Beeston, Nottingham-19th November 2013

Location of Sighting: Beeston, Nottingham
Date of Sighting: 10th Nov 2013
Time: 8.45
Witness Name: Scorpionxedos

Witness Statement: At 8.45, saw a red orb moving from left to right, in a north easterly direction, maybe a mile away. It was a solid, Ferrari red colour. It would illuminate for 2 secs, then off briefly, then back on, but it wasn’t flashing. It looked a solid round structure, moving very deliberately and smoothly. From my position, in the sky the object would measure about 1cm. Couldn’t make out any detail, too far away. No sound either. Then it continued away on the same course, but my view was obstructed by house roofs across the road. It was located to the north of my house and I would estimate it’s location when I saw it, to be somewhere near J25 of the M1 motorway.

Source:?www.uk-ufo.co.uk

Comment : If you can provide further information on this or other possible UFO sightings in this area then please leave a comment or send details through our ?submit sighting? form

Updated: November 15, 2013 — 8:32 pm

25 Comments

Add a Comment
  1. Hi Scorpionxedos,
    Yes, many thanks – Re the ‘looney’ comment – no offence taken at all on my own part and all of my colleagues on here probably would also harbour no offence as such. That is a good idea to invest in some good camera equipment – you never know when you may see something of interest (and as in my case!) – it is best to look skyward both during the day and at night. I totally understand your reluctance to put your experience on here, especially when you do not have other witnesses to it – with mine, I was lucky in that 2 other (independent, and unknown to me) witnesses also saw what I saw at the same time and reported it independently.
    You did exactly what was right in reporting it on here – whether you were ‘shot down’ on here in any way, it doesn’t matter a jot – you know what you saw! There are a lot of people on here who comment that ALL have valid ideas – whether these things are ‘alien’ or ‘paranormal’ or ‘are-misidentified’ or are
    real UFO’s – this is very much open to conjecture and interpretation on an individual basis and you, and me also, are open to any flak from anyone who does not agree with our own interpretation! All that I can say is to yourself, (and anyone else for that matter) – take any sh*t on the chin – please do not take it personally and continue to report anything on here! -Paul

  2. Chris, if this orb was if unearthly origin. I don’t get why “they” would have an interest in, by the OP’s admission. a dull side street in the East Midlands. Baffling in more ways than one.

  3. Sorry “of unearthly origin”.

  4. “George Adamski said he took thousands of pictures, but he did some showing ‘detail’, but even those were ridiculed!. ”

    Rightly so; they’re laughable. This is, however, an interesting one, although I would suggest a drone of some sort.

  5. Hi Gary,

    Yep, baffling it is, but that’s this phenomenon all over isn’t
    it?, even if it’s a ‘drone/lantern’, there’s no logical reason for the lighting configuration, the ‘probing’ effect’, or why it’s moving up the side of a roof in Beeston! & was ‘Ferrari red’ in colour, & to the observer was ‘a solid round structure’.

    Hi Steve T,

    Have you seen a ‘drone of some sort’ that has the above quality’s
    to qualify that statement?. I’m not saying this is ‘unearthly’, but I don’t accept that this is a drone/lantern for all the above reasons. So, over to you ;-).

    If we are talking about the ‘Venusian scout craft’ picture, would you point out what you find so ‘laughable’?.

  6. Chris,

    “Have you seen a ‘drone of some sort’ that has the above quality’s
    to qualify that statement?. I’m not saying this is ‘unearthly’, but I don’t accept that this is a drone/lantern for all the above reasons. So, over to you ”

    No problem;the thing about these sightings, Chris, is that we can never be sure exactly what the observer saw. We were not present, after all. Have I seen a drone with exactly the properties you describe? No, have you? No, but does that mean this is not what was seen? The why’s and wherefores we’ve touched on these before, that’s exactly what they are, and like yourself, I cannot be sure this was a drone. However, I can be pretty sure it was something that originated from earth,simply because, statistically and logically, that makes more sense than the alternative. Seeing something you don’t recognise, all you can do is tell it like it is. I’ve been there, and I guess so have you.

