UFO's caught on video at Lafayette, LA air show

Well,I don't have anything more to add except my opinion so here it goes.
I watched all the videos again and again plus the plictures and in the end,i think they're bugs after all.

They were two things that could change my mind,one:the possibility that the thing in the first video did go behind the plane,which bloodcircle's gif and later IAttackPeople's nice pictures both show that it's flying in front of the planes and second:i was gonna ask you what Chadwickus did.
Allthough you didn't notice any bugs (which troubled me since i'd believe that if you didn't notice a single bug there then maybe there weren't any),in the last video,after 00:53 there's also one more thing flying in 56 which for me is clearly a bug and makes me believe even more that there were just bugs there flying around and being annoying.

Sorry about that,that's just my opinion but i sure do appreciatte your effort.

Originally posted by The Dave
I reckon if you were watching the fighters at the show, you wouldn't have a chance of seeing the UFO - it's moving incredibly fast. You could blink and miss the whole thing.

If this was a UFO flying at a great distance and speed, there was always a possibility of nobody seeing it, but I doubt it.

First, even when our attention is focused on an object, our field of view is much bigger than that of common camera lens, we have a field of view of some 180º in the horizontal and a stereoscopic field of view of some 140º, while in the vertical we have a field of view of some 130º, much larger than the field of view of the camera, and that would mean that the object, even unnoticed, was inside the field of view of the people much longer than on the field of view of the camera. Also, the zoom reduces the field of view, and as it was used a optical 4x zoom that means that the camera was seeing even less of available scene than at 1x zoom.

The speed looks greater because of the frame rate of the video, as our eyes do not work in a digital way, we do not have frames as a video, and the image would be more noticeable, even if it was not clearer.

The speed would have made it more noticeable in the peripheral vision, the vision that makes us see things make small movements made at the "corner of the eye", so when the people were looking at the jets and the object was entering the field of view, if it was perceived as an abnormal object it would have made people look at it.

Another thing, that I have noticed with my tests with a Panasonic DMC-FZ30 and a Canon MV730i, is that our vision works at a level comparable with a 10x zoom, so the camera was seeing objects smaller than the people that were looking at that scene.

I've also heard of some UFOs being picked up on camera but not to the human eye, another possible explanation.

Yes, I have read about it many times, but I have never seen one occasion where it could be confirmed.

What is a known fact is that people do not pay attention to what surrounds them, and when they look at a photo they notice things that were there all the time but that were "invisible" to them before, not because the things were not there but because the person's brain ignored it, considering it irrelevant.

Originally posted by lifeform
what are the chances of a bug being filmed by two different people at the same airshow during the same sequence of event at close range to the camera.

It could have been more than one bug, but even if it was just one, do you think that the chances of two people videoing (is this a real word?) the same subject some metres from each other catch the same bug on the video are smaller than the chances of filming an object at a great distance and at a very high speed?

Also, if it was the same object on both videos, if it was far away, the difference in angle on the second video (the one not made by Wolf321) should make it smaller, and the fact that this second video shows the jets smaller and the object bigger, if it was the same object, it was closer to the second camera than to the first, and much closer, considering the relative difference in size, making it almost impossible for it to be far away.

if you really believe it is a bug then you have to believe the bug did'nt just fly past one camera at close range but two camera's, during the same sequence of event.

No, I don't have to believe that, it could be another object, bug or not.

people may like to concentrate on one video only, but both should be taken into account not just one.

I like to concentrate at one thing at a time, so it was what I did, and I started by Wolf321's video.

the fact it is seen by two camera's surely proves it is not a video error or artifact but a REAL object. i'm unsure why that is still being suggested.

I do not remember anyone suggesting it was an artifact or video error, are you sure someone suggested that explanation?

then its a bug, thanks to the very scientific observations of ATS members that has been cleared up.

well done everybody. no need to observe both video's, just the one.
and certainly no need to think why it is'nt a bug. lets just try our best to MAKE the 'bug' fit the data and ignore the bits where it dos'nt fit.

it's a bug, it's a bug, say it again it's a bug. keep repeating, if you say it enough times it becomes true.

seriously, if you want to believe its a bug, then do so. i'm certainly not convinced it can be proven eitherway as yet and believe some people are missing or ignoreing other things which should make them think ferther.

i cannot make people see what i see you have to see it for yourselves.
i don't think this is a case of a proven bug, just a case of people choosing to go with that explaination.

my concern is there is something more to this and people are just going to say 'it's a bug' and ignore what could be actual proof of a u.f.o. caught on two films at once at the same place and time.

it COULD be a bug dos'nt do it for me.

