none of *them* even take a picture, then... Wtf? *Someone* has to be a professional or even hobbyist photographer with a quality, high-powered digital camera.
      • fffizzz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Well, if you look at the video of the interview with the Pilot, both sighting took place over water a good distance from the coast.. HOWEVER, since the pilot said he saw it from 50 miles away, you'd think someone on land did in fact see it as well.
      • majorbabu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Cloud cover?
    • topace3000, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Cyberen is right! IT IS CONFIRMED YOU IDIOTS OPEN YOUR EYES THE END IS HERE!
    • DeathBorn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2PICS OR IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!
    • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Here's the deal. I've seen a UFO (unidentified flying object, because I don't know wtf it was). It looked like a shooting star, but then it changed directions, stopped for a couple seconds, and then shot off again in another direction.

      My friend standing next to me at the time also saw it. We were both incredulous, but since we both saw it, we had to accept it.

      Shooting stars don't make course corrections, and there's no aircraft that can stop on a dime, hover, and then go supersonic again. You tell me what I saw, and I'll admit there's no UFOs. Until then, it's UNIDENTIFIED.

      And mind tripping.
  • frieddonuts, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8Mmmmm.....giant flying twinkie.
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7It looks like a giant...
      WEINER, get your WEINERS...
      • DoubtingThomas, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Good lord, what is that? If I didn't
        know better I'd say it's a-

        WANG!!!! Pay attention!
  • OGTL, on 10/11/2007, -10/+36I, for one, welcome our cigar-shaped craft piloting overlords.
  • Tokerman, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11And they brought a book called, "To Serve Humans". mmm, mmm, taste like chicken. *****, all I can say to them is "Eat Me".
  • tehxen3, on 10/11/2007, -13/+3I for one welcome our new alien overlords!
  • Dotcommer, on 10/11/2007, -12/+10Bunch of *****. Its from thisislondon, which is a ***** tabloid that has NO validity what so ever. Take any and all of this with a grain of salt.
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You went to the trouble to auto debunk the source without even checking to see if it was anywhere else? Others have posted links to BBC etc sources for the same story as it happens.
  • Sithlrd, on 10/11/2007, -14/+68They came to kick Kevin's ass for screwing up the comments section of Digg
    • merlin77077, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Since we all know that Kevin should be held solely responsible for everything that you don't like on Digg...
      • norman619, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Get it right. The comments section of Digg is messed up since they decided to "fix" it.
  • loganhid, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3I for one welcome our over-sized overlords
  • Jimgress, on 10/11/2007, -11/+12This is interesting, but I would like to actually know more about what phenomena causes these types of sightings. Instead of the douches in this thread who are all OMGZ ALIENZ

    And another thing, so what if he's a pilot? That doesn't matter. He's a witness. Witnesses, even immediately after an ambigious encounter, regardless of profession, and sometimes during have a hard time not fudging up their story. Human perception at levels of ambiguity are incredibly tricky with accuracy. So the whole "mile in size" thing could be terribly inaccurate especially if you are looking in the blank sky and have nothing to calibrate your dimensions with. All I see in this photo is a blur, with no field of vision and nothing around it to determine scale or anything else.

    Why weren't there more photos?!!? People have cameras all over the damn place and we can't get one good shot of this thing that doesn't look like utter *****?
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Jim that was a lot to write just to admit at the end you didn't even pay much attention to the article. The photo is not alleged to be of the craft. There is no photo. The article is about a few credible people and what they saw. They have eyes, minds were presumably sensible and sober people who have nothing to gain by lying or exagerating, trust me nobody ever made a cent out of a fake UFO report but plenty of reputations and careers have been lost over making any UFO report. I do wish the auto debunkers would get out of their heads that people would voluntaril go public with a UFO sighting when they only stand to lose.
      If you want to go ahead and jump to conclusions about people being crazy, imagining things and whatever other rationalisations go for your life but the problem is exactly what is it going to take to convince you that one out of the thousands of reports which arise and most of which you never heard of? You might say seeing it yourself but I can tell you from experience that can be harder than you might imagine even.

      Addiction to rationalisation is not the same as rational.
      • Jimgress, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"There is no photo."
        and this doesn't trouble you at all?


