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.

 

[NEW PICS!] China airport UFO was no helicopter!!

page: 11
57
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by primetime2123

Originally posted by IsAllInAll1

Originally posted by freighttrain
Who ever says this is a missile or a helicopter is in complete denial...


Whoever says this image is not a missile or rocket is wrong.

Watch this video:


Pause it at 1:33 and take note.


Looks almost identical to this:


Whoever says this image is not a helicopter or aircraft is wrong.



This is because the image is obviously showing a red strobe light over a few seconds of time, common on helicopter and aircraft.

Here is a picture of a helicopter and it's search light over 6 seconds. It was searching for people lost at sea (coast guard):






[edit on 10-7-2010 by IsAllInAll1]

so you are saying the object is a helicopter/rocket hybrid that can transform into one or the other since it can be both at the same time??


[edit on 10-7-2010 by primetime2123]



Oooops that video is from the wrong date.

you lose again




posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   
hey guys i dont know if this has been posted yet, i looked through some threads and havent seen it. it doesnt even look like the UFO's that are being analyzed by anone here. check it out




*edit to add - looks like there are 3 pics starting at about :30 seconds in.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by ziggyproductions05]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
It was the launch of a Russian Rocket, discussed here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The second image is a helicopter.

Why do we need a new thread?

For Stars and Stripes! Why do you even bother replying when hardcore UFO fans don't want to listen to rational explanations?



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by eennoo
This topic is an epic fail!

At least from this we can see who is blind and who isn't.

Obviously the original picture for this story was a long exposure. You can not deny that it is a long exposure because there is obvious ghosting of the house and the power lines which is caused by a slow shutter speed (long exposure) and a small movement of the camera. If you draw a line from the tip of the house to the tip of the ghost house, you can see the angle and the distance the camera moved from left to right (seems to be following the craft)

Anything moving in front of the camera during this long exposure will show up as a streak. The best way to describe this effect is to think of it as a video displayed all in one picture.

It is a camera special effect. This is how it's done:



After watching the above video, imagine what it would look like if he was filming an aircraft in the sky with lights, instead of cars.

It would look like this:








...but the above images are very long exposures. The original image from the OP's story is a shorter exposure, but still longer than normal.



...another version of the same image:



The red line with the red 5 red dots is standard red aircraft strobe light. Anyone ignoring this is living a life of ignorance.

The two streaks of light on the bottom are the landing lights for a jet. The light beam pointing to the right is the beam from landing lights reflecting off of low clouds or fog.

To all who keep repeating the line, "They wouldn't shut down an airport for a helicopter or aircraft"... THINK AGAIN.

If a private or military aircraft enters the airspace of an airport without contacting the air traffic control at the airport, they are considered "unidentified". If they are unidentified, and they are not in communication with air traffic control, then there is a safety concern for all flights, so all flights should be put on hold ("airport closed").

Just because someone labels it a "unidentified flying object" doesn't mean they can't identify that it is a jet or a helicopter, sometimes it means they can't identify who is flying it.

Having a rouge helicopter or jet flying around in a controlled airspace without identifying itself with air traffic control is not safe, but it does happen, and is a reason to shut down airports.

Also, what the heck is up with the videos going around? It seems as though someone did a Google image search for the term "long exposure of helicopter" and then placed all the images in a video, and went around fooling everyone saying it is the same sighting. It's not, it's a compilation of helicopter photos taken with a slow shutter speed.

That beam of light is the search light. Search lights move around and they try to focus them on one object while the helicopter moves around. So it could look like some type of light shining in the sky, but it's not.

Before you tell me it isn't an aircraft or a helicopter, why don't you go buy a camera with the ability to change the shutter speed, and then go take some pictures of jets and helicopters at night, and then come back and talk....

The other picture in the OP is just rocket in the upper atmosphere, and the zero-g is causing the exhaust of the rocket to spread out over a very large area. Also, that image is older than the China airport incident.

