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.

 

A Closer Look: UFO releases intelligent moving spheres!! First ever video footage!

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch
If this object is FULL of balloons, why did it not shrink? I mean..come on!!!!! If it was full of 50 balloons, 25, however many, its going to shrink in size!!!!

Obviously, it didnt.


You are assuming that the main object is a balloon.

It looks more like a kite object than a balloon. And so do the smaller objects although there is no reason to not think that both technologies are being adopted here.

This being the case the more rigid frame of the main object would not change shape at all. What it would do is lose weight and become more unstable causing it to swing more violently. This is exactly what was witnessed in the video IMO.

The main problem that we have is that we do not have the unadulterated video of the event.

The video shown gives the impression that the object spewed dozens of smaller objects - went wild - and then spewed out some more.

My thinking is that the object released the smaller objects once and the remainder of the video will show the break up and dispersal of the objects and subsequent disappearance.

[edit on 8/7/2009 by skibtz]




posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oreyeon
Wow. Why does it have to be balloons? Why does it have to be CGI? Can it not just be a UFO, something totally unexplainable that IS NOT within your line of thinking and current understanding of your Ego-verse?


We are trying to determine what the object is and going through a process of elimination. We are fully aware that it is a UFO.

Leaping straight to exotic conclusions without first eliminating the obvious would say more about your 'Ego-verse' than anyone else's.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by skibtz
 


A kite? Full of balloons...sighs...I dont know..I just dont see it..of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch
 


It is possible that the object is unrelated to balloon/kite assembly.

Until there are known facts about the incident and the objects concerned then there really is no right or wrong - just speculation and investigation.

Until it can be proved beyond doubt that the object is not a balloon/kite assembly then that remains a possiblity. Just the same as the possibility that the object is an ET craft, biological entity or other identification remains.

[edit on 8/7/2009 by skibtz]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 06:47 AM
link   
When i first viewed the clip my first impression was that the objects were pulled out of the central larger object on some-sort of wire system.
The jerkyness of their movement and then the following swirling, as if the line went slack, just seems familiar to me.

I personaly don't think we have anything alien here.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 07:05 AM
link   
>While it was an Interesting video. To me, it really looked
>like a group of balloons floating up into the sky and then
>experienceing some ridiculous turbelence and wind
>disruptions in the upper atmosphere.

The original video does not show balloons.

To debunk and say the cluster of objects are balloons has no grounds.

I can fly an F117 model craft and take videos and photos and like you use
that to disprove that the U.S. F117 is a fake.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by tonyz
The original video does not show balloons.

To debunk and say the cluster of objects are balloons has no grounds.


I am not debunking. I am trying to eliminate a candidate.

The movements very closely match those of balloons and kites.

To rebunk and say the cluster of objects are not balloons has no grounds either.

You have already stated that you know exactly what they are. Please tell us what they are so that we can get to the bottom of this event.


Are we witnessing Cosmospheres in this event?

Would these be the first public images of Cosmospheres being deployed?

[edit on 8/7/2009 by skibtz]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMythLives
 


Why do you think these are CGI? What is it about the video that creates this impression?

I notice you limit your hypothesis of what these are to two things, and not the obvious 3rd option of intelligently controlled machines.

Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you are in the bible belt and hence you think all aliens and UFO's are the work of Satan and his minions would it?

Despite the fact that the R.C. Church in Rome recently pronouncing that ET's are humanities celestial brothers, and if you believe in God, you should also believe in aliens, for to not, would be the same as saying God has limits on his power.

Still think ETs are the devil?
Hmmm?



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by skibtz

Originally posted by Oreyeon
Wow. Why does it have to be balloons? Why does it have to be CGI? Can it not just be a UFO, something totally unexplainable that IS NOT within your line of thinking and current understanding of your Ego-verse?


We are trying to determine what the object is and going through a process of elimination. We are fully aware that it is a UFO.

Leaping straight to exotic conclusions without first eliminating the obvious would say more about your 'Ego-verse' than anyone else's.


I concur my friend. However, I never said that I believed it was a UFO. I was simply stating that why can it not remain something that is totally unexplainable? Why MUST people have an answer? And why the majority of the time, does that answer have to be such a laughable attempt at discrediting.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Oreyeon
 


I totally agree


Open minds ahoy



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
>To rebunk and say the cluster of objects are not balloons
>has no grounds either.

I know what they are! That's why I can tell you that they are
not balloons.

The only thing I have not done is fly in one.

If you publicly asked official Russian sources if Cosmospheres
exist, they will laugh and tell you no. They are known by other
names as well.

If you asked official U.S. sources if the delta UFO crafts are
there's they will laugh and say no, that the U.S. does not have
that sort of technology.

If you asked official U.S. sources if they are behind the worldwide
cattle mutilation, they will laugh and tell you no.

The UFO arena has become a money making machine.





Originally posted by skibtz

Originally posted by tonyz
The original video does not show balloons.

To debunk and say the cluster of objects are balloons has no grounds.


