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.

 

Incredible,that's all i have to say ! Chemainus ufo video

page: 4
88
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by AsimpleAbstraction
I am a professional video-editor, I am familiar with aperture techniques, lens flares and editing tricks. I have never seen anything like this before. Some of the artifacts in the close-zoom footage are definitely camera-induced (small pixelations) as well as the hard edge that the object has.
Are you also familiar with how an out of focus light appears on different cameras?


Also the stationary dark spot residing in the bottom of the object is quite odd.
It's also the result of the light being out of focus, as the darker top.

You can see how that happens in a Canon MV730i in the video below.



Why is there multiple video sourcing the exact same thing?
Because an our of focus light will look the same when seen through another camera with the same type of lens.
Some time ago I could even recognise a Sony camera by the shape the out of focus lights showed.


People are observant, not stupid. Why would these [multiple] people be awing over something so simple?
They can be observant and stupid, although I don't mean that's what happened in this case. People's reactions are the result of their personality, so we cannot really know why they reacted like they did. Maybe they had a predisposition to be awed by something like this.

Edit: YouTube resized the video (and in this case it made it bigger), so it looks even worse than it was originally. If anyone wants it I can provide the original, unedited (I removed the sound) and unconverted video.
edit on 12/3/2011 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by WideOpenSpace
I believe the second video should be added to the original post. It looks like most of the people here have not watched it. The woman filming clearly said several times that there were a few of these things, at least 4. Well, it could also be one, which disappeared and reappeared again.
Anyway, the second video was obviously filmed by a different group of people which rules out streetlights, grapes, etc.


edit on 12/3/2011 by WideOpenSpace because: added the video


Yeah i posted this a handful of posts before yours..
Yet people are still not even paying attention. lol


LOOK AT THE OTHER VIDEO< PEOPLE>

Sorry for yelling..
but goddamn.

and some of you are still screaming and crying how "pathetic" others are?




Watch the video posted on the page before this one, ( TWICE NOW) and shut the ef up! lol

edit on 12-3-2011 by Ahmose because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by vinay86
reply to post by Immortalgemini527
 

Plasma Beings




The video in the OP is of a Plasma Being, they appear in the form of these plasma ships which are similar to what lava looks like, drunvalo describes them as friendly and peaceful beings living inside the earth.

Drunvalo says these beings lived on the surface of earth before us.

Carlos Diaz of Mexico took pictures of these plasma ships first time in 1991. Drunvalo also says he has visited their underground cities, and they have no particular physical form, but they can appear in human form.
edit on 12/3/11 by vinay86 because: someday we will meet them.


WOWWWWW !


This is very new to me, and very far out, but if anything explains what this is, this sure does, this is an excellent video that clearly relates to the 2 videos of this thing. It explains it all, incredible find, just down right incredible. You made me a believer of what ever this is, I never like to believe in bs ,that’s why I said in the opening ,I am ‘baffled’ but now because of you and the positive responses that I received ,I’m going to take this series until further a do, im ‘super stoked ‘ on this info you presented ,thanks a bunch.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by curious7
Well until we find out more info, that video could be the best case for a truly unexplained piece of footage. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

Thanks for the positive response.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mclaneinc
Chadwickus has already rightly spotted what it is, I'll expand on it a little..

What it is......A streetlight with moths or something flying around it.

What are the swirls......Its a combination of branches between the light and the camera being brought into the image by the digital zoom artifacts. Its a small point of light being overzoomed which causes those odd patterns.

What its not...A Planet, clouds or a star and certainly NOT an alien craft...

Sorry, its a very very common effect seen on many many video's..

EDIT: The same effect can be seen partially in the video in this thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The item isn't a round pulsating blue ball as you will see when the guy pulls back the focus so you can see the buildings, only then do you see its a small whiteish light that's blinking and probably a star with some atmospheric goings on causing that twinkling look.

Again, once an item is digitally over zoomed out of focus you start to get diamond shapes, a look like the top half is darker and many other FALSE image artifacts.
edit on 12-3-2011 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)


I just have one thing to say. The object was to high to be a street light, and I have never seen a street light, that far in the sky, in both videos ,and in both cases.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr10k
reply to post by curious7
 


The guy above me is right. It is a false image artifact of over zooming...

