Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Genuine ufos midlothian and Dumfries & Gallow


johncbdg

Recommended Posts

genuine ufo footage from midlothian Scotland and one from Dumfries & Galloway

Some footage of the ufos from Midlothian and one from Dumfries & Galloway Scotland some crazy but genuine ufo sightings that i caught i do hope you enjoy this video,first two are of iridium flares often mistaken for ufos the rest are still unkowns.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

Edited by johncbdg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Thanks for the intro. Not much to see. It's dots. Get some binoculars and see what is out there.

We have telescopes NV Cams everything one needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, stereologist said:

Thanks for the intro. Not much to see. It's dots. Get some binoculars and see what is out there.

Further to this, has anyone used or thought of using a theodolite-camera or TC app?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Further to this, has anyone used or thought of using a theodolite-camera or TC app?

Dunno about TC's, but there is simply no substitute for 'big glass' (ie a large front element) when you are working at high magnification and low light.

For young people with healthy eyes, that means 7x (mag) 50mm (lens diameter) binoculars (that's a good combo for eyes with good pupil dilation).

For older folks like me, 10x50's are good (more magnification but our eyes don't dilate as well..)

For photographers, similarly big lenses are best, and on big cameras, eg an 12Mp+ DSLR or 'superzoom' camera at a minimum.

For photographers who obsess about UFO's, a good, 24Mp+ full frame DSLR would be the minimum I would recommend.

FTR - I'm in between those last two..  And in the near future I plan to show off the capabilities of a quite reasonably priced DSLR, using commercial jet aircraft at various distances filmed at dusk and night.  Perhaps I should link to some of john's stuff then for a comparison... :)

 

Now, the OP, johncbdg, claims to be an enthusiast, and yet, despite not being poor and having had many years worth of advice from me and others, still uses a potato camera.  And uses it badly - there are many techniques that can be applied that can help with potato-cam footage.  John has ignored those suggestions in the same spirit as his postings, which are lazy (almost never explains the video content) and of bloody awful quality.   Using decent techniques and a even a half-decent camera, we/he could almost certainly easily identify all these sad UFO's in the dreck he posts.  But johncbdg obviously does NOT want that outcome.

Please don't encourage him by clicking on his videos.  He doesn't listen to the answers anyway.

Oh, and john.. look up the word 'genuine'.  Then look up the word 'Unidentified'.  Do you see the multiple problems?

And furthermore - have you ever jumped into your car and driven towards the UFO, to see where it eventually goes and what happens after you (conveniently) stop filming?  If not, why not?  If so, show us that footage...

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Dunno about TC's, but there is simply no substitute for 'big glass' (ie a large front element) when you are working at high magnification and low light.

For young people with healthy eyes, that means 7x (mag) 50mm (lens diameter) binoculars (that's a good combo for eyes with good pupil dilation).

For older folks like me, 10x50's are good (more magnification but our eyes don't dilate as well..)

For photographers, similarly big lenses are best, and on big cameras, eg an 12Mp+ DSLR or 'superzoom' camera at a minimum.

For photographers who obsess about UFO's, a good, 24Mp+ full frame DSLR would be the minimum I would recommend.

FTR - I'm in between those last two..  And in the near future I plan to show off the capabilities of a quite reasonably priced DSLR, using commercial jet aircraft at various distances filmed at dusk and night.  Perhaps I should link to some of john's stuff then for a comparison... :)

 

Now, the OP, johncbdg, claims to be an enthusiast, and yet, despite not being poor and having had many years worth of advice from me and others, still uses a potato camera.  And uses it badly - there are many techniques that can be applied that can help with potato-cam footage.  John has ignored those suggestions in the same spirit as his postings, which are lazy (almost never explains the video content) and of bloody awful quality.   Using decent techniques and a even a half-decent camera, we/he could almost certainly easily identify all these sad UFO's in the dreck he posts.  But johncbdg obviously does NOT want that outcome.

...

@ChrLzs,

Have you put all this information in a blog?

Further to the theodolite question - it looks like there are a few apps with that provide an overlay that gives information on the orientation of the phone.  Some seem to even cater for UFO activity.  I haven't found an app that can take video too.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

@ChrLzs,

Have you put all this information in a blog?

Nah, I'm not really a bloggy type.  But when it comes to good photography, you won't shut me up and I'm happy to repeat the information - so if John (or anyone) actually engaged, I'd be happy to go through this stuff (all over again) and help improve their imagery.  It's best if they tell me about their equipment, budget and what they wish to achieve, so I can give 'customised' and thus more useful information.  But John doesn't engage or listen - and just look at the stuff that he is presenting above - he claims the distant lights behind the airliners are 'genuine', and yet you can see they move at the right speeds for aircraft, no useful detail is resolved other than the lights flicker at the exact the same rate as aircraft strobes.  Gee, those aliens (or whatever) are sooooooooooooo clever - they make their craft look *exactly* like aircraft do at a distance.

What a phenomenal waste of time.

16 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Further to the theodolite question - it looks like there are a few apps with that provide an overlay that gives information on the orientation of the phone.  Some seem to even cater for UFO activity.  I haven't found an app that can take video too.