Originally posted by lifeform

starred and flagged, simply because the explainations given so far do not describe what is seen.

it should be obvious the object is in the distance(whatever it is) and not in the foreground.

Agree 100% To me the object is behind the jets.

Great video op and a star and flag from me.

Originally posted by lifeform
no need to observe both video's, just the one.
and certainly no need to think why it is'nt a bug.

OK, why it isn't a bug?

lets just try our best to MAKE the 'bug' fit the data and ignore the bits where it dos'nt fit.

I did not saw anyone making uncommon assumptions to make the bug theory fit the data, could you point one of those cases to me? Thanks.

it's a bug, it's a bug, say it again it's a bug. keep repeating, if you say it enough times it becomes true.

Why should we do that? And I can only speak for myself, but I never said that it was a bug, I said it could be a bug, and I add that the one on the second video looks more like a bird.

seriously, if you want to believe its a bug, then do so.

I do not want to believe anything, I want to know, believing in something is the best way of being deceived.

i'm certainly not convinced it can be proven eitherway as yet and believe some people are missing or ignoreing other things which should make them think ferther.

What things?

i cannot make people see what i see you have to see it for yourselves.

Neither can other people make you see what they see, and that is the problem, so we have to try to explain it the best we can.

i don't think this is a case of a proven bug, just a case of people choosing to go with that explaination.

I don't think it's a case of a proven bug either, and while some people go for one explanation other people go for other explanations, as usual, different people have different ways of interpreting data.

my concern is there is something more to this and people are just going to say 'it's a bug' and ignore what could be actual proof of a u.f.o. caught on two films at once at the same place and time.

I think you are giving to much importance to the bug theory, I did not saw it as promoted as the truth as you seem to think it was (or maybe I see things in a different way), and could you please tell us what you think there could be more than "a bug"?

Even if it was proved as a UFO (an Unidentified Flying Object), by definition, it would not be identified.

it COULD be a bug dos'nt do it for me.

I wasn't doing it for you, so no problems there.

birds

uk.youtube.com...

www.fazed.org...

uk.youtube.com...

bugs

uk.youtube.com...

uk.youtube.com...

just to get an idea of speed at close range, shapes, movement. if you still think it is a bug or bird fine. i'm not convinced.

if people want to misindentify the object that is their call. it dos'nt mean i have to agree with their observations or accept the object being given a label that simply dos'nt fit what we are seeing.


[edit on 4-11-2008 by lifeform]

Originally posted by lifeform
just to get an idea of speed at close range, shapes, movement. if you still think it is a bug or bird fine. i'm not convinced.

Those videos bring nothing new to my knowledge about what birds and bugs flying look like, either with the naked eye or on video or photos, I see them everyday and I have filmed several birds flying and tried to film bugs flying (filming a fly, for example, it's very hard to do on purpose, they are too fast to follow with the camera) to compare them to what I see on videos posted on ATS.

And, once more, I did not said that it was a bug or a bird, I said it could have been a bug or bird, I have no way of knowing it for sure, and when I can not be sure I do not make statements implying it.

if people want to misindentify the object that is their call.

Then help them/us to identify the object, saying that it's a UFO is the same as not identifying it, you are identifying an object saying it is an unidentified object.

it dos'nt mean i have to agree with their observations or accept the object being given a label that simply dos'nt fit what we are seeing.

Neither the other people have to accept your interpretation, whatever that may be, the people that really think that it was a bug or a bird may be thinking the same thing about you, that because you can't identify it as a bug or a bird it doesn't mean they have to accept it.

