UFO's filmed from Elon Musk's car, floating in space

a reply to: InhaleExhale


Yes, it's the Moon - it is not moving, the car is rotating giving the illusion that it is moving. Or, it's an alien mothership. I wish it was, but sadly it isn't.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: peacefulpete

Also, just think if you saw that flashing UFO from your backyard -- you'd think it was an airplane. You'd never think it was a satellite because that's really not what they look like. It's what airplanes look like.

as has been mention numerous times

Yes a satellite can look exactly liked that when rotating and catching light of reflective surfaces.


You say I have no point,

I keep posting based on things you say that just aren't reality.

The dot is the moon,

The camera as you can see is has a pretty close focus.

someone said take a pic of the moon with your phone, it will just be a dot.

I also acknowledged that a spinning object can create a flashing effect. Of course.

However, we wouldn't expect it to look like the strobe lights of an airplane (which is what it looks like in the vid).

The pattern of flashing is very extreme and seemingly artificial, with multiple flashes followed by a pause, then multiple flashes again. It's a very extreme pattern of flashing light, very regular / rhythmic.

And it does look almost exactly like a distant airplane. (I know what a distant airplane looks like lol.) That's why I mentioned that we should imagine what anyone would think if they saw that object from their backyard. Anyone would think it was a plane because the flashing lights resemble those of a plane. No one would think that maybe it was not a plane lol, or a satellite, or spinning space debris.

It looks like the strobe lights of an airplane, flying through the blackness of space.

originally posted by: peacefulpete


Honestly I don't even see where that caption is from?

That's easy to explain. You didn't bother to use 'tineye' to find the original source.

And you still seem proud of being defiantly clueless about perspective.

originally posted by: peacefulpete


I don't think I misquoted anything; my links that I mentioned are from 63 million kilometers, is accurate (I just double-checked)...

Your link to a provincial newspaper in southern India was YOUR ORIGINAL SOURCE?

The 63 million km figure was for the two tiny dots image in the article, then obviously some local caption writer also added it to the caption of the much higher resolution image at the top of the article. And you believed it because.... ?

Please consider this a learning experience.

We've ALL followed this same route....

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: InhaleExhale


Yes, it's the Moon - it is not moving, the car is rotating giving the illusion that it is moving. Or, it's an alien mothership. I wish it was, but sadly it isn't.

I can concede that the movement may be from the car.

However, I'm really surprised that some folks keep insisting that that one UFO is the moon.

It's not our moon. It's the wrong size (too small), and wrong shape (too angular), not to mention it seems to have a glowing light or engine.

I just posted like 6 NASA photos (including a GIF made up of maybe 12 NASA photos) that show the Earth and moon together.

The moon remains proportionate to the Earth, like I've been saying for two days lol. All my posted pics show that. There's even a pic with the moon moving behind the Earth, and even then, the moon remains proportionate. It never shrinks into a tiny, mishapen, angular, miscolored rock, which is what the UFO really resembles.

How about you guys insist it's a rock, instead of insisting it's the moon, which it's clearly not. Just call it a rock or asteroid or whatever. It's MUCH more possible and believable that it's just a very strange, shiny rock / asteroid etc.

originally posted by: peacefulpete

Plus, the flashing UFO doesn't appear to be orbiting Earth, either. The flashing UFO seems to be flying through the darkness of space.

The video does show Earth at times, as a very bright blue image filling the screen. So if there were satellites, they would be expected to be visible around the image of Earth. Not floating through black space.

Darkness of space? "Black" space? It's in full sunlight. Don't you see it?

You're thousands of miles from Earth. Under what laws of optics would ANYONE 'expect' to see meter-scale objects on a TV image?

a reply to: peacefulpete


I think that this has all been explained to you multiple times. incidentally, what do you mean when you say "UFO"?

originally posted by: peacefulpete

It's not our moon. It's the wrong size (too small), and wrong shape (too angular), not to mention it seems to have a glowing light or engine.

How angular WAS the moon -- that is, what was its phase? Crescent, maybe? Waning gibbous? Did you check?

duplicate

originally posted by: peacefulpete

It's not our moon. It's the wrong size (too small),.....

At some point you're going to slap your forehead and realize how stubbornly foolish you've been, and we'll chuckle together and all go out for a beer.

Your passion is commendable, and needed.

In Earth orbit from the space station the angular size of Earth is about 160 degrees. Why doesn't the moon, by your logic, have an angular size of 40 degrees [instead of half a degree]?

a reply to: peacefulpete

I also acknowledged that a spinning object can create a flashing effect. Of course.

so then you contradict yourself.

You said one would think its a satellite because they don't look like that and planes do and then agree that a satellite can look like that?

The pattern of flashing is very extreme and seemingly artificial, with multiple flashes followed by a pause, then multiple flashes again. It's a very extreme pattern of flashing light, very regular / rhythmic.

which perfectly explains a rotating object in orbit that has reflective surfaces.

as it rotates light hits the reflective surface and shines back to the observer.

If there are separate 3 surfaces that are in the right position to reflect then with each rotation you will get 3 flashes until the objects or your perspective changes.

The reflective surfaces could be on 1 side so you get 3 quick flashes and then a second or so pause and then 3 quick ones again and so on.

The pattern of flashing is very extreme and seemingly artificial, with multiple flashes followed by a pause, then multiple flashes again. It's a very extreme pattern of flashing light, very regular / rhythmic.

Just watched it, first video in OP


It seems like its flashing in sort of pattern or rhythm but its not,

there are 2 quick flashes sometimes and other times 3,



the 2nd video on the OP is the moon.

a reply to: peacefulpete

How about you guys insist it's a rock, instead of insisting it's the moon, which it's clearly not. Just call it a rock or asteroid or whatever. It's MUCH more possible and believable that it's just a very strange, shiny rock / asteroid etc.

so you want readers to embrace this ignorance?

