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.

 

The Meteor Shower That Wasn't A Meteor Shower

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by mcrom901
 


Based on what?

Your experience? A feeling? What other people who know little about meteors are saying?

Care to share some details?


[edit on 12-10-2009 by C.H.U.D.]




posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Thanks for your in-depth answer C.H.U.D

It makes sense to me. I will nevertheless check on everything you stated, not because I don't trust you, but because it is important to corroborate.

So, with the not-meteors theory almost established, two questions remain.

Is the video fake somehow (CGI), and if not, what are the objects passing over the rooftops?

Snowballs?

By the look of it, I would say the video is real. But that is an opinion, not a fact, and I dare say anyone who claims the opposite is also expressing but an opinion.

Someone with profound knowledge in video graphics should take a closer look at it,

[edit on 12-10-2009 by Heliocentric]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


the texas fireball incident was an example i was referring to....

what i find surprising is that..... there are always some kinda complications regarding the 'debris' which are supposed to be found..... but are never accounted for.........


take this as another example......




posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


My pleasure Heliocentric. That's what I'm here for.

If you can't find info on any of the points in question, let me know and I will try to point you in the right direction. Trustworthy info on meteors can be quite hard to find in some cases. It's good that you are not taking me on my word alone. If only more here were as thorough as you appear to be!

Although I'm no CGI/video expert, I am very confident that this is a real video with the "objects" added in there afterwards. There are a few people on here (at least one has his own forum here - but I forget who) who do specialize in CGI/video footage analysis, so hopefully one of them will drop in here. I agree that it would be good to get an expert opinion on this matter for the sake of completeness.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by mcrom901
 


mcrom901 - Could you be more specific please: Which event are you referring to? This one:
UFO - meteor like object with sonic boom above Dallas and Austin Texas!

??

What "complications" do you mean?


As for the other example you gave, it was discussed at length in this thread:
Unidentified Object crashes into QLD mountain

I don't want to derail this thread by going too far off topic, but as I recall, there were two main factors involved with the QLD mountain event... The first was that a meteor was observed apparently very low down in altitude, and the second was that that there was a fire on QLD mountain.

These two events, which I believe were separate and unrelated, have been grouped together as "cause and effect" by people who do not understand meteors, purely because they happened to occur at more or less the same time.

The fact is that a meteorite fall has never been proved to have caused a fire, and this is consistent with what we understand about the physics involved when a meteoroid makes it to the ground, resulting in a "meteorite fall". If you take a look at this thread, I explained in detail why it is highly unlikely that any meteor could be connected with a fire on the ground.

As for the claims made by some that this event was a UFO, someone always shouts "UFO" when a large event like this is seen by many people, even when meteorites are recovered, and footage is recorded that is consistent with what we know to be meteor related activity.

Unfortunately there will always be some who insist UFOs must be to blame, when there is hard physical evidence to the contrary, and when those who know the subject through and through are confident that a meteor was the cause.

To put this into perspective, it is actually a very common occurrence that people ring 911 (or whatever the local emergency service number is), to report seeing a "fireball" (taken to mean a "ball of fire" literally, and not necessarily anything meteor related) "crashing to the ground just out of sight but near by". Or they will say something like "an aircraft crashed just over the other side of the hill", or in some cases they realise it was a meteor, but say "it fell just over the other side of the fence, and on to my neighbors property".

The emergency switchboard operators are overloaded with such calls at least 2 or 3 times in the USA alone every year when a major event takes place at a time when lots of people are around to see it (usually in the early evening on a warm summers night) , and the USA although a vast country, is still only a small fraction of the Earths surface area.

So if you consider that this is taking place all over the world, and all the time (many events go unnoticed due to daylight, and because they usually only last for a hand full of seconds in even the longer lasting events), this raises a few questions.

Firstly, if so many UFOs are crashing around the world, why has no one managed to get a piece of one, or proof that one crashed. Governments would be hard pressed to clean up debris from what must be decades, if not 1000's of years of UFO crashes.

But I have yet to see solid evidence of one...

Secondly, do you seriously believe a civilization advanced enough to send craft here, would come all this way just to crash into a mountain/the ground? Multiple times every year?

It makes no sense whatsoever if you think about it.

