zoser Posted November 15, 2012 Author #4251 Share Posted November 15, 2012 (edited) Those pics are very similar other than that the top one has 5 lights while the others have 4. Do you think that could be because of the angle the pictures were taken at? Quite possible I just don;t know. I'm caught by the arc that the lights make. That must be significant. That these photo's are not causing some comment I find surprising. They certainly interest me. What's your view? Edited November 15, 2012 by zoser 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synchronomy Posted November 15, 2012 #4252 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Quite possible I just don;t know. I'm caught by the arc that the lights make. That must be significant. That these photo's are not causing some comment I find surprising. They certainly interest me. What's your view? The fact that I'm not commenting isn't reflective of the thought and research I'm putting into this. Not just these ones, the ETH in general. It's on my mind a lot. I'd like to see the Denbigh dude post the rest of his minutes of video about this. He hasn't even responded to my request. Boony (I believe) added a comment to the video on Youtube as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReaperS_ParadoX Posted November 15, 2012 #4253 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Quite possible I just don;t know. I'm caught by the arc that the lights make. That must be significant. That these photo's are not causing some comment I find surprising. They certainly interest me. What's your view? Honostly Zoser I dont know maybe If the shape of what these lights are coming from was more defined I would have a better Idea of what they could be, but the fact that basically the same thing showed up in each of these three different places does cause me to question it. I mean something definately is going on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 15, 2012 Author #4254 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Honostly Zoser I dont know maybe If the shape of what these lights are coming from was more defined I would have a better Idea of what they could be, but the fact that basically the same thing showed up in each of these three different places does cause me to question it. I mean something definately is going on Yes I agree it's puzzling that we have no defined shape; I recall that One of the Yuma witnesses did describe a metallic object. I posted their testimonies a few posts back. It's nothing conventional I agree. At a stretching could imagine it belonging to the black military. Why would they chose to hang out in a quiet welsh village? Tomorrow I'll do a check on Fraserburgh to see if it lies near an RAF base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synchronomy Posted November 15, 2012 #4255 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Yes I agree it's puzzling that we have no defined shape; I recall that One of the Yuma witnesses did describe a metallic object. I posted their testimonies a few posts back. It's nothing conventional I agree. At a stretching could imagine it belonging to the black military. Why would they chose to hang out in a quiet welsh village? Tomorrow I'll do a check on Fraserburgh to see if it lies near an RAF base. It probably wouldn't even have to be near an RAF base. In my younger years I spent a lot of time in the Northeast of Scotland. The whole countryside is used for RAF low-level training. You could be in the midst of nowhere and a couple, sometimes three or four, fighters would tear through a valley playing cat and mouse. They would often fly so low I swear you could count the rivets. A likely source could be: http://www.raf.mod.uk/raflossiemouth/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 16, 2012 Author #4256 Share Posted November 16, 2012 The fact that I'm not commenting isn't reflective of the thought and research I'm putting into this. Not just these ones, the ETH in general. It's on my mind a lot. I'd like to see the Denbigh dude post the rest of his minutes of video about this. He hasn't even responded to my request. Boony (I believe) added a comment to the video on Youtube as well. Nice one Synch. It's good to see it being taken seriously because something is undoubtedly at play. The three cases cannot be taken lightly. I also think a good Strategy would be to see if there are any other similar sightings that show the same characteristics. I'll make this a priority for this evening. Be back later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 16, 2012 Author #4257 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Lake Okeechobee Florida 2006 Here is what I believe is the same object again. Filmed some years earlier than the other footage. Interesting that at around 2:45 the object blinks out and a few seconds later an airliner makes a pass. Did the UFO blink out because it was coming? See what you think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIrfax0hlw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 16, 2012 Author #4258 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Otway North Carolina - Sept 2012 Another candidate? At 3:15 on the following youtube video: Best UFO Sightings Of September 2012, AFO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 16, 2012 Author #4259 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Not related to the above sightings, but perhaps the most intriguing footage I have ever seen; so much so that one wonders if it may be a hoax. Not sure what to think. No reference as to time or place. 4:34 on the following clip: Best UFO Sightings November 2012 (Compilation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted November 16, 2012 #4260 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Lake Okeechobee Florida 2006 Here is what I believe is the same object again. Filmed some years earlier than the other footage. Interesting that at around 2:45 the object blinks out and a few seconds later an airliner makes a pass. Did the UFO blink out because it was coming? See what you think: [media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIrfax0hlw[/media] That is interesting, I must admit. One of the comments claims to argue that it's actually New Zealand, and it was ripped off, but I couldn't possibly say. And wherever it came from, does that mean that it was Faked? if not, what might it be? If it actually is real, then the simple shouts of "Plane, retard" (as another of the comments says) wouldn't seem very likely. Why does it stay in the same spot for so long? It is interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 16, 2012 Author #4261 Share Posted November 16, 2012 That is interesting, I must admit. One of the comments claims to argue that it's actually New Zealand, and it was ripped