so...this is an actual UFO Snake?

Here we go again. If this is a balloon made of thin plastic or mylar or whatever,
how come it don't react to the airplane's presence. Simple question requesting a good
answer.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by free_spirit]

reply to post by free_spirit

Using a zoom lens distorts perspective. We cannot judge the size or distance of objects. We can guess the size of the aircraft but not its distance, we guess the size of the balloons but not their distance. It is no more than an assumption that they are close to the aircraft. Since they are not disturbed by the aircraft, they are probably no where close to it.

In photography, angle of view describes the angular extent of a given scene that is imaged by a camera. It parallels, and may be used interchangeably with, the more general visual term field of view, where an object close to the lens appears abnormally large relative to more distant objects, or in distant shots with a narrow angle of view, where the viewer cannot discern relative distances between distant objects and more distant objects may look exceptionally large, when such images are viewed with a typical viewing angle.

www.absoluteastronomy.com...



[edit on 1/29/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by free_spirit

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by free_spirit

 

The reason why the object wasn't disturbed is the same reason why this image doesn't show a near miss.

Then you are saying the object in the video is actually a craft not a balloon just like
in the photo you posted? Good for you, you are a winner !!

No their BALLOONS its the field of view of the lens that makes you think the plane and ballons are close to each other.

a good example look at the tree branch and building in relation to the jet
thats what happens when you use a high zoom!

i.dailymail.co.uk...

this one shows wide angle next to telephoto to show the difference

www.roshsillars.com...

The house in the background didn't move
Now can you understand the balloons were not near the jet!

[edit on 29-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 29-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 29-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

Originally posted by free_spirit
Here we go again. If this is a balloon made of thin plastic or mylar or whatever,
how come it don't react to the airplane's presence. Simple question requesting a good
answer.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by free_spirit]

G'day free spirit

To my mind, it's quite obvious.

The answer is as per Chadwickus' picture.....

It's perspective.....

The balloons are much closer than the plane.

If you look closely at your video, I think you can see the tip of the wing passing behind the balloons, although that's very too hard to see & somewhat arguable from the video. I'll try to capture the appropriate frame.

I'm still with the "ballooners".

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 29-1-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


I thought to same but could not be a****d downloading the video etc so posted pics above to show a good example.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

I thought to same but could not be a****d downloading the video etc so posted pics above to show a good example.

G'day wmd 2008

I love the plane shot!

Your house / lens comparison is a strong example of the manner in which lens effect makes it impossible to estimate size & distance without the relevant technical info, as per Phage's text.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


Ok Doomsday Rex, you seem to be a voice of reason on this video which I appreciate. I would like to believe it is a close up of a real space/sky worm, however I don't think it is.... It's bumpy body seems too much like balloons to me.

However I am interested and cannot find an explanation for this "Balloon Cluster's" movement. It moves as though it were alive in a way, and even rocks back and forth slightly...

How is it moving the way it is? is someone on the ground controlling it with ropes that we cannot see?

I can't see how it could be a free floating cluster of helium filled balloons and just floating like that in the air and moving about as though it were alive

Any thoughts?

reply to post by Nomad451


G'day Nomad451

I'll risk being presumptuous by jumping in here, when you've directed your question to Doomsday Rex.

In a previous thread about these "UFO snakes", members posted pictures of these clusters of balloons in rectangular wire frames that were hinged/hooked between each other.

The construction was therefore akin to a series of long rectangular rectangles joined end to end, with hinges/hooks between the rectangles.

That accounted for the "segmented movement".

Does that help?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Well, it certainly gives me a reference to look into... I think anything is possible and I think it's possible that some kind of atmospheric creatures perhaps exist... But why they should look exactly like a balloon arch is beyond me.

I've definitely concluded that this video is of a balloon structure, no doubt about it.

And the detaching balloon is what closes it for me. I can't speak mexican perhaps someone can translate what Jaime is saying?

Jaime seriously needs to close up his way too open mind for the sake of UFO research... You have to be skeptical of EVERHING untill proven totally unexplainable in this UFO field...

The UFO subject attracts wackos, crazies, hoaxers and space cadets like flies to Poo

Originally posted by Nomad451
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

I can't speak mexican perhaps someone can translate what Jaime is saying?

G'day again Nomad451

I've translated what Jaime is saying:

BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BSBS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Hahahahaha, I believe you may be right.

Cheers

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by free_spirit

 

Using a zoom lens distorts perspective. We cannot judge the size or distance of objects.
We can guess the size of the aircraft but not its distance, we guess the size of the
balloons but not their distance. It is no more than an assumption that they are close to
the aircraft. Since they are not disturbed by the aircraft, they are probably no where
close to it.


[edit on 1/29/2010 by Phage]

If we guess the worm shaped object was far from the airplane then it was really huge
right, and also dangerous for the aerial traffic don't you think.

Wich leads again to what I am signaling here. Guessing, guessing, assumption wich
equals to speculation, hypotesis, posibility, maybe, pehaps etc. all the same guessing
without a solid proof of anything here. And yet the video is interesting indeed.

