It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Triangle UFO *60 miles north of Bakersfield, CA*

page: 24
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 12:23 AM

Originally posted by jritzmann
Unfortunately the tape graciously sent to me from the witnesses was damaged in transit. I'll wait for Springer to ask them just to flip me a DVD (I only house Hi-8 Decks not mini DV) As soon as I get it here, I'll see what I can see.

Jeff, the links I sent you are full DV resolution exports from Diana's DV tape. I highly recommend that you base any analysis on these clips, or request specific times for me to export for you.

DVD's use MPEG compression of varying types and quality, so you will not be working with as pristine a version as possible, and it could be significantly degraded without you necessarily even realizing it (as you may know, and apologies if I am stating the obvious)

Please consider using the clips I sent you or requesting new ones from me, referencing the two part full length version I uploaded to Divshare here and here.

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 02:29 AM
I have been using those, and am still going over them. I've found a couple of interesting things, I'm getting the DVD for continuance, and we'll go from there. I am fully aware of the compression issues of DVDs.

[edit on 8-12-2007 by jritzmann]

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 02:39 AM
reply to post by jritzmann

Can you give any hints on what you've found?

Eagerly awaiting for your post on this. Hopefully not too much longer.


[edit on 8-12-2007 by PhotonEffect]

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 08:50 AM
I have been watching this thread to see what develops with the video. It's really exciting to think what we may have here.

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 12:11 PM

Originally posted by jritzmann
I have been using those, and am still going over them. I've found a couple of interesting things, I'm getting the DVD for continuance, and we'll go from there. I am fully aware of the compression issues of DVDs.

Excellent! I'll be very curious to see what you have or haven't found as well.

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 04:09 PM

Originally posted by jamestkirk

the kentucky blimp footage you posted depicts a craft that is QUITE stationary is it not? i

Perhaps this video is a closer match. Don't get me wrong, I have no need to prove that this is a man made craft. I just seek the truth, whatever it is.

June 2006 Michigan Video

[edit on 12/8/2007 by TheAvenger]

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 02:18 PM
reply to post by BLACKburn


I was amazed when I came across the report pertaining to your sighting, and more amazed when I saw the video. I had been wandering around the Web for a couple of years now visiting numerous UFO sites and searching for something or someone that would express what I experienced and, today, I think I finally found it!

Blackburn, I saw EXACTLY what you saw last month, the only difference being that my sighting occurred in Romania (E. Europe) in October 2005, in a small town situated about 30 km away from the capital, Bucharest.

I was walking outside the house that I used to stay in this Romanian town at the time at around 8.30 PM, one evening. I happened to gaze skyward. I was spellbound when I saw this huge V shaped thing with white-green lights (as you had mentioned) that didn't blink, "float" right above where I was standing. It was extremely huge, was "floating' at a very low altitude. It made NO sound. I say it was floating because it absolutely made no sound, even if it was so close and so big. The whole experience lasted less than 40 seconds. I was the only witness. It went straight ahead (and not sideways, as you put it). What perplexed me was its appearance - it seemed to have a pulsating-energy like quality especially near it borders, as the borders seemed to "waver" just like steam does when it emerges from a kettle. It had a definite shape but again, near the edges, it was somewhat mystifying. I remember that the "inside" of it was dark in color.

After seeing your video and reading your description, I am convinced that this is the exact object I saw back in 2005. I even drew a picture of it at the time, and I portrayed it in a V shape, since the lights were in that pattern.

I definitely think that this thing is not from anywhere near our world, because of the way it was "floating" silently as if it was a huge V shaped feather. I distinctly remember myself getting so disoriented during those 35-40 seconds while it was passing directly over my head. No one else saw it in this Romanian town.

Blackburn, if you happen to see this post, please respond. I shall divulge more details in such case. But what I want to emphasize is that WHAT YOU SAW IS REAL. I watched your video several times to make sure - the lights (even if in my case they weren't blinking), the shape, the way it hovered around....THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I SAW.

I BELIEVE YOU, since I am a witness too.

What perplexes me is the fact that this object could be seen in two distant places - America and Romania. Maybe what I saw was another object that belongs to the same "model," maybe it is the very same thing you saw. Whatever it is, I believe that it is not of this world, since during the moments I saw it passing overhead, I felt as if I was in a time if time had slowed down or my perception had changed in those moments.

The object just floated straight ahead, and I remained there stunned, with the cigarette that I was about to light still on my lips.

