UFO caught heading into tornado. Amazing footage *Video*

reply to post by Goathief


Excellent point!

It would appear that all the evidence presented here is anecdotal.

I admit that I have taken the word of an ex- member that the second camera man was a hoaxer, but how is that any different to the claims of "official" confirmation of the speed/dimensions of the object in the OP's video?

reply to post by greeneyedleo


How do you explain that the bird is going that fast though? that thing was goin pretty fast. no way could a bird fly that fast

So, I've done a little research on the man who made this video, Lan Lamphere. It's not looking good...

Here is some information that Lamphere apparently created some kind of bogus UFO-scientific organization called "NEXXUS":

Here is how NEXXUS's SCAM goes: Call Macabee, tell him Friedman and hundreds of others are directors of NEXXUS. Then Call Friedman, say the same thing. Then call ACC and tell them Friedman and Macabee "are directors". This is obviously a "BUILDUP" Scam, and the guy who calls himself "Lan Lamphere" and resides, according to the Internic, on Salisbury St, in Norman, OK, isn't real. He is either a Government Agent working in an undercover capacity, either CIA or Air Force. Notice the timing - shortly after ACC announced the Transcapacitor, all of the sudden, this guy surfaces and runs around lying from person to person, that his newly contrived "org" NEXXUS, is directed by all the famous names he can think of in the UFO community. Then he has the gall to admit his organization is less than a week old (see above, posted three days ago, when ACC confronted him, right on NEXXUS'S website). Therefore, "NEXXUS" has only existed in the mind of the person using the name "Lan Lamphere", since December 21, 1997 (10 days)!! Hundreds of scientists and nuclear physicists, plus famous people like Friedman, Macabee, Shulman, Rense and others, in under a Week? What a bunch of #!!

www.artgomperz.com...

Below is an interview with Jack Shulman, president of ACC (American Computer Co.). Shulman claims that Lan Lamphere instigated a hoax which incuded reporting that Shulman had stated on a New Jersey radio show that his company ACC were using alien technology.

Jack Shulman
"Yes, [name], I obviously never gave any interview to ANY Atlantic City radio station, and I caused the entire Investigation of Roswell to come into being, to try to find out the Truth, and to support the vast majority of the UFO community doing likewise. I was actually quite mortified at the PRESS and the CIA and the NSA and the DOD for harassing people who expressed an interest in UFOlogy, and have spent an enormous amount of money doing things I think might contribute towards remedying that unfair proposition.

As to the alleged Interview (which was apparently fashioned by Todd Andrews, in anger) in fact, the article pretty much sounds more like Lan Lamphere's last letter to the UFO community on his 'Nexxus' website, since the falsified radio announcement was written by his alleged friend Tod Andrews, I wouldn't be surprised if they simply decided to flip the tables on one another. My former employer sued Lamphere for libel and other torts, and won a $462,000 judgment against him." Host "Whew, that must have been enough to send Lamphere scurrying for the underground!" Jack "It was.

I personally believe [Nancy] Lieder and Andrews, along with Campbell and Lamphere, are people without a conscience, who will do anything for money, they don't really care who they hurt, so long as they hurt their 'appointed targets'.

webcache.googleusercontent.com...:kFwRe_CdQecJ:pages.prodigy.net/benede/info17.html+lan+lamphere+ufo&cd=43&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&clie nt=firefox-a

www.zetatalk.com...

There's a good chance this is a scam, guys.



[edit on 2-7-2010 by FOXMULDER147]

So this has what it has come down to?
So much for the "time wave novelty" crap and "disclosure imminent" threads... we are now down to parsing a few frames of a video of a thunderstorm where an illuminated image appears as a potential ufo???
Really???

With the capabilities we have with cameras and video cams we are actually scrutinizing a few frames of what could be anything or most likely nothing and suspecting it of being a UFO?

Really???

