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.

 

1979 Video Of National Broadcast- Pittsburgh Daylight UFO'S At Football Game - 52,000 Stadium Atten

page: 15
218
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thunderheart
Did they have remote controlled kites in 1979?




posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by elouina
 


Hmmm, would it be possible to upload the VOB or ISO copy? I might be able to get something clear out of the original, or maybe someone that is an expert at video with some kickass program could come up with something. I would be willing to give it a shot at least.
edit on Tue, 07 Jun 2011 06:08:07 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


Ok I was curious why you asked about the DVD vs VHS. But um how do you upload about 4 GB in those formats here? (Both videos combined are 7GB, but disc 2 is all that is needed.)


Originally posted by Scoriada

Originally posted by Thunderheart
Did they have remote controlled kites in 1979?


Interesting.... I searched all over the internet for every kite in existence. Never saw that one.

Self propelled kite




U.S. Patent Number 4,180,221 December 25, 1979



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I was confused.... nevermind

edit on 7-6-2011 by Forevever because: fail



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Ok an investigator just got back to me. Here is what he said.




Hello Again, I just viewed vid and stills and can say it is not a kite and not a balloon and nothing we have flying is like it.


YES!!!!' Oh YES!!!!! YIPEE!!!!!



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
No one is looking at the stills on page 13?

Come on people, take a look!



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
No one is looking at the stills on page 13?

Come on people, take a look!


If you want these objects to be UFOs the stills are a great resource. But if you actually want to identify the objects the video is much better


They're rotor-kites.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
No one is looking at the stills on page 13?

Come on people, take a look!


If you want these objects to be UFOs the stills are a great resource. But if you actually want to identify the objects the video is much better


They're rotor-kites.


Oh I get it, don't look at the frames from unconverted video. (And it was not zoomed in either. This is what I saw while watching the video.) Instead, look at the far away and poorer quality video posted on Youtube so the cover-up continues.

The news may be picking this up. Fingers crossed.
edit on 7-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Hmm, couldn't find a filehost that does files that large. Crap, you could get it smaller without losing quality by muxing it, but that is a complicated thing to do


The big problem with youtubing a DVD, you lose some info when you convert from VOB, then youtube converts it again which loses more info.
edit on Tue, 07 Jun 2011 19:33:29 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by elouina

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
No one is looking at the stills on page 13?

Come on people, take a look!


If you want these objects to be UFOs the stills are a great resource. But if you actually want to identify the objects the video is much better


They're rotor-kites.


Oh I get it, don't look at the close-ups from unconverted video. Look at the far away pictures posted on Youtube so the cover-up continues.

The news may be picking this up. Fingers crossed.
edit on 7-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)


I heard about this "sighting" some time ago and I applaud you for making the video available online
I'm not saying to be mean or anything but to me this thread ended with staples post on page 1. It's quite obvious that your will to believe has impacted your judgement here.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by elouina

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
No one is looking at the stills on page 13?

Come on people, take a look!


If you want these objects to be UFOs the stills are a great resource. But if you actually want to identify the objects the video is much better


They're rotor-kites.


Oh I get it, don't look at the close-ups from unconverted video. Look at the far away pictures posted on Youtube so the cover-up continues.

The news may be picking this up. Fingers crossed.
edit on 7-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)


I heard about this "sighting" some time ago and I applaud you for making the video available online
I'm not saying to be mean or anything but to me this thread ended with staples post on page 1. It's quite obvious that your will to believe has impacted your judgement here.


I don't believe anything one way or another yet. I learned my lesson earlier when I was giving in and conceding those were kites. But I then followed jinglelords advice, and looked at them on a large screen TV. I have been meaning to thank this person. So I am thanking you now Jinglelord..
You opened up some new evidence.

post by Jinglelord

post by elouina

What you are doing cripmeister, is making a judgement based on 1/2 the evidence. And the most poor quality of the evidence. So who is skewing evidence for their own beliefs? At least I am willing to keep an open mind to both sides. And have even entertained a balloon theory.

Like AmatuerSkyWatcher said, everyone, take a look at the stills on page 13.



:



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by elouina

What you are doing cripmeister, is making a judgement based on 1/2 the evidence. And the most poor quality of the evidence. So who is skewing evidence for their own beliefs? At least I am willing to keep an open mind to both sides. And have even entertained a balloon theory.

Like AmatuerSkyWatcher said, everyone, take a look at the stills on page 13.


