Triangle UFO over UK? Drone? Meteor?

[seeder]

UFO spotted in sky above Mounts Bay

http://www.westbrito...tail/story.html

eta source

Edited February 4, 2014 by seeder

[Space Commander Travis]

Drones: the new Swamp Gas. Anyway, it certainly looks like something entering the atmosphere, doesn't it, so it can't be a uFO*, so I'd expect Meteor. Although according to the picture, it's in front of, i.e. below, the clouds. Would that be likely?

* since no UFOs have ever been seen entering the atmosphere, as we know

Edited February 4, 2014 by Colonel Rhubarb

[qxcontinuum]

That is not a rounded shape object normally meteorites should look like. It is a triangle.

[keithisco]

That is not a rounded shape object normally meteorites should look like. It is a triangle.

Firstly it is not a meteorite, it is a meteor, and secondly a meteor can be any shape

[JesseCuster]

That is not a rounded shape object normally meteorites should look like. It is a triangle.

It's a vaguely triangular looking object from the direction it was photographed at. That's all that can be said. There's nowhere near enough detail in the photo to accurately determine just how close to triangular it is. It just looks like a blob to me given the lack of detail available.

What makes you think meteorites should be rounded shaped?

Also, the "cleaned up" version shown on the website is bunk. It's just the typical "enhanced" nonsense we see where someone has cranked up the contrast/brightness/saturation/color levels/whatever etc. thinking that the result somehow offers insight into a photo.

Edited February 4, 2014 by JesseCuster

[qxcontinuum]

It's a vaguely triangular looking object from the direction it was photographed at. That's all that can be said. There's nowhere near enough detail in the photo to accurately determine just how close to triangular it is. It just looks like a blob to me given the lack of detail available.

What makes you think meteorites should be rounded shaped?

Physics. Any relatively smaller item edge shaped entering in the atmosphere will be reshaped by speed and friction forces. The edges will burn out dissolving first in the upper atmosphere ending up in relatively round shape in the lower atmosphere.

Edited February 4, 2014 by qxcontinuum

[Dumpnuts]

Physics. Any relatively smaller item edge shaped entering in the atmosphere will be reshaped by speed and friction forces. The edges will burn out dissolving first in the upper atmosphere ending up in relatively round shape in the lower atmosphere.

You mean like this?

or this?

or maybe this?!

I think your physics textbook has lied to you.

[qxcontinuum]

is that one of those allegedly meteorites that supposedly fallen on earth a few million years ago?

[Dumpnuts]

Oh Jeebus you're one of "those" people.

[qxcontinuum]

sorry man, I stopped believing in geological and historic fairy tales a while ago.

[Sweetpumper]

Can't tell much from that picture.

[JesseCuster]

Physics. Any relatively smaller item edge shaped entering in the atmosphere will be reshaped by speed and friction forces. The edges will burn out dissolving first in the upper atmosphere ending up in relatively round shape in the lower atmosphere.

Have you ever seen a meteorite?

[qxcontinuum]

Have you ever seen a meteorite?

Never a real one that has fallen recently.

[Dumpnuts]

sorry man, I stopped believing in geological and historic fairy tales a while ago.

I'm just curious. What exactly have you read within the realm of geology, history or physics, that has brought to this Grimm conclusion? Edited February 4, 2014 by DumpsterJesus

[JesseCuster]

I'm just curious. What exactly have you read within the realm of geology, history or physics, that has brought to this Grimm conclusion?

qxcontinuum doesn't believe in geology or history.

But if NASA says that their geologists have evidence of past water flowing on Mars, he's all over that like a fly on ****.

Geology is fairy tales until it says something he wants to believe.

[JesseCuster]

Never a real one that has fallen recently.

Here's one that has fallen recently.

It's the remains of the Russian meteorite from last year. Doesn't look very rounded to me. In fact it's very angular and not round at all.

Edited February 4, 2014 by JesseCuster

[qxcontinuum]

I'm just curious. What exactly have you read within the realm of geology, history or physics, that has brought to this Grimm conclusion?

on this subject, a few thousent or millions years old meteorite is corroded, eroded or influenced by numerous factors to such extent that is no longer in its initial shape.

[qxcontinuum]

Here's one that has fallen recently.

It's the remains of the Russian meteorite from last year. Doesn't look very rounded to me. In fact it's very angular and not round at all.

when i am saying round shape I am not referring to a circle obviously. As you can see here there are no sharp edges and this is far from a triangular shape. It is much close to round. That is exactly what I am talking about, Thanks for this pic!

[Iron_Lotus]

oh boy you really do live in your own fantasy world

[JesseCuster]

when i am saying round shape I am not referring to a circle obviously. As you can see here there are no sharp edges and this is far from a triangular shape. It is much close to round. That is exactly what I am talking about, Thanks for this pic!

I think you should see an optician if you think that meteorite is round.

Here's a better pic:

Round? No sharp edges? Interestingly, from this angle it's almost triangle shaped. How about that?

Now look at the fuzzy orange blob in the OP and tell me where you can see sharp edges. Here's it blown up for your convenience:

That's your idea of an object with sharp edges and the meteorite above is a round object with no sharp edges?

If you really think that, then you are beyond reason.

PS, I'm not saying that the OP object is a meteor, just that qxcontinuum is clearly making no sense whatsoever and the facts are clearly stacked up against his bizarre theory.

Edited February 4, 2014 by JesseCuster

[qxcontinuum]

PS, I'm not saying that the OP object is a meteor....

so then we're both on the same agreement, what is the point of argumentation anyway...

Edited February 4, 2014 by qxcontinuum

[DecoNoir]

so then we're both on the same agreement, what is the point of argumentation anyway...

That your understanding of geology, physics, and meteors is severely lacking. Thus letting casual forum readers have some idea as to just what conclusions are more likely.

[JesseCuster]

so then we're both on the same agreement, what is the point of argumentation anyway...

No, we're not in agreement. When I say that I'm not saying it's a meteor, I merely meaning that I am not asserting that to be true, I'm also not saying it's false. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I'm not making either claim. You are however claiming it isn't a meteor based upon some very sloppy reasoning not backed up by anything resembling facts.

Anything to say about the pics I posted and my above post?

Still think the object in the OP is triangular with sharp edges and thus can't be a meteor because meteors become rounded by the earth's atmosphere and thus don't resemble angular objects with sharp edges, despite the evidence of the photos above?

Edited February 4, 2014 by JesseCuster

[qxcontinuum]

Anything to say about the pics I posted and my above post?

That is a freaking expensive rock! They are selling small chunks of it on eBay. They are ranging between a few hundreds to a few thou-sent. Wondering how much did they hammer it down?

[Sakari]

Drones: the new Swamp Gas.

Because no way could we make drones that could be mis-identified as alien.....No way....We do not have that technology.