Blackburn, once again, THANK YOU for sharing this valuable piece of info with us. I have finally found proof that what I saw has been seen by others too, even if they belong to faraway countries.


posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 03:10 PM
reply to post by TheAvenger

The only "Top Billing" anything gets n ATS is promulgated by the membership hitting the Flag button. This was on the front page the first couple days it was up, but it's nearly a month old now and the new threads are getting the flags.

We simply don't manipulate the content positioning. For us to "force" a thread to the headlines would go against our firm belief in the "Wisdom of the Crowd".


posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Springer

The only "Top Billing" anything gets n ATS is promulgated by the membership hitting the Flag button. This was on the front page the first couple days it was up, but it's nearly a month old now and the new threads are getting the flags.

We simply don't manipulate the content positioning. For us to "force" a thread to the headlines would go against our firm belief in the "Wisdom of the Crowd".


I understand Mark, and it makes good sense. Time must factor in also it would seem since this thread has 90 flags and newer "top billed" ones have fewer. I know, there are some older threads with way more than 90. I haven't paid particular attention to how the flags work, although I apply them generously.

I think many of us are just surprised that there is not more member interest in this very intriguing case. Certainly no knock on the way ATS is managed, I assure you.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 10:23 AM

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
Eagerly awaiting for your post on this. Hopefully not too much longer.

[edit on 8-12-2007 by PhotonEffect]

We are all waiting for new developments.

There are so many points that could be at least discussed and maybe proved / disproved.
- Does this UFO behave like a solid? This means checking angles and distances with a 3D model.
- Is there a perfect match with a known phenomenon? Most hypothesis can be eliminated easily. For example small RC aircrafts can't stay in perfect formation over a period of several minutes because of atmospheric turbulence.
- Is there a good match with another UFO observation? A vague resemblance (with different color, or flashing pattern) is not good enough.
- Is there any way of finding specs (frequencies and patterns) from strobe lights manufacturers?

About the crossing/passing lights, there are some more (very dim) no one mentioned yet, even simultaneous with the 4 that are easily seen. I think it's very likely they are stars, satellites or planets. I'm going to call them stars as a working hypothesis.
- Is it possible to improve my quick and dirty analysis of the crossing star? I did better since, with motion blur removal software. Maybe the star or whatever it is gets partially occluded in a few frames. Not conclusive either way IMO.
- Can the apparent movement of stars be correlated to the orientation of the 5 lights in a "V" formation? It seems that the "V" orientation always coincides with the direction of motion.
- Are there unusual accelerations? Some stabilizing and temporal averaging could reveal more details and more stars in the background. I hope jritzmann will address these points.

I don't want to sound too demanding, but I'm no expert at video analysis, and I did my homework already.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 11:44 AM
This thread remains on the top of my "to watch" list. I lookforward to hearing more on what our experts think.

Et/not ET, this is still one of the best to come along in some time.

And again a thank you to the OP for bringing this to our attention. Even though the ATS process of close scrutiney may seem harsh, those items that survive are naturally the top of the heap. No other site that I know of is so rigorous in it's member driven standards. You have shown great courage and resolute commitment to finding answers.

We all look forward to further developments.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 11:57 AM
reply to post by NGC2736

I agree that this is one of the better cases to come around in some time. I'll be sure to keep track of this one until we find out more.

Hopefully soon!

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 05:11 PM
reply to post by rmmmr

I envy you and Blackburn and so many others who get to see such fantastic sights, to be honest. Have been "looking up" for decades with no luck :-(

I would urge you to share more with us and let us know all the details since you seem to be corroborating the same object to some extent. Perhaps JR's analysis will further bolster what you describe as well.

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 11:34 PM
HI everyone , this case is sure really interresting , for some of the lights moving around the ufo it makes me think of MAD : Magnetic AeroDynamics , check out works by jean pierre petit ( french researcher ) ... for long time i'd like to believe in the ET explanation but i think this is military mad project ...or not

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:32 AM
This is what I currently have written as I've been examining the footage. With the holidays time has been extremely tight, as I'm sure it's been for many of you.

The exam as a whole is far from over, and is going to take a lot of time to sort out involving everyone I have to contact. Please understand answers (or potential ones) don't happen overnight.

What some of you have been waiting for I'll answer before pasting in the prelim report. No, there is no shape visible to the UO. None. Not even pixel matrixing to hint at anything. So far, my opinion is we're looking at multiple objects (perhaps not just one UO per light), as I have no evidence that it's one object. Sorry, no shape to be seen.