off, but I couldn't possibly say. And wherever it came from, does that mean that it was Faked? if not, what might it be? If it actually is real, then the simple shouts of "Plane, retard" (as another of the comments says) wouldn't seem very likely. Why does it stay in the same spot for so long? It is interesting. I agree it's fascinating. I think that the plane's appearance is very interesting and if nothing it shows that the unknown object and the plane are not one and the same. The plane is clearly flying in a different direction and it's lights are very dim by comparison, The original object could not have made such a dramatic change in direction. I'm struck by the similarity with the other sightings too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted November 16, 2012 #4262 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Just looked like a plane making a banking maneuver to me, after which the lights would obviously look different because they aren't shining in the same direction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1963 Posted November 17, 2012 #4263 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) Just looked like a plane making a banking maneuver to me, after which the lights would obviously look different because they aren't shining in the same direction... At the risk of being labelled a "Sceptic" again....this is a video that we discussed on another forum , and agreed with your assessment Boony! ...erm...!..hope Zoser doesn't see this! Cheers buddy. Edited November 17, 2012 by 1963 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synchronomy Posted November 17, 2012 #4264 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Not related to the above sightings, but perhaps the most intriguing footage I have ever seen; so much so that one wonders if it may be a hoax. Not sure what to think. No reference as to time or place. 4:34 on the following clip: Best UFO Sightings November 2012 (Compilation) That just looks like the video was taken through a window and it's a reflection on the glass. Don't give much attention to these "Best UFO Sightings" videos...there's a new one every month. Most of them are easily explained such as the one at 3:40 of this video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted November 17, 2012 #4265 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Just looked like a plane making a banking maneuver to me, after which the lights would obviously look different because they aren't shining in the same direction... i agree that the winking lights at either extremity might suggest that, but Can you explain why it seems to stay in the same place for a very long time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 17, 2012 Author #4266 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) At the risk of being labelled a "Sceptic" again....this is a video that we discussed on another forum , and agreed with your assessment Boony! ...erm...!..hope Zoser doesn't see this! Cheers buddy. Doesn't mean that the assessment is correct does it? Impossible for an airliner to bank as quickly as that. A fighter jet would struggle to make that kind of manoeuvre. Also no one has addressed the issue of the row of lights. Where does one find an array like that on an airliner. Finally the point from Mr Omsk; why did it remain in one position for so long with no apparent diminishment of intensity? Finally Finally; there is the similarity between this and the other sightings (Fraserburgh, Denbigh, Yuma etc). I suggest you take these points back to 'the other forum' and start over. Edited November 17, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 17, 2012 Author #4267 Share Posted November 17, 2012 That just looks like the video was taken through a window and it's a reflection on the glass. Don't give much attention to these "Best UFO Sightings" videos...there's a new one every month. Most of them are easily explained such as the one at 3:40 of this video. I'm really not with you there Synch. I cannot see how this could be a reflection. It's either something unexplainable or an outright hoax (cgi). My suggestion would be the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 17, 2012 Author #4268 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) I just found this: A standard rate turn is defined to be three degrees per second. This is what ATC expects when you’re on an instrument clearance. It is also called a two-minute turn, because at that rate it takes two minutes to make a complete 360∘ turn. http://www.av8n.com/...m/maneuver.html I looked at the footage again and timed the transition (if indeed it was a transition) and at the very maximum arrived at 15 seconds. More likely 10-12. According to the above guideline it should take around 30 seconds. As I thought an air liner cannot do this (we all knew that really didn't we chaps?) Plus one minute the object is invisible, the next we have an airliner where we see it's total profile. The transition is not actually visible. No my hypothesis is that what ever it was more likely it disappeared seeing that the airliner was approaching. Edited November 17, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted November 17, 2012 #4269 Share Posted November 17, 2012 i agree that the winking lights at either extremity might suggest that, but Can you explain why it seems to stay in the same place for a very long time? I'd have to watch the footage again to get the precise frame of reference you're mentioning here, but from a general standpoint of perspective it is pretty easy to explain. When an aircraft is flying directly toward you or directly away from you, it can appear as though it is hovering in place simply because you don't see any, or perhaps very little, lateral motion. This optical illusion is accentuated when an aircraft is very far away and all you can see are it's running and/or landing lights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted November 17, 2012 #4270 Share Posted November 17, 2012 I'd have to watch the footage again to get the precise frame of reference you're mentioning here, but from a general standpoint of perspective it is pretty easy to explain. When an aircraft is flying directly toward you or directly away from you, it can appear as though it is hovering in place simply because you don't see any, or perhaps very little, lateral motion. This optical illusion is accentuated when an aircraft is very far away and all you can see are it's running and/or landing lights. I know that, but if anything in the viedo is to be believed, it seems to stay in one spot for much longer than that without seeming to move at all. And while the lights, at a distance, might be landing lights, it is true, in the blow-up (if that is the actual thing), they seem to look less like landing lights, don't they? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted November 17, 2012 #4271 Share Posted November 17, 2012 I know that, but if anything in the viedo is to be believed, it seems to stay in one spot for much longer than that without seeming to move at all. And while the lights, at a distance, might be landing lights, it is true, in the blow-up (if that is the actual thing), they seem to look less like landing lights, don't they? I just watched it again and honestly I don't think there is any point where it stays in one spot. As for the lights in the blow-up, they are all blurry and out of focus, but they do look like how I would expect aircraft lights to appear under those conditions, and as the footage continues you can see the blinking lights which would be on the wing tips. Seems to be very obvious to me that this is just an airplane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted November 17, 2012 #4272 Share Posted November 17, 2012 I just found this: A standard rate turn is defined to be three degrees per second. This is what ATC expects when you’re on an instrument clearance. It is also called a two-minute turn, because at that rate it takes two minutes to make a complete 360∘ turn. http://www.av8n.com/...m/maneuver.html I looked at the footage again and timed the transition (if indeed it was a transition) and at the very maximum arrived at 15 seconds. More likely 10-12. According to the above guideline it should take around 30 seconds. As I thought an air liner cannot do this (we all knew that really didn't we chaps?) Plus one minute the object is invisible, the next we have an airliner where we see it's total profile. The transition is not actually visible. No my hypothesis is that what ever it was more likely it disappeared seeing that the airliner was approaching. First of all, we don't know the make and model of this aircraft and capable turn rates can vary widely. Secondly, just because a standard rate of turn is defined, it does not mean that an aircraft is incapable of turning at a faster rate. Perhaps one of our resident pilots will pipe in with more detail, though I wouldn't be surprised if they would find the exercise a waste of time. Thirdly, I doubt if your timing is even accurate, as it begins to bank between 2:20 and 2:25 in the video (noted by the beginning of the tilt), at 2:38 the video looks down, and when at about 2:49 he re-acquires it, the full turn hasn't even been completed yet. It isn't until about 3:10 that we can clearly see that it is about perpendicular to the camera POV. Even if we shave off both ends and say the maneuver starts at about 2:30 and finishes at about 3:00, we're well within the range of your link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 17, 2012 Author #4273 Share Posted November 17, 2012 First of all, we don't know the make and model of this aircraft and capable turn rates can vary widely. It's an airliner! It's bound not to be one of the fastest at making a right angled turn. Secondly, just because a standard rate of turn is defined, it does not mean that an aircraft is incapable of turning at a faster rate. Perhaps one of our resident pilots will pipe in with more detail, though I wouldn't be surprised if they would find the exercise a waste of time. You still haven't answered the other points in my last post. I'm not saying you have to, but at least to acknowledge them as good points would be appreciated. Thirdly, I doubt if your timing is even accurate, as it begins to bank between 2:20 and 2:25 in the video (noted by the beginning of the tilt), at 2:38 the video looks down, and when at about 2:49 he re-acquires it, the full turn hasn't even been completed yet. It isn't until about 3:10 that we can clearly see that it is about perpendicular to the camera POV. Even if we shave off both ends and say the maneuver starts at about 2:30 and finishes at about 3:00, we're well within the range of your link. No. It begins it's banking at 2:38. At 2:50 we clearly see the full profile of the airliner. It is already travelling in that plane (horizontal to the viewer). I totally disagree with your interpretation of the clip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted November 17, 2012 Author #4274 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) First of all, we don't know the make and model of this aircraft and capable turn rates can vary widely. Secondly, just because a standard rate of turn is defined, it does not mean that an aircraft is incapable of turning at a faster rate. Perhaps one of our resident pilots will pipe in with more detail, though I wouldn't be surprised if they would find the exercise a waste of time. Thirdly, I doubt if your timing is even accurate, as it begins to bank between 2:20 and 2:25 in the video (noted by the beginning of the tilt), at 2:38 the video looks down, and when at about 2:49 he re-acquires it, the full turn hasn't even been completed yet. It isn't until about 3:10 that we can clearly see that it is about perpendicular to the camera POV. Even if we shave off both ends and say the maneuver starts at about 2:30 and finishes at about 3:00, we're well within the range of your link. Just to make the biggest criticism of all with the airliner banking hypothesis; what are the bright lights? Are they supposed to be the jet engines exhaust flames or something? Is that normal? When we see the airliner in full profile we only see tiny flashing lights. Where did the lights go? Edited November 17, 2012 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted November 17, 2012 #4275 Share Posted November 17, 2012 I'd have to watch the footage again to get the precise frame of reference you're mentioning here, but from a general standpoint of perspective it is pretty easy to explain. When an aircraft is flying directly toward you or directly away from you, it can appear as though it is hovering in place simply because you don't see any, or perhaps very little, lateral motion. This optical illusion is accentuated when an aircraft is very far away and all you can see are it's running and/or landing lights. I just watched it again and honestly I don't think there is any point where it stays in one spot. As for the lights in the blow-up, they are all blurry and out of focus, but they do look like how I would expect aircraft lights to appear under those conditions, and as the footage continues you can see the blinking lights which would be on the wing tips. Seems to be very obvious to me that this is just an airplane. There's a very clear difference to the airliner that goes past later on, though. That's easily identifiable, and the Object really doesn't look as if it's moving at all. I really don't think, if it is real, that Plane or Aircraft is an adequate explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now