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.

 

UFO Video Captured By Homeland Security Analyzed

page: 19
56
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: funbox


so in the two levels of zoom we see the objectbird, clone itself ?


Does the clone take off in another direction, or does it follow the exact same path in parallel with the original? That should tell you whether it is two separate objects or a single object that, for technical reasons, appears to be two separate objects on a TV screen.




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

it doesn't travel in parallel , it's at a tangent I believe, the second disappearing under the waves, the other hangs about tauntingly , then vanishes without a trace , much to the cameraman's surprise


as they travel, you may notice that there is variation between the two as time progresses , would a mirror image or ghosting effect cause this .?

to add: and besides, the split is clearly visable within two framed shots , the close up and the medium, two instances of optical changes for ghosting to occur , highly unlikely

funbox
edit on 24-8-2015 by funbox because: doublewolf backflip 3 and 3 quarter twist



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: funbox


it doesn't travel in parallel , it's at a tangent I believe,


No, they travel strictly in parallel. Watch again or at least look up what the word tangent means.


the second disappearing under the waves,


Or ceases to be visible...


the other hangs about tauntingly , then vanishes without a trace , much to the cameraman's surprise


What cameraman?


as they travel, you may notice that there is variation between the two as time progresses , would a mirror image or ghosting effect cause this .?


Absolutely; it is caused by dark current, among other things.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

my apologies , I meant divergence , they are not parallel , one is clearing getting further away at an angle, they are not heading in the same direction



which I thought what parallel meant, to whatever its applied to , in motion or otherwise


someone's tracking this with a joystick controlled camera , or did you think I thought someone was up there with a camera strapped to there shoulder ?


human controlled actions are clearly evident at the end , when the operator starts looking *hunting* for the object

dark current... I noticed no wobbles

funbox



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: funbox

They are moving parallel...



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
She pointed several things I wasn't even aware of. She did an excellent job. I can't make out the flapping she is talking about. I'll have to watch it again on a bigger screen in 480p.

a reply to: CardDown



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

if you say so


*a small portal appears , a guest appearance of Kryten from Redwarf waddles onto the stage and announces , "straight jacket at standby sir!"*



a reply to: DJW001

the first framing ive already exampled , here's the second framing, with a non-zoomed then zoomed gif.. you can clearly see the wake as it hits the water, then splits





o btw , ying is yang and yang is now ying

funbox



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: funbox

You videos kind of prove the bird theory. You know what parallel means right?



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

don't take up carpentry



watch the video, at the start, what distance are they apart ?, as time tics on two the end , how far at are they apart ?, if this was to happen with train tracks we would have some seriously bow legged trains

funbox



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:42 PM
link   
But that's still parallel movement...the object doesn't actually split and as pointed out could very well be a heat signature reflecting off the water.

You aren't really helping your case at all, you're actually undermining it.

a reply to: funbox



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: funbox
watch the video, at the start, what distance are they apart ?, as time tics on two the end , how far at are they apart ?, if this was to happen with train tracks we would have some seriously bow legged trains

I don't know how far apart each pixel would be at the distance of the object, but it could be a wing tip or something as the bird tilts to turn. The whole thing is too pixelated and fragmented to tell specifically, which is why we have to consider what it looks like on average over the length of the entire video.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

the whole frame is of water , you need to start thinking in 3dimesions , then consider the parallelity of the objects

how can you say that it doesn't actually split when its seen doing so in two different zoomed shots , one at distance , with the shoreline just visible in the video ive exampled , and the other where the shot is much closer , this shot, we watch these objects move slowly apart , no tandem here, in look or visibility .

heat reflecting off the water ? what type of balloons where these ? Chinese lanterns? I had no idea infrared cameras picked up reflected heat in water , like a reflection
wheres that straight jacket ?


funbox
edit on 24-8-2015 by funbox because: much needed wolfensteine



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 07:38 PM
link   
The only problem I have with the "other bird theory" is that it should have been standing still before the first one approached. But there is no evident acceleration and I doubt that a pelican can start moving without having to flap quite a bit, also producing a considerable movement of water, and the shape should at least show a deformation rather than a smaller signature. This without even going into the field of how much water is needed on the feathers to make it disappear (dropping its temperature drastically) and reapper and still wouldn't explain the same effect seen above the ground.

The "debunker" didn't do a great job, I suspect she just skimmed on the report because she seems to think that the authors used the tracking to calculate the distance not knowing that the measure was for the floor behind. You just need to reach page 19 to read they considered that explicitly.

She also did a calculation using a highway (that in fact was the airport runway) and placing the object half way between the camera and the background and there is no way to tell this in a few frames, the object could be on that line at any point, much closer or quite a bit farther than midpoint. What she says isn't backed up by a line of sight analysis which is the only way to determine the distance and needs to be done either in a short enough time and with enough angular motion and it's a pain in the ass, so I understand her comment on being lazy, or averaged across most of the video.

Another claim is that the small object can't be locked because it is too small, but there is no source to backup this claim and it's not really this evident by itself. I think that the software evaluates both the laser tracking data and the angular diameter, not just the blooming signature, but I can't find additional details other than the pdf presented also in the appendix of the report and I couldn't find any more techinical detail on the locking mechanism.

And just to play like most of the debunkers, are you sure her credentials are really enough?

The problem is that I am not able to find any other military flir cam video that shows a bird to make a proper comparison. The few I found are at terrible resolution and from the ground without camera motion and not really for military application. Same can be said for the thermal imager presented a few posts ago to show multiple reflections of the same object: they can't be comparable to a military grade high quality camera shooting at distant targets, and the reflection even in that case is much dimmer.

Bird? Maybe, but I can't see clearly this flapping, and pelicans don't glide "forever". I still prefer to say I don't know.
edit on 24 8 2015 by Mastronaut because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: funbox

You can make the straight jacket comment all you want, but your ignorance is showing...
edit on 24-8-2015 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Mastronaut

I also can't make out any flapping, but the portion she mentions about the bird hunting in the water is clear as day now and Funbox even has a nice gif a few posts up that shows it perfectly.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

then explain how it is , ive no more examples to show unfortunately


you bounce from one theory to the next , I don't even believe ive voiced one , only its dynamics really,

so you tell me , where does the consistence lay ? with me or you ?

funbox



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Mastronaut

I also can't make out any flapping, but the portion she mentions about the bird hunting in the water is clear as day now and Funbox even has a nice gif a few posts up that shows it perfectly.


you thinks so ?

a bird that was carrying another bird on its back? one paying its fair then swimming off to its underwatercavern.. indeed


two optical shifts. one then two , then shift still two , then one .shift , still one ,, shift,, then none.. no hiding from that raymundoko


funbox


edit on 24-8-2015 by funbox because: wolfoons



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: funbox

You have a theory, you believe the report...that's pretty obvious.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

heres the catch.. I haven't even read it


funbox



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

how can you remain objective if you have crap rolling around you're head, look first, chat after

if you can honestly say you don't see environmental manoeuvres during this footage , I promise not to giffazise them later to contradict your mind over your eyes


funbox



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join