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.

 

Triangle UFO filmed near Brussels (Houillart) august 2007!

page: 7
38
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by RancidCat
I just found this filmed on 2nd July in France seems to be the exact same craft, even down to the dim centre light.

www.dailymotion.com...



Nice find:


you can find it even here

(Belgique) OVNI triangulaire - 1990
www.dailymotion.com...


and here

Triangle belgique vague d'ovni
www.dailymotion.com...

Is the same video taken on 1990, despite there is written respectively "july 2 2007", "july 20 2006" and "august 18 2007" .
A piece of it is also visible in the video i posted in my second post of this thread.
I think it wasn't intention to deceive by the the uploader; simply, the DailyMotion system sets by default the current date, that you may change, and the uploader didn't.
In facts, he doesn't mention dates on the description, just invites to visit his website (which, moreover, looks interesting). As said before, IMHO doesn't looks at all to be the same craft.


[edit on 4/9/2007 by internos]




posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Nice work internos!

Towards the end, the object appears to go behind and is eclipsed
by the front left window post of an automobile, at least that's how it
looks to me.

You can just make out the shape of the rear view mirror housing in
this screen capture.



I've adjusted the highlights and midrange of the tonal qualities to
bring the elements into view.

(Dang, I wish I had Photoshop on the computer I'm using...


[edit on 4-9-2007 by goosdawg]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by the secret web
Also (and this is VERY clear in the stabilised versions once Springer uploads it) the 1st light to hit one of the two lines 'jumps back' as soon as its about to hit it.


With all due respect, consider this possibility, if you will, good secret web:

As the first light is eclipsed by the car's window frame and disappears, the far light, until now hidden by the body of the object, raises into view just as it too is eclipsed by the frame, followed by the third light as the entire object disappears altogether.

At any rate, that's how it appears to me.

I must say, I can't wait for the stabilized version...

Thanks, in advance, secret web!



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by goosdawg


Nice work internos!

Towards the end, the object appears to go behind and is eclipsed
by the front left window post of an automobile, at least that's how it
looks to me.


Thank you

Of course, the quality of the video is too bad.

IMHO, what the location looks to be is



About the lines, the odd fact is that when the first light crosses the first line, it keeps being visible for at least 4 frames, (in some frame it appears obfuscated, as if it is behind smoke, in some others it appears clear)
whereas the other lights disappears...



Moreover, as Wayne noticed, the first light seems to bounce at its first "contact" with the first line...


It seems that once crossed the green line, all the light vanishes..



[edit on 4/9/2007 by internos]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Hmmm, is there a way to contact the person who posted the video and
determine their surroundings at the time?

Example: were they standing adjacent to a car, traffic signals, bushes,
mountains, etc.

Someone who speaks their native tongue...? (hint hint)

Yeah, the other objects in the enhanced frame are throwing me.

For example, your "bush" looks to me, like the space where the side front
window of the vehicle would be located, the window being rolled down.

And your "gate" object, to me, is the housing/screen of the video camera
the other observer is holding, but not yet enabled.

From the first viewing, the diagonal object behind which the object
disappears looked like the lines of a car.

Until you raised the issue, it hadn't occurred to me the diagonal line
could be anything else.

It's rather frustrating to not have the software available to me,
personally, at this time to tease more detail out of this video, first
and foremost, the ability to examine it by stepping through each
frame in a reliable manner. And then in series with enhancement.

You're doing a smashing job with this, keep up the good work!

Edit:
Oh, and could the "bounce" be a reflection of the light off the windscreen?

[edit on 4-9-2007 by goosdawg]

Back to the "bush", upon further review at full screen, of the video posted
on the website, it looks like a reflection of the second observer, because it moves with him...does it not? So maybe the window is rolled up?

[edit on 4-9-2007 by goosdawg]

The website posted video...

[edit on 4-9-2007 by goosdawg]

And on the very last frame it looks as though the leading light of the object
is just about to come out from behind the post, like a hint of light caught in
the pixel at the edge, due to the compression scheme.
Dang, why did they stop taping just then?

I think I'm starting to see things...


[edit on 4-9-2007 by goosdawg]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by goosdawg
Hmmm, is there a way to contact the person who posted the video and
determine their surroundings at the time?
Example: were they standing adjacent to a car, traffic signals, bushes,
mountains, etc.
Someone who speaks their native tongue...? (hint hint)

One of the issues of this video is that the authors (and only witnesses)
are anonymous ☺, as the website (www.cropcirclewaterloo.be) stated: anyway, i can try to contact the webmaster of the website in french and ask if he knows their names or if they are totally anonymous (i won't ask for the names: just if he knows them, so he could ask for these infos).