While location and direction information is good, in general terms mobile phones (unless you spend a fortune on them) are simply not useful for taking pictures of small things that are far away.  If the objects were closer (which, obviously, they are to others..) they will be seen to be aircraft or other similar mundane objects, which is why it's only people like john who bother to film them and then cry that the sky is falling, based on the simple and obvious fact that they are too far away to be resolved and identified..

Most of us get that...  It's not rocket science.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/08/2018 at 5:59 AM, ChrLzs said:

Dunno about TC's, but there is simply no substitute for 'big glass' (ie a large front element) when you are working at high magnification and low light.

For young people with healthy eyes, that means 7x (mag) 50mm (lens diameter) binoculars (that's a good combo for eyes with good pupil dilation).

For older folks like me, 10x50's are good (more magnification but our eyes don't dilate as well..)

For photographers, similarly big lenses are best, and on big cameras, eg an 12Mp+ DSLR or 'superzoom' camera at a minimum.

For photographers who obsess about UFO's, a good, 24Mp+ full frame DSLR would be the minimum I would recommend.

FTR - I'm in between those last two..  And in the near future I plan to show off the capabilities of a quite reasonably priced DSLR, using commercial jet aircraft at various distances filmed at dusk and night.  Perhaps I should link to some of john's stuff then for a comparison... :)

 

Now, the OP, johncbdg, claims to be an enthusiast, and yet, despite not being poor and having had many years worth of advice from me and others, still uses a potato camera.  And uses it badly - there are many techniques that can be applied that can help with potato-cam footage.  John has ignored those suggestions in the same spirit as his postings, which are lazy (almost never explains the video content) and of bloody awful quality.   Using decent techniques and a even a half-decent camera, we/he could almost certainly easily identify all these sad UFO's in the dreck he posts.  But johncbdg obviously does NOT want that outcome.

Please don't encourage him by clicking on his videos.  He doesn't listen to the answers anyway.

Oh, and john.. look up the word 'genuine'.  Then look up the word 'Unidentified'.  Do you see the multiple problems?

And furthermore - have you ever jumped into your car and driven towards the UFO, to see where it eventually goes and what happens after you (conveniently) stop filming?  If not, why not?  If so, show us that footage...

Some of the equipment we use for Skywatching. Nikon COOLPIX P900 Digital Camera Nikon D5300 Digital SLR Camera Nikon D3200 Digital SLR Camera Pulsar Recon 550R - Night Vision Monocular Rongland NV-760D+ Infrared Night Vision IR Monocular Telescopes 7x60 Celestron NexStar 5 SE Computerised GoTo Astronomy Telescope Celestron PowerSeeker 114EQ Reflector Telescope 675x Magnification,But your input is worthless another one who hides behind Anonymous put your name to it then we will talk,but keep posting and keep my posts to top of the message board thank you.

Do not be a Anonymous show every one who you are and back up what you say in the real world when you are ready or no one is listening,i can meet you on facebook for a head to head that way we both can have a say with nothing to hide it is just how it should be nowadays.

Unless your mum is not going let you out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worth noting that thesde are not recent videos - the aircraft one, at least, was taken in May 2009

https://www.scotsman.com/news/jackie-s-ufo-youtube-film-hits-heights-1-1207467

In any case, I would guess the first bit of footage shows the ISS whilst the aircraft is probably been buzzed by a midge close to the camera.  The "spinning object" is probably a star.  Or maybe Venus.  And the last one is a blurry out of focus white thing that could be anything from an aircraft to a bird to the Moon (unless it's meant to be the same object as #3 in which I would go with Venus.)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can not see a video but hey i love you Guys a whole lot of anonymous posters trying to investigate ufo sightings and footage that is not there and saying its me lol....

Hey keep the good work keep me at the top of ufo board i love it up there, hey facebook is a good place to see whos who i get the feeling i know some of you already?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Essan said:

Worth noting that thesde are not recent videos - the aircraft one, at least, was taken in May 2009

https://www.scotsman.com/news/jackie-s-ufo-youtube-film-hits-heights-1-1207467

In any case, I would guess the first bit of footage shows the ISS whilst the aircraft is probably been buzzed by a midge close to the camera.  The "spinning object" is probably a star.  Or maybe Venus.  And the last one is a blurry out of focus white thing that could be anything from an aircraft to a bird to the Moon (unless it's meant to be the same object as #3 in which I would go with Venus.)

Now tell me you are joking for you are looking silly here,Look it states what year it was and as for the ISS read on it tells what the first clips are shall i tell you iridium flares

Edited by johncbdg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Nah, I'm not really a bloggy type.  But when it comes to good photography, you won't shut me up and I'm happy to repeat the information - so if John (or anyone) actually engaged, I'd be happy to go through this stuff (all over again) and help improve their imagery.  It's best if they tell me about their equipment, budget and what they wish to achieve, so I can give 'customised' and thus more useful information.  But John doesn't engage or listen - and just look at the stuff that he is presenting above - he claims the distant lights behind the airliners are 'genuine', and yet you can see they move at the right speeds for aircraft, no useful detail is resolved other than the lights flicker at the exact the same rate as aircraft strobes.  Gee, those aliens (or whatever) are sooooooooooooo clever - they make their craft look *exactly* like aircraft do at a distance.

