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: 4
56
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: fockewulf190
It's most likely a burst weather balloon , its proximity to the airport would give them good reason to keep an eye on it.



I assume that was an attempt at sarcasm ?

I was interested in the footage at the time and as I suggested in the original thread great to see someone (in fact the group of authors are a lot better than someone) has investigated considering the data that was available.

Thorough investigation and appears to be a genuine unknown.




posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:14 AM
link   
a reply to: data5091

After having a read of that report and watching the clip a few times, I am satisfied with my own conclusion that it is an unidentified flying object of unknown origin that has the ability to mobilize in various physical mediums.

I am not familiar with any current known tech that can display the ability to both fly through the air and under the water like what is shown in the vid.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: skyblueworld




It's most likely not a weather balloon considering it submerges into water and then emerges again at a better rate of speed.

Except it doesn't.
If you watch closely the object becomes invisible to the FLIR camera a couple of times as it appears to rotate ,most notably at about 1.50 , this also happens as it travels over the water.

a reply to: chunder


I assume that was an attempt at sarcasm ?

You assume wrongly.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex

a reply to: chunder


I assume that was an attempt at sarcasm ?

You assume wrongly.


Then please refute the (what appear valid to me) reasons given in the report as to why it can't be a balloon - primarily speed and change of direction.

Otherwise what is that makes you come to that conclusion ?



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 07:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: chunder

originally posted by: gortex

a reply to: chunder


I assume that was an attempt at sarcasm ?

You assume wrongly.


Then please refute the (what appear valid to me) reasons given in the report as to why it can't be a balloon - primarily speed and change of direction.

Otherwise what is that makes you come to that conclusion ?


He has a full very detailed report and video evidence to see that the conclusion is not a balloon. But if he wants to choose that option, so be it.

But he's clearly wrong this time.




posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: sprockets2000
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

At first I thought some of the skeptics on here were just hard to please, which I am also hard to please. However, if you come on here saying this is a bird you are either trolling or just refuse to admit what your eyes are showing you. No idea what this is, but I know what it is not and that is a bird. As for people claiming its being circled and not really accelerating, that is also absurd

Where have I said it's a bird? Be specific. I don't know what it is and never said I did.

Follow this

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Looks like a bird.


originally posted by: skyblueworld

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Looks like a bird.


Birds have heat signatures in infra-red.


If someone tries to say that ^^^ is WHY it's not a bird, then it's absolutely reasonable to reply with

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

originally posted by: skyblueworld

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Looks like a bird.


Birds have heat signatures in infra-red.


According to the report, so does the object in the video.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

I remember this video all too well.

It was blown out of proportion "hoax style" by Jose A. Martínez

OpenMinds is one of those sights that posts hoaxes, so it gets blocked.

All the people involved in the "Report" are known UFO hoaxers.
edit on 13-8-2015 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: baddmove

DHS knows what it is. It's a balloon, or pack of balloons.

This report wasn't compiled by DHS, it's compiled by a known UFO Hoaxer Jose Martinez.

Read the source article:


A group of UFO researchers with backgrounds in science have come together to analyze an alleged UFO video they have confirmed comes from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).


Edit: Also, they come to the conclusion it was going 95 MPH, which should tell you this is just a big hoax. They can't determine the speed because the camera filming the object is moving at an unknown speed and altitude. We have no idea how fast this object is moving. I would wager however fast the wind was blowing that day.
edit on 13-8-2015 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: baddmove

DHS knows what it is. It's a balloon, or pack of balloons.

This report wasn't compiled by DHS, it's compiled by a known UFO Hoaxer Jose Martinez.

Read the source article:


A group of UFO researchers with backgrounds in science have come together to analyze an alleged UFO video they have confirmed comes from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).


No point saying oh it's a known hoaxer, how about debunking the entire report instead, that's what needs to be done, before the conclusions are "oh it's a hoax" without proving so.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: chunder



Then please refute the (what appear valid to me) reasons given in the report as to why it can't be a balloon - primarily speed and change of direction.


The only reason I can see why they say it isn't a balloon is the estimated speed they believe the object was traveling.
It's pretty obvious to me the object does not enter the water but the expert panel seem to think it does , they estimate the speed it enters the water at about 109.7 mph but there is no splash on entry , at 109 mph ! , they think it might of made a slight wave or movement in the water looking at the video frame by frame but that seems a bit suspect to me for a supposedly scientific panel , it's a body of moving water how can you identify a slight ripple in a sea of waves from FLIR footage , or are they just seeing what they want to see.