It really baffles me how many of you come here with almost little to no knowledge, video manipulation skills, and/or experience recording footage (not speaking to you directly).

It would help some of you to maybe try using a video recorder once in a while. I am pretty sure the same guywho made the video has had exerience with the guy on youtube who overzooms and calls diamond shaped overzooms "angels of light".

Or the people on youtube who truly believe orbs, that can only be seen "when taken with a camera" are spirit orbs. Again, not calling anyone out, just saying, it helps to *Think* before you *act*
edit on 12-3-2011 by mr10k because: (no reason given)






Prove exactly what you are talking about...in both of these videos,you, and the guy above you.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
@ArMap

I can entirely agree with you, how out of focus light can be portrayed in a similar way. In fact, the question of whether or not this footage is out of focus is obviously a given.

What I'm stabbing at (and what you failed to recognize) is where the light source (we can agree its a light source) is at relative to the ground/horizon. Its obvious that it is high(er) in both videos. Thus impossible to be a street light.

Obviously its going to look different in out of focus cameras, and the specific phenomena is called Bokeh [en.wikipedia.org...] Depending on aperture, the actual blur quality can change shape and opacity.

This is an odd one. As you can see in the video, the internal density of the light is quite solid. The secondary ridge that surrounds it is a bit odd for a typical light blur.

Despite the aesthetics, the fact is that its a considerably large light source that is also pretty high up (the light is actually reflecting off the TOP of the clouds)

Your argument that the people filming are truly ignorant enough to speculate that this is a common light source is weak at the most. It seems in both cases that these people are at their homes, thus giving them a familiar environment where most likely they would recognize any significant change (like a new street light, or maybe a huge freaking UFO in the sky, duh) and I would lend credibility due to the child (and second person in the other video) also being surprised/alert and specifying exact details the individual filming spouts.

Its out of focus, sure. Its an abnormal hovering light-source (UFO), yep.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

edit on 12-3-2011 by AsimpleAbstraction because: double post



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Imagination may be your worst enemy.


That shape is characteristic of an out of focus light, and changes according to the lens used on the camera. This is what an out of focus light looks when using a Canon MV730i.



The moving lines that we see on the object are probably in front of it, like out of focus tree branches, they do not look like they go around the shape, they look only projected on the object, not on its surface.

But whatever it was it was really there, we can see the clouds illuminated by it.


But whatever it was it was really there, we can see the clouds illuminated by it.



What do you think about this ,does this have relevence,its my first time hearing about this.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by HeresHowItGoes
The odd thing is the U.F.O dissapears when a military plane appears.
This to me suggests a sentience behind the U.F.O ie it has the sentience to dissapear when a hostile craft appears.

Looks like plasma to me, or maybe holographics.


So its intelligent in your opinion?



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrnBdry
Some of the responses in this thread make me want to unjoin this place. Either that, or some people should just be banned from being allowed here.

A grape? A flare? A street light? Clouds infront of it? Seriously, the people who try and debunk stuff have a greater imagination than those who believe.

A GRAPE???????? Just go away.


Cant argue with that! so what is your opinion on this?



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by AsimpleAbstraction
What I'm stabbing at (and what you failed to recognize) is where the light source (we can agree its a light source) is at relative to the ground/horizon. Its obvious that it is high(er) in both videos. Thus impossible to be a street light.
In my first post I said that the light was really there and illuminated the clouds.


Your argument that the people filming are truly ignorant enough to speculate that this is a common light source is weak at the most.
I didn't said anything like that. Could you please tell me what did I said that you interpreted that way? Thanks in advance.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527


What do you think about this ,does this have relevence,its my first time hearing about this.
I hadn't the time to watch that video, I will watch it tomorrow, it's getting late here in Portugal.


Edit: I corrected the link, it needed a "-" at the beginning.
edit on 12/3/2011 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 
I can't get the sound, so I am going by the video. Looks like an out of focus light, with tree branches moving in front of it as if they were moving in a car.