So no one in the last 10 years has been able to get a decent close-up video or picture of a UFO so now we analyze every frame of something we see flash across a video or scrutinize some frame of film from a moon-shot that is distorted and scream its a UFO???

All this crap is IMO a hunger reaction from a lack of credible evidence and only exaserbates the image that UFO "believers" are a bunch of crazy whackos who wish to believe.

I never post much
but here is what I have to add about this topic and the
debate thats going on in this thread.

What would a bird be doing in that area if there is a tornado
going on. Won't all the birds fly away from this area to a more safer location?

Other than that this looks either like a blob of light/insect or a spacecraft
And I'm a believer of the second sort myself.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
It is clearly a bird. You can see the wings flapping if you watch in slow motion - or frame by frame. It is so obviously a bird, I cant even believe the people uploaded this claiming UFO.

I will try and get some screen captures up.

 

ETA: Grabbing screen shots probably wont help. As the object is so tiny. You just have to hit puase many times and watch frame by frame starting around 4:00. If you do this, you can see the wings flapping.

[edit on July 2nd 2010 by greeneyedleo]

no. it looks like wing movement, but that is the dragging of the object across the picture as the camera tries to pick it up because it's moving so fast.

if you look very carefully, the object does not change shape or consistency, and actually does, if you look very carefully, impacts and effects the small area of cloud it flies through. you can it more easily zoomed in, and because were watching it on the computer, you can see the pixel patches change shape and color.

do you really think you guys are the first to suggest it is a bird or insect and simply be right by not being video analysts? logic can only take us as far as we understand it and the world currently.

Originally posted by Teabags
So this has what it has come down to?
So much for the "time wave novelty" crap and "disclosure imminent" threads... we are now down to parsing a few frames of a video of a thunderstorm where an illuminated image appears as a potential ufo???
Really???

With the capabilities we have with cameras and video cams we are actually scrutinizing a few frames of what could be anything or most likely nothing and suspecting it of being a UFO?

Really???

So no one in the last 10 years has been able to get a decent close-up video or picture of a UFO so now we analyze every frame of something we see flash across a video or scrutinize some frame of film from a moon-shot that is distorted and scream its a UFO???

All this crap is IMO a hunger reaction from a lack of credible evidence and only exaserbates the image that UFO "believers" are a bunch of crazy whackos who wish to believe.

no, not really. but you can read about that other stuff if you want instead of bash us talkign about this particular video in a thread dedicated to it.

Do a little research on the owner of the video, Lan Lamphere.

You will find that he isn't the most credible source. He is a conspiracy-talk radio host and has been linked to quite a few hoaxes (see my post above)). Most recently he has been involved in some controversy regarding Obama's citizenship.

He is also charging for an unedited version of this video.

I have a strong feeling now that this is neither a bird or a UFO - it's a hoax.

Originally posted by shagreen heart

Originally posted by Teabags
So this has what it has come down to?
So much for the "time wave novelty" crap and "disclosure imminent" threads... we are now down to parsing a few frames of a video of a thunderstorm where an illuminated image appears as a potential ufo???
Really???

With the capabilities we have with cameras and video cams we are actually scrutinizing a few frames of what could be anything or most likely nothing and suspecting it of being a UFO?

Really???

So no one in the last 10 years has been able to get a decent close-up video or picture of a UFO so now we analyze every frame of something we see flash across a video or scrutinize some frame of film from a moon-shot that is distorted and scream its a UFO???

All this crap is IMO a hunger reaction from a lack of credible evidence and only exaserbates the image that UFO "believers" are a bunch of crazy whackos who wish to believe.

no, not really. but you can read about that other stuff if you want instead of bash us talkign about this particular video in a thread dedicated to it.

And just what "bashing" are you referring to? If I wanted to read "that other stuff" I would reply to those threads. I am referring to this one. Read the above again if it escapes you.

I am referring to a few frames of the video in this thread. Thats what I refer to as a "parsing of frames" and a "grasping at straws" mentality that we have seen so frequently here on these forums due to the lack of any substantial to discuss.