Originally posted by goosdawg
Yeah, the other objects in the enhanced frame are throwing me.

For example, your "bush" looks to me, like the space where the side front
window of the vehicle would be located, the window being rolled down.

And your "gate" object, to me, is the housing/screen of the video camera
the other observer is holding, but not yet enabled.

Of course you could be right.

Mine was just the "first impression" i got watching them.
The first natural instinct of our brain is to link any undefined objects with something that already knows (i.e. people who sees man's faces in the clouds).


Originally posted by goosdawg
From the first viewing, the diagonal object behind which the object
disappears looked like the lines of a car.
Until you raised the issue, it hadn't occurred to me the diagonal line
could be anything else.
It's rather frustrating to not have the software available to me,
personally, at this time to tease more detail out of this video, first
and foremost, the ability to examine it by stepping through each
frame in a reliable manner. And then in series with enhancement.
You're doing a smashing job with this, keep up the good work!
Edit:
Oh, and could the "bounce" be a reflection of the light off the windscreen?

The lines, IMHO, are much like contrails shaped, and as said, at least the first is tranparent, because one light keeps being visible even once is behind it (see image in the previous post).
About the "bouncing", i'm pretty sure that Waine will show us much else, (even about the triangle's general behaviour in flight).



[edit on 4/9/2007 by internos]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Actually, it looks like perhaps ALL the lights violate the leading edge of the first grey line and are no longer visible before they pass the trailing edge.

Could this be due to viewing the lights edge-on through the facing surface of an automobile windscreen, further obscured by a slight refection of the ambient light?

If this is the case, then it would lend weight to the argument against this being CGI and more in favor of there being an actual, physical object being recorded in real time, IMHO!

Duplicating such an interaction with a transparent, reflective surface is quite a different story than simple lights on a black background.

Perhaps the artifacts due to video compression are adding to this "transparent" effect?

This is great fun, but I think I'm going cross-eyed squinting at these dancing pixels!




posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by goosdawg
reply to post by internos
 


Actually, it looks like perhaps ALL the lights violate the leading edge of the first grey line ...


Yes, they does.

Let me see if i understand correctly (i'm becoming blind watching at these dots):

you think this could be the front left window part of the car
(please, correct me if i'm wrong).
But if it's so:

1) The window's sheath should be only at the internal side (at contact with the glass)
2) The contours should be much sharper than these ones

3) The light, once crosses it, should vanish
4) At the start of the video, there are more objects visible, as two lights: but if there was a car parked there, how could them be visible, behind a car?

5) Why does they aren't visible at the start of the video, whereas they do are when the
camera zooms-in?


I made another timeline of the final part of the video: the one in which the lights crosses the line: hope it could be helpful

img73.imageshack.us...

img73.imageshack.us...

[edit on 5/9/2007 by internos]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Either a secret military spacecraft, or reptilians visiting Belgium.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   
OK here's the stabilised footage for you all. First up is sequence 2 I stabilised it as soon as the lights are in focus.


Sequence 2 Stable


Sequence 1 was a complete b*tch to do to be honest due to the light intensity going up and down and size changes and a whole host of other stuff that made it kep losing tracking. It loses stability in the center section for a second or so but I'm working on a much more stable version at the moment.

Sequence 1 Stable

OK hope those help a bit, things to look out for as well as the things already metioned in the thread is the way at one point the rotation of the lights line up perfectly with the movement of the street lamp. Maybe co-oincidence , maybe not ,I'll leave that for others to judge.

Wayne...


PS. This is a slightly more stable version I'd advise people to keep a copy of it as it could disapear form my server without notice due to changes behind the scenes at teh moment.

Sequence 1 - more stable version (temp link)



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 06:19 PM
link   
The original triangular UFO belgium wave back in the early 90's was actually the black budget NRO/NSA TR-3B "ASTRA" project.
About this video in question the shape or the movement of the object has nothing in common with the original belgium flap reports and video documentation.
This new thing it's a hoax. A disinformation attempt. No masive witnessess reports...no airforce scrambling.. no.. nothing...



