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.

 

Very Odd UFO Takeoff Video from Joshua Tree National Park

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: StarnatalSandia

Riddle me this Batman?

What kind of bird leaves the ground but never flies?



Wonder midget! buah hahahaha!




edit on Rpm93016v40201600000035 by randyvs because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 03:27 AM
link   
Amazing that there are still fully functioning adults who can't tell a bug on video when they see it. It's a bug. Why would it be anything else.?



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: klassless

...I estimate its size to be approx. 25 feet plus or minus.



Er, what?

Do you mean that the object, which has to be at most, only very slightly further from the camera than the base of the tree (either than or it can somehow be seen through the ground which it would be beneath if much further than the tree) is 25 feet across.

If so then the base of that tree would be at least 100 feet in diameter, as it's at least 4x the width in the images than the moving object.

Additionally a 25 foot object at a distance of1 150 - 200 feet would be appear large in the frame and not as a tiny spec.



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: purpleivan

Do you mean that the object, which has to be at most, only very slightly further from the camera than the base of the tree

It could also be just outside the car window, maybe only a few feet from the camera.


edit on 2016-10-1 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
there is more crazy unexplainable goings=on in this world I gotta say....

out in the middle of nowhere it has reflection on the top......too big to be a bug.....

I was at the lake in broken bow....it was an alligator back with water propelling it as if from a prop
and it didn't wiggle a tail, so it had to be an R C alligator screwin with me....somebody laughin their azz off, couldn't spot em.....



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: purpleivan

originally posted by: klassless

...I estimate its size to be approx. 25 feet plus or minus.



Er, what?

Do you mean that the object, which has to be at most, only very slightly further from the camera than the base of the tree (either than or it can somehow be seen through the ground which it would be beneath if much further than the tree) is 25 feet across.

If so then the base of that tree would be at least 100 feet in diameter, as it's at least 4x the width in the images than the moving object.

Additionally a 25 foot object at a distance of1 150 - 200 feet would be appear large in the frame and not as a tiny spec.


I don't know what you and the other nay-sayers have been smokin' but it seems to have affected your vision. Look at my screen capture below and you'll see that the object has to be a couple of hundred feet away from the camera. The object doesn't pop into view from the leaning tree, it's first seen where I show it and you can see that it is at quite a distance. My 25 feet diameter is just a blind guess but it's gotta be approximate for the distance.

LOOK AT IT!



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
there is more crazy unexplainable goings=on in this world I gotta say....

out in the middle of nowhere it has reflection on the top......too big to be a bug.....


Well, this is appears big, and it's a bug:

The thing in the OP's video could be grasshopper-sized and may appear as big as it does because it is moving through the frame, and the video interlacing cannot keep up with the motion. Due to video interlacing, it could look different in each frame.


edit on 2016-10-2 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: klassless

originally posted by: purpleivan

originally posted by: klassless

...I estimate its size to be approx. 25 feet plus or minus.



Er, what?

Do you mean that the object, which has to be at most, only very slightly further from the camera than the base of the tree (either than or it can somehow be seen through the ground which it would be beneath if much further than the tree) is 25 feet across.

If so then the base of that tree would be at least 100 feet in diameter, as it's at least 4x the width in the images than the moving object.

Additionally a 25 foot object at a distance of1 150 - 200 feet would be appear large in the frame and not as a tiny spec.


I don't know what you and the other nay-sayers have been smokin' but it seems to have affected your vision. Look at my screen capture below and you'll see that the object has to be a couple of hundred feet away from the camera. The object doesn't pop into view from the leaning tree, it's first seen where I show it and you can see that it is at quite a distance. My 25 feet diameter is just a blind guess but it's gotta be approximate for the distance.

LOOK AT IT!