Sorry you we confused at my point.

Clearer for you now?

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Do a little research on the owner of the video, Lan Lamphere.

You will find that he isn't the most credible source. He is a conspiracy-talk radio host and has been linked to quite a few hoaxes (see my post above)). Most recently he has been involved in some controversy regarding Obama's citizenship.

He is also charging for an unedited version of this video.

I have a strong feeling now that this is neither a bird or a UFO - it's a hoax.

well there is also the option that this is genuine footage to which he is capitalizing on that (which is kind of pointless, and a definite red flag for my mind), and that when he realized that, he got involved in all of these seedy hoax issues and ruined his good name.

i won't rule out the chance that he his a fraud, or the video, but there is the chance that the footage is genuine, and the guy is a dirtbag.

Originally posted by Teabags

Originally posted by shagreen heart

Originally posted by Teabags
So this has what it has come down to?
So much for the "time wave novelty" crap and "disclosure imminent" threads... we are now down to parsing a few frames of a video of a thunderstorm where an illuminated image appears as a potential ufo???
Really???

With the capabilities we have with cameras and video cams we are actually scrutinizing a few frames of what could be anything or most likely nothing and suspecting it of being a UFO?

Really???

So no one in the last 10 years has been able to get a decent close-up video or picture of a UFO so now we analyze every frame of something we see flash across a video or scrutinize some frame of film from a moon-shot that is distorted and scream its a UFO???

All this crap is IMO a hunger reaction from a lack of credible evidence and only exaserbates the image that UFO "believers" are a bunch of crazy whackos who wish to believe.

no, not really. but you can read about that other stuff if you want instead of bash us talkign about this particular video in a thread dedicated to it.

And just what "bashing" are you referring to? If I wanted to read "that other stuff" I would reply to those threads. I am referring to this one. Read the above again if it escapes you.

I am referring to a few frames of the video in this thread. Thats what I refer to as a "parsing of frames" and a "grasping at straws" mentality that we have seen so frequently here on these forums due to the lack of any substantial to discuss.

Sorry you we confused at my point.

Clearer for you now?

the object is in frame for less than two seconds. what else are we supposed to look at regarding this footage?

fail smartass is fail.

I don't believe in birds so it couldn't have been a bird..

But, i do believe in UFO's so i would have to say that it was a UFO..

case closed....

I can't believe some people still can't get around perspective, size, and speed.

Yes it would be going tens of thousands of miles an hour ... if it were a very large object very far away.

But what if it was a 1cm bug flying 3 inches from the lens ... would it have to be flying thousands of miles per hour? Of course not ... they are that much nearer to the camera and have that much less ground to cover before exiting the frame, hence a slower speed.

A bug taking .2 seconds to travel 8 inches away ... or a large UFO taking .2 seconds to travel thousands of feet ... going to be very similar I'm afraid from a fixed point on the ground.

For those that still can't wrap your minds around this fact ... sit away from your computer monitor a bit and fully extend your right arm out and give a "thumbs up" in the middle of the monitor. Close one eye. Now slowly bring the thumb towards your open eye without moving your head ... at some point you will not be able to see the majority of the monitor. It's not as if the thumb is suddenly that much bigger or the monitor is that much smaller ... it's just the distance between the lens of your eye and the object has changed - your perspective of it has. Not a perfect example, but you should be able to get the gist that the monitor could be a far away UFO, the thumb a bug close to the camera.

These videos always bug the heck out of me because even these so called video experts don't touch on this fact. I also don't see it going through the clouds, I see whatever it is strobing slightly (like a wing flap) and the object being very close in color to the lighter cloud layer in the background.

So let me say, I do not believe it is a UFO ... it COULD be (my argument allows for that possibility), but IMO most of these blurry, speedy objects are simply insects or birds much closer to the camera lens.