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Waine, you made a great work


I only can imagine what for hard time you had with the first one


There's not need to repeat what so far already said:

shortly, IMHO, there are:
♪ unrealistic movements
♪ unrealistic behaviours in fly
♪ unrealistic apparitions from nowhere
♪ unrealistic vanishings to nowhere
♪ the lights sometimes are two, else times are three, else times are four, else times are five else times ther's a light alone in the dark.


♪ The shape is NEVER the same, it shifts continuously without an intelligible reason.

♪ The two stripes are visible since around sec. 55, never before, despite several times the video zoomed to the same area, before.

♪ I've never seen a bouncing light, before, neither one "photocopying" himself.

♪ The lights disappears once crosses the first line, and doesn't reappears, even between the two lines there should be NOTHING, as we can see at the start of the movie.









Moreover:

♫ There are, totally, two witnesses (the same guys who filmed)
that are, on top of that, anonymous.

The video # 1 has been published on August 24 2007 on Dailymotion:
www.dailymotion.com...

There is a clear invite, for possible witness,
to contact a website, even anonymously by mail or posting in the forum;


The video # 1 has been published 3 days ago on YouTube:
www.youtube.com...

Even on YouTube there is a clear invite, for possible witness,
to contact the same website etcetera;

The video has been watched 12170 times on dailymotion, 2,323 times on Youtube

♫ So far, no one has contacted them to say he/she witnessed the same sighting:
www.cropcirclewaterloo.be...

♫ So far, no one posted in the forum
cropcirclewaterloo.bb-fr.com...

♫ There are no more witnesses, there is no media coverage, neither small articles on local newspapers: NOTHING. Just websites linkink/embedding the two videos and reporting the same words of the website.

Anyway, the thread is quite interesting IMHO, and i thank Pjotr for it

there are some positives too: the video # 2 looks to be better an some dots are visible in the display of the cell phone in the video # 1


[edit on 5/9/2007 by internos]



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 


I thought the lines were a stadium, I don't know why I believed that but actually it must be roads which are elevated.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by jeanne75018]



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Internos, thanks for all the contributions. I did not have time to stay on track, but read all the posts again.
As you said, I also found glimmers on the cellphone that suggest that there was something there.
In regard to the rims on the end. First I thought this was a building, that blocked further sight of hte ufo, but the carpost argument seemed also valid, but then I would have thought you would just turn and raise your camera above the car to follow the event. And indeed, in passing one little light seems to be in front of the rim, but maybe the light bounces of there. Guess not.

I'll try to get in touch with the socalled makers in French.



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   
The cellphone display is entirely visible since sec. 53.
Link to sequence # 1
I checked off with a "X" the only still which, IMHO, looks to contain some white dots, but i'd need someone else's opinion about it: anyway, it's jus one frame.
There's a couple of problem even about the video # 2:

What we see on its display is a red light on the left, but in the
video # 2we can see MANY lights or just the triangle: why?


It looks that this guy suddenly points his cellphone once he noticed to be caught on camera (please, correct if i'm wrong: take a look at sec. 17-countdown)
Anyway, at least it's CLEAR that he starts filming NOW:
notice what appears in the cellphone display:

and then whatch at cellphone movie and tell me if (and when) you see the same


Video # 1




Video # 2 (cellphone]




[edit on 6/9/2007 by internos]



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
wow.

I ignored this post for a day thinking it would be the same short clip we always see or some sort of altered CGI.

I must say this is the best piece of footage I've sen in quite some time. Decent length. Several good ground reference points. And, alot of movement from the UFO.

Terrestrial or not, excellent find! Whether this footage is authentic still remains to be seen (I didn't read all 4 pages of the thread yet), but wanted to put in my say right away since I ignored this post for so long.

starred & flagged



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Thats pretty cool I have seen something similar to that when I was living in arkansas hah it stayed in one place for a while I thought it was just a plane or something. It was there for a while (20 min maybe) but then it was just gone.



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Ehm, a utube comments like this: The "UFO" is following the camera ... bad joke :|

I agree with him (this was going on around 20th second). In my opinion this is 100% fake. Did you find a convincing answer to that?

[edit on 6-9-2007 by commodore64]



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by commodore64
I agree with him (this was going on around 20th second). In my opinion this is 100% fake. Did you find a convincing answer to that?
Are you talking about the sudden movement of the "UFO"?

I said it before, I think that the movement is the result of a rotation of the camera, the light at the bottom left corner of the screen also moves.



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 



Yes, but why is "ufo" moving along with camera? If camera moves, shifts, then the Ufo shouldnt follow it, right?



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join