Anyway... this whole thing is a bunch of CRAP. More distraction from what is important.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by eennoo]


Excellent post - thanks for taking the time to put it all in one place and tie up all the loose ends! Case solved in my opinion. I'll just quote your whole post for the next page


As a by-the-way... it isn't an "epic fail" if people have the right mindset in searching for truth. Did you expect people to not even discuss things? I missed most of the previous 35-page thread on the subject so didn't know I was duplicating pics.


[edit on 10-7-2010 by Thermo Klein]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paradigm2012
Oooops that video is from the wrong date.
you lose again


No YOU lose at life.

That guy was trying to show you how the video looks similar. He was NOT trying to say they are the same event on the same date!

Seriously, are you not capable of reading English text?

-edit mistakes doh!

[edit on 10-7-2010 by eennoo]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
I found some more information!

Here's what I think we are seeing in this picture:



Navigation lights: All aircraft are equipped with a steady light near the leading edge of each wingtip. When facing forward from the perspective of the pilot, the light on the right wingtip is green while that on the left wing is red. The different colors make it possible for an outside observer, such as the pilot of another aircraft, to determine which direction the plane is flying.



Strobe lights: High-intensity strobe lights that flash a white-colored light are located on each wingtip. Most smaller planes are only equipped with one of these strobes near the leading edge just behind the red or green navigation light. Larger airliners may be equipped with an additional strobe at the trailing edge as well. These flashing lights are very bright and intended to attract attention during flight. They are sometimes also used on the runway and during taxi to make the plane more conspicuous.



Landing lights: Bright white landing lights are usually fitted to most planes for enhanced visibility during the landing approach. These lights can also be used to illuminate the runway at poorly lit airports. They are often required for night landings but also commonly used during the day as well to make the plane more noticeable. While the usage of these lights is common, their location can vary from plane to plane. Landing lights may be located in the wing root, in the outboard wing, or somewhere along the forward fuselage.


Source

That would place a red light on the wingtip, a white strobe on the wingtip and probably landing lights under the fuselage.

I assume these are only for airplanes, couldn't find anything for helicopters. They would be very similar though I would imagine.

That explains the 3 different lights seen and also back up my theory of the aircraft going right to left across the photo.

I think this is almost proof that what we see is a normal human aircraft.

[edit on 10/7/10 by GobbledokTChipeater]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by eennoo

Originally posted by Paradigm2012
Oooops that video is from the wrong date.
you lose again


No YOU lose at life.

That guy was trying to show you how video looks similar. He was NOT trying to say they are the same event on the same date!

Seriously, are not capable of reading English text?

but the object is the China UFO over the airport right in two different pics?? is it not ??



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater
I found some more information!

Here's what I think we are seeing in this picture:



Navigation lights: All aircraft are equipped with a steady light near the leading edge of each wingtip. When facing forward from the perspective of the pilot, the light on the right wingtip is green while that on the left wing is red. The different colors make it possible for an outside observer, such as the pilot of another aircraft, to determine which direction the plane is flying.



Strobe lights: High-intensity strobe lights that flash a white-colored light are located on each wingtip. Most smaller planes are only equipped with one of these strobes near the leading edge just behind the red or green navigation light. Larger airliners may be equipped with an additional strobe at the trailing edge as well. These flashing lights are very bright and intended to attract attention during flight. They are sometimes also used on the runway and during taxi to make the plane more conspicuous.



Landing lights: Bright white landing lights are usually fitted to most planes for enhanced visibility during the landing approach. These lights can also be used to illuminate the runway at poorly lit airports. They are often required for night landings but also commonly used during the day as well to make the plane more noticeable. While the usage of these lights is common, their location can vary from plane to plane. Landing lights may be located in the wing root, in the outboard wing, or somewhere along the forward fuselage.


Source

That would place a red light on the wingtip, a white strobe on the wingtip and probably landing lights under the fuselage.

I assume these are only for airplanes, couldn't find anything for helicopters. They would be very similar though I would imagine.

That explains the 3 different lights seen and also back up my theory of the aircraft going right to left across the photo.

I think this is almost proof that what we see is a normal human aircraft.

