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.

 

white ufo filmed in HD

page: 12
12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Looks more like a windsock than a UFO and yes, that music is annoying as all get out.




posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Looks more like a windsock than a UFO and yes, that music is annoying as all get out.



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Sorry for the double post!



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxxsee
What I would like to see is a screen showing the object clearly being behind the pole and the bush at the same time if this is what you think is the position of the object.

You will not see a screen-shot of that in the same way we do not see a screen-shot of it being in front of the trees.

With two objects with an unknown shape there is no way of knowing, in a video with that quality, which one is closer to the camera, specially if both objects are relatively close to each other and far away from the camera.

Only if we knew the shape of one of the objects could we say that one was in front of the other. We don't know the shapes, but we know one thing, that trees do not have great changes in shape along their silhouette, so we can use that information to look at the tree, and what we see is this (after a change in saturation, to increase the visibility of the different objects):



To me, the tree does not look "cut", as it would look if something was in front of it, the tree's shape on the right side of the "UFO" looks uninterrupted.

As for the "UFO", we don't know it's shape, but if we imagine that it is symmetrical then we can have something to work with.

By using the "UFO", mirroring it (and rotating it a little, it's not perfectly horizontal), and superimposing it on the image, we can compare it to see if there is anything missing from a hypothetical symmetrical object.



And as we can see, the object looks symmetrical, with no real signs of being behind the tree.

So, we are left without any real signs that the "UFO" is behind or in front of the tree.

The other video you posted that also shows that place does not help because it was filmed from a different location, closer to the water, so the perspective is not the same.
 

Next stage, you are the only person here (as far as I know) that knows that place, so could you please tell us what's that building? Is it a private house? Something official or semi-official? Knowing what that place is could help.

Another thing, do you have other videos (or photos) of that house, besides the two you posted? They could also help.



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by maxxsee
 


Well, I have to say whichever thing that rotating object is, it looks exactly like the ufo's of my abduction experiences....truly!

It even looked like it was moving with a central rounded area and radials and hovered in a similar way.....I am keeping an amount of scepticism here as to the fact it isn't moving across the sky and the umbrella picture which confused me....you are saying the rotating whitish object is the UFO right? and there's a bird that flies by and there was something you mentioned in a post beneath it that I didn't see on the vid..that is?.....and the umbrella?....is that somewhere in the vid too..apart from maybe (though hopefully not as hoaxes aren't cool) being the UFO?

Please clarify....also I would like to say even if it was a hoax which, if you could, please provide more proof to show it isn't, if possible...then it
has accurate looking similarities to the UFO'S in my abduction experiences.



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxxsee

Originally posted by TallWhites
Video is fake and you are a fraud!

Your youtube homepage: www.youtube.com... has a UFO video dating back to last year, that tells me you have a previous interest in the subject. And somehow you got "lucky" and saw this UFO?? I aint buying it

I've been able to film these objects whenever I wanted as I was filming them a lot. Last year I filmed many many clips. It is from this and others material and testamonies I believed and still believe.
This ufo showed up long after I started filming these very fast moving small objects.


Perhaps you could provide more pictures / vids of these objects if possible, I have seen plenty though didn't get much in the way of pictures of them...would be interesting at least and certainly something that would provide something for the credentials of this possible ufo.



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


Rotating? The "UFO" does not rotate, I think you are interepreting the flickering of the video as the rotation, but if you look closely you will see that the "UFO" has some brighter areas near on its side, and those do not move, showing that the "UFO" is not rotating.



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


Rotating? The "UFO" does not rotate, I think you are interepreting the flickering of the video as the rotation, but if you look closely you will see that the "UFO" has some brighter areas near on its side, and those do not move, showing that the "UFO" is not rotating.


Okay, looking at the video again this white object does seem to be static though having relooked and this time seen the flying thing at the bottom of the screen at around 25 seconds and seeing as the OP posted something on this maybe it is this that is the ufo?

Clarification please OP...



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 

Look I respect you and all, nice work that you did.
I was especially impressed with the mirror effect.