On the other hand, there is plenty of hard evidence that this planet is bombarded with natural rocks 24/7, and that people are quick to jump to conclusions about what they see without bothering to seek out the facts.

It makes matters worse that the vast majority of people have little if any experience when it comes to meteors, and even less when it comes to very bright meteors or "fireballs"(very bright fireballs are also sometimes referred to as "bolides"). Most people have probably seen at least one meteor before, but do not understand that than not all meteors are alike, so when they do eventually happen to see an exceptionally bright event (as was the case at QLD mountain), they wrongly assume that what they observed was not a meteor.

To compound this, when our brains are confronted with bright lights in the sky, they can not interpret the signals received form our eyes correctly (as you will see if you read the link I posted above), and the altitude, distance, speed, as well as the physical size of the light source are invariably mis-calculated.
The Moon illusion works in a similar (but less spectacular IMO) way.

Now I can't say that every single observation of a bright light resembling a fireball is not a UFO, because almost anything is possible, but in all of the cases I have come across, I have not seen a shred of evidence that suggests anything other than a meteor.

Please feel free to pick my brain on any related points, but for the sake of not derailing this thread, please post your questions in the relevant thread.

Thanks



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by wx4caster
 


Sorry...
at the time I´m answering you most swedish internet sites are down so I´ll have to come back to you with an exakt reference.

But still, some 20 kilometers due east of Copenhagen in the most southern part of Sweden called Scania in english or Skåne in native.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by C.H.U.D.
reply to post by mcrom901
 


mcrom901 - Could you be more specific please: Which event are you referring to? This one:
UFO - meteor like object with sonic boom above Dallas and Austin Texas!

??


cheers mate.... i dont understand whats the confusion about..... well; here is my initial post....


Originally posted by mcrom901
i believe some of these fireballs could in fact be crashing ufos......





it was just a general suggestion.....



What "complications" do you mean?


and here is my second response in light of your a/m question....


Originally posted by mcrom901
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


the texas fireball incident was an example i was referring to....

what i find surprising is that..... there are always some kinda complications regarding the 'debris' which are supposed to be found..... but are never accounted for.........



i.e. mysteries surrounding the debris



As for the other example you gave, it was discussed at length in this thread:
Unidentified Object crashes into QLD mountain

I don't want to derail this thread by going too far off topic, but as I recall, there were two main factors involved with the QLD mountain event... The first was that a meteor was observed apparently very low down in altitude, and the second was that that there was a fire on QLD mountain.


thanks for that.... i'll check it out later on.... anything on the 'debris'?



The fact is that a meteorite fall has never been proved to have caused a fire, and this is consistent with what we understand about the physics involved when a meteoroid makes it to the ground, resulting in a "meteorite fall". If you take a look at this thread, I explained in detail why it is highly unlikely that any meteor could be connected with a fire on the ground.


thanks again for the infos..... but if thats the case..... then i dont think so the fire from the crash in australia was caused by any meteorite..... and as you have stated above that there were already fires on the mountain.... well; i dont think that to be the case.... i'll have a look through it later on....



Firstly, if so many UFOs are crashing around the world, why has no one managed to get a piece of one, or proof that one crashed. Governments would be hard pressed to clean up debris from what must be decades, if not 1000's of years of UFO crashes.


thats a nice one..... looooooool





But I have yet to see solid evidence of one...






Secondly, do you seriously believe a civilization advanced enough to send craft here, would come all this way just to crash into a mountain/the ground? Multiple times every year?






It makes no sense whatsoever if you think about it.


well...





On the other hand, there is plenty of hard evidence that this planet is bombarded with natural rocks 24/7, and that people are quick to jump to conclusions about what they see without bothering to seek out the facts.


i suggest you check about the research of ed grimsley......





It makes matters worse that the vast majority of people have little if any experience when it comes to meteors, and even less when it comes to very bright meteors or "fireballs"(very bright fireballs are also sometimes referred to as "bolides"). Most people have probably seen at least one meteor before, but do not understand that than not all meteors are alike, so when they do eventually happen to see an exceptionally bright event (as was the case at QLD mountain), they wrongly assume that what they observed was not a meteor.






To compound this, when our brains are confronted with bright lights in the sky, they can not interpret the signals received form our eyes correctly (as you will see if you read the link I posted above), and the altitude, distance, speed, as well as the physical size of the light source are invariably mis-calculated.
The Moon illusion works in a similar (but less spectacular IMO) way.