I forgot to include the screen capture:


Grasshopper my eye! What a bunch.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: klassless

Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine the angle/direction that the OBJECT is travelling. From the screen caps in the OP that include white circles surrounding the initial starting position of the OBJECT at the base of a tree in a clump of grass/weeds (no I'm not smokin' either), the object looks very small... in some of the following images it appears larger. This MAY be due to the fact that the OBJECT could/might be moving TOWARDS the camera. Perspective is a tricky thing and our human eyes/brains are not infallible. I'm curious, Klassless, what do you think is the most likely explanation for the OBJECT?
Thanks for your input.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: klassless

Exactly how did you work out distance and size this I must see, I also
at the OP for telling us what we cant say it is.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
Oh, come on. You're not seriously suggesting UFO for this thing! It's a bird.

But your fellow debunkers are sure it is a bug. How can you both be so sure yet contradict each other?
Because you are all just guessing and trying hard to avoid admitting that it just could be "alien". Especially when it's too fast for a bird and too large for a bug at the distance the OP reported. And ESPECIALLY, when it looks like a typical UFO oval disc.



edit on 2-10-2016 by micpsi because: Typo corrected.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 05:45 PM
link   
I

originally posted by: micpsi

originally posted by: schuyler
Oh, come on. You're not seriously suggesting UFO for this thing! It's a bird.

But your fellow debunkers are sure it is a bug. How can you both be so sure yet contradict each other?
Because you are all just guessing and trying hard to avoid admitting that it just could be "alien". Especially when it's too fast for a bird and too large for a bug at the distance the OP reported. And ESPECIALLY, when it looks like a typical UFO oval disc.



I've only said it "could be" a bug. I never claimed to be 100% sure it was a bug.

Sure, it could be a large alien craft far from the camera, or a tiny alien craft close to the camera, or a unicorn, or ghosts, or an alien ghost unicorn throwing bugs around.

It could be lots of things -- including a bug...And since bugs are a common sight flying around outdoors, I'll keep saying it looks like a bug.

For example, if I see a lights in the sky looking exactly like an airplane (red/green nav lights, white strobe anti-collision lights), I suppose it's possible that it is an alien craft disguising itself as an airplane...or it could be just an airplane. Considering airplanes are common, there's a better chance it's an airplane. So until someone can give more evidence that it was really an alien craft disguising itself as a plane, I'd stick with the plane explanation.

Same logic applies here. Considering bugs are common, I'm going to keep saying the OP's video could certainly be a bug until someone gives me a reason to believe it wasn't a bug.


edit on 2016-10-2 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: klassless

originally posted by: purpleivan

originally posted by: klassless

...I estimate its size to be approx. 25 feet plus or minus.



Er, what?

Do you mean that the object, which has to be at most, only very slightly further from the camera than the base of the tree (either than or it can somehow be seen through the ground which it would be beneath if much further than the tree) is 25 feet across.

If so then the base of that tree would be at least 100 feet in diameter, as it's at least 4x the width in the images than the moving object.

Additionally a 25 foot object at a distance of1 150 - 200 feet would be appear large in the frame and not as a tiny spec.


I don't know what you and the other nay-sayers have been smokin' but it seems to have affected your vision. Look at my screen capture below and you'll see that the object has to be a couple of hundred feet away from the camera. The object doesn't pop into view from the leaning tree, it's first seen where I show it and you can see that it is at quite a distance. My 25 feet diameter is just a blind guess but it's gotta be approximate for the distance.

LOOK AT IT!


REALLY klassless have a look at these 2 pictures below





Those images are taken with 2 different lenses at a distance to keep the statue approximately the same size in both images now did the STATUE or CHURCH move between images


Of course not we know they couldn't

This is to show without the required information guesstimates like yours are worthless


But hey they give people with a little common sense or an understanding of photography or both a

edit on 2-10-2016 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Sigh.. No Disrespect.. but when all this time & effort etc.. Gnomesayin ? I'm sure we All see strange things every so often, but er... so much song & dance not only to convince ourselves, but others ?? Not really 'helping' is it..



