Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Metallic saucer filmed on my mobile phone {{Identified}}

page: 2
118
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   

If you were so glued and in an altered state, how did you manage to be able to capture the second craft (coughs) as soon as it became visible?


Well, keep in mind this is a cellphone camera. So probably neither eye was glued to the eyepiece. He probably would have seen this with his eyes, or out of the corner of his eye, and moved the camera.




posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
it looks genuine to me. if it's a hoax, it's a good one.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Kind of looks like the ships Billy Meier made in his garage, and talked about, not saying this is a hoax it looks genuine to me, just saying....Pleiadian light ship?



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by william.gauncents
 


This is a terrible "debunking" with no offer of proof than your personal opinion ... and quite rude as well ... no need for rudeness mate.

Have you ever filmed with a mobile camera?

I know when I do, because of the view finder, I can be quite aware of what else is going on around in the general vicinity of the subject I am filming.

So the OP could have easily be filming the first object and notice the secondary object in his periphery vision.

Echelon - The ATS video analysts will need to see the original footage that has not been put through youtube ... RAW images if possible.

I must admit I don't know if a phone camera produces RAW files but if they do, that is what will be needed to be analysed.

Personally the third vid that shows the object move to the left and then stop is very interesting to me.

I would love to see what an analysis of that finds.

Edit - I think this is a cracking vid ... thanks Echelon



[edit on 24/11/09 by Horza]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Is there a business of any kind or a company office in that general direction. The first thing you have to eliminate is a balloon. Over the years I've found them shaped just like that in 6', 12', 20' and 30' diameters. Same shape and in the air they would look just like that.

We had one not to long ago that the owner the balloon escaped from actually debunked it. He had pictures to prove it. It had gotten loose from its mooring. Do a search here and you will find the thread.

You could see it better than that poor video you posted. Was it silver and smooth surfaced and did it appear to float motionless? Did it show any sign of intelligently controlled flight. If so, why did you not make a video of that?

Sorry, but I think the chances of it being a balloon are in the 99.999% range. If it floats like a balloon it usually is.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:14 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Any movement could simply be attributed to the camera moving laterally. There is not enough movement to say that the UFO is what is moving.

The smaller object, as I said looks like it's CGI. The motion tracking is all off. But hey maybe that's how the fly, jumping about when the camera jumps about.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
He said it was gone when he came back out.

So unless it broke loose and floated away, it was not an advertising balloon.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
S&F this for futher discussion ..


2nd line



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by fleabit
 


Any movement could simply be attributed to the camera moving laterally. There is not enough movement to say that the UFO is what is moving.

The smaller object, as I said looks like it's CGI. The motion tracking is all off. But hey maybe that's how the fly, jumping about when the camera jumps about.


I don't think so. The awning on the house did not move at all, just the object. The camera was not moving laterally. The object was moving. In fact, it was moving left when the camera jerked right. So no, not jerks, nor lateral movement.

Not saying it isn't CGI, just saying that I don't think you can discount a sighting because it doesn't move in the way you feel it should.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   
The guy has presence of mind enough to get what video he could get with his camera phone and you twits are bitching because he could not snap his fingers and have a professional film crew there so he could give you super quality video!

Balloon my hind leg...and "bad video"...what a bunch of inconsiderate whiners!! Best I have seen...clear sky...enough reference to other objects so some idea of size can be made..

Until someone professional analyzes the video and finds a problem I say you are one lucky guy..with some real footage. S&F!



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 



no i disagree there is a truss or soffit backing that doesn't change it's position until he does move it laterally, and that is to follow the ufo's movement.
Also in the third video it appears to be stationary, move, then stop. Do balloons do this?
very interesting video thank you for posting.

-So the cgi claim is just like calling this guy a liar, isn't it? Am i misinterpreting the situation?


[edit on 24-11-2009 by heyo]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:22 PM
link   
OP do not be discouraged by the debunkers...you knew they would show up...heck, that's what makes this site great.....please keep us posted on if you are able to contact any of their neighbors.




posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus

Any movement could simply be attributed to the camera moving laterally. There is not enough movement to say that the UFO is what is moving.


Yes there is. The object moves left at a distance of roughly two rafters if you watch it closely. As the object moves left, the camera perspective stays the same, the rafters do not change position relative to the camera.



As for the jumping around appearance, I believe this is a side effect of the poor film quality and compression.

[edit on 24/11/09 by dmorgan]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Nicely done OP, a quick question for you:

Did you feel any weird sensations, like numbness or were there any portholes/windows visible?

star and flagged for you



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


I'm not discounting the sighting.

Just making observations.

Also, I re-watched the video and agree it does move to the left.
My mistake.





[edit on 24/11/09 by Chadwickus]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I don't mind true skeptics at all. Heck, I am skeptical of most sightings, and pretty much all crop circles. But I try to stay unbiased. However, you will run into your fair share of folks that come into any UFO based thread with the preconceived notion it is faked, mistaken identity, Chinese lanterns, and so on.

So if you can get past that, the hard questions actually will cement your case for the better, if it is legit. Playing Devil's advocate is hardly a bad thing imo.


I'm not discounting the sighting.

Just making observations.


No problem Chad, you seem to have a clear mind and are not predisposed to instantly discount everything based on bias. Well, maybe sometimes.


But I appreciate a logical, clear mind when looking at this stuff.

Also, I enjoy these cases the most. Because it's hardly mistaken identity. Either it's something alien, or a hoax. No need to wade through a mire of Chinese lantern suggestions.

[edit on 24-11-2009 by fleabit]

[edit on 24-11-2009 by fleabit]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


There are only houses and vines around there, definitely no offices or anything. As soon as I seen this thing, I thought it was a balloon, however after a few seconds I realized it wasn't like any balloon I am familiar with.

It definitely appeared metallic and shiny on top, like it was polished to a sheen. And as I said in my description, it was stationary in the sky for about a minute before it started to move to the left. As it was hovering still, there was a slight wobble to it, like it was floating and not dead still.

For it to have been a balloon, someone would have had to be out in the vines with a rope (which I never noticed) which would have extended up into the sky and tied to the bottom of the craft.

It wasn't very high, the size of the craft I would say appeared to have been around 30 feet I guess, I can't be sure.

Why someone would be out in the vines, on a scorching hot day with a flying saucer balloon I really don't know hahaha, but perhaps they were and perhaps it was a hoax and it indeed fooled me.

I don't believe it was a balloon, not one bit. Or the smaller craft.
The saucer in the sky never displayed any physics shattering maneuvers unfortunately for any viewers of the videos.

This isn't unfortunate for me however, because just seeing it there in the sky, slowly wobbling, slowly moving off to the left and the appearance of the smaller ball shaped craft was enough for me personally.

It blew my mind.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Nice video, I liked it.
I'm from Australia too, and I can tell you're being honest. I'm pretty cynical on most things but I believe you on this one.

I just wish people had better cameras. It looks close enough that you could have gotten some good detail on it if the camera was better.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   
When you ran into the house to look for the video camera, how long were you gone?





new topics

top topics



 
118
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join