Now I can't say that every single observation of a bright light resembling a fireball is not a UFO, because almost anything is possible, but in all of the cases I have come across, I have not seen a shred of evidence that suggests anything other than a meteor.






Please feel free to pick my brain on any related points, but for the sake of not derailing this thread, please post your questions in the relevant thread.


loooool.... nothing of that sort..... and please bear in mind that i'm not intending to claim that all such crashes are a result of falling ufos and that there are no meteorites..... i do agree with your viewpoints to an extent.... however i dont see fit as to ruling out the concerned ufo incidents..... what i find frustrating with this subject is the fact that the authorities use these natural occurrences as a shield to cover up what we already know is going on in our skies....

cherio mate



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


Alright, I have a couple of issues with this being meteors. One, they are all in the same section of sky, and far too close together. Two, they are all going in the same direction. I have watched meteor showers for a long time, whenever I remembered the date and the weather was good for it. My dad always remembered, and we watched when I was a kid, too. Meteors don't all come from the same direction, and go in the same direction, like whatever is on this video. I sat outside with my younger son for the Perseids this year, and we saw only about six in an hour. Plus, they were in different areas of the sky, and not all going the same exact way. I don't know what sort of video was used, so I can't say if the lack of a streak of light is telling or not (meaning maybe the camera didn't catch it), but this is very odd.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by m4ng4n
In the 17th of January around 20.00 GMT this showed up in the sky and was explained as a meteor.
It lit up the sky and was seen in a radius of 500 km.

I often wonder about it?

Link to video:
sydsvenskan.se...

No one I´ve ever talked to know of an impact site???

[edit on 11-10-2009 by m4ng4n]


Awesome video, if real, and if so, no way there wasn't an impact site. Anyone familiar with the language there that can look for news reports?



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
The video in the OP screams out "fake" to me. It seems way too staged. The guy starts out in his apartment and says "here we go" then films his way to the door knob. Who would do that?

Then his reactions to the non-meteor looking orbs is way to calm.

Just my opinion... fake


I would probably say something like that, if I saw this happening, and got the camera to film it. Even the pointing it down for focus looks real; done the exact same thing when filming fireworks. I think he thought he filmed meteors.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Awesome video, if real, and if so, no way there wasn't an impact site. Anyone familiar with the language there that can look for news reports?


Yes it was real. Here is the thread discussing it: Big blue light over sweden

I'm not sure if any meteorites were recovered in this case.

Actually, despite the appearance of the meteor being low on the horizon, it is not likely that this meteor was even within 40 km of the ground at the point at which it appears to burn out in this footage. The link I posted earlier in this thread has a detailed explanation of why this is the case.

Anyway, if you liked that meteor footage, here are some more big ones






[edit on 12-10-2009 by C.H.U.D.]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


OK. I'll give you that. Some people 'might' film their way to the front door like a movie scene and then during the filming say they are going to put in on youtube.

I personally would be so freaked out by the non-meteor event and just run outside and start filming and react naturally (like woooah!)

I suppose everyone reacts differently. Still I think this is CGI based on what I see.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   
whats your take on this.....





posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 01:43 AM
link   
The OP "non-meteor shower" is a FAKE ..

The "meteors" are addes later.

You see, any camera filming in very low light situation, will lower their shutter speed to minimum, ussually 25 or 30 frames / second, which is the case here. (not talking about special settings like very slow shutter speed settings about a few frames /second which some cameras are capable, this is not the case here).

And when the shutter speed is low, every fast moving object will appear blured and elongated along the movement direction (unidirectional blur)

The OP shows contradictory facts:

Look for the final sequence when the operator pans the camera away:



as anybody can see, all the bulb lights are elongated (uni-directional blur), which is normal as camera is using slow shutter speed and objects moving in the frame (actually the camera itself is moving/panning, but all it matters is the movement recorded in the frame no matter the cause)




on the other hand, the fast moving "meteors", don't exhibit any motion uni-directional blur:



This is unnatural, and contradicts the way that cameras is able to record moving objects in low light.

So, it is FAKE, with "meteors" addes in post production.

Why? Well...



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by depthoffield
The OP "non-meteor shower" is a FAKE ..

The "meteors" are addes later.