What about the press photographers (as Chadwickus pointed out)? What about the 52.000 attendees? If this was a legit UFO sighting wouldn't there be tons of photos and newspaper articles of it? I looked at the stills on page 13 and the stills make it look like a UFO but the video tells me otherwise. staples video is a good match, can you offer any evidence that they're not rotor-kites?



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by elouina

What you are doing cripmeister, is making a judgement based on 1/2 the evidence. And the most poor quality of the evidence. So who is skewing evidence for their own beliefs? At least I am willing to keep an open mind to both sides. And have even entertained a balloon theory.

Like AmatuerSkyWatcher said, everyone, take a look at the stills on page 13.


What about the press photographers (as Chadwickus pointed out)? What about the 52.000 attendees? If this was a legit UFO sighting wouldn't there be tons of photos and newspaper articles of it? I looked at the stills on page 13 and the stills make it look like a UFO but the video tells me otherwise. staples video is a good match, can you offer any evidence that they're not rotor-kites?


I can't tell you about what I do not know. Can you offer me any 100% evidence they are rotor kites? Since you are making the statement as to exactly what they are. Otherwise your comment is an opinion. Myself, I am clueless and perplexed, and consider them unidentified for now. But unidentifed means they could be anything, manmade or not.


edit on 7-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by elouina

Can you offer me any 100% evidence they are rotor kites?


Again, the video posted on page 1 is a match for what we're seeing in your video. If that explanation isn't okay with you then you must contribute something better or disprove the rotor-kite theory, simply saying that you don't agree isn't good enough.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scoriada
Did they have remote controlled kites in 1979?


They've had remote control planes for almost a hundred years. Why not kites? Just a matter of putting a radio control on a kite...



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister

Originally posted by elouina

Can you offer me any 100% evidence they are rotor kites?


Again, the video posted on page 1 is a match for what we're seeing in your video. If that explanation isn't okay with you then you must contribute something better or disprove the rotor-kite theory, simply saying that you don't agree isn't good enough.


So you are saying that a totally round 3d object, like the one on on the left, is a rotor kite?
I have analyzed this video with video mastering software and the light refection is covering up the fact that it is always three dimensionally round in 100% of the frames. This is downright obvious with deinterlacing either the top or bottom field. I would believe a balloon theory before your opinion of a rotor kite. An opinion you didn't even think up on your own. Such hogwash...


Now the right object is also being messed with by light reflections. Once again substantiated with deinterlacing. So what you are seeing in the compressed video is not what is actually there. A large majority of this oblect is falling off. Due to the rotations and the resulting enhanced light reflection. And the stills represent the whole picture of what you are missing.

So how are you substantiating your claim of a rotor kite? Like I said you are stating as a matter of fact that they are rotor kites. It is a theory unless you can provide proof. A lot of things rotate since it facilitates movement and aerodynamics.....

To anyone reaching this thread for the first time, please see the stills on page 13.

edit on 7-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Mabey it's a form of staying aloft.

the spinning that is.
edit on 4-10-2011 by Berenai because: im newb



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Berenai
Mabey it's a form of staying aloft.

the spinning that is.
edit on 4-10-2011 by Berenai because: im newb


Whatever it is, manmade or not, perhaps you are right. Good idea!
Maybe we should be looking at spinning remote control aircraft?

Anyways, I am experimenting with video mastering software. This looks kewl when not enlarged. The colors of the object are unchanged by me. I think.
Although corrected. This is new software for me.



I keep thinking a round kite. But it would not be able to rotate in the direction it was. Since it would be rotating right across the multiple lines needed for it. Not possible.
edit on 8-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 12:18 AM
link   
maybe something like this for spherical UFO, maybe non-RC version of it.

youtu.be...



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Just got an unbiased opinion from a stunt kiter. And I never asked this person either. I left a comment on their site that mentioned my video. And they just happen to be a stunt kiter! I have hit the lottery! Anyways they are going to do some research for me.




Huh.. Just watched that video again and damn.. I will never believe that these are kites.. What I was talking about is "rotor ufo kites" , but they are really hard to control to be in formation like that and they are just too high..

edit on 8-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina

So what you are seeing in the compressed video is not what is actually there.


So we're supposed to have a discussion about material only you have access to? You should make an HD version (not stills) of just the objects available, otherwise this discussion is pointless.
edit on 8-6-2011 by cripmeister because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
218
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join