It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Wanna Catch UFOs on Video? Tennessee knows how.

page: 2
20
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 06:39 AM

Originally posted by Zelong

Originally posted by Bachrk
Well I just went out back and taped for 10 minutes on my Sony handycam and just reviewed the recording. Nothing but a couple of birds.

Great work Bachrk

What if its just Space Junk.
By blocking the sun out you now get a reflection from the Sun on an object that is less brighter than the sun,now you can see them(space Junk) because it is now the brightest object?

My thoughts.
Zelong.

I'm going to try it again today. Yesterday I tried it without zoom and even tried it on nightmode? Today I'll try it with zoom and without and post the results later.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 06:55 AM
I want to discuss this "space junk" theory a bit more.

I want to ask, could a piece of debris, reflecting the suns light, be seen so clearly from the ground?

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 08:16 AM

First of all, I would like to say that I think this "technique" only shows relatively low flying objects, because the bigger the distance between the camera and the object blocking the light the more things you see. That is easily confirmed by holding your hand in front of the camera; you will see none of those flying objects, but if you use something some metres away you will start seeing objects in the air.

The two cameras should be arranged in the same way, but instead of pointing exactly up they should be tilted slightly to each other, or one pointing up and the other pointing at an angle, like this.

Knowing the angle (X) and the distance between the cameras (L) you can know at what altitude is that area seen by both cameras, so you can know the altitude of any object that appears on the images from both cameras.

PS: In the example above, with X=71.2º and L=136 (the drawing is wrong, showing the distance between cameras 3 pixels longer than it should), the distance (D) from camera A to the area seen by both cameras would be D=L/cos(X) or D=136/cos(71.2) = 422. As this is also the hypotenuse of that triangle, the altitude (H) would be H^2=422^2-136^2 = 399.

PPS: the side view should have both cameras with the same angle, unless you want to make more complex calculations.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 10:44 AM

Originally posted by esteay812
In Middle Tennesse, USA a man claimed to know how to film and see UFOs in the broad daylight. He told this to a news crew... then proceeded to prove it!

Get your camera, point it at the sun and then block out the sun. The news crew did this and captured a dozen UFOs in the span of only 20 minutes. I think I'll try this, maybe you should too.

Here is the coverage:

Part 2:

Thought I would give this a go myself.And I have to say am quite taken aback by the results.There is a heck of a lot of stuff flying back and forth in the video I have just taken.I used my sony dcr-sr36 with a screw on infrared lens and with the nightshot function on.(I think this also helps to protect the camera). Anyway see for yourself.I for one think it is particles that are being illuminated by the sun.I guess could be wrong though.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 11:26 AM
Hello fellow ATSers. These are pics that I took with my cell phone cam a few years ago. I noticed the same thing about the sun affected your ability to pick up UFO's with cameras. I'm a Paramedic and was on duty the evening these were taken. My partner and I were on the way back to our station after a call and I noticed a hint of something in the sky when we came to a stop at a big intersection. I pulled out my cell cam to take a pic. I couldn't see much detail on the small cell screen and just put it back in my pocket. A few minutes later I noticed that it was still there, I don't want to say it was following us, but it seemed to be keeping the same distance and position in relation to us. I took the second pic, again not seeing much detail on the cell screen. I sent the pics to my online album and later when I looked at the pics on a fulll screen I saw this. Now that I know the sun was actually helping to enhance my ability to capture, I will doing alot more daytime skywatching.

*Edit: I'm having a hard time posting the pics on my reply, so here's links to the pics. Which code am I supposed to use? Or can someone post the pics for me?

[edit on 4/25/09 by Chillidog1]

[edit on 4/25/09 by Chillidog1]

[edit on 4/25/09 by Chillidog1]

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 11:27 AM

This video you just posted has an interesting anomaly at 11 seconds and continues to 17 seconds. The rest of it, I think, is normal junk in our atmosphere. Pollen, bugs, dust, ....just junk.

But the other thing needs to be studied. It definately has a constant trajectory, seems like it turns slightly, and it's not an airplane or a bird.

You should have someone check that out for you.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 11:50 AM

I have had a look at the video through my windows player and I have concluded it is a bird as the shape can be made out on the full screen setting.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 12:01 PM

Originally posted by Pakd-on-mystery

Originally posted by EvilBat
which I didn't see anything on it
yet my friend when I emailed it to him said he saw some stuff
If anyone wants to check it out for them self I'll see if I can upload it
It's called the John Bro Technique
media.abovetopsecret.com...

Dude I saw something in your vid though too. The thing that catches my eye about it is that once at 0:04 in the left middle of the picture and a few times later. The one comes from left and not even a seconde after it is where I saw it first it was on the other side of the picture. Take a real close look at it, you'll see it too! There's more than one though, and the are all coming from different directions, and going in different directions too.

I counted atleast 8 I saw.

1 in beginning going what seems like faster than the speed of light from right to left.

A few spots that quickly form and vanish midway through and a really slow one ( compared to the rest ) that goes from right to left kind of upwards I think.

They appear in different spots and move in all different directions.

I think you would have seen even more had you blocked out the sun more.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 12:03 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP
Some years ago I tried this "solar obliteration technique", as someone called it, and I got something on a photo.

After looking to the sky for some minutes I understood what it was, it was a small feather from the pigeons that were on the top of the building in which I live.

All other cases of "UFOs" photographed or filmed with this "technique" look like small object floating in the wind.