What a phenomenal waste of time.

While location and direction information is good, in general terms mobile phones (unless you spend a fortune on them) are simply not useful for taking pictures of small things that are far away.  If the objects were closer (which, obviously, they are to others..) they will be seen to be aircraft or other similar mundane objects, which is why it's only people like john who bother to film them and then cry that the sky is falling, based on the simple and obvious fact that they are too far away to be resolved and identified..

Most of us get that...  It's not rocket science.

you ...? never!

hope you are well Mr C. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, johncbdg said:

Now tell me you are joking for you are looking silly here,Look it states what year it was and as for the ISS read on it tells what the first clips are shall i tell you iridium flares

So why are you posting up footage of an iridium flare as being a "genuine" UFO?

Oh, and nexct time you put a video together, leave any words on the screen up for longer that 0.5 seconds so people can read them without having to press pause!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Essan said:

So why are you posting up footage of an iridium flare as being a "genuine" UFO?

Oh, and nexct time you put a video together, leave any words on the screen up for longer that 0.5 seconds so people can read them without having to press pause!

It was a reported many times no hundreds of times and had become a ufo in its own right,i posted it up not as a ufo as its say first two are of  iridium flares.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, quillius said:

you ...? never!

hope you are well Mr C. 

Will do send me your  e-mail so we can get started.................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Nah, I'm not really a bloggy type.  But when it comes to good photography, you won't shut me up and I'm happy to repeat the information - so if John (or anyone) actually engaged, I'd be happy to go through this stuff (all over again) and help improve their imagery.  It's best if they tell me about their equipment, budget and what they wish to achieve, so I can give 'customised' and thus more useful information.  But John doesn't engage or listen - and just look at the stuff that he is presenting above - he claims the distant lights behind the airliners are 'genuine', and yet you can see they move at the right speeds for aircraft, no useful detail is resolved other than the lights flicker at the exact the same rate as aircraft strobes.  Gee, those aliens (or whatever) are sooooooooooooo clever - they make their craft look *exactly* like aircraft do at a distance.

What a phenomenal waste of time.

While location and direction information is good, in general terms mobile phones (unless you spend a fortune on them) are simply not useful for taking pictures of small things that are far away.  If the objects were closer (which, obviously, they are to others..) they will be seen to be aircraft or other similar mundane objects, which is why it's only people like john who bother to film them and then cry that the sky is falling, based on the simple and obvious fact that they are too far away to be resolved and identified..

Most of us get that...  It's not rocket science.

send me  your e=mail and i will go over it all with you,hey but forget the distance airplanes if that is all you got forget it as you do not know what you are talking about and i do 

not need just another one with not much to help solve anything. 

Hey keep posting and keep me on top of the ufo boared but again no e-mail and real name then we can not do 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, johncbdg said:

Hey keep posting and keep me on top of the ufo boared but again no e-mail and real name then we can not do 

Best to avoid asking members for their personal information - you don't need anyone's real name to discuss UFOs.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, johncbdg said:

It was a reported many times no hundreds of times and had become a ufo in its own right,i posted it up not as a ufo as its say first two are of  iridium flares.....

We have seen it. We have also seen the rather mundane explanation. Many times. Why revisit it?

Cheers,

badeskov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Saru said:

Best to avoid asking members for their personal information - you don't need anyone's real name to discuss UFOs.

I understand it was his/her offer to go over pictures/videos  and as i said i can not work with Anonymous on pictures and videos it has to be a real person.

Regards

John..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

johncbdg you should know the ISS when you see it.

I take it you think everything up there is the ISS if you took time out and read then it tells you that is not the ISS in the video but you should know that they are iridium flares and it even says so at start of video did you not read before you posted 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, johncbdg said:

Some of the equipment we use for Skywatching. Nikon COOLPIX P900 Digital Camera Nikon D5300 Digital SLR Camera Nikon D3200 Digital SLR Camera Pulsar Recon 550R - Night Vision Monocular Rongland NV-760D+ Infrared Night Vision IR Monocular Telescopes 7x60 Celestron NexStar 5 SE Computerised GoTo Astronomy Telescope Celestron PowerSeeker 114EQ Reflector Telescope 675x Magnification,

But no tripod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think you could use that telescope without one?yes they got them but when out walking it is handheld skywatch yes.

Hope that clears that up for you.next

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, johncbdg said:

Do you think you could use that telescope without one?yes they got them but when out walking it is handheld skywatch yes.

Hope that clears that up for you.next

At least it is cleared up, again, that your knowledge about the use of astronomical instruments is near to zero.

Quote

Telescope Celestron PowerSeeker 114EQ Reflector Telescope 675x Magnification,

This is a very good of example for that you don't have a clue about astronomical instruments and optics. The claim that the unit has a 675x magnification might be right by stupid math but it is useless related to observations. Just a hint, the diameter of the human pupil is doing the trick here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.