        "If you want to go ahead and jump to conclusions about people being crazy"

        Where in my statement did I say they were crazy? My argument that scientifically witnesses are by nature unreliable because human perception is so easy to manipulate by natural externalities beyond of the control of the participant.

        "lying or exagerating, trust me nobody ever made a cent out of a fake UFO report but plenty of reputations and careers have been lost over blah blah words words"

        When did I say they were lying? quote me on it cause I don't see that. A person doesn't have to lie to misjudge an ambiguous situation..it's called guessing.

        "I do wish the auto debunkers would get out of their heads that people would voluntaril go public with a UFO sighting when they only stand to lose."
        seriously, where do you even get this from? How is this even related to a person's ability to perceive something with nothing to judge distance and size from??!

        apparently you were being so self righteous in your own agenda that you failed to notice that I opened with saying that I am curious to the explanation of consistent sightings like this. Unfortunately I'm just a "debunker" because I'm not willing to believe a light in the sky is huurrrr Teh space alienz.

        This is considered critical thinking these days?!?!
      • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You did not so much say they are crazy as imply their testimonies are suspect, due to the content alone of what they said.. They would have to be crazy to describe such a thing as this if it was mostly their imaginations. I don't see any guesswork by them but an honest description of what they saw. The point of the personal cost to people who report such things is why you would have to be crazy to make such a report unless you were very sure of yourself. I confess however that the overall gist of what I was saying was less directly to your comment than to the genral attempts to debunk from the first point. Why assume that several people would all independently be mis-construing something or exaagerating it when there is nothing in the reports to suggest any such thing. You failed to recognise the photo was an archival one and assumed it was relevant, which shows that you have not really looked closely enough at what IS said without getting into speculating about the accuracy of their observations or ability to comprehend. Scepticism is fine, but if you go off half cocked then scepticism is nothing but a handicap for anyone to learn anything new, at least until it is widely accepted by others. I consider any attempt to rationalise anybody's sighting by assuming failings on the part of the witnesses to be unhelpful and it amounts to auto debunking.

        Assume they saw what they say they saw until you have a good reason not to. Seems like open mindedness to me.

        Pilots are likely to be fairly good at judging size and distance, though an unusual size like this naturally led to a moment of confusion about the size and distance. I wasn't really attacking you to be honest so your tone is not necessary, however if you took it this way I undertsand and apologise. It is a bit hard not to be self righteous when you yourself have had close contact enough to KNOW without any need for belief that there is something out there. The annoyance at people's unending scepticisim is impossible for anyone but a sightee or worse to quite understand. This is the only reason for my tone if it was a bit pissy. I agree your comment was not closed to the possibility at least. I don't believe every sighting I read about is ET in origin. I do know such things are very common however so don't waste time trying to debunk everything. I don't have to believe they say an ET craft to believe their description exactly as they give it. That is what is called open minded. What you are talking about is auto-scepticism and it is a handicap to progress in science or learning of anything new. Far wiser to be more credible but open minded. Accept what people say at face value unless you have a genuine reason to doubt them. Mere doubt for its own sake is nothing but a dam for knowledge. Just because I refuse to start making presumptions about their credibility or sobriety does not mean I am saying it was an ET craft or any sort of craft. BUT I can comfortably see no reason to be sceptical at this point. I just don't have enough information to form a conclusion. THAT IS WHAT IS CALLED CRITICAL THINKING.

        Gallileo was not an auto sceptic, and nor was Newton. They were credible men, men who sought answers in the unknown. The auto sceptics were the inquisition instead. You want to be sure of your position in history before claiming superior logic.
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1By the way I never bumped you down because your view was nevertheless relevant. Sceptics have their say too, it is just that scepticism is not the answer always and it too is open to criticism. As we see.
    • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2No one's screaming that there's aliens. You're just trying to marginalize people here.

      People are saying they saw an Unidentified Flying Object, and that seems to be the case. Once YOU have evidence that there wasn't a flying object, we'll get back to you. Otherwise, eye-witness testimony is still GOOD EVIDENCE for most people.
  • jamaph, on 10/11/2007, -15/+8*sigh*

    So where do you guys want to meet so I can start passing out the tinfoil.

    ______

    buried
    • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1There's no conspiracy here, nor aliens.