Preliminary Analysis Report

Video submitted by Diana Blackburn/ Footage Shot 11/13/07

Several lighted configurations seen 11/13/07 both in driving and stationary positions. UO in some scenes shows triangular based shape object, while in other scenes shows no particular shape at all. Lights do not appear to be standard strobes, as there is no recognizable pattern in strobe release (i.e. 55c per second, ect) Lighting configurations appear to change several times, and previously unknown areas of UO strobe on and off making actual shape of object highly questionable.

Multiple brightness burns and contrast enhancements were applied to excerpts where the UO seemed most defined by lights. No shape or geometry of UO was visible. Excerpts were ported to a 50 inch plasma monitor and again, no shape nor edge was seen to the UO (viewings took place in complete darkness) nor was there any pixel matrixing to hint at structure.

Most of footage (or excerpts) seem to be shot in night vision. All lights as seen in footage when not captured on nightshot, and through witness verification were red. Red lights in typical aircraft are of course not red, and this analyst knows of no aircraft that exclusively uses red lighting/strobes only.

It should be noted that military operations will use red lighting on night operations to save ground troop night vision in landing situations, but whether or not all red lighting is used is unknown to me, and I have not been able to verify this with local military bases in my area.

I cannot resolve this UO to one solid object, nor can I find any pattern to it's apparent lighting configuration. It's speed and distance cannot accurately be calculated due to complete lack of stationary objects within frame. UO does seem to pass stars in the sky at a rapid rate if viewed at a stationary point on the ground. However, distance is not attainable.

One could easily conclude that this UO could be comprised of several objects with independent strobes (hence the erratic patterns, and subsequent distancing of strobes late in footage) if the objects are canopy parachutists with individual strobe lights attached, this could account for the fairly tight start pattern and subsequent distancing later due to wind currents and safety issues.

Another option is the alleged military use of aerial platforms. This has been rumored for many years, as well as lighter then air craft in huge shapes such as triangles used by the U.S. Military. This very well could be yet another test flight (or regular flight for all we know) of such a craft having lighting malfunctions. Starlight Camouflage may be in use and malfunctioning, but I don't see any definitive evidence of that.

Please note I cannot consign this to a UO of "alien" origin, nor is it my opinion that it is. While admittedly excerpts were taped quite well, this is still a distant object, under darkness. It's not my opinion that we're seeing one solid object, as I have no evidence within the excerpts to support that.

Further, significant examination is required and I am currently waiting on unedited footage. I have also had minimal contact with Ms. Blackburn and have purposefully stayed away from the ATS thread concerning it, so as not to preconceive any information before viewing the footage.

With Ms. Blackburn's permission I will be taking this footage to several military and civilian avionics experts as they can meet with me. I will have them give their opinion on the strobes and report that back here. I will also be contacting Ms. Blackburn by phone to go over the footage with her, and get her impressions that might be missing from the tape.

In the end, as good as the footage seems to be, there's many questions, and not enough data to answer them all. I wish I'd have found a shape to define shape, but there simply isn't any I can find.

More to come.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:47 AM
Thank you very much for your synopsis jritzmann and look forward to more developments.

I'm not saying that I think they were jumpers but if they were skydivers how long does it take for them to parachute to the ground, and how long is the footage. That's not to say there weren't two jumps, one in formation then a looser one afterwards? spliced into the footage. She is an avid Skydiver after all. Just thinking out loud, be nice to get the original unedited footage and it's a bit strange that it's gone quiet on that front...

[edit on 11/12/07 by October]

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:35 AM

Originally posted by jritzmann
Lights do not appear to be standard strobes, as there is no recognizable pattern in strobe release (i.e. 55c per second, ect)

This is plain wrong. There is an easily recognizable standard pattern for each of the 5 UFOs in the "V" formation, and a different pattern for the 6th UFO. I can post frame numbers from the 16 minute version as proof. Please see my previous posts for exact timings.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 01:04 PM
Thanks for the update jritzmann,

More wait and see I guess.

The jumper theory, as someone mentioned, doesn't seem right to me. This video captured 16 mins, albeit in sections, of footage of these lights. That's at least a couple of jumps, at night. Is that typical? Do we know if there are mountains where this was filmed? Would they jump over mountains? Plus at some instances in the video the lights seem to move horizontally past stars.

Either way it's all very bizarre.

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 01:11 PM
reply to post by PhotonEffect

Also a day shot of the area showed a lot of power lines in the area where this supposedly took place. Those are not really good spots for a night jump unless your plane is crashing.

(I know, I said "supposedly", and by that I meant no slander. Just that all possibilities have to be taken into account when reviewing such things.)

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:11 PM
reply to post by jritzmann

Thank you for the update. We appreciate your efforts. I will be looking forward to anything else that you may be able to determine.

top topics

<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in