I think you are giving too much relevance to this; stop for a while and rethink the way you are approaching this situation, this is only two possibilities of interpretation of the video, it's not definite proof of anything, and unless we get a third video taken with a much better camera showing the object as a bug or bird or, on the contrary, as an artificial object passing behind the jet, this is the only data we have.

Even if all people that post on this thread think it's a bug or a bird that should not stop you from keeping on studying the case, that is the great advantage of a forum, while the thread is open you (or anyone else) can come here with new data or a new way of interpreting the same data and show what this really was.

what makes you think i am not helping identify it? if i could find something that looked the same i would of provided it. all i can currently do is eliminate possibilities, or test how simular it looks to other suggestions.

however i cannot find anything that moves at that speed with that shape.
those that put the bird and bug theory forward have been unable to provide anything either so far. yet they claim its so common it happens all the time.

maybe if somebody was able to provide an example of a close flying bug visable for only a few frames, that would help.

however so far all i have seen is opinions it COULD be a bug but nothing conclusive.

all i am pointing out is it needs ferther investigastion before walking away.

and that the bug theory is just as unprovable at this point than the u.f.o. theory.

i suggest the OP passing the video's onto a serious research and investigastion team. all your ever likely to get here is conflicting opinions.
what people THINK it is as oppose to either admitting it is unidentifable, or actually pinpointing what it is using tools most people here do not have at their disposal.

i agree to disagree. i'm not saying it is a spacecraft, or it is'nt a bug.
i am merely pointing out nobody has been able to prove anything eitherway. the bug and bird theorys have come about simply as a suggestion rather than with something being shown which supports it.

all the bug and bird video's from various ranges ive seen, do not look the same or move at that speed.

however it is impossible for me to beable to see every video. so if somebody finds something please post it.

Originally posted by lifeform
what makes you think i am not helping identify it?

The fact that you haven't posted any idea of what the object may be.

all i can currently do is eliminate possibilities, or test how simular it looks to other suggestions.

That is the next best thing, when we can not find what it is, if we can prove what it isn't then we reduce the probabilities of what it may be.

however i cannot find anything that moves at that speed with that shape.
those that put the bird and bug theory forward have been unable to provide anything either so far. yet they claim its so common it happens all the time.

The speed is relative, if the object is closer to the camera a slower movement would appear as a fast movement.

Look at this image.


The red lines show the field of view of a camera.

Now imagine that the closest line (at a distance of 49 pixels) is the path an object follows at a constant speed (10 pixels per second, for example).
Another object travels along the farthest line (at a distance of 408 pixels), at a speed of 50 pixels per second. Both objects enter the field of view at the same time, looking like this.


And this is what it looks like in my hypothetical video, the slower object disappears from the field of view before the faster object disappears, because although it was 5 times slower it travelled a distance that was 7 times (more or less) smaller.


Considering that the faster object was 8 times farther away and was 5 times faster than the other object, if it was even farther away it would look even slower, and a faster object could be farther away and look like it had the same speed.

Considering all this, I think that a bug or a bird flying closer to the camera would look faster than the jets, but if the object was farther away than the jets then its speed should have been tremendous.

Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing the size and distance of an unknown object, so we can not know if the UFO was closer or farther than the jets.

And the shape of any object at a speed high enough will appear as a blurry version of its general shape.

maybe if somebody was able to provide an example of a close flying bug visable for only a few frames, that would help.

As I have said, it's a bit hard to film a bug at high speed flying close to the camera, it's only by chance that those things happen.

The best I have is this video, I think it's a small bird because of the way it moves (there are some small changes in shape that look like the flapping of wings).

It appears at the end of the video.

however so far all i have seen is opinions it COULD be a bug but nothing conclusive.

The problem is we can not have anything conclusive with just these images.

all i am pointing out is it needs ferther investigastion before walking away.

Well, I never walk away from any UFO thread, I have many "sleeping" in my favourites threads list, always waiting for more data.

and that the bug theory is just as unprovable at this point than the u.f.o. theory.

Not really, because it is a UFO, we are trying to turn it into a IFO, an Identified Flying Object.

i suggest the OP passing the video's onto a serious research and investigastion team. all your ever likely to get here is conflicting opinions.
what people THINK it is as oppose to either admitting it is unidentifable, or actually pinpointing what it is using tools most people here do not have at their disposal.