      Just a phenomena that your dismissive close-minded self is being ignorant of. Carry on, seems that we didn't need your analysis anyways.
  • flexmentallo, on 10/11/2007, -12/+6You would think that the photo would be in better quality in this day and age...
    • OGTL, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Rtfa. That picture was an older one, it only "looks similar" to the one this crazy old brit says he saw.
      • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Did you fail to notice that it was several different witnesses too?
  • rlarkin0220, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4 David
    They are positioning themselves all over the world and using this
    one signal to synchronize their efforts. In approximately six hours the signal will disappear
    and the countdown will be over.

    MARTY
    Then what?

    DAVID
    Checkmate.
    • wcaclimbing, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1LMAO hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
      thats a great movie : )
  • noch, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4uh . . u guys know the site thats on is a tabloid site, right?
  • loganhid, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3it was a weather baloon
  • Wickedboss, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3The picture was taken by a iPhone !!!! Now you have a news !!!
    Cause the quality will be like this ***** pic...
  • mage1129, on 10/11/2007, -8/+20It is probably the Battlestar Galacttica finally finding Earth.
    • GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7As long as they bring a million Tricia Helfer's with them I for one welcome our Cylon overloads!
    • addicted68098, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1About time!
  • xoon, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Yawn.... exo-politics..
  • Zoltair, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5Lame, Aliens and Ghost... much the same, both figments of an over active imagination...or too many drugs....or not enough...
    • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Except when different people see the same event.

      Which just blows your hypothesis out of the water. Try again though.
  • kahakauai, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Alright... break out the water hose and a baseball bat - Swing away damnit, swing away!!!
  • jerryn, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1It's not global warming, the aliens are terraforming!

    Hmm... it was sun glare off the ocean.
  • underthewether, on 10/11/2007, -8/+8worst...photo...ever

    This goes up there with all the blurry Bigfoot photos and the videos of ripples in Loch Ness that could be anything.
  • Wickedboss, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2I cant believe they still sale Cigar shape ships outhere... I hope they will improve they float with kick ass spaceship.
  • Lister169, on 10/11/2007, -3/+27Sometimes a cigar-shaped object is just a cigar-shaped object.
  • theratdotus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22its a photo of an old ufo sighting that the pilot is comparing it to. there is no photo of what he saw.
    • SamuraiGhost, on 10/11/2007, -6/+0So what you are saying is that it never happened?
    • philba, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0so, you are saying that it actually did??? and that it was an extraterrestrial visitor???? Dude, anyone can say anything. A little skepticism wouldn't hurt. I recall my 6th grade teacher's favorite saying - "some minds are so open that they need to be closed for repairs" Seems appropriate.

      Also, I love how people look at that picture and DON'T EVEN READ THE CAPTION!!!!!
    • Rabbit63, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Thank god someone said it I was getting sick of how many didn't get it but you can only lead a horse to water i suppose.
      • sabach, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Yeah yeah, anyone who has ever seen a book on UFO sightings has seen that photo. I want you to answer my question (that I posted up above here, I'll repeat it...)

        Rabbit, you've seen all these different UFOs, I'm an amateur astronomer and have spent many, MANY nights with my eyes to the skies and have never seen anything I couldn't identify. Nobody would like to see one as much as me and there have been numerous opportunities, but no objects have flown past me that were anything more exotic than a transversing satellite. Where are you that you so frequently get buzzed by flying saucers?
        • bromac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2sabach, then as an amateur astonomer, please explain to me what an object that looks like a metorite, stops, goes the otherway, stops, and then goes in yet another direction (a triangle-like course) and then shoots off over the horizon is. My friend standing next to me saw the same thing. I've also met three other people who told me the exact same sighting before I ever mentioned my own. Identify that for me. Please.
          • sabach, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I'd have to see it to have an opinion, but my first guess would be exactly what you originally thought, a meteor breaking up. I absolutely believe there are space-faring aliens; and maybe this bunch of violent primates that we are have been under observation, we are after all playing around with nuclear fusion. But I consider that to be amongst the least likely explanations. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. All I said was I have never seen one.
  • mortigon, on 10/11/2007, -15/+1OH NO!

    CALL WILL SMITH AND JEFF GOLDBLUM!!!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 140 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.