But there is a way of knowing if these things are close or far away. By using two cameras pointing to a specific point in the air we can know at what distance the objects are if we know the angle between the cameras.

Apparently, nobody has tried this, I wonder why.

PS: I can not try this for myself, I had to return the camera that I have been using to its owner.

I see your point , but don't call other people out for not trying it when you yourself have not tried it.

Makes it seem like you are just against it because.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 12:12 PM

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
I see your point , but don't call other people out for not trying it when you yourself have not tried it.

I tried it two years ago (I think), what I haven't tried (and cannot try at the moment) is to use two cameras.

Also, to see these things you do not need a camera, your eyes are enough (if you have average vision).

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 12:35 PM
What fun - I have just spent 30 mins in the garden trying various recordings....

Wow - what a lot of stuff flying around! Much you could tell was something close and more pollen/seed/dust type but others were strange.

I need to try this again but use something much further away to block the sun which will then let me gauge whether it's something close (and explainable) or something 'way-up' and weird.

Anyone with HD, good zoom and VERY high FPS should try this and then slow it down.

Just go and do it - it's worth it.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:00 PM
I have seen this for some years now. It was first described as a way to film rods. Little flying things that move like water creatures in the air but are infinitely less dense than water creatures. They are so low density in fact that they tend to float on air and use undulation like a water creature to move about.

There is even a theory that due to the fact that they never touch the ground in their lives that they use some electrostatic propulsion as well due to static build up on their bodies. They are about the density of aerogel. Most of the researchers I have talked to believe they are evolved from a species of water creatures and that they vary in size from just a few inches across all the way up to huge miles across creatures that float at the edge of space and have the ability to use energy from the sun and particle matter in the upper atmosphere for food.

Their low density and the fact that they never need to touch the ground means that when they die they just fall into very tiny pieces back to the ground as dust so we have never had a body to examine when they expire.

If you were to somehow capture one which is unlikely given their speed of movement they would just fall to pieces given their very low density and would just be carbonaceous dust when examined.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:07 PM
sun reflecting off of orbiting satellites look exactly like those "ufo's"

coincidence?

um, maybe not.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:18 PM
this is interesting, because a homeless guy from my mom's church told me the best way to see UFO's, is to look at the sky on a sunny day, but to block out the sun while standing under a shelter or awning, and look up towards the sky...

maybe this is what he meant?

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:18 PM

It looks like dust to me, dust that's catching the light of the sun as it moves downward. It doesn't look like they are craft with any significant weight and even the reporter said they appeared translucent so its rather unconvincing...

But others should definitely try this so we can either debunk or confirm this method...

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:38 PM

good observation.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:47 PM
I live in Memphis Tn
Im gonna go try this right now

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 02:04 PM
There are a ton of these videos on YouTube. Most of what is claimed to be absolute proof of UFOs looks like the same regular particles that I have watched with the naked eye using the same technique since I was very young. It is still interesting to realise how much crap is floating around in our atmosphere.

But, there are quite a few anomalies captured as well, things that do appear to be far off, moving against the wind, at speeds not consistent with the apparent wind speed, shapes that don't seem to fit with pollen, feathers or dust etc.

In this video the guy seems so fascinated by his particulates that he appears to have been unimpressed by what looks like a real UFO at 1:40...

and in this one the object that shoots up to the top of the frame looks interesting. I'm linking it because full screen is important to see it.

I have a 3CCD HD video camera and some filters, I think I'll go investigate this technique.

Take care...Michael

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 02:19 PM
I think that some people may be missing the point of this exercise. I don't think anyone is claiming that if you use this "solar obliteration" technique, you'll suddenly be able to see endless streams of alien spacecraft. You will, apparently, see some sort of unfamiliar phenomenon.

Many people confuse 'UFO' with 'alien spacecraft'. They are not the same thing at all. Alien craft are only one among many theories. And certainly, many UFO's aren't any sort of spacecraft at all, they're just not readily identified.

This experiment seems to show that if you aim towards the sun, while protecting against the extreme glare of the sun itself, you may see some sort of aerial phenomenon - an unidentified object that appears to be flying, or a UFO.

The importance of this, if it actually happens, is that there a way to reproduce at least one sort of unknown (or little-known) aerial phenomenon. What the video showed looked nothing like the UFO's that might be spacecraft. All I could see were bright spots moving - lights, without anything solid. The chances are very good that these were small objects receiving an unusual amount of light, which we'd ordinarily miss because the glare of the sun would overwhelm the small glare of the objects. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be an artifact of using a digital camera, something like the 'orbs' often observed with digital still cameras. That whole theory would come crashing down, of course, if this same effect occurs with film cameras.

I'm wondering whether you could get a similar effect with bright moonlight. That might explain some of the lights seen in the sky at night. It certainly won't explain them all, but it could help to eliminate some spurious sightings. It is useful to do this, because the more spurious events you can eliminate, the more clearly the remaining events stand out as genuine unknown phenomena.

A word of caution, BTW. You should never gaze directly into the sun, either with the naked eye, or through a camera lens, not even if you're using sun glasses. That can cause permanent eye damage, including blindness. Even if you're not gazing at the sun, the brightness can damage the camera. Think of a magnifying glass, focusing on the delicate CCD. It can burn it, which destroys it.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 03:04 PM

One of the individuals on YouTube posting a bunch of these type of video stated that he tried at night with moonlight and didn't pick up anything. I'm not saying don't try it, just mentioning his statement.

new topics

top topics

20