Out of focus: you can see the concentric rings of focus when an object is blown up way over it's focus. We do that in astronomy to check the alignment of the mirror with the lenses.

Branches: the appearance of dark stripes may indicate branches, instead of clouds. In astronomy, clouds would be more dissipated, foggy, and have softer shadowing. These shadows are more distinct, albeit out of focus. Hence, probably branches.

The color of the object indicates it is the color of the planet Mars, out of focus. The camera being used would not be powerful enough to get a clear image of Mars that size, or as bright an image out of focus, so it would not be Mars.

If this event should happen to you, and you have the ability to go from autofocus to manual focus on your digital zoom movie camera, please use manual focus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------

Very well said, excellent point of view, can’t argue with that.
But umm, when was the last or the first time you ever seen a bright light in the sky 'stationary' at night, with clouds passing in front of it?



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   


They can be observant and stupid, although I don't mean that's what happened in this case. People's reactions are the result of their personality, so we cannot really know why they reacted like they did. Maybe they had a predisposition to be awed by something like this.


Although indirectly implied; an argument, accusation, or assumption in referral to the situation-dependent reaction of the people in the video(s) of an observant stupidity is obviously non-applicable in the current situation due to environmental familiarity. An unexplainable huge ball of light on your doorstep is obviously going to make most-anyone react that way.



In my first post I said that the light was really there and illuminated the clouds.


"Why is there multiple video sourcing the exact same thing? "
Because an our of focus light will look the same when seen through another camera with the same type of lens.



Again, implying that both videos were nothing but out-of-focus light sources. My original thought behind the question was referring to "Why is their multiple videos sourcing the [huge abnormal light-source hovering in the air in front of their homes?]"

which your answer to my question was: "Because an our of focus light will look the same when seen through another camera with the same type of lens."

This is obvious, we are just failing to communicate properly.


**** Ah, hadn't seen your previous post. My apologies.

edit on 12-3-2011 by AsimpleAbstraction because: Simple mistake



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by randomname
 




if you watch the phoenix light's documentary, these are exactly the orbs that make up the lights of the giant craft they saw.

orange balls of light that seem to contain and swirl the light inside of it.

and the kids reaction seems natural.

and hahaha, the u.s. army can't do squat. on the bright side these kind of videos barely raise an eyebrow.

i think we are ready for the next step of official contact. multiple, giant formation sightings and more detailed closeups being allowed to be filmed.


iug 527> I think so to, it seems like the ats posters understand allot on this subject, and have giving us very good evidence on this matter. I get tired of hearing we are going to get disclosure soon. It seems like these aliens are getting impatient, lol.
edit on 12-3-2011 by Immortalgemini527 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WideAwakeNow
Is it just me or can you hear machine gun fire in the back ground, is there a military base near that location?.
Interesting clip.


lol,Now i have to go back and check that out.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoxBenBen
very nice video....i think it should be getting more attention than the jeruslem one...i also agree that anyones attempt to explain what it is are feeble and childish....really? sometimes i feel like there is a bunch of thirteen years old posting on here...im not saying its alien.,..but im accpeting that it is bizarre and that i cant possibly give an explenation...sorry my EGO isnt to big to give you a "definate assumption"


Loll, I guess we can both agree on one thing, it’s a 'ufo'. Don’t know what kind it is, but it’s definitely unidentified.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Since a dude here said, plasma type ufo. I never heard anyone else say anything like that. Cuz what I saw looked plasma, "lava glowing" as some one said on here. A burning glow. I even said that on my thread about the plasma part but I never thought of lava looking but yeah it did.

Now about the vid in the op;
If this being an out focused glare or a true solid object, Im not a pro. But I am open on to what this, the vid on the OP. ???

WOW


Heres a pic of my glowing object. Yes it is a light in the sky but I seen more that that !





Thanx again, good times
edit on 12-3-2011 by VenomVile.6 because: add



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
The video looks legit, but the audio sounds like...well...like acting.

The first quarter of the video didn't sound believable to me at all; it sounded forced. As time went on...he sort of fell into the role and starts sounding more natural. Maybe it's real, maybe it's not. I do not know. The video I believe, the audio I do not.




top topics



 
88
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join