Ok, Ive watched the video a few times on full screen. It amazes me how many people think its a bird. I assume everyone watched it on full screen as well. If so, I don't know where your heads are at. There is no way that is a bird. This is AT LEAST an unidentified flying object, or UFO for short.
Not to beat a dead horse here but if you haven't watched it on full screen, do yourself a favor. It may help if you have a 20" IMac, sorry but IMacs are the shiznit.

It also looks as if the object, or bird for you blind bats out there, is descending (getting smaller) as it moves across the screen. And that thing is traveling fast and oscillating.

I sense the emotion in this thread and I'm not attacking anyones opinion here, I just like mine the best.

I did not mean to hurt any bats' feelings. I understand you were born blind.

P.S. That was no insect directly in front of the camera!! Those darn metallic, spherical insects are elusive though!!!

I read this entire thread and sided with the "not a bird" folks, based on watching the embedded video.

But I just went to youtube and watched fullscreen; and I have to say, on the first viewing fullscreen, it totally looks like a bird.

When I watched it in the embedded, I thought it was going ridiculously fast. Fullscreen--nope.

Embedded, I saw it go behind the clouds. Fullscreen--didn't see it.

I encourage anyone who hasn't done so to use the youtube link and watch this expanded to fullscreen. It might change your mind as it did mine.

Maybe someone with a little more 'clout' than myself could email Skeet Vaughn and ask him if he did in fact analyze this footage and make those speed/size estimates. Or why he didn't think it was a bird :p (sorry lol)

Skeets Website

Even though no one will ever read this post... because it's on page 11 (lol), anyone who thinks that's a bird... you're living in denial, plain and simple. What you are seeing at seconds 4:01 to about 4:02 in frame-by-frame is "ghosting" that was captured by the equipment, keep in mind this was 1997. 1997 people!! No where near the image capture capability of today's cam.

Second... to he who said it was light reflecting through the lens... omg i rolled out of my chair with that one. Sorry but what light? You have a storm filled sky, with a camera on a tripod on concrete providing the most miniscual if not, no camera jitter whatsoever... impossible for light to reflect through the lens.

Third... this is not an insect. Why? Besides me saying: Prove it. It's quite obvious if you have analyzed footage where it was debunked as an insect. The object would be practically see-through fuzz swooshing across. What was captured was practically a white dot, with NO transparency. In cases where a bug is captured, the unfocused lens captures a blur, and what's behind the blur, thus allowing for transparency. Take a look @ ANY footage where it was debunked as a bug and you'll see what i mean.

Hands down. Great footage. Too bad TPTB took this guy's job away when he started getting popular for capturing the UFO. I can see it now *ring ring* "Yes?" "Fire him... or we'll ruin your life and your companies life" "ummm ok!" "you're fired".


// The conspiracy hunters never win by themselves...

Being an Okie I have to correct the narrative....Chickasha is pronounced Chick-uh-SAW not Chick-uh-SAY. Just nerves me.

ATS Team:

I am very familiar with this material.

Further to the imagery provided by greeneyedleo.....

.....I still wonder about the manner in which this object “splits in 2”.

You can clearly see that in the following sequence.

What do you think that indicates?

_________________________________________________

P1 at 9.24: Object split in 2


_________________________________________________

P1 at 9.24: Object split in 2 zoom


_________________________________________________

P2 at 9.24: Object NOT split in 2


_________________________________________________

P2 at 9.24: Object NOT split in 2 zoom


_________________________________________________

P3 at 9.24: Object split in 2


_________________________________________________

P3 at 9.24: Object split in 2 zoom

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ab3379b0e1a6.jpg[/atsimg]
_________________________________________________

Kind regards
Maybe…maybe not

[edit on 3-7-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

Originally posted by ReeVeeR
reply to post by greeneyedleo

 

If you watch the video to the end, the Nasa guy and all the other experts said this "bird" was flying close to 16,000 MPH.

Not if it was an insect flying by close to the camera! A foot away would mean it was flying at 1.6 MPH!!