I am not debunking. I am trying to eliminate a candidate.

The movements very closely match those of balloons and kites.

To rebunk and say the cluster of objects are not balloons has no grounds either.

You have already stated that you know exactly what they are. Please tell us what they are so that we can get to the bottom of this event.


Are we witnessing Cosmospheres in this event?

Would these be the first public images of Cosmospheres being deployed?

[edit on 8/7/2009 by skibtz]


[edit on 8-7-2009 by tonyz]

[edit on 8-7-2009 by tonyz]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMythLives
 


Well in the first one they have it all backwards.
The craft is flaming with high voltage Tesla style and other
ships come to rescue it by setting up a proper generator
oscillation.

Since they all work on an inflow of charges the flaming craft
needs to be rescued, this flame from the Tesla AC one way flow
is noted by Tesla in 1892 and is shown on the net by present
day experimenters.

ED: Tesla 1911: his ship will be "perfectly safe in the greatest
storm", think, the Illuminati are well read in Tesla and know what
to make you think this ship does not exist when in fact the Tesla
ship is the UFO ship.

They tell you there is no ship, no ether, stay away, your silly, ETs are
here. ETs did it, we may have copied them by reverse engineering
but we don't know for sure are all Illuminati lies so don't be fooled
by mind control.



[edit on 7/8/2009 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 





Why do you think these are CGI? What is it about the video that creates this impression?


Well just look at the video! There are a ton of white lines and not only that red infusions which should not be their if the object is real. It appears that it was CGI and Balloon combination, it really does. Like an they added the CGI to the balloons or perhaps they added it the other way around, but it does not.




I notice you limit your hypothesis of what these are to two things, and not the obvious 3rd option of intelligently controlled machines.


Intelligently. Your right, it could be a man made aircraft with people inside. I apologize I forgot that one.




Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you are in the bible belt and hence you think all aliens and UFO's are the work of Satan and his minions would it?


lol, your assumptions and invalid personal attacks will not make me respond to your ignorance of me or any other skeptic. Stop trolling for a fight. And prove that it is alien, the burden of proof is on you mate, I just provided a reasonable explaination to what it was.




Despite the fact that the R.C. Church in Rome recently pronouncing that ET's are humanities celestial brothers, and if you believe in God, you should also believe in aliens, for to not, would be the same as saying God has limits on his power.


And?




Still think ETs are the devil?


When the hell did I say that? Stop putting words in my mouth. Perhaps its not this skeptic who is closed minded....


You could have been a real and mature person if you would have just stated what you felt professionally and respectfully, but thats ok, I still respect you and your alien opinion



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Oreyeon
 





I was simply stating that why can it not remain something that is totally unexplainable? Why MUST people have an answer? And why the majority of the time, does that answer have to be such a laughable attempt at discrediting.


Why would you not want to find an explaination? Thats my question. With an explaination you will know what it is! Also if its so laughable, then why are their Alien UFO believers in here agreeing with me?



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   
I would still appreciate hearing from those who think that balloons were ejected how they believe it was done technically.

The issues I have questions about are:

The devices required to load and fire dozens of balloons serially in a matter of a couple of seconds and at great velocities would be very complex, exotic machines. These would be heavy as well. The balloons have a substantial diameter so the mechanisms for handling them on the launchers would have to be of a large caliber. For comparison a manual recoilless cannon that fires 5inch rounds weighs nearly 200 pounds. What would be the weight of device that fired something with the diameter of perhaps a foot or more? What would the autoloaders for such large projectiles weigh? How would you design a light weight system for performing this function that was not cost prohibitive?

The balloons were ejected at high velocity and in rapid succession. This would have taken a considerable amount of energy so a hefty power supply would have had to been lofted by the balloon/kite. What would you use as a practical power supply for a balloon/kite system that worked like this?

Generally when a projectile is fired it tends to catch up with the previously fired projectile because drag causes them to eventually stop at a particular distance. In the video the objects are spreading apart from each other after being launched. This would require some type of control system for each device. If the devices were tethered then that tether system would need some type of mechanism at each balloon in order to allow them to travel along the tether in a controlled manner. How would you design the balloons and control mechanism so that it was strong enough, light weight enough to keep the balloons buoyant and not cost prohibitive? If the devices were not tethered then each balloon would have required some type of guidance and propulsion system to keep them flying in a strait line.

Firing or yanking the balloons out at such velocities would require that the balloons be made out of some very strong, light weight and cost effective materials. What would you use for this?

I have addressed some of the issues surrounding the launching of balloons only and already my homemade balloon/kite is getting pretty complex and expensive (I’m guessing in the 6 figures range minimum). Can someone with a technical background explain how this could be done mechanically on a home built or similar budget? Could you whip up a working, ground based version for demonstration? I know I couldn’t and my business has many years experience successfully developing complex electro-mechanical systems across many industries. I would love to here from those of you who know how it could be done.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
well thats a very well thought out thread with a lot of evidence that adds up to...nothing.

sorry but no. The original video is not balloons. You got a better chance of pleading CGI.