Anyways I will try to respond as clearly as I can

This is a screen of original No ufo scene (without object)
inverted
if you watch this carefully you will see the contour of the bush/tree

here is the clearafied screen of contour of bush


Now if we take your image screen in your post, firstly I have to say the edge of the object on the right side does look very similar to the edge on the left side of the object.
Another point is that the line I drew above that shows the bush contour/edge does go quite straight down to the left (watch line above)
So we have a bush that should have covered the object kind of like this red line shows

or covered the object like this basically

Which it doesn't do at all.

Compare the two sides and see how similar they are:


edit: OH and I almost forgot. The no ufo scene is filmed from the same spot as the ufo scene. It might look as I'm at another spot but that is because I am filming down more on the water than directly at the hill. See vid clip I posted for this no ufo scene.







[edit on 21-11-2009 by maxxsee]



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
....you are saying the rotating whitish object is the UFO right? and there's a bird that flies by and there was something you mentioned in a post beneath it that I didn't see on the vid..that is?

Yes the white saucershaped object in the middle is the ufo..The bird flies beneath it yes. You say you saw this? How much like it did it look, was it the same craft you think?

[edit on 21-11-2009 by maxxsee]



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by maxxsee
 


I have seen and been in UFO's around 20' diameter and 10-15' height, round, saucer like with a round area at the top and radial insets inside in Scotland as a child and a few times in England, these were abduction experiences.

Other UFO's I have seen are very fast moving lights in the sky, dancing in formations and very intelligent to each other and us, as well as light orb UFO's, orange and white both at night and during the day...also lights circling the moon, and an object that zoomed very fast a few feet above while driving.

[edit on 21-11-2009 by theabsolutetruth]



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Initially, I felt that the image was a tad too bright to be an umbrella considering the amount of light reflecting off of other things. This is hard to tell as there are not enough references to make this call, so it's imo.

Then I felt that the reactions were a bit savage in presentation but not necessarily in content. Though this attributed some sympathy points via the benefit of the doubt, the continued reluctance to post the only thing that can really be analyzed is... suspect.

If you're genuinely interested in this, why would you not present the ONLY thing that could clarify the issue, not just for you but for the people you're asking?

Makes no sense.

[edit on 21-11-2009 by astronomine]



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
There is absolutely, positively, no way to analyze your video, period. Because it is highly edited and not the original raw footage.

Until that is provided, it is completely moot point to discuss. So, Id suggest uploading the original, unedited video directly from your camera.



Best thing Ive heard on the entire thread. And to those whining about the hostility, maybe if the OP hadnt actually played around with the footage, contradicted him/herself on their youtube site and posted somwething actually half decent, then the hostile remarks wouldnt have occured.



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Best thing Ive heard on the entire thread.

Only the video isn't edited at all...


The quality of picture is just like in original.
I have never contradicted myself. Ppl have misinterpreted what I have stated/posted though. Big difference. And don't try use this as an excuse to use bad manners please...



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxxsee

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Best thing Ive heard on the entire thread.

Only the video isn't edited at all...


The quality of picture is just like in original.
I have never contradicted myself. Ppl have misinterpreted what I have stated/posted though. Big difference. And don't try use this as an excuse to use bad manners please...


Actually you said you never saw anything when you originally filmed it, yet your video actually zooms in on the object..

Im not sure how that couldve been a misinterpretation



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 

In the original film I didn't zoom in. The zoom in was added later in a program.

edit: On my page I am talking about the original clip. Obviously I am not talking about the zoomed in edit.

[edit on 21-11-2009 by maxxsee]



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxxsee
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 

In the original film I didn't zoom in. The zoom in was added later in a program.


Ah, but on your last post you claimed that the video wasnt edited at all?

A new contradiction or are you simply lying?



posted on Nov, 21 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   


As you can see in the image the size is roughly 2.5m or 3.0m. Now before you begin to question what i am saying you need to understand that i have exactly the same tarps covering my town house allowing me to sit comfortably during the hot summer days. However these are located above the windows thus providing shade to the rooms.

Also note that the tarp is covering a double edged window pane. Since 99.9% of all windows used in public houses unless they are customed ordered are usually 1.25 +-. Just look at you current homes windows and you will see what i am referring to.