Why insist its a rock when to many it resembles the moon, its seem to be in the right position and phase according to some.


If you need to believe in this then why argue, simply believe its something unknown.

What you are arguing doesn't need any faith or belief.

Many are trying to give you hints.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: peacefulpete


Honestly I don't even see where that caption is from?

That's easy to explain. You didn't bother to use 'tineye' to find the original source.

And you still seem proud of being defiantly clueless about perspective.

Man you can't be serious. I know where I posted the pic from.

I posted the pic from NASA's website, not an unknown, mysterious source.

However, the part that I didn't expect was that after posting links to NASA's photo galleries, those same images do not link to the actual webpage that they're from (on NASA's site).

And that's actually just bad website design. Not what I was expecting from NASA. I should have posted a link to the webpage along with the images.

...

I don't know what "tinyeye" is, and I would check it out, except you're the only person that I've seen mention it, so I'm not interested lol.

Perspective: We all know what perspective is, and how it works. Come on man. The fact is that perspective is just irrelevant to the conversation. If it IS relevant, no one has shown that it's relevant beyond just arguing nonsense.

I posted multiple legit NASA photos that prove MY point, that perspective does not distort the moon beyond all size, shape, color. NASA photos show that the moon remains round, and remains roughly 1/4th the appearance of the Earth. Look at the NASA pics I just posted.

It's not relevant that obviously there are photos that show obvious size distortion, like in a lot of Hollywood cinematography, the moon looks huge because they set their cameras far away from the scene they're filming, for example. It's just not relevant to our conversation, though. The car video is from space, and that's what's relevant.

There are zero examples of the moon becoming so shrunken and distorted as that UFO that you guys keep accusing of being the moon. Rather, all NASA photos, of the Earth and moon in space, show the moon keeping its roundness and general size properly.

You guys should call that UFO a rock or asteroid, much more believable and possible.

a reply to: peacefulpete


I'm afraid that you have gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick and are now just beating around the bush with it.

Apologies for the mixed metaphors but that is pretty much it.

Peace.

a reply to: peacefulpete


OK, you've invested so much ego-defense in your error, the epiphany is gonna be awesome. We've ALL done it, usually more than once, and after brief embarrassment we got down to the serious research the topic requires. Give it time, maybe tonight or tomorrow night you'll sit bolt upright in bed and shout 'Dammit'. Welcome to the club, there's work to do.


Don't be a stranger.

a reply to: peacefulpete

Perspective: We all know what perspective is, and how it works. Come on man.

we?


There is one poster in this thread that isn't a part of 'we'.


I wonder who it could be

The fact is that perspective is just irrelevant to the conversation.

Oh look.


Now you say perspective is irrelevant when it wasn't earlier on.

Stop trolling ATS.

There are zero examples of the moon becoming so shrunken and distorted as that UFO that you guys keep accusing of being the moon.

Look its guilty,

the juries out, its the moon.


There is no accusations just knowledge.

Rather, all NASA photos, of the Earth and moon in space, show the moon keeping its roundness and general size properly.

Why is that?


Do you know or are just assuming because it shows in the pic then that's how it is?

Do you know how the images are taken, how they are developed and if the are composed of numerous images?

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: peacefulpete


I don't think I misquoted anything; my links that I mentioned are from 63 million kilometers, is accurate (I just double-checked)...

Your link to a provincial newspaper in southern India was YOUR ORIGINAL SOURCE?

The 63 million km figure was for the two tiny dots image in the article, then obviously some local caption writer also added it to the caption of the much higher resolution image at the top of the article. And you believed it because.... ?

Please consider this a learning experience.

We've ALL followed this same route....

Actually my first 3 photos were from NASA.

The 4th and 5th were from a local newspaper, apparently.

So, your post implies that... you don't trust local newspapers?

As for that source adding the wrong distance to one of the pictures: Well, so you busted the paper for mixing that up, and me for not realizing it.

Big deal. At least I started with NASA sources so we could at least be clear on the topic, regardless that one paper adding the wrong number for the caption, apparently.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: peacefulpete

Plus, the flashing UFO doesn't appear to be orbiting Earth, either. The flashing UFO seems to be flying through the darkness of space.

The video does show Earth at times, as a very bright blue image filling the screen. So if there were satellites, they would be expected to be visible around the image of Earth. Not floating through black space.

Darkness of space? "Black" space? It's in full sunlight. Don't you see it?

You're thousands of miles from Earth. Under what laws of optics would ANYONE 'expect' to see meter-scale objects on a TV image?

That's my point. We wouldn't see satellites unless the car was actually flying in the Earth's atmosphere, which it wasn't.

Re: Sunlight: I'm glad you enjoyed the sunshine lol.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete


I think that this has all been explained to you multiple times. incidentally, what do you mean when you say "UFO"?

This is exactly the kind of meaningless, sarcastic nonsense that isn't even worth responding to.

It's all been explained to me? Really. Well a lot of readers find the videos interesting and compelling; look at their posts and their stars & flags. And then I see a lot of people arguing nonsense. Why don't you glance at the videos and the posts which are not sarcastic nonsense, and you might find that "this has all been explained to you multiple times."

Enjoy your day.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: peacefulpete

It's not our moon. It's the wrong size (too small), and wrong shape (too angular), not to mention it seems to have a glowing light or engine.

How angular WAS the moon -- that is, what was its phase? Crescent, maybe? Waning gibbous? Did you check?

First, did you actually look at the UFO that we are talking about? It isn't even round. And the moon does remain round through its stages.