I agree (but still thank the OP for his painstaking work.)

The balloon theory simply does not account for the phenomenon of these illuminated objects appearing to shoot out in both directions from the central object, at speed.

I said yesterday I didn't think it was CGI: but I don't have any other plausible explanation. Apart from something truly unknown (and you know what that means...)



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oreyeon

Originally posted by skibtz

Originally posted by Oreyeon
Wow. Why does it have to be balloons? Why does it have to be CGI? Can it not just be a UFO, something totally unexplainable that IS NOT within your line of thinking and current understanding of your Ego-verse?


We are trying to determine what the object is and going through a process of elimination. We are fully aware that it is a UFO.

Leaping straight to exotic conclusions without first eliminating the obvious would say more about your 'Ego-verse' than anyone else's.


I concur my friend. However, I never said that I believed it was a UFO. I was simply stating that why can it not remain something that is totally unexplainable? Why MUST people have an answer? And why the majority of the time, does that answer have to be such a laughable attempt at discrediting.


There are practical reasons why we "must" have an answer:

1/we're human. That's what we do-- seek answers. That's why we don't live in caves any more.

2/if something which I can't identify is hovering over my city, I'd like to know what it is, to see if it is doing anything damaging/dangerous/good/wonderful/amazing/enlightening

3/If we don't find out, our enemies might, first...

4/To find out are we alone on this dusty rock, or are we part of a wider community.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by dainoyfb
I would still appreciate hearing from those who think that balloons were ejected how they believe it was done technically.


I don't believe but I do consider the possibility that what we are looking at is a kite/balloon assembly.

In order to explore the balloon/kite hypothesis we should make some assumptions. The first assumption is that the balloon was made on a shoestring budget by a member of the public. It doesn't matter why the assembly was created in this hypothesis although two immediate reasons IMO are those of a deliberate hoax or a celebration/party item.

To answer your first issue we should step back from the assumption that the object is massive in size and weight and instead suggest the possiblity that the object is approx. 10FT. The smaller objects being approx. 8 inches. We also need to bear in mind that any reflective quality of the objects could distort the actual perceived size.

We also need to estimate an altitude - for this hypothesis let's say that it is 1000FT

In order to get a 10FT assembly to an altitude of 1000FT it would be wise to use a helium balloon/kite object assisted by a ground-to-sky tether system. The helium balloon element would be used to provide the lift and the kite element could be used to stabilise the assembly.

We now have the problem of the smaller objects and how to eject them so that they form a straight(ish) line - remember that the video only shows a very brief containment of the smaller objects in a straight line. This is not too difficult now that we are working with a lightweight assembly that is tethered to the ground at an altitude of 1000FT and looking dandy. The smaller objects weigh a matter of grams due to being 8" wide and made from lightweight thin wire and paper, bear in mind here that a XL 100% cotton t-shirt weighs approx. 230g - these smaller objects could weigh 20g!

We now know that the shot required to propel the objects would be minimal. For the purpose of the hypothesis we could launch 2 fireworks that drags out, from each end of our tethered assembly, a wire that has attached to it, dozens of our smaller objects.

This would give the effect of smaller objects coming out, in a straight line, from each side of the larger object.

At this point the objects scatter. Some group together. Some stay with the larger object.

This effect would be made possible by simply varying the connections along the wire and wiring some objects together and wiring some that stay with larger assembly. Weaker points along the wire in a random order would provide the effect seen on the video IMO.

The air patterns could also help contain the balloons and keep them together.

And don't forget that by using a ground-to-sky tether system, you have the option to provide power to a mechanical device if you wanted to.

All materials used in the above would be very cheap and ready to buy in public outlets at minial cost. Having said that I have no idea how much helium costs


However, if we approach this from the hoax angle where the anticipated reward, for example, is $5k. I would have no problem investing $1k to make it happen. And I believe that $1k could provide a model possible of delivering the results seen in the video.

I can't create a working model. Mainly because I am still looking for a job since being laid off at Christmas and have no cash


It would be a fascinating and achievable project though


You got any jobs going


[edit on 8/7/2009 by skibtz]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
~~~***~~~***~~~***~~~***~~~
Best Greetings to All,

Here are a few photos taken by Billy Meier way back in the mid-1970's, before there were any CG programs. Oh, look, can you see the crane that's lifting these things? NO? 'cause there isn't any crane. Well then, must be 'swamp gas,' yes?

Demonstration flight of a ship and reconnaissance probe, 3 March 1975.


One of the clearest photographs of the type 3 plejaren beamships.


OK, where is that crane gone to? Lemme see now, hmmm, helicopters?


I do own the original Photo-Journal produced by Lee and Brit Elders which contains these photos, so do have rights to post these. These are also now in the public domain at:
www.futureofmankind.co.uk...

So, where is ATS on this? The Meier 'case' has the best I've ever seen.

Peace

***



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by skibtz
 


I like this theory best.

Mexican guy presenting looks deceptive - in just about everything he does - or is that just me?



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join