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.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by fleabit
A yacht is a "thing". Please provide the source stating that this was "not a toy". The English translation of the report from TUBITAK (after an extensive analysis of less than a day) seems to have disappeared for some reason but I do not recall it saying anything to that effect. To my recollection the report made two salient points; 1) It was not CGI (fine with me) 2) It was not made in a studio (not sure how they reached that conclusion, but OK). I do not recall any statement to the effect that the object was a UFO.
You know what seems odd. This thing supposedly showed up for three years in a row (hasn't made its 2010 appearance apparently) and only this one guy was on the ball and lucky enough to get videos of it or talk about it after all the publicity it had.
[edit on 7/18/2010 by Phage]
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Here is a translation of the "Image Pre-evaluation Report" from Tubitak:
English
Notice that the report says the tape was received on January 31, 2008.
Here is a scan of the report (in Turkish):
www.siriusufo.org...
Notice that the date of the report is January 31, 2008. TUBITAK received the tape and issued the report on the same day. They barely had a chance to look at it unless they had nothing else to do. If this is just a preliminary ("pre-evaluation") report, where is the final report? In any case I see only two thing of interest in the report. The truncated translation says that the tape is not CGI (I would agree with that). It also says the tape was not made in a studio (though I can't imagine how they would determine that). It says nothing else which bears on its authenticity.
I misunderstood you, so my fault not yours. I didn't consider "shipping lanes". I have a follow up question: "Does this make it odd that there would be no ships?" (If this is not a yacht)
The light reflection from the left side of the object which is seen on August 10th shootings is not produced by the moon. At that time, the moon was in a phase that was pretty close to the “new moon” phase and located approximately at a 10 degrees proximity/angle to the horizon. Moreover, the image processing analysis conducted on some part of the footage revealed that the center of the object has the same density as its background, namely is of a transparent nature.
Because, it would take quite a long time to analyze all of the images, only randomly selected parts were pre-examined. During this process, emphasis was not placed on images produced by optical clarification effects which a number of point light sources generated.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Phage
The light reflection from the left side of the object which is seen on August 10th shootings is not produced by the moon. At that time, the moon was in a phase that was pretty close to the “new moon” phase and located approximately at a 10 degrees proximity/angle to the horizon. Moreover, the image processing analysis conducted on some part of the footage revealed that the center of the object has the same density as its background, namely is of a transparent nature.
Interesting.
We are all laughing at the BOAT WINDOW CRAP.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by fleabit
The maker of the video is a night watchman.
Originally posted by GeminiSky
reply to post by fleabit
Its disturbing how professional assessments, analysis, and opinions can be dismissed so quickly.
And instead a UFO case that has taken some professionals years to research and is still unexplained, will be completely explained and debunked here within minutes by our members.
Your right, we have some BRILLIANT minds on ATS
Good questions MMN
too many holes in the story.
The yacht theory doesn't do much to help clear up the muddy waters I guess.
As for your previous question about the object being something like a shower head, I really couldn't say with any kind of certainty.
We'll probably never know!