Oban – Mull ferry, Sound of Mull, Scotland-25th September 2013

Location of Sighting: Oban – Mull ferry, Sound of Mull, Scotland
Date of Sighting: 25/09/2013
Time: 10.30am
Witness Name: E Alexander

Witness Statement: While travelling on a ferry from Oban to Mull my wife and I saw a small ball like object travel across the water between Isle of Mull and the Scottish mainland in approximately 2 – 3seconds. The distance travelled would be approximately 10miles. The object then went behind some clouds and reappeared shooting in our direction before stopping and diving into the Sound of Mull and not reappearing. A splash was visible as it submerged.

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: October 8, 2013 — 10:10 pm

41 Comments

Add a Comment
  1. Chris, many thanks. This is exactly the reply I expected from you.

    The question is behavioural. Your answer provides me with a very clear picture of your cognitive abilities and reactions which link directly into the comments you post on this site.

    If something impacted with the water in the Sound of Mull or off Oban, it would have been heard for miles underwater. If it was witnessed the impact could have been corroborated.

  2. Reality, although Chris is erudite in his defence of the mythology of flying saucers, he is clearly an auto-believer ( copyright Grumpy Old Bob ), therefore will not have any truck with logic which will destroy his beliefs. Hence why he refused to respond to your point re said object allegedly hitting the water. For your information, Chris, I do have an interest in the subject. I’m just not so easily persuaded.

  3. When I saw a sphere from an aircraft over Staffordshire nearly 20 years ago, I’m afraid I couldn’t bring myself to report it to the pilot or anyone else in authority. I explained the reaons for that in my report – https://www.uk-ufo.co.uk/burton-on-trent-staffordshire-july-15-1994/
    Ideally, I should have said something. It would have been ‘responsible’ to do that, and it might have given weight (or otherwise) to my report. I regret keeping it to myself.
    In reality, however, we’re all different, and we react differently in different situations.
    I find E Alexander’s report fascinating and credible. I don’t have any explanation for it, any more than I have one for what I saw. Sometimes we have to accept that things are as they are (or appear to be), even if they defy all reason.

  4. Hi Steve T,

    If your stance is, ‘9 alien space craft, or something more earthly in origin? I know which I prefer’, I totally respect that, however, Kenneth Arnold said that the objects didn’t ‘look like geese’, he said there flight reminded him of geese in flight in that that they were in ‘echelon formation’ i.e., in the formation of a ‘v’. And as you know, he also likened the objects movement to a ‘saucer skimming across the water’ in a up & down movement, I’ve never seen geese fly in that fashion, & I’ve never read that Arnold thought he was looking at geese.

    Regarding the USAF’s ‘flying wing’, this aircraft
    (as good looking as it was), was critically unstable in flight, & aircraft manufacturers’ will only produce one or two prototype versions, to test out it’s viability ‘off drawing board’.

  5. Hi Gary,

    You say you have an ‘interest’ in this phenomenon, but, with respect, your ‘interest’ lies in the negative, were as mine lies in the ‘positive’.

    This terminology ‘auto believer’, is nothing short of insulting, because it implies that I’m devoid of independent thought, & that I’m unable to look at each & every sighting in a rationale/objective way & that I have preconceived ideas, & will always ‘believe’ that all these sightings are ‘alien’ no matter what anybody else says, is that because unlike you, I’m ‘easily persuaded’.

    Of course I could always throw it back to you & say you are an
    ‘auto believer’ in that there’s nothing going on that can’t be ‘explained’, but, that would be just insulting ;-).

    I have no wish to respond to ‘Reality’, I’m not getting involved with likely ‘scenario’s’.

  6. Gary and Stephen, I take your points. I take safety and defence in the air and at sea very seriously.

    I rest my case.

  7. Chris,

    I didn’t say Arnold said he thought he was looking at geese; rather, he admitted it was a possibility. As for flying wing aircraft, there have been many under development across the years, and they led directly to such craft as the F117. Who’s to say these were merely prototypes? Do you know how many F117’s were built and flown before we knew about them?

    The problem with this subject is that there are many ways to approach it; surely, with something ‘unknown’, the best way is to look for the likely rather than the unlikely, first? I know it’s a drum I keep banging, but it simply amazes me that, when seeing lights in the sky, people are so easily convinced its aliens, when there is no evidence they exist. Put it this way: if you were walking down the street and passed a 7-foot tall, hairy creature with claws, walking on two feet, would you assume it’s a werewolf, or a bloke in a suit?

  8. Chris, I can’t recall one instance when you have looked for the ordinary. Maybe I’ve just missed it.

    The reason I take the stance that I do is simple. Having been a keen walker and bird watcher, together with an almost fanatical interest in military aircraft, which means I have spent a great deal of time looking at the skies; add to this many holiday flights whiling away the time looking across vast expanses of space, I have seen precisely nothing inexplicable.

    If I’ve touched a nerve calling you an auto-believer then there’s still hope for you 😉

  9. Hi Steve T,

    ‘but it simply amazes me that, when seeing lights in the sky, people are so easily convinced its aliens’.

    I personally don’t think that’s the case, people are asking for a rationale explanation as to what they’ve seen. And commenters will
    respond, depending on their viewpoint, with an explanation.

    With the greatest respect, commenters on sightings do not posses
    any pre ordained ‘knowledge’ or ‘insight’ into the phenomenon any more than Joe Bloggs does, just an interpretation, based on there ‘belief system’.

    One thing that never ceases to amaze me is the sheer arrogance of
    some commenters, were a poster might say, ‘defo not a lantern, plane’ ect, and a commenter will respond with ‘lantern ect, is that because they know better?.

    Hi Gary,

    There’s two hopes for me, & one of them is Bob 😉

    Ce le vie!

  10. Hi Gary,

    As the Carly Simon song goes, ‘this song isn’t about you’ ;-).

    Though you might be a keen ‘sky watcher’ over the years, & observed ‘precisely nothing inexplicable’, that is at odds with
    the people who report these sightings & are doing the most mundane things, dog walking, having a smoke outside, or any random thing you can think of.

    And what they have observed, appears, (on the face of it), to defy any ‘rationale explanation’, which brings them to this great site, in the hope of resolving the question they have
    for a reasonable logical answer as to what’s been observed.

    I think it’s fair to say, you & me are on opposite sides of the fence, & there is no ‘middle ground’ that we could agree on, I do however, understand & respect your views.

  11. Steve T. Regarding the 7ft hairy creature, you can find this being in the Area 51 of the UK – Sunderland. This is 100 per cent true folks.

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.