It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Single UFO Orb Hovers for Hours Jan 2015 - Video with Nikon D800e

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Interesting is an understatement with this latest UFO discovery video and commentary. I've already watched it multiple times. Get's really interesting around 4:30 into the presentation.

What the object is I don't know, so we'll leave it up to ATS experts.

He also has some great equipment too. Nikon D800e which is about 3k, with a doubler lens, so he's able to get some great footage.

Also he makes a interesting observation in regards to comet tail colors.

www.youtube.com...


edit on 16-1-2015 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 06:49 PM
link   
copy and paste a link?



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Just went through the Denounce UFO Youtube Hoax thread and did not see Crow777 in there. His channel is very interesting if he is genuine. S&F

Here's his most viewed Moon UFO video:



^I feel like this has been a thread on ATS before?

Maybe this one too, he thinks the Moon is a hologram and has video evidence:




posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

I can't take anyone seriously who starts touting the "chemtrail" hoax. He's either correct in that it was a planetary object, or it could also be a balloon (which is what it looks like).

Either way, "chem-planes"? Spraying?
Definitely something wrong there...



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 08:20 PM
link   
I won't totally discount someone just because they have a belief in chemtrails.

I have to keep my cup half full.




originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: Realtruth

I can't take anyone seriously who starts touting the "chemtrail" hoax. He's either correct in that it was a planetary object, or it could also be a balloon (which is what it looks like).

Either way, "chem-planes"? Spraying?
Definitely something wrong there...




posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Realtruth
I won't totally discount someone just because they have a belief in chemtrails.

I have to keep my cup half full.




originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: Realtruth

I can't take anyone seriously who starts touting the "chemtrail" hoax. He's either correct in that it was a planetary object, or it could also be a balloon (which is what it looks like).

Either way, "chem-planes"? Spraying?
Definitely something wrong there...



I will totally discount someone who believes in chemtrails and the moon being a hologram. They're disconnected from reality.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Realtruth
Interesting is an understatement with this latest UFO discovery video and commentary. I've already watched it multiple times. Get's really interesting around 4:30 into the presentation.

What the object is I don't know, so we'll leave it up to ATS experts.
Do you have some reason to think it's not a balloon? For supposedly such good equipment, both the "dot" and the clouds look out of focus, though it could be the result of his using digital zoom instead of a better telephoto lens. This other photographer seems to have a better telephoto lens which is what's needed to get pictures of something farther away:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: nothingwrong
reply to post by H1ght3chHippie
 


No, not at all. I am saying that a tiny white dot in the sky is a pointless photo to post here, as it tells us nothing. If after all the processing I still had a small white circle I would have been very sure it was not an aircraft as I have done everything possible to get a good picture.

Here is another tiny white dot I saw in the sky some years ago:



This picture was taken on the same camera, with the same lens, and processed in the same way on the same computer. With the naked eye both were just a tiny white dot in the sky. After proper photography and processing I got 2 very different results.

For the record, we decided this was a weather balloon. But only because of the quality of the photography.

So yea - I guess to a point I am saying that it is pointless using a camera phone to photograph a small white dot, as we can not learn anything from it.
The so-called "movement" of the edges probably isn't movement of the object. It could be the same type of distortion in the atmosphere that makes stars "twinkle" plus digital artifacts.

But the movement of the object itself sounds very consistent with a balloon. Can we make a positive ID of that? Of course not, but it doesn't seem like anything to get excited about if it looks and behaves exactly like a balloon.
edit on 16-1-2015 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I said I didn't know what it was. Good info though thanks for sharing.

I guess it does show why we need people to use good equipment properly.

Some people are not trying to mislead on purpose they maybe just ignorant, or non-professionals, and just trying their best.

I'm not even close to amateur in this area, so that is why I leave it up to the experts here on ATS.

If it's a balloon, then it's a balloon.


One day someone won't even need a zoom lens though, the UFO will be undeniable.

edit on 16-1-2015 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:48 PM
link   
I have been observing it too, our local news station told us that it is the ISS.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:54 PM
link   
if it's a recent observation, it's most likely Jupiter.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: antar
I have been observing it too, our local news station told us that it is the ISS.

