Yes, sadly, newspapers are using UFOs as some device to sell more copies, and they all are probably laughin at those who study the subject matter with
a serious approach, or at those who just would like to know more: some newspapers like The Sun are casting a VERY bad light on the phenomenon:
on 2008 the Sun ONLY published chinese lanterns and birds photographs, the ony UFO you could spot in their articles was in the title.
Some newspapers are still serious though, let's dont forget it.
This specific case: it IS a bird in my humble opinion, but it's not so blatant simply because it's out of focus: out of focus + motion blur =
deformed shape. Many see a cigar, many see a plane, many see an helicopter, many don't see a wing flap, many dont see it passing between the monument
and the camera. It's all ok, because what we have after all is a bunch of pixels, so one is entitled to say that he/she doesn't see it clearly: but
if we extract what is really useful, then we get a very clear scenario:
1) Wings flapping:
these frames were extracted from the better version of the video i've been able to find: the frames after them are just some amorphic bunch of pixels
and the ones before show nothing: i don't need glasses, at least my oculist told me that not much time ago, and i see clearly wings flapping: just
can't outline anything because the camera was focusing on the monument, on the crowd, on the subject of the report, which was not the birds of the
2) "It passes behind the monument": NOPE, it passes closer:
unless the monument is made of glass, but i don't think so.
3) "It could be an helicopter, a plane":
since it could be (BUT only IF planes and helicopters have flapping wings), let's make some calculations:
Facts About the Washington Monument
Height: 555 feet, 5.125 inches (169.29 m)
Width at Base: 55 feet, 1½ inches (16.80 m)
Width at Top of Shaft: 34 feet, 5 inches (10.5 m)
Thickness of Walls: 15 feet (4.6 m) at base and 18 inches (460 mm)at observation level
Number of Blocks: 36,491
let's assume that the height at which the "ufo" and the monument crossed was the half (but is NOT, is more towards to top of it): let's say 45
feet, ok? What we see is approximately one third of the width of the monument, let's esyimate 15 feet then. But the monument is on focus, the object
is NOT. The object is out of focus because it's way closer to the camera than the monument. Besides the object's appearance is affected by its
motion blur, the monument is NOT. An object, which apparent size is 15 feet, but which appearance is elongated by the lack of focus and motion blur
can be really some helicopter plane etc, (don't forget its wings flipping)?
Finally, the speed: in order to calculate the speed of an object moving in a 3d environment basing the calculations on what we see on a 2d plan is
just a waste of time. All you can do is to guess, don't fake calculations because what you would need is a trianglulation and what you would need in
order to make a triangulation are TWO videos taken from TWO different angles: you have neither the first nor the second one, and even if you would,
then the calculations would be VERY approximate so don't talk about speed
: talk about apparent speed
: it's WAY better. Speed is
something known, apparent speed is something claimed by you.
Just my two €. cents
[edit on 24/1/2009 by internos]