[edit on 18-1-2008 by Palasheea]

yeah that is a "x362" spy drone the military developed for use in what i like to call: Operation Iraqui Liberation (O.I.L) it would have been in a patrol flight... sorry to burst your bubble

This thread is so very indicative of the reason that UFOs continue to be a fringe area of interest.

Here's the deal - Jeff asked me to look at the clip. I'm not impressed. It's nothing out of the ordinary.

That there are some of you who think this is something paranormal, is both telling and frustrating. That some of you claim that you're sure it's going behind the cloud - well, I'm an expert at knowing the depth prioritization of 2D representations of 3D objects, and the issues of foreshortening distortion of objects in motion, and it's clear to my TRAINED eye that this is a small thing MUCH closer to the camera than the plane. It absolutely does NOT go behind the cloud. It's most likely a small bird, or insect. It's NOT a missile or other type of fueled/unfueled projectile, unless someone shot something from a wrist rocket close to the camera.

It seems that many people here think that ANY opinion is valuable about a topic - sorry, I disagree. INFORMED opinions are much more valid and insightful than random opinions. I don't offer definitive conclusions about many things, but when it comes to something like this clip, I'm completely comfortable saying that, in my professional opinion, it's absolutely nothing to get excited about. I share Jeff's frustration with this situation, and the constant demands of some of the folks here that he spend insane amounts of time doing analysis at no charge, because you WANT him to do it. It's part of the scourge of entitlement that has infected our society, and I personally detest this attitude. You want in-depth analysis? Then get us original, uncompressed video, and ask NICELY, and we'll consider taking a close look. You have grainy, low-res, compressed video showing the degradation of being run through harsh DCT compression, and you have the chutzpah to DEMAND they we PROVE that it's not a UFO? Get real, folks.

As far as the whole RODS thing - give us a break. We know ALL ABOUT the RODS nonsense. Anyone wanting to buy into it, have fun - it's about as mysterious and interesting as a pile of dirty diapers. Realize that belief in that silliness is predicated on absolute ignorance of analog/digital video formats, interlacing, fields and frames and motion artifacting. BELIEVE what you want, but once you learn video 101, you'll quickly realize what the deal is, and move on.

And for the record, NOTHING would thrill us more than being able to say, without hesitation, that a piece of video is genuinely a UFO. But stop and consider - a legitimate photo of a UFO tells you precious little about what it is, where it came from, what's inside of it and what it means. Jeff and I have both had multiple, intense sighting experiences, and our agenda is to try and get some clarity around this topic. Jeff's been involved in investigation work in this field much longer than me, and I can see why so many folks get turned off to any level of rational, reasonable discussion of the topic. It's sad - this is certainly one of the most important, and interesting topics worthy of our time and consideration, and in the end, it all turns into a #storm of egos, vested interests and insecurities. Too bad.

Believe what you will, Jeff and I have little use for belief, it's understanding and knowledge that primarily drive both of us. We don't claim to know what the truth of this phenomenon will ultimately turn out to be, but we know a fabricated/bogus/conventional image/video clip when we see it. Take it or leave it, we offer our opinions, but make harsh demands of us, and we'll cease sharing our thoughts and continue in our quest in a personal and more discrete fashion. That's a promise.

dB

[edit on 18-1-2008 by davidbiedny]

[edit on 18-1-2008 by davidbiedny]

[edit on 18-1-2008 by davidbiedny]

"That's fair enough but what about the fact that the object passes through the clouds? "

I think what you are seeing is what you want to see. I see none of thise "passing through clouds" you mention. This is just a rod. Wether it's a bug or womething else is not important.

for anyone to say that they are a trained professional and to think that this object doesn't go behind the cloud is a joke. Nice try to make yourself sound like an expert, but this is no illusion. That object is clearly shown to go behind the clouds twice. This is a fact and there is no debating that fact. If you try and debate that this object goes behind the clouds you are either lying or very far from a professional. It's funny how everyone is a professional when they are trying to push their opinion on a certain topic. A person trying to prove this does not go behind the cloud would have to believe that this video was a fake and had been photoshopped. The level of agenda on here by some is no laughing matter.