[edit on 10/7/10 by GobbledokTChipeater]

...we have seen the video of the UFO..it is not an aircraft



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by primetime2123

...we have seen the video of the UFO..it is not an aircraft


Whereabouts? I haven't seen it yet.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Here's what I learned today...

1) All News Web is a horrible source that wilfully lies to get hits on their website. Even though hundreds of news sources around the world ran this as a UFO story I, the OP writer, get shredded by a pack of dogs for ignorantly using ANW.

2) Long exposure photography explains a lot.

3) There are a whole bunch of REAL JERKS on ATS who will prejudge someones intentions because they disagree with the outcome... and I mean A LOT!! A bunch of you could really benefit from chilling the ego a bit and actually think and read.

4) Phage was right again, so was Chadwickus, but eennoo writes a far better post for proving it!

Since this came up numerous times - I wrote this thread with very good intentions and thought I was posting something new. I was wrong.


[edit on 10-7-2010 by Thermo Klein]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I came here to see new pics and was presented with one alternate pic. How disappointing.

I'm generally not a sceptic, but I have to thank them for being here. After them showing us what long exposure shots of aircraft can look like, I think this picture is definitely just a regular aircraft.

Yeah, I want definitive UFO proof as much as the next guy, but so do the sceptics, y'know. If it weren't for the sceptics, you'd think a picture of a UFO on MS Paint is definitive evidence of UFOs.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


If I could give you an applause, I would. Searching for the truth is hard, but as the saying goes, live and learn. This thread was a joy to read, thank you for sharing this with us.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by primetime2123
 


China has one of if not the largest military organization in the world. I incredibly doubt that the military would allow a plane or helicopter or any other military aircraft to enter airport airspace without first notifying the airport. Why? Because 1) accidents will happen. 2) Mass confusion. It is unlikely that the military would be so gullible.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Some of the close up photos IMO show a cigar shaped object with different light configurations. I believe that cant be a heli or missile.

--However---

some other footage of the event clearly shows a large plume of light and/or exhaust, very similar to a rocket or missile traveling in the atmosphere, NOT A UFO...

So everyone on ATS is arguing whether its a UFO or a missile......But what if it was both?

UFO's have been observing and monitoring ICBM launches for decades. This happened especially often during US test launches. They have been captured on the launch footage several times, with one tale telling of the UFOs actually disabling the rocket in flight.

So could this have been a UFO observing the US ICBM launch, and people in the area managed to obtain evidence/footage of BOTH objects?

Because based on the footage coming in, It clearly has two DIFFERENT objects which are being filmed/photographed by various sources.

Comments?

--GeminiSky



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by primetime2123
 


There is NO video of the alleged craft. There is one of the comet like object gently flying across the sky. Just go to youtube and search UFO for most recent uploads.

As many of us here, I am no expert, but I have taken many pictures in my time and many pictures that are not so good. The "invisible" house as some have called it can also be the fact that someone doesn't know how to keep a camera steady. Even with long exposures. I also find it a bit odd that no one has even mentioned that this could have been taken with a cellphone.

[edit on 11-7-2010 by DragonFire1024]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by GeminiSky
 


I think on page 4 of this thread, they show a picture of this craft compared to a painting from 1710 having to do with baptizing Jesus. UFOs have been seen all over the world for hundreds of years, and they are evident in paintings that are hundreds of years old. Since planes did not exist in 1710, I have to wonder where they got the idea to put "UFOs" in these paintings. Also a small note: the idea of "aliens" and "UFOs" did not really exist prior to the Roswell incident. At least not how we know of them today.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by diamount

Originally posted by Ahmose
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.




Reported.

You need a lesson in manners

On topic.. it should be obvious with a little bit of research that those are overexposed helicopters. Denying that is denying ignorance.



lol,
Get a life.
my manners exceed just about all people i come across in 'real life'. seriously.
Im just sick of the hordes of turds on ATS.
and frankly I am getting sick of ATS and I just dont care.

Yes I know where the door is.




[edit on 11-7-2010 by Ahmose]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:42 AM
link   
I really dont know where to start on this one, we have a selection of photographs and one video (of photographs in said sequence), none of them have been actually confirmed as the unidentified object that caused the airport to close. So why even bother to discuss them if we dont know for FACT they are that said object?