I agree, but I do not expect anything conclusive, if the original images are the ones we saw (the AVI files).

the bug and bird theorys have come about simply as a suggestion rather than with something being shown which supports it.

I disagree, there has been some support for that theory (if it was at a great distance the object would have looked more faint because of the distance and the smoke, dust, etc., a closer object looks faster) but those are just small things that show more that theory can be considered as such than support of a real theory.

But at the moment that is the only theory that has been presented as a possibility with something to show that it is really a possibility.

all the bug and bird video's from various ranges ive seen, do not look the same or move at that speed.

That is why I try to make videos with things that I have seen in UFO videos, to see if a common bird or bug flying close to the camera can look like a UFO.

however it is impossible for me to beable to see every video. so if somebody finds something please post it.

Done above.

like i said, i agree to disagree. and i know how prespective works thank you very much, nothing you have said or have shown so far has swayed my opinion. i have already took everything you have shown or said into consideration from the outset.

and i still believe it is inconclusive.

then again i see both videos as the same event rather than both videos as being a seprate event to the other.

maybe it is possible for something you say happens by chance to occur twice at the same time in different locations, but i'm not convinced.

and i'm still not convinced about wether the object passes infront or behind.

im afraid untill/if some proper analysis of the video's is done, i'm unlikely to change my postion.

clearer information is needed.

i apologise if i don't take a COULD as a IS.

reply to post by Wolf321


I had a similar experience at a jet show myself.... I posted it here on ATS,
Click here for thread with pics....--> www.abovetopsecret.com...

Mine turned out to be a ufo bird?..lol (well thats what we all think)

I still dont think that the first video was a bug .. reallly.... we needed some expert video analysis on that ... the second one I just didnt saw yet ...

Originally posted by lifeform
and i know how prespective works thank you very much, nothing you have said or have shown so far has swayed my opinion.

The way you talked about the high speed of the "bug" made me think that you may not be thinking about that difference, so I thought it was best to present some information about it, it never hurts to show some information, maybe someone can gain something with it.

i have already took everything you have shown or said into consideration from the outset.

and i still believe it is inconclusive.

OK.
And if you have read all my posts you have seen that I have said the same thing, as it is, this is inconclusive.

then again i see both videos as the same event rather than both videos as being a seprate event to the other.

maybe it is possible for something you say happens by chance to occur twice at the same time in different locations, but i'm not convinced.

It's possible that both videos show the same thing, but if they do then it looks even more like an object close to the camera than a far away object at high speed.

and i'm still not convinced about wether the object passes infront or behind.

Neither am I, as I said before.

im afraid untill/if some proper analysis of the video's is done, i'm unlikely to change my postion.

clearer information is needed.

I agree, that is I said that, as it is, is inconclusive.

i apologise if i don't take a COULD as a IS.

I see that I have not made my position clear, maybe the distance between my intentions and my words got bigger once more, but I never take a "could" as a "is", and that is why I say "could" or "possibly" or "probably" or "looks like" instead of "is", I have very few certainties, and none about things I have never seen in my life (like the air show on the video).

In conclusion, it looks like we have been saying more or less the same thing, we need more or better data, the data we have is not enough to reach any conclusion, not even if the object passes in front or behind of the aeroplane.

Originally posted by kyleplatinum
reply to post by Wolf321

 

I had a similar experience at a jet show myself.... I posted it here on ATS,
Click here for thread with pics....--> www.abovetopsecret.com...

Mine turned out to be a ufo bird?..lol (well thats what we all think)

thanks for pointing it out. i do think that one is a bird because of the body shape.

but like anything video will always be clearer than a snapshot of one moment, because you get to see speed and movement. it's a pity you did'nt get footage.

In conclusion, it looks like we have been saying more or less the same thing, we need more or better data, the data we have is not enough to reach any conclusion, not even if the object passes in front or behind of the aeroplane.

agree 100%

reply to post by mikesingh


huh Well I was there and didnt see it in my video, but did see it in your video, Wonder what that was? if it was anything they would have picked it up in radar, are you serious? I dont know what it is.