See link for reference guide.
www.shadeaustralia.com.au...


So thats about all i have to say in reference to your image and thread. Enjoy your stay.



posted on Nov, 22 2009 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by maxxsee
The videos have unedited bitrate/quality.
I've just removed sound in 2 clips.

the first one with the scene no ufo in it 11 mb
www.2shared.com...

second small clip with sound full hd 17 mb
www.2shared.com...



Ok I looked at every video you uploaded....

You STILL have yet to upload an UNEDITED version of the video with the "ufo" in it. As you can see, there is a "ufo" in the bottom left corner of the video that I circled in red:



You had to have edited your video to put that YouTube name in the corner. I need to see the RAW untouched video, preferably the entire video with full sound, WITHOUT any tags placed on it. I don't want it run through ANY external programs.

I watched the very short section you uploaded with sound, and I want to hear the rest. Your breathing is not bad at all, so don't worry. There are multiple reasons why I and others want the sound in the video;

1) To hear your reactions at the time of the sighting.
2) To hear any other reactions around you. (like the kids playing in the background spotting it out).
3) to make sure the video hasn't been run through ANY type of editing software.
4) to keep the original file from the camera in tact to preserve tags hidden in the movie file.
5) to see if you are telling the truth.
6) to hear any other sounds like motors or engines, or anything else that could be used...

If you keep denying uploading the full video with all the sound, then you are highly suspicious. It seems you are hiding some incriminating evidence.

So far, since I can hear your breathing, that means you are really close to the camera, if not looking into the view port while filming. Since the "ufo" is one of the brightest most eye catching objects in the frame, I find it really hard to believe that you did not see it "until later". Actually I'm pretty sure you did see it when you were filming, maybe filming it on purpose. The human mind and eyes are known to jump to the most visible object in a frame, and that's why they call it "eye catching". I highly doubt that you didn't notice it, even while sitting there breathing into the camera.

You have two parts of video. One with the object, and one without the object. The video with the object is perfectly stable, like you had it resting on something or on a tripod. However the video without the object, which was taken later, is not perfectly stable and seems to be hand held, shaky, and at a totally different angle.

Here is an overlap of the two videos..


It is not a perfectly aligned image because they are taken at totally different angles, and different amounts of zoom.

If you look close there is a major change of light from the building. Something changes...

So far, I am thinking this is some type of reflection of light on the camera lens or something else. And I think the OP knows this.... Light reflections only happen at certain angles, and any small change could make the reflection move away, or disappear. The fact that the video with the "ufo" is perfectly stable tells me that the reflection can only be visible from that exact camera position. Since the angle is drastically different in the video without the "ufo", that tells me the refection disappears because of the change of camera angle.

I do not think the "ufo" is behind the tree, or behind the flag pole.

Hey maxsee, I need to know the exact location of the building and flag pole. I need the exact coordinates, and an exact visual Id from Google Earth, or other satellite imagery. So far I have not seen an exact match.

Your video on YouTube claims it is from "Gothenburg", but you tell us it is from "Ljungskile" which is 35 miles away. I need to know the EXACT location of the building, or your location while filming.

The reason I need to know, is so that I can pinpoint the exact position of the Sun. I also need to know at what time of day you took that shot, and the date. I want to know exactly the angle of the Sun, the position of the buildings, and the compass direction the camera is facing. All of this is critical in finding out if it is some type of light reflection from the Sun or somewhere else. I need to know the exact lighting situation, and location.


If you deny uploading the FULL video with sound, without any added tags, or any editing, and you deny telling the exact location of the building in the camera view. Then I can only guess that you are hiding something.

Good day.









[edit on 22-11-2009 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Nov, 22 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman

Originally posted by maxxsee
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 

In the original film I didn't zoom in. The zoom in was added later in a program.


Ah, but on your last post you claimed that the video wasnt edited at all?

A new contradiction or are you simply lying?


KO

Left hook to the body followed by a quick left hook to the head.

[edit on 22-11-2009 by bloodline]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join