I dont hold a degree and my education stopped at some college. I will also admit when I am wrong as I am not ego-driven. I'm always open to learn new things BUT surely, air traffic control operators and military personnel would know how to spot and identify a Helicopter in their own airspace?

For me. Theres way too many IFs/Buts. We need a more fact based report on this case.

Whilst the photos offered forward might be low exposure shots of helicopters.. its a pointless debate as it detracts from the actual facts of the case.

A couple of things need to be clarified. Could it be seen on Radar? YES/NO?
Could it be seen whilst in the airport? by this i mean tourist types already at the airport?
What was its height? where did it travel from and to?

The other thing what has already been mentioned here is the chase to persue this object, which apparently outran whatever the chinese military sent up to catch it.. sooo... what gives there? did the military send up their own vehicles to catch something they made themselves?

We should stop pointing fingers and start asking fact based questions to get to the bottom of the story. Calling each other names does little to further our knowledge or learning of the case. Does any of us here know anyone in or around that area that could get us some honest fact based info on this case?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 01:04 AM
link   



There have been reports from all over China and this UFO craft deserves a second thread not dominated with the "it's a helicopter" agenda.



So, you start a new thread until you get an opinion you accept?

also, what is the ""it's a helicopter" agenda."? Are they CIA? Or FIFA?



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Superiorraw
I really dont know where to start on this one, we have a selection of photographs and one video (of photographs in said sequence), none of them have been actually confirmed as the unidentified object that caused the airport to close. So why even bother to discuss them if we dont know for FACT they are that said object?


Why not? We know one thing that is 100% sure. This IS a "UFO" which means exactly what it is, an 'Unidentified Flying Object." I hate that these days that most people assume right away when we say "UFO" it's automatically an alien spacecraft.


I dont hold a degree and my education stopped at some college. I will also admit when I am wrong as I am not ego-driven. I'm always open to learn new things BUT surely, air traffic control operators and military personnel would know how to spot and identify a Helicopter in their own airspace?


That is my thought exactly. China has one of the biggest air travel areas in the world, and one of if not the largest military organization in the world. A freak mistake is possible, but given that the airport was closed that leaves me skeptical.


For me. Theres way too many IFs/Buts. We need a more fact based report on this case.

Whilst the photos offered forward might be low exposure shots of helicopters.. its a pointless debate as it detracts from the actual facts of the case.


Exactly. And until the person or persons that took the photo come forward with where exactly and when they took the photo, we just don't know. However, it could be something that was buried in the web ages ago and its possible it will turn up somewhere eventually, who knows.


A couple of things need to be clarified. Could it be seen on Radar? YES/NO?
Could it be seen whilst in the airport? by this i mean tourist types already at the airport?
What was its height? where did it travel from and to?


I will try to answer these as best I can. Yes it could be seen on airport radar at the least as said here: Airport closed after UFO appears on radar screens, but this is the first one I came across in a brief search. I myself read many and yes it was.

RE question 2: So far, and I do some freelance reporting occasionally so have been keeping close eye on news and video stories, no one has come forward as being a witness at the airport. Maybe its in Chinese news, but its hard to get a translation if not an English option. Someone else may correct me if I am wrong.

RE all other questions: Again that would be for whomever took the photo(s) to com forward and say. It is just not possible to tell from the most popular image anyway. If I had to guess, looking at the photo I would say it appears to be going to the right, hence the appearance of a "trail." If it were a missile or some sort of ICBM or space junk, I would assume that it would be recovered by someone. I would also assume you could tell its general altitude from the radar screen and direction as well.


The other thing what has already been mentioned here is the chase to persue this object, which apparently outran whatever the chinese military sent up to catch it.. sooo... what gives there? did the military send up their own vehicles to catch something they made themselves?

We should stop pointing fingers and start asking fact based questions to get to the bottom of the story. Calling each other names does little to further our knowledge or learning of the case. Does any of us here know anyone in or around that area that could get us some honest fact based info on this case?




top topics



 
57
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join