    “If we are talking about the ‘Venusian scout craft’ picture, would you point out what you find so ‘laughable’?.”

    One, the very concept of a craft from Venus; two, the fact it has been replicated by others using everyday objects; three, doesn’t it strike you as odd that this craft conforms exactly to the pop-culture image of what a UFO was meant to look like back then, disc shaped, with portholes and stuff, an image that was conjured entirely by the press in the wake of the Arnold sighting, and that has remained since? Four, having read Adamski’s tale many times, I consider him a fraud. Of course, that last bit is just my opinion, but as his pictures and videos have been authenticated by some and firmly ripped apart by others, I can’t see why anyone with a serious interest in the subject would raise his experiences as evidence.

  7. Been looking at the back and forth on this thread and thank you to everyone for their interest.

    I’m not contesting anything, because it was my sighting, alone, with no physical evidence. I cannot prove yay or nay.

    But if you had seen what I saw, you would feel calm.

    I didn’t feel scared, threatened or anything similar. Just in awe of a superior technology.

  8. Hi Steve T,

    I appreciate your honesty, much respect!.

  9. Hi Steve T,

    RE: Adamski’s ‘Scout Craft’ picture.

    You will no doubt be aware of the picture of an ‘Adamski type craft’, taken by Stephen Darbishire at Coniston, Cumbria in Feb 1954, & he described it as, ‘A solid metal looking thing, with a dome, portholes, & three humps or landing domes underneath. In the centre the underneath was darker and pointed like a cone’.

    As you’ve read Adamski’s ‘musings’, you will have read that Adamski gave one of the ‘spacemen’ a film holder (that he used to get the pictures) as ‘a gift’, & on the 13th Dec 1952, the film holder was returned to him,(by the same or similar saucer) & the original photograph had been removed, & in it’s place was proved to be some ‘writing’, plus a drawing of an ‘eye shaped device’.

    In 1963, Marcel Homet, an explorer & archaeologist, with over a dozen books to his credit, published a book about his exploration in Amozonia entitled ‘Sons of sun’, & in the back of the book Homet gives a set of inscription’s that he says he found in his expedition, together with an almost exact replica of the ‘eye shaped devise’ that appeared in Adamski’s film holder.

    You could of course speculate that Homet ‘borrowed’ the Adamski’s glyphs to add some mystery to his book, in a letter dated 7th Sept 1961, to a UFO researcher, Miss Rey d’Aquilla, Homet concludes, ‘With regards to the oval design, which I have published
    in ‘the suns of sun’ I have discovered in the neighbourhood of the
    Pedra Pintada (Painted Rock) Amozonia. The other ‘graffiti’
    surrounding the oval have also been discovered by me in the same area, but they have been very much effaces through the effects of time(which in fact, by the way, denotes an age of about 12/14000 years BC) so much so that, if I had not seen them in ‘Flying Saucers Have landed’, published by Adamski, I would not have paid any particular attention to them’.

    So Steve, with an ‘open mind’, is it beyond the realms of possibility’s that there is a ‘connection’ from this tiny dot in space that we live on, & the great ‘unknown’ that is the universe out there?.

  10. “So Steve, with an ‘open mind’, is it beyond the realms of possibility’s that there is a ‘connection’ from this tiny dot in space that we live on, & the great ‘unknown’ that is the universe out there?.”

    You’ve asked this question before, and I gave you an answer then: yes, of course there is. The opposite is also true, as accepting a possibilty, as you and I both have, means also accepting that there might be none at all. You constantly misinterpret my having an open mind as the opposite: I’m not willing to jump on the ‘ooh fast moving lights in the sky, must be aliens’ bandwagon, and I don’t take the finding of similar shapes and heiroglyphs in different places as evidence of alien intrusion into our lives years ago. Primitive art, by its very nature, uses shapes and images that we would be familiar with. The above is all very well, but there’s absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Adamski was anything other than a clever conman.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.