Frame by frame analysis indicated that there might be a slight wave or movement of the water as the object entered the ocean. It is unknown at the time of this report if the U.S. or another nation has developed the ability to diminish water displacement caused on impact. it is more difficult to explain the lack of significant deceleration as it entered the water despite the absence of an identifiable power supply.


If they are wrong about it entering the water then they may be wrong about the speed the object was traveling and their claim it wasn't a balloon , I believe they are wrong and that it is a balloon.


Contributors within SCU include individuals from organizations around the world in the UFO/UAP field, militaries, governments, private industry and media. All work SCU conducts is presented objectively and scientifically to the public through peer review. All contributors are appointed based on professional and educational background, no membership exists no dues are collected.


So , what makes you think it isn't a balloon other than this suspect report ?


edit on 13-8-2015 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

A balloon ?? *funbox puts the gas mask on*

gasbox



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I don't think it splits in two, that is the reflection of its infrared light from the water.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Dr X

certainly fooled the camera operator though didn't it
, didn't know which way to turn in the confusion.

funbox



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex


So , what makes you think it isn't a balloon other than this suspect report ?



To call the report suspect is harsh to say the least. The data has been provided in a reasonably scientific manner - by all means pull it to pieces in a scientific way but not simply by opinion.

Yes it's estimated speed - what else ?

The estimated speed has been based on series of calculations, if they are wrong I'm sure someone with superior knowledge to me will point out the inaccuracies. However, if I can't refer to this suspect report all I can refer to is the video (although by definition I suppose that is also suspect).

To me, visually, it doesn't behave like a balloon. It moves too fast and appears to change direction and altitude. I can't rule a balloon out entirely simply by the video, the wind could be much stronger than it supposedly was and gusting in different directions. It could also be that the movement of the plane gives the impression of direction change. That isn't what it looks like to me though.

Then you have the other factors, radar returns, control tower sighting, why it was even being filmed (I don't accept that a balloon that size would present much of a hazard to flights). Course can't rule out hoax either but all things considered (report included) I'm still going with a genuine unknown.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
How is this NOT a drone? Come off it guys this is just ridiculous.
edit on 13-8-2015 by hardcoreparkour because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

never mind...was bitten by Google's poor app design. (Google Earth)




edit on 13-8-2015 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: chunder

I haven't questioned their data I question their interpretation of the data and willingness to fill in the blanks in regard their claim it entered the water at speed.

it is more difficult to explain the lack of significant deceleration as it entered the water despite the absence of an identifiable power supply.

It didn't cause a splash or slow down because it didn't enter the water is the simple answer , not that difficult.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
The video reminds me of the 1994 Nellis AFB UFO video. This one just happens to have more veracity toward its origin.

IMO its legitmate and displays an object defying our current understanding.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko


They can't determine the speed because the camera filming the object is moving at an unknown speed and altitude. We have no idea how fast this object is moving.


Incorrect. This is proof that people only see what they choose to see. The video includes both the GPS location of the aircraft, and the general long/lat of where the target is pointing. It also has the aircraft's altitude, which starts around 1000 feet and lifts up to about 4000 by the end. Arguably, that's also the airspeed there too (in the region of 300).

Some of this info can be used, not all of it. As such I was able to use some of the long and lat positions recorded in the video to plot the rough position of the aircraft filming over the course of the video. Using landmarks and the direction the cross hair is facing, can also make an accurate judgement at where the "UFO" is in relation to the aircraft and camera.



The fact the aircraft is circling doesn't really help (it's a very dizzying video) but after doing my own calculations I'm putting the object at about 60-80mph. I'm not entirely convinced it even moves as far as my image above gives it credit for, if so would put the speed nearer 30-40mph.

What it "is" I can't really speculate. But yeah, the GPS info is in the video, so you can plot the aircraft and cross hair positions on a map for yourself, then speed = distance over time etc etc


It seems like a rogue bunch of balloons or such that they were simply concerned about it flying over an active airport, though I admit the speed and water effect are odd, but that could just be an "effect" as the aircraft is climbing and distancing itself from whatever it is. It certainly looks odd enough. But the real motions of the aircraft and the camera seem to somewhat overplay the situation, IMO.

If the heli hadn't done a huge arc around the edge of the island, it would have been a lot easier to see the speed of said object. Quite why they have to do a huge arc is perhaps one reason it was actually slow moving. It's hard to say, that in the first 3 minutes, it ever really moves further than from one end of the runway to the other.



posted on Aug, 13 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
This camera system should not have detected this manifestation into our plane. Probably, a just a reverse energy syphon reflection inward which would explain the lack of concern for states of matter based on our perception.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join