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.

 

UK Police Tweet for help on UFO: Hot, Invisible & Flying into the wind

page: 13
122
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: fatdeeman

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: SargonThrall


Here is a good movie of those critters, hole in centre and notch in circumference. They pulsate as they move like jelly fish.



You mean the out of focus specular highlights AKA bokeh with notches from the corresponding part of the lens zoom mechanism that intrudes into the optical path? Seriously, critters?

Just another person seeing shapes in the clouds and then failing at the inherently impossible task of giving a logical explanation. That's the problem when you start with something that looks interesting and make a bold claim, you have to work backwards from there and attempt to explain away all the flaws in your reasoning, clumsily pounding away at those puzzle pieces with your fist, desperately trying to form them into a cohesive and credible story when it's easier to just assemble them in the logical way.


That's the first time I've ever heard the objects on the STS video referred to as bokeh. Not saying they're UFO's, but bokeh? Lol.

As a photog, I have a hard time agreeing with that opinion.

And it is only an opinion, after all.




posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Article I read stated that they switched through all of the FLIR settings, they couldn't see the object using their own eyes.
Jet airplanes have running lights.

Object was reported to be approx. 1 mile away from the chopper.
The running lights would be easily visible.


It wasn't (imo) an exhaust plume from a jet.

cheers


*Also object was moving quite slowly, against the wind.


edit on 1-10-2016 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Would the police really ask for public help? Totally weird...



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: canucks555
Not sure how the range was determined but I've been reading along.

I wonder if they may have been mistaken about moving against the wind. Relative motion between airborne objects can be confusing.



edit on 10/1/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: jacob33
Would the police really ask for public help? Totally weird...


Actually very common. The UK police request public assistance often, even through a long-running TV show, 'Crimewatch', in which crimes are dramatised to try and elicit responses from potential witnesses / informants - as well as to entertain and shock, of course



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 02:04 PM
link   
To be fair, if there were some unidentified flying object (in the literal sense) wandering around the area at the sort of altitudes used by police helicopters, that could be a serious matter. See all the recent scare-stories about drone collisions. So the police tweet could have been a ploy to lure pranksters or witnesses into the open.

Mind you, that idea depends on how clever you think the police are, which all evidence suggests is 'not very'.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a ufo could be something as simple as a plastic bag caught in the wind, people are so dramatic.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 03:27 AM
link   
A digital copy of the full eight minutes of NPAS footage is now on youtube.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   
The YT embed link wasn't working earlier. Here it is.

To be quite clear, this is a first-gen digital copy of the complete eight-minute NPAS recording, rather than the previously-released 30 seconds of blurry cameraphone footage filmed off a monitor screen.




edit on 23-1-2017 by audubon because: incomplete post



posted on Mar, 21 2017 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
Hot air balloon in the far distance. The "wobbling" is due to the distance.

Next...

It was invisible to Radar, going into the wind... So no.



posted on Mar, 21 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   
I've just googled to see if anyone was able to provide an explanation, nothing....anyone read anything? Or should we file this under UNEXPLAINED :O



posted on Mar, 21 2017 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

I can't find anything, I twittered the UK police to see if they contacted the military about this. Received zero response.



posted on Mar, 22 2017 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

Some of the best footage I've seen, and I think this puts to bed the theory that the police force were mistaken that the object was moving. Its relative position to stationary ground references constantly changes.

Does anyone know why they have blurred out the information on the bottom left of the screen? You can see some digits or characters constantly changing through the blur, which tells me there might be something important there, which might be key.


Here is an interesting zoom of the Object (not my zoom, but that of the camera, I have left the scale I viewed it at):



I'm not sure if this is a digital/lensing artefact, as when they try to zoom further in, it appears the object disappears completely. If it isn't, the shape of the object is unusual. It appears as though the heat source comes from the front side (basing this on the direction of movement, relative to stationary ground objects), and there is also a hot core? Who knows...



edit on 22/3/2017 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2017 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: AmatuerSkyWatcher

Can you make it hot white, which would make a lot more sense?



new topics

top topics



 
122
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join