Iranian Navy artillery and gunfire at UFO

That is definitely a flare and that thing at the end is reflection of the car's roof buttons thru the rear view mirror.

Like John Lear once asked Bob Lazar..!!

Was it ours or theirs..??

a reply to: Vanux

As others have posted, it's target practice at a flare?

originally posted by: andre18
'If we have a military engagement that look like that event in an area that has a military base, the obvious conclusion is that it was an engagement.'

There's a problem with that statement, the lack of enemy.

a reply to: ArMaP

Let's commence with an evaluation of the light source in question. Should this indeed be a flare, particularly one from an illumination round, its manifestation would necessitate the presence of a smoke trail and a strict vertical descent. It is rather evident that these criteria are not met within the visual evidence provided.

Your own analytical conclusions corroborate this observation, indicating a trajectory that veers to the right, rather than a straight downward path. Consequently, it becomes implausible to attribute the movement to a flare, which would consistently adhere to the laws of physics by descending in a linear, downward direction.

The presented examples below serves to illustrate this expected characteristic, thereby establishing a standard of how such flares appear.

m.youtube.com...

twitter.com...

If it is not fake, it is an object that can neutralize AA shells.

Must be fake, since we have never seen an object being fired upon like that being able to do what it is doing.

We only see the tracer rounds , there is a lot of unlit ordnance between them.

Mystery

originally posted by: andre18
Let's commence with an evaluation of the light source in question. Should this indeed be a flare, particularly one from an illumination round, its manifestation would necessitate the presence of a smoke trail and a strict vertical descent. It is rather evident that these criteria are not met within the visual evidence provided.

Why a "strict vertical descent"?

Your own analytical conclusions corroborate this observation, indicating a trajectory that veers to the right, rather than a straight downward path. Consequently, it becomes implausible to attribute the movement to a flare, which would consistently adhere to the laws of physics by descending in a linear, downward direction.

It's to the left, but the direction is irrelevant for this case.
From what I have seen, flares have a parachute, so they do not fall too fast. A parachute will be affected by the wind and will follow the wind's direction at the same time it loses altitude.
A right to left wind would make a parachute with a flare move the way we see in the video.

m.youtube.com...

We can see the flares on that video move to the right while falling, they are not following a linear vertical direction.

PS: I agree that, for the thing in the video to be a flare, it appears to have something missing, a trail.
I don't know if there are any smoke-less flares.

a reply to: ArMaP

Upon further analysis, your assessment stands correct.

The military footage has undergone a process known as false color filtering, by altering the overall color scheme and reducing the natural contrast, the colour manipulation ensures a uniform color representation of all light sources, it simultaneously reduces the discernibility of smoke trails.

Therefore, we can confidently assert that this video does not offer credible proof of a UFO, thus leading us to categorize it as a hoax.

It’s very strange how it doesn’t move independently to the light on the building. The light on the building is fixed and the object in the sky is fixed. Also it’s quite possible it’s the moon The light on the building is really over exposed and maybe that’s what’s happening with the moon which is then obscured by clouds at the end.
Plato’s cave can get mundane at times glad we might finally be let out, or let in on the knowledge.

a reply to: Capies

I suppose you didn't see this image I posted on page 2.



As you can see, the light moves. Also, near the end of the video, it disappears.

The Moon does not have that behaviour.

Everything (in my opinion) points to a target flare with a parachute.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: DaydreamerV

No, my link points to an ATS thread where it was shown a second video of an exercise in that same area and they look similar.

It doesn't prove anything except that it looks similar.

Very strange excersize in proximity to the city. I am no expert but don't the military have some sort of a radar that can tell the flare from the whatever? Before shooting?

Also, as a practice, the target is almost stationary. What skills are being tested?



Just asking.

Thank you I did not see your earlier post. I see the independent movement of the object compared to the light source on the building .a reply to: ArMaP

originally posted by: DaydreamerV
Very strange excersize in proximity to the city. I am no expert but don't the military have some sort of a radar that can tell the flare from the whatever? Before shooting?

Also, as a practice, the target is almost stationary. What skills are being tested?



Just asking.

And they still have managed to miss most of the rounds. Not even close to the 'flare'. Unless, indeed, there was something else further out above that the camera did not capture.

a reply to: pianopraze

It's called smoke...happens when flares burn....

Kind of rises "up" from heat.............

Mg

originally posted by: DaydreamerV
It doesn't prove anything except that it looks similar.

It's better than saying "I don't know what that is, so it must be aliens".

a reply to: andre18

looks like a practice target or illumination flare

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: DaydreamerV
It doesn't prove anything except that it looks similar.

It's better than saying "I don't know what that is, so it must be aliens".

Is it?
If we don't know what is it then all ideas hold equally valid...including aliens. But sure, you might think differently, I am not arguing with you.

I wish someone who served military could confirm it is common shooting practice with flares as targets. I will rest the case then.

originally posted by: DaydreamerV
Is it?
If we don't know what is it then all ideas hold equally valid...including aliens. But sure, you might think differently, I am not arguing with you.

I think it is, because it's something we do know exists and has that use.

Saying it's aliens it's just exchanging an unknown with a different unknown.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: DaydreamerV
Is it?
If we don't know what is it then all ideas hold equally valid...including aliens. But sure, you might think differently, I am not arguing with you.

I think it is, because it's something we do know exists and has that use.

Saying it's aliens it's just exchanging an unknown with a different unknown.

Has anyone who knows for a fact confirmed it is a routine practice with live ammunition involving a flare in the sky as a target? This way we can eliminate one 'unknown'.

Then, strange 'self destruct' like flashes...Looks like gun fire was hitting the barrier of some sort to me.