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.

 

BBC World News - Unidentified Objects

page: 15
75
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Madcow9597
 


Where? Please post a link.

Thanks.




posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Madcow9597
 


Really? You saw "the original video"? Would you care to point me in that direction?



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curio
They're clearly pigeons. Pigeons are an iridescent silver color that reflects light very nicely - if you've ever seen a bunch of pigeons flying against dark clouds, but with the sun lighting them from the front, you'll know it can be quite cool looking. Any transparency effect is from the speed they're diving not being captured by the video. And pigeons can dive pretty quick!

So is this what October 14th was all about? Pigeons


[edit on 14-10-2008 by Curio]


Pigeons!? Cheap CGI yes, but how anyone can see birds in this video is beyond me and I'd recommend to have your eyes checked or your monitor replaced



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by paperplanes
 

On the sound... maybe if you turn up the volume on your t.v. and rewatch it directly from your DVR you can let us know if you hear the sound from the original feed and get back to us. Then we can either throw out the sound or continue from there.

-anyone



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 


I am feeling incredibly stupid for not doing that already. I replayed the video on my DVR and no, as I suspected the sound did not come from the recording itself. I'm sure something moved in the room around the camera and produced that noise. It is a coincidence that it coincided with the objects flying by.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by paperplanes
 


Doh... well that sucks. I thought that was the key to the vid. Well I guess we call out the big guns and ask one of the video savvy mods to come into the picture and maybe shed some light.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Probably someone else brought something similar to this discussion but hey, they're wonderful creatures, why not post more of them


www.motion.kodak.com...


As an increasing human population claims more and more room for our homes, recreation, work and infrastructure, we often displace the other creatures who share the planet. Sometimes, the results are tragic. The loss of habitat can contribute to the extinction of both plants and animals. In some cases, the only way to prevent this is to preserve a habitat in its original form. But once in awhile, wild creatures can adapt and thrive in suburban, or even urban landscapes, especially if they get a little help.

That's exactly what Kodak has done at our headquarters in Rochester, New York. In 1995, in cooperation with the Rochester Peregrine Falcon Project, we placed nest boxes on Kodak Office Tower. The boxes are about 64 meters (210 feet) from the ground. They were first used in 1998. Since then, our nesting falcons have returned each year and successfully raised over 20 chicks (called eyas).


Literally, a KODAK moment!


There's your UFOs people

Don't be carried away by the speed they can zoom past a skyscrapers window, they can do more than 150 miles/per hour. Any airplane has never flown too close to high rise buildings with such velocity, it is too dangerous because when in high wind, gaps or turbulence would be creating major instability in the flight path, resulting in a crash near another building. hence we don;t have footage of small planes zooming fast past skyscrapers.

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

To summarize, these were falcons.


[edit on 14-10-2008 by spacebot]



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   
My friend sent me pics of a supposed UFO over Nevada last night at 7:27 pm through his cell phone camera, definitely had the shape and metallic gloss of one. Thought that was a pretty weird coincidence.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by spacebot
 


Well... if, in fact, they are birds, we would all like to have that smoking gun piece of evidence that proves it.

Paperplanes, just for me can you watch it one more time with the sound blaring? That is one hell of a coincidence. Thanks.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by anyone]



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 


I played it a few times more with the sound up, and I'm really not hearing the whooshing sound. The more I listen to it, I *think* I'm hearing a faint something, but I'm sure it's my imagination. The whoosh on the uploaded video is quite noticeable; I'm sure I would hear it on the DVR player.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by paperplanes
 


Darn I thought maybe your canon picked it up better for some reason. Did you hear the second whoosh that I was referring to in the first vid you posted? I know I may just be beating a dead horse (sorry,I hate that phrase).



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by anyone
 


No, no noticeable whoosh at all. I replayed the uploaded video again just to see exactly where I should expect the noises to occur, and you're right, it fits perfectly with the movement of the objects. The whoosh lines up exactly with the objects flying by. Unfortunately, I think it is just an odd coincidence.

Edit to add: If the noise had come from the DVR video rather than in the room around me, I would certainly find the BBC joke/hoax argument more likely. It would be a bit too much. I'm actually glad that the noise was an interference from the area around the camera.

[edit on 14/10/08 by paperplanes]



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by spacebot
 


The city looks like NY to me but I could be wrong!

Those objects being birds? they must be really big birds since, in the first video, they fly behind the last building and if you compare the windows of the building and the 'birds', the 'birds' are bigger.

I do hear the wooosshhy sound and I say, in my opinion, that it is CGI.
Some one is just having a good time with us.

Edit to add: Not only are the objects waayy bigger that the windows, they never reappear. From the direction they are going you would think they will appear once they pass the building, but they just vanish!



[edit on 10/10/2008 by thegrayone]



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by paperplanes
 


Well, if they(BBC) take you seriously and return your email maybe you should ask them to send you a better copy of the vid. to further scrutinize it. Good Luck with it and I will return in the hopes that you learn more.

-anyone



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegrayone
reply to post by spacebot
 


The city looks like NY to me but I could be wrong!



A few individuals from London confirmed that the area is Canary Wharf in London.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Hold up.

The vid shows a beutiful day in London, but i remember it being pretty horrible.

12:00


13:00


Met Office

Cheat!



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
those weren't ufo's those are my ships.



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Man_Versus_AntiMan
 


This was also discussed here earlier. The forecast for London showed a very cloudy day with light rain. Several people in London noted the particular conditions in their area, and while some stated that it was cloudy, there were also some who stated that it was sunny in their area for part of the day. I do not know what the conditions were during that time near Canary Wharf. Also, a BBC viewer mentioned that the background feeds of an area often appear brighter than the area's conditions really are--this is another possibility. And yes, it is certainly possible that the background was not "real time".

[edit on 14/10/08 by paperplanes]



posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Well, I can imagine sunny spells being possible with the weather we had today.

But at times there was 100% cloud coverage, id say at a bare minimum there was maybe 70% the whole day.

All the videos have 0% cloud coverage, for as far as the eye can see, blue skys - not a chance.




top topics



 
75
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join