Truth is I don't know what the snake, worm or whatever thing is, I wasn't there to see
it with my own eyes or binoculars. The fact that it looks like a balloon doesn't mean
it must be a balloon like a flying saucer looks like a big hat doesn't mean it's a flying
hat. The doubt is there in absence of more elements. And yet these flying things are
appearing also in other countries and we have many videos by now, pretty nice of
those balloon jokers releasing those expensive group of balloons wich in my dream
suggest this is a real balloon invasion.

reply to post by free_spirit

If you are "guessing" that the balloons are far from the airplane but closer to the camera, they are not really huge. The distortion of the perspective makes the airplane appear larger than it should so the size comparison just does not work. The video is not a reliable thing to base the guess on. But you are right, a bunch of balloons would be a hazard if it were near where aircraft are flying.

The fact that airplanes look like airplanes does not mean they must be airplanes either. In fact there are some people who insist that they are not. But experience, logic, and reason tell us that they are airplanes because they look and behave very much like airplanes (even at night or when they are far away).

Balloon arches are not terribly expensive:
www.balloonexpress.us...
And what do you expect people to do with them when the party is over? Keep them for souvenirs? I agree that it's foolish to release them but people at parties are known to do some very foolish things.

[edit on 1/30/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by free_spirit

What i find most interesting about this kind of UFO is its relation with certain culture manifestations, like in the symbols (logos) discussed here: Vector Symbols on Space related Programs

reply to post by free_spirit


The ballons were closer to the camera look at the links to see what
Phage,Maybe-maybe not and myself are talking about look at the house in the second link its closer so using your logic the house moved!

They look like individual balloons in the video others can see this so why cant you.

i.dailymail.co.uk...



www.roshsillars.com...

As you can see telephoto lenses compress the perspective its easy to see in the second link above, the jet appears close to the ballons but it wont be think about what you see the jet almost fills the frame so if the camera was not in high zoom the photographer would have to have been in the air near the plane

Balloons closer to camera jet further behind high zoom used.

Lots of people on here are keen even pro photographers and know what
clues to look for in videos and pictures.

[edit on 30-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by free_spirit

 

If you are "guessing" that the balloons are far from the airplane but closer to the
camera, they are not really huge.

Wrong again. You have a problem in your judgement, you are not listening to the
voices of the actual witnesses, the one videotaping and the other one with the
binoculars. They are describing the worm shaped object in the sky and then one of
them say there is an airplane coming, is getting closer, tape it. At this moment the two
skywatchers realize the airplane is close to the object wich indicates they were seeing
the whole scene, the two of them in real time and their eyes had the best perspective,
they are skywatchers with experience and this is their testimonial of the action, an
element of the evidence.

You can't dismiss or ignore this element and focus only in the video wich play tricks to
your criterion due to the discussed perspective, it's like watching the video without
audio, without hearing the voices of those who were there describing what they are
watching in the sky. If you know what a research is you wouldn't dismiss the
testimonials of the witness and in this case is important because it indicates how close
was the airplane from the worm shaped object. That is the point.

Was this object a balloon or not that is another issue, I don't know for sure and I have
my doubts in this particular video. By the way those balloon clusters, yes they are very
expensive, just ask with a distributor how much a cluster of this size and you will know.

reply to post by free_spirit

If the eyewitnesses "guess" the object was large they would think it was farther away from them (and closer the the airplane). I have personally seen people make this mistake with a balloon. They thought a small toy balloon was very large and very high. Our eyes play tricks on us.

I guess expensive depends on your point of view but I'm sure there are wealthy fathers in Mexico (just like anywhere) who want nothing but the best for their daughter's wedding.

The balloons can be either air-filled or helium filled. Balloon arches range in price between $60 and $400, with most averaging $135 - $250.

(from the link I posted earlier)
But so what? Balloons do not last forever. Releasing them when the party is over seems like a natural (yet foolish, not good for the environment and a danger to aircraft) thing to do.


[edit on 1/30/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by free_spirit

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by free_spirit

 

If you are "guessing" that the balloons are far from the airplane but closer to the
camera, they are not really huge.

Wrong again. You have a problem in your judgement, you are not listening to the
voices of the actual witnesses, the one videotaping and the other one with the
binoculars. They are describing the worm shaped object in the sky and then one of
them say there is an airplane coming, is getting closer, tape it. At this moment the two
skywatchers realize the airplane is close to the object wich indicates they were seeing
the whole scene, the two of them in real time and their eyes had the best perspective,
they are skywatchers with experience and this is their testimonial of the action, an
element of the evidence.

You can't dismiss or ignore this element and focus only in the video wich play tricks to
your criterion due to the discussed perspective, it's like watching the video without
audio, without hearing the voices of those who were there describing what they are
watching in the sky. If you know what a research is you wouldn't dismiss the
testimonials of the witness and in this case is important because it indicates how close
was the airplane from the worm shaped object. That is the point.

Was this object a balloon or not that is another issue, I don't know for sure and I have
my doubts in this particular video. By the way those balloon clusters, yes they are very
expensive, just ask with a distributor how much a cluster of this size and you will know.

Look at your statement the clue is there which again you have not spotted ONE of them was LOOKING THROUGH BINOCULARS have you ever done that its the same as a telephoto lens it compresses perspective like I said some of us on here LOOK for the CLUES and have a knowledge of video photography and optics.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 31-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 31-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

Serpents!