That's not possible since the ISS circles the Earth at 27,724 kilometres (17,227 mi) per hour, completing 15.7 orbits per day. On average, it takes about 3-5 minutes for the ISS to travel across the sky from horizon to horizon. The object in the video is observed for hours. Therefore, can't be the ISS.



posted on Jan, 16 2015 @ 11:03 PM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_

I have to admit though when he went into the chemtrail comments he was starting to lose me, but I figured even an amateur that believes in chemtrails could have got something on video.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 05:38 AM
link   
How can a balloon stay in the one spot for hours?

Im not discounting it but im having a hard time getting my head around that fact.
Also, anyone who claims the moon is a hologram needs a head check



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 06:36 AM
link   
I love the way that just because something is bright and to far away to see what it is it automatically gets labeled an 'orb'. Because 'Orb' sounds more alien-ish.

Just using the word in the label of a video shows upfront the poster is prepared to jump to conclusions or has an agenda.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_

I agree, I was onboard till the chem-cloud statement then I just skipped to the end.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Realtruth
I won't totally discount someone just because they have a belief in chemtrails.

I have to keep my cup half full.




Candidly, to me, there's 50ml of liquid in a 100ml container.



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
I love the way that just because something is bright and to far away to see what it is it automatically gets labeled an 'orb'. Because 'Orb' sounds more alien-ish.

Just using the word in the label of a video shows upfront the poster is prepared to jump to conclusions or has an agenda.


Or quite possibly you enjoy assuming and jumping to conclusions yourself about my posting. lmao! Talk about hypocritical.

Not sure what else to call it, maybe a square UFO? Also that is what the photographer called it on his YouTube description "large orb (UFO)", so I deleted the large because I didn't have a point of reference, or knew what it was.

The term can also be used for lens anomalies, or something an amateur photographer might experience when filming, so that is why I chose the term, because I didn't know what he was experiencing.

en.wikipedia.org...


The term orb describes unexpected, typically circular artifacts that occur in flash photography—sometimes with trails indicating motion

edit on 17-1-2015 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_

True and it gave me an ?????
????? when I heard it. Since then I just think maybe it was Venus or something and they had been getting so many calls they just made that one up, I do not know. They did say you could see it with the naked eye. weird huh?



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: _BoneZ_

originally posted by: antar
I have been observing it too, our local news station told us that it is the ISS.

That's not possible since the ISS circles the Earth at 27,724 kilometres (17,227 mi) per hour, completing 15.7 orbits per day. On average, it takes about 3-5 minutes for the ISS to travel across the sky from horizon to horizon. The object in the video is observed for hours. Therefore, can't be the ISS.




On topic: I think the footage is rather unimpressive for a D800E and a huge telephoto lens. Still looks like mobile phone video.


On a totally unrelated note (and I hope my post does not get deleted), 3-5 minutes... This is good info. Are you sure this is accurate?

I remember seeing something rather strange from the balcony of my 13th floor apartment one summer night. There were 2 very bright star-like dots moving across the sky at a very steady pace, following each other right above me. It seemed to me like they were linked somehow, as if you could draw a line between them, matchstick long and it would stay the same length throughout the journey.

The objects definitely looked like they were way up high in space and I caught a few glares like you would sometimes see from a satellite. They were going pretty fast and I could see them traverse the "skybox" above me and disappear behind the horizon in like 10-15 seconds. I would estimate that it took them about 20 to 30 seconds to travel from horizon to horizon.

No idea what it really was but I figured that it could be ISS with a space shuttle docking, as the docking was actually in the news the other day. Now I am not so sure..



posted on Jan, 18 2015 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

The guy is one of the biggest IDIOTS on youtube just after sunrise VENUS rises one of the brightest objects in the sky

here is a picture I took last year when it was near the Moon early morning.



Just thinking about what about theses balloons Google has been using could it be that.
More info on time date approx location direction etc would hekp to rule out certain objects.


He has some good equipment it's just a pity he is not that smart!

wmd.
edit on 18-1-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
9

log in

join