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 -

Here is a sighting and got footage of a spinning object 13 April 2014 Any one know what this object


johncbdg
 Share

Recommended Posts

  1. well that was nice, John, can we now discuss what it is? :geek:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
On 1/8/2022 at 4:41 AM, ChrLzs said:

I shall repeat my requests and comments - John, please answer the questions asked of you.  Earlier you said:

As I stated earlier - you haven't shown or talked about any of the techniques by which you can rule out stars, planets and aircraft.  Or all the other things like sky lanterns, drones, LED balloons, satellites or other space junk, and so on.

So tell us about how you ruled out those things.

While you are at it, you might want to address my critique of ...

1. No tripod, or if it is on a tripod it is neither solid nor damped to give smooth motion tracking. My cheapest tripod, cost about $49, has excellent stability and a nicely damped movement to give smooth pans.

2. Terrible noise.  I've never seen such bad noise, but what is worse is the way it seems to freeze and jump every few frames, probably because of:

3. Ridiculous over-compression - the image is covered in jpeg compression artefacts and distortions - you should not be able to see all those weird squared off edge patterns and the horrible jumps as the noise seems to get ''stuck'' for multiple frames.  Youtube does sometimes over-compress imagery, but this one takes the cake...

I would also question what appears to be the use of some sort of night vision device instead of a proper visible light camera - using night vision would explain the awful noise levels and generally they don't have especially good optics.  When footage is this bad, making assumptions that the shapes shown are actually real and not some sort of artefact due to the bad optics and worse electronic processing, is not going to garner any credibility from knowledgeable video-/photo-graphers.

As for what it is.. it's going at the right sort of rate for either a satellite or a high flying jet aircraft. (Note that the object appears to be 'bloomed', which is a common problem on IR/nightvision footage.  As photographers know - once something blooms out, be it from overexposure or mis-focusing - you cannot make assumptions about its shape.

 

Rule all that out for me, would you john?

 

 

Not got the time or energy to go over all that with you but look untill some one can prove 100% then it remains what it is a real UFO/UAP simple as that sorry to be blunt but that is it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2022 at 5:57 AM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:
  1. well that was nice, John, can we now discuss what it is? :geek:

2 I am here to listen to what you think it is i need 100% fact not what you just think it is proof i we need,i for one would like to rule out all the UAP/UFO footage with 110% real proof,if not it falls in to the same world wide Global Category of a UAP/UFO..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, johncbdg said:

i need 100% fact not what you just think it is proof

My friend,

If we could speak only when we had proof, this forum and many others (Unexplained M*Y*S*T*E*R*I*E*S) would shut down. We need mysteries, not proof.

Conversely, if we do have proof of something (all facts) nobody would care, it would be common knowledge. Boring. Face it, This place was built for opinion

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does one find the *U*n*e*x*p*l*a*i*n*e*d* Mysteries?

By applying the vast repository of human knowledge to each claimed mystery and eliminating those that are easily explainable.

There is nothing on this thread that is not easily explainable.  The sad part is that there are some simple lessons to be learnt about how to get better footage... and those lessons have been consistently ignored, hence the low quality...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the purposes of completion of *another* wasted johncbdg thread...  Allow me to make some comments about the video in the OP...

Let's just ignore the silvery female body used as the title page for the video, shall we? (cheap clickbait attempt).

The imagery begins with what appears to be a distant, shaky light in the sky - even when zoomed back it is *very* shaky from handholding.  I note the white blob at upper left - what was under there?  Whatever it was may give a clue to the equipment being used..  There is no background detail visible, so no way to judge movement (it may all be camera shake) or scale.

The image then zooms in to show a featureless, madly dancing blob, that is obviously:
- out of focus and/or digitally zoomed so it is a distorted blob of 'bokeh' ie false details
- 'scintillating' from atmospheric disturbances (same principle as twinkling stars - the colors are prismatic effects and do NOT relate to the color of the object)
- badly affected by 'coma' and chromatic aberration, which suggest either cheap optics or (more likely) that he is filming via two devices, one of which is misaligned, ie not at exactly 90 degrees to the other
- shaking around at a ridiculous rate, such that it is also affected by motion blur 
In some frames, there are some small light dots that could be stars, but could also be 'hot pixels'.  At no point are there enough of the dots to identify them as stars.  It's worth noting that on at least one frame, one of those stars clearly shows a matching coma effect with a bluish/purple edge at top left, just like the object - this shows that the little bits of blue/purple are caused by bad optics and are not real.

While the object is scintillating and moving around from camera shake, it shows no sign of 'spinning' as claimed.
Being handheld, the imagery is highly compromised.  John has been told multiple times by multiple people to use a tripod or even just freakin' lean the dam camera against something.
As he has not included any useful background (by zooming back, and adjusting exposure) there is almost nothing we can do in the way of analysing it.
He has offered no information about the equipment setup, which again precludes any decent analysis.

I invite readers to look at john's posts, and tell me what you think about his desire to:
1. improve his work
2. actually identify anything, rather than just seek fodder for his collection of supposedly unexplainable blobs in the sky.
 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

My friend,

If we could speak only when we had proof, this forum and many others (Unexplained M*Y*S*T*E*R*I*E*S) would shut down. We need mysteries, not proof.

Conversely, if we do have proof of something (all facts) nobody would care, it would be common knowledge. Boring. Face it, This place was built for opinion

I do agree spot on...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

There is nothing on this thread that is not easily explainable.  The sad part is that there are some simple lessons to be learnt about how to get better footage... and those lessons have been consistently ignored, hence the low quality...

If he improved his typical style of recording footage on a vaseline covered potato during an earthquake, the mundane things he is recording would become far too obvious as normal stuff and it wouldn't be unexplained - and he knows that all too well.

The more ambiguous and crappy the recording, the more room to call it a "mystery".

Edited by moonman
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the OPs YT channel should be included in the guinness book of records because there are at least 3 records:

  1. dozens of videos of >16 years and not a single one focused well
  2. all videos are made without a tripod
  3. all videos are made with a very shaky hand

Unbeatable! Well done!

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, toast said:

all videos are made with a very shaky hand

Just on this point, the video in the OP shows an unusually fast rate of shaking.  If the footage is not sped up (and we cannot tell as he has turned off or removed the time display), I would have to suggest it is either shaken deliberately or that the person has a medical condition like Parkinson's or Delerium Tremens or Essential Tremor - in which case the videographer should see a doctor urgently.

 

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

7 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Just on this point, the video in the OP shows an unusually fast rate of shaking.  If the footage is not sped up (and we cannot tell as he has turned off or removed the time display), I would have to suggest it is either shaken deliberately or that the person has a medical condition like Parkinson's or Delerium Tremens or Essential Tremor - in which case the videographer should see a doctor urgently.

Exactly my thought. Or deliberate shaking to simulate movement.

  • Like 1
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.