The "Concord" UFO Video

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Sahrhyce
 


G'day Sahrhyce

Thanks for that.

And......I'm still after the "Concored" UFO vid that was mentioned.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not




posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by rizla
Most UFOs are visually quite vague in appearance, and as such can be explained as camera ghosts. Doesn't mean they are.


G'day rizla

Well, that's quite true.

That's why I would like more detailed explanation regarding that vid.

The more detail that's available, the better idea we'll have regarding the possibility of a "camera ghost" being an option.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Ahhh, the Oxford clip is the same one yes and it's included in the documentary that shows how the Concorde *UFO* was a result of the camera lens..



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
This is a very well known case: it's an official British Airways film and it was taken on 1976 (if I'm not mistaken): some analysis indicated it was an odd-looking reflection of sunlight in the lenses: according to that analysis, (since they were filming a plane from a plane), in order to avoid the "jumping" effect they had to equip the camera with an automatic stabilizer, and this determined the "independent movement" effect.
That being said:
  • I've never seen the analysis, which seem to have ben presented during some documentary.
  • I've never watched the original video, I just could watch some relatively good version of it on TV several times and the appearance of the object was way less impressive than in most the later compressed/digital versions: some of the later version were even edited in order to "enhance" the object but this jeopardized the video.
    Plus, I remember that a group of students from some British university (was it Oxford, FireMoon?) allegedly managed to duplicate the same effect under some very similar circumstances but unfortunately, I've never seen the duplicate, which was shown during some documentary if memory serves, but I think that the analysis and the re-creation were made by two different sources.
    Basically, I can't and really don't want to express any judgement because of lack of any helpful documentation: all I know for sure is that the original video actually showed what looked to be some small, barely visible sphere apparently descending, siding the Concorde for a while, then voila: it goes upwards until it vanishes, and that at the time the explanation of the reflection on lenses + stabilizer was given, it was accepted as the good one. In such a video, small details are extremely important, and since the versions circulating presently are in the most lucky cases some 10th generation ones, (plus the YouTube lossy compression), any assessment is extremely difficult, in my humble opinion.
    I'm sorry for not being helpful

    Thanks for sharing



  • posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 11:55 PM
    link   
    Perhaps ice fell from beneath the craft and was blown back upward by powerful updraughts? *shrugs*



    posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 12:24 AM
    link   
    reply to post by internos
     


    G'day internos

    Thanks for your thoughts & insights.

    It's a strange one.....

    On the one hand, it's a very well known case.

    On the other hand, it is not at all well documented.

    .....all in all, very interesting!

    Kind regards
    Maybe...maybe not



    posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 01:10 AM
    link   
    At first glance, this just feels like a camera recording anomaly to me and always has (considering the movement). Combine one's gut instinct with the likely method of camera stabilization, light reflections, etc and I think there is nothing much to see here.

    Of course, if one is determined to think this is something, anything other than mundane then they will see that as well.

    But, to jump to the least likely conclusion would take a leap of ignorance...the very problem with this subject.



    posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 01:36 AM
    link   
    reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts
     


    G'day IgnoreTheFacts

    That's what I truly enjoy about ATS.....

    I started this thread because I understood very little about that video.

    Subsequent to the commentary of internos & you, I can start to understand the "object" could be explained in terms of a camera effect.

    However, in order to "put it to rest", I would still like to see a little more detail about that.

    Unfortunately, I may not find that detail.

    Kind regards
    Maybe...maybe not



    posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 12:49 PM
    link   
    reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
     


    There are a lot of videos that have these kinds of reflections going on. Check out this bumblebee UFO at 0:20




    posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 06:58 PM
    link   
    Interesting video but....


    .......THAT GOD DAM MUSIC!! Sounds like some 9 yr old blowing a trumpet for the very first time man....sheeees!!



    posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 06:37 AM
    link   
    reply to post by cripmeister
     


    G'day cripmeister

    So do you think the Concord UFO is a reflection in the camera?

    Kind regards
    Maybe...maybe not



    posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 06:39 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by fuserleer
    Interesting video but....


    .......THAT GOD DAM MUSIC!! Sounds like some 9 yr old blowing a trumpet for the very first time man....sheeees!!


    G'day fuserleer

    Here you go then.....






    posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 08:05 AM
    link   
    If not an artifact or lighting from the camera then this can be a classic example of a "Foo Fighter" from 1944 which was said to fly and dart around aircraft and "play with the craft" but never did any harm, Any information that the military has collected on this phenomenon has never been released....Not sure why that is ..Still no explanation as to what was around that concord but if by history we can judge what we will find out tomorrow then unfortunatly we may never know.



    posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 11:18 AM
    link   
    reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
     


    Yes, most likely a reflection imo.



    posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 02:18 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Sakrateri
    If not an artifact or lighting from the camera then this can be a classic example of a "Foo Fighter" from 1944 which was said to fly and dart around aircraft and "play with the craft" but never did any harm, Any information that the military has collected on this phenomenon has never been released....Not sure why that is ..Still no explanation as to what was around that concord but if by history we can judge what we will find out tomorrow then unfortunatly we may never know.


    G'day Sakrateri

    I'd love to think it was a "Foo Fighter".

    Unfortunately, there also appears to be some "weight" behind the camera stabilisation / reflection argument.....


    Kind regards
    Maybe...maybe not



    posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 02:22 PM
    link   

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

    Yes, most likely a reflection imo.


    G'day cripmeister

    Thanks for stating your opinion on that one.

    I'd be very interested to see a more similar camera stabilisation / reflection effect as compared with the Concord video.....

    I shall have to try to find time tonight (it's early morning here now) to see if I can find something.

    Kind regards
    Maybe...maybe not



    posted on Mar, 16 2010 @ 12:57 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
    At first glance, this just feels like a camera recording anomaly to me and always has (considering the movement). Combine one's gut instinct with the likely method of camera stabilization, light reflections, etc and I think there is nothing much to see here.

    Of course, if one is determined to think this is something, anything other than mundane then they will see that as well.

    But, to jump to the least likely conclusion would take a leap of ignorance...the very problem with this subject.


    How does the movement indicate a camera recording anomaly ?

    Do you mean a camera recording anomaly or a reflection that is actually present and accurately captured by the camera ?



    posted on Mar, 16 2010 @ 10:56 AM
    link   
    reply to post by FireMoon
     


    Hi all,
    As many mentioned it's an old one, of a promo for the concord or the airline, I can't recall which. Some suggested it was a flare on the lens, others said they weren't sure what it was. But at the time it was interesting.

    Decoy



    posted on Mar, 18 2010 @ 02:13 PM
    link   
    reply to post by chunder
     


    G'day chunder

    A few of our more experienced members insist the appearance & movement of the "object" is quite consistent with a reflection combined with strong video stabilisation.

    I would be very interested to see some similar examples.

    Internos' commentary is quite telling, particularly when he notes the "less impressive" appearance of the "object" in earlier generation vid's.

    Internos also mentions the film makers have offered explanation.

    I'll have to spend some more time looking for all of that.

    Kind regards
    Maybe...maybe not



    posted on Mar, 19 2010 @ 12:29 PM
    link   
    reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
     


    I have no clue what the object itself is, but it's obviously a free falling object caught up in the drag created by the supersonic jet, pulled in, and then breaking free of the drag.





    top topics
     
    9
    << 1    3  4 >>

    log in

    join