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   
"The energy off that mountain is intense, isnt it?"
Intense enough to make tiny aliens go nuts.
edit on 2-10-2016 by smashdem because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
smashdem.... Innit
lol



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Looks like a bug, and it's laughable to even argue otherwise. It's completely black.. so even though quite sunny, no reflection. It moves just like a bug moving close and fast near the camera. Please don't make this stupid video into another like the ridiculous 100+ page video about a white umbrella in someone's back yard. There is nothing there to suggest it's far from the camera, is metallic, or is NOT a bug. Without a point of reference, saying it is 25 feet or whatever is laughable.

It's.. a... bug.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: seattlerat
a reply to: klassless

Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine the angle/direction that the OBJECT is travelling. From the screen caps in the OP that include white circles surrounding the initial starting position of the OBJECT at the base of a tree in a clump of grass/weeds (no I'm not smokin' either), the object looks very small... in some of the following images it appears larger. This MAY be due to the fact that the OBJECT could/might be moving TOWARDS the camera. Perspective is a tricky thing and our human eyes/brains are not infallible. I'm curious, Klassless, what do you think is the most likely explanation for the OBJECT?
Thanks for your input.


I'm glad you asked. While the OP included the white circles it is my opinion after playing the video in various speeds that the OP is wrong with that angle. Whatever he circled it is not the object that I show in the frame grab which is why I say the distance is farther away when the object pops up and takes off, whatever he circled taking off is almost invisible and is coincidental. The object in question is bigger than what is shown in the white circles and as it speeds away you can see that it has a typical UFO shape with a white or reflective top as someone else here also pointed out. Whether it is a classic UFO or not I don't care, I'm arguing against the silly replies saying it's a bug, a grasshopper, etc. Show me wings!

To go on the record, it's a UFO until someone proves different and I know none of us will be able to identify it conclusively.

I can't answer for the OP but I'm basing distance on what I see in the video. It's 150-200 to where the object is shown in the freeze frame.

edit on 3-10-2016 by klassless because: To add text.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 12:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: klassless

originally posted by: purpleivan

originally posted by: klassless

...I estimate its size to be approx. 25 feet plus or minus.



Er, what?

Do you mean that the object, which has to be at most, only very slightly further from the camera than the base of the tree (either than or it can somehow be seen through the ground which it would be beneath if much further than the tree) is 25 feet across.

If so then the base of that tree would be at least 100 feet in diameter, as it's at least 4x the width in the images than the moving object.

Additionally a 25 foot object at a distance of1 150 - 200 feet would be appear large in the frame and not as a tiny spec.


I don't know what you and the other nay-sayers have been smokin' but it seems to have affected your vision. Look at my screen capture below and you'll see that the object has to be a couple of hundred feet away from the camera. The object doesn't pop into view from the leaning tree, it's first seen where I show it and you can see that it is at quite a distance. My 25 feet diameter is just a blind guess but it's gotta be approximate for the distance.

LOOK AT IT!


REALLY klassless have a look at these 2 pictures below

snip

Those images are taken with 2 different lenses at a distance to keep the statue approximately the same size in both images now did the STATUE or CHURCH move between images


Of course not we know they couldn't

This is to show without the required information guesstimates like yours are worthless


But hey they give people with a little common sense or an understanding of photography or both a


I started using a film camera when I was 17 in 1955 and I processed film, I KNOW about photography. I know about compression which is what you did with your photos. Except that you had to move your location to achieve what you did. The OP didn't move locations, he shot from inside the car and didn't zoom 'cause he didn't expect anything out of the ordinary to happen. The distance is static. It was no bug.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 12:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
Looks like a bug, and it's laughable to even argue otherwise. It's completely black.. so even though quite sunny, no reflection. It moves just like a bug moving close and fast near the camera. Please don't make this stupid video into another like the ridiculous 100+ page video about a white umbrella in someone's back yard. There is nothing there to suggest it's far from the camera, is metallic, or is NOT a bug. Without a point of reference, saying it is 25 feet or whatever is laughable.

It's.. a... bug.


Actually, your lack of logic is laughable.

edit on 3-10-2016 by klassless because: to add zinger!




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join