The OP shows contradictory facts:

...as anybody can see, all the bulb lights are elongated (uni-directional blur), which is normal as camera is using slow shutter speed and objects moving in the frame (actually the camera itself is moving/panning, but all it matters is the movement recorded in the frame no matter the cause)

...on the other hand, the fast moving "meteors", don't exhibit any motion uni-directional blur:

This is unnatural, and contradicts the way that cameras is able to record moving objects in low light.

So, it is FAKE, with "meteors" addes in post production.


That is a valid and interesting observation worth taking into account, but not enough to discard the video as a fake, which you so boldly do.

There's one difference between the 'meteors' and the outdoor lights you referenced, you mentioned it yourself; the 'meteor' light signature is not elongated when the camera is still, neither are the outdoor lights, they become elongated when the camera pans rapidly. Unfortunately, we don't get a good shot of the 'meteors' while the camera is panning rapidly.
There's a difference in light intensity between the 'meteors' and the lights that could play into the result, there are so many different image processing technologies of different qualities and capacities that it is hard to say how a camera will react in this situation.

You would actually have to take the camera, test it on this basis, then compare the results with the video in question.

Another way to approach this would be to check pixelation, in order to see if the 'meteors' have been added in or not.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you jumped the gun.

In what way does the OP show "contradictory facts"?



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Our friend on Youtube has been busy...



This time it looks even more fake IMHO!


Here are some real Leonids for comparison:

2009


2001 (during the storm that occurred that year)



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Yes, that video does look - at first glance - to be a poorly made fake C.H.U.D.

A closer look at thenewboston's (the youtube poster) youtube-account shows plenty of CGI tutorials - how to import 3 dimensional objects into an image among other things, so this guy's credibility just disintegrated.



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   
Several facts about this 'meteor' video must be considered. Each of the 'lights' pulse very regularly as they travel acoss the sky. That is very unusual for meteors, but not impossible. It isn't a camera shutter (night-shot) effect since the general scene, buildings etc, don't pulse in the same way. There's no exposure blur (trail) at all. Even with a fast shutter, real meteors will always show some streaking. A night time video will undoubtedly use a slow shutter, so you'd expect streaks.

There are too many 'meteors'. The number of 700 per hour was mentioned earlier. Of course that's the calculated rate from this small video frame. In real meteor showers, they appear all over the sky, not just within a small framed area. So, what we have here is a meteor mega-storm. Something unseen since the haydays of the Leonids, when 20,000-40,000 per hour were observed. Such a storm would make front page news worldwide. I didn't read anything, did you?

And finally, there's the inordinate luck of this individual. Whenever I go meteor spotting, I'm lucky to see one or two in an hour. This guy just wanders outside and they appear on queue in hundreds. That's statistically less than improbable. Indeed if these lights aren't reflected from something nearby, birds, etc., then it's almost certainly a hoax.

WG3



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   
This is soooo obviously a fake that it's absurd to discuss it any further..
Every falling star looks exactly the same, has the same angle, the same pattern and the same duration.



posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 



Someone with profound knowledge in video graphics should take a closer look at it


It does not take anywhere near a profound knowledge in video graphics to explain this one. Assuming you turned off the centers of your brain that deal with logic reason and common sense, which would cause you to overlook the ridiculously staged beginning setup...........the blur on the balcony or whatever is fake, added in post to give it more of a "real feel", however in real life (for the most part) cameras at the consumer level don't come anywhere close to behaving in this manner. So that is obviously fake. Second there is no legitimate motion blur in the graphics that have been added to the footage. Common cgi mistake, however it wasn't meant to fool you upon close examination or repeated viewings either.

I could go on and on, but there is no point. If most around here are like you and don't even understand the very basics of things, then why ask for someone who has a profound background to explain something to you as you couldn't possibly understand their explanation. Also, anyone can come on here and claim profound knowledge of anything and try to sell you their viewpoint through "gentle education". There is no substitute for personal experience. And fortunately, personal experience in video taking and editing is VERY cheap now days, and should be high on anyone's list that wants to live and breath on a UFO forum.

Go out and buy a camera. Download some free/cheap video editing software. Use it for six months. If you can't debunk obvious tripe like this with even that limited experience then there is no help for you.


[edit on 27-11-2009 by IgnoreTheFacts]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join