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.

 

MUFON CASE : 110975 Volusia county FL, US ( August 16, 2020 )

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2020 @ 03:16 PM
link   
MUFON CASE : 110975 Volusia county FL, US ( August 16, 2020 )

Hot off the presses, this was yesterday.
The speed of it is impressive, not much detail though.

From the uploader

Mutual UFO Network : MUFON SUBMISSIONS : Object seem to be hovering with no sound miles and miles from the hotel I was at. It made no nosie it looked dark grey Long Description of Sighting Report : On vacation went out on the balcony and noticed a black disk shaped object from a far distance on the beach just hovering in one spot for about minute or two that's what caught my attention. It then started to move and I lost it. I grabbed my phone to record hovering and then I thought I lost because the sun was shining so bright I could barely see or sit on the balcony. Then I noticed I found the object again it seemed to be scanning the same spot and then it took off so fast I could barely see because of the sun in my eyes I had to put the phone down to see where it went. But it kept hovering that area of the water drop real low go back up and shoot cross the water and then disappear from my eye view

Whaddya think ATS?
A near drone or a far off ufo?




posted on Aug, 17 2020 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
Whaddya think ATS?
A near drone or a far off ufo?


Looking at the movement and judging from my own experience in CGI/3D tracking, it seems very likely that the camera footage was obtained first and the object has been inserted as a 3D object afterwards.

The technique is called "Match Moving", i.e. matching an existing camera motion with a virtual 3D environment in such a way that artificial 3D objects can be placed on a layer on top of the actual footage but more or less in sync with the camera motion.

This method is often time-consuming (which is why such clips are often very short) and it's not always 100% perfect depending on how many reference points you use to sync the 3D environment and camera motion. This sometimes results in slightly jerky motion of the 3D object or makes it feel somewhat out-of-sync compared to the original footage.

It's a bit like in the video below, but with the object (or text) also moving:


Just my two cents based on many similar videos I have seen up to now.



posted on Aug, 17 2020 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Maybe a Traxxas drone they're kind of small



posted on Aug, 17 2020 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I'm thinking drone.

I'll look into the case and see what the investigator says so far

ETA:
No investigator assigned to it yet.
Witness submitted a total of 3 short clips.
Claimed she watched it hover, drop down to water level, then back up and manoeuvre a bit.
Then she lost sight of it because the sun was too bright on her balcony at the hotel.

I'm sticking with drone.
edit on 17-8-2020 by Macenroe82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2020 @ 04:46 AM
link   
From what I see in the video it could even be a seagull, as they are perfectly capable of doing that in the right conditions, when they are facing a constant wind. I have seen them doing it many times.
At the end, it turns and, with it's back to the wind, it moves fast.

It's that what we see? I don't really know, but I think it's possible. The low quality of the video doesn't help.

Edited to add that I forgot to say that, when it leaves, it looks like we see wing flapping, another thing that makes me think of a seagul.
edit on 18/8/2020 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2020 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: jeep3r
Looking at the movement and judging from my own experience in CGI/3D tracking, it seems very likely that the camera footage was obtained first and the object has been inserted as a 3D object afterwards.
I didn't try to analyze the video for CGI artifacts, but the audio track of the video and what the video shows makes no sense, which leans toward either a doctored video, or the worst photographer on the planet. Look near the end of the clip for example, she's filming an object in the sky, and then points her camera down at the ground, and asks "where did it go?" This makes no sense at all, why is she pointing her camera at the ground if she's wondering where the object in the sky went. If the camera was at least pointed at the sky it would at least be believable that she was still looking for the UFO.

For that matter, the first time she "loses" the UFO doesn't seem very plausible or realistic either. It's hardly moving but she pans her camera to the right faster than the UFO is moving to the right and then wonders why she lost it. It should have been easy to follow at that initial slow speed.



posted on Aug, 18 2020 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I also have that impression, the audio seems to be a bit "off" when looking at the camera motion and what she says when. There's a rather "long" delay after she pointed down the camera. Only then we hear her saying "I lost it" (according to her this was due to the brightness of the sun).

Maybe someone can post the other two clips that she submitted.



posted on Aug, 18 2020 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: SecretKnowledge

Fake.

She primed the video by saying she was going to 'analyse it' when she got home before she'd shown it doing something unusual

She didn't lose it - she moved the camera away from it horizontally.

The audio is edited on to the video. Its way too clear and doesn't match, and her 'surprise' is feigned.



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join