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.

 

HD video of UFO Stalking Chilean Jets Over Santiago Air Base

page: 14
56
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
I agree the 'heat analysis' thing is strange.




posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by UFOGlobe
 


It llooks like more assumptions there, as I understand it this is a fairly big event there. Why wouldn't this be video taped professionally with some camera with more capabilities than what you are assuming this random guys camera had.

That they claim videos include cell phones shows to me that this would have had to be some detailed investigation. This was probably reveiwed on what ever professionaly done video they had available first and then once the anomoly was noticed it seems they may have checked attendance and contacted many people to get copies of whatever they taped as well (that alone could have taken a lot of time almost of itself negating the 2 year timeframe arguments).

The general spectaters probably do not have any capability like what you are pointing out. Why assume there wasn't a much better camaera to film this fairly big event.

My opinion is only based on the actual evidence before us right now, and with that is sure seems to be a bug. However why should everyone automatically discount the possibilities of other videos. The supposed professional analyses takes away from that theory as it would be easily disproven with multiple videos. However even professionals can get caught up in a moment wanting to believe they have something more special then what they do so I cannot wait for additional videos to be released.

I'm definitely keeping an open mind on this one.


edit on 17-3-2012 by seeker1977 because: typo

edit on 17-3-2012 by seeker1977 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
reply to post by UFOGlobe
 


Your basing your evidence on your opinion of what YOU think it looks like, its all hear say formed from no physical evidence, a blurry video and bias.


But so is everyone else? We have hearsay in the article - no proof any of it is true. We have hearsay about "testimonies from alleged super duper important smart people" and hearsay that there are 7 other videos.
if people want to believe the article as 100% reliable, that is fine. some of us don't, which is fine too.

At this point, everyone is just offering their opinion. there is only ONE piece of evidence to go on. Not the article. Not other videos. the one and only video that has been released. That is where people are getting their "bug theory" from - from watching the one and only video.....until everything else is verified and proved, it is ALL just hearsay and little evidence.


edit on March 17th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1977
 


LOL! You accuse me of making assumptions, then you continue to write one huge assumption about the entire event being filmed by special infrared cameras. That's comedy.

Maybe you need to study this image again...



The "infrared" image is an exact copy of the normal image. You can compare the relative position of the cloud below the UFO and everything, it is identical. That means they took that normal image from a normal camera and they used image manipulation to make a fake "infrared" analysis.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by UFOGlobe
 


You are right, its image manipulation, not infrared imagining. If it were real thermal/infrared imaging, the engines of the planes would be a different colour, as would the rest of the surroundings.

You cant tell some people though


Claims without evidence, 6 missing videos and testimonies of alleged big wigs....m'kay
All the hallmarks of a hoax.
edit on 17-3-2012 by loves a conspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
My post is not an assumption, it is providing the benefit of the doubt until we receive further evidence. You are assuming everyone is flat out lying, incompetent and so on.

Why wouldn't they have a camera that could monitor infrared, I am not saying that is a fact just sayiung they claim to have had one and why not. They were taping an event with jets they may have wanted to monitor infrared in case of any anomolous heat signatures. If something went wrong an infrared capable camera on site would help provide more evidence of where it may have happened.

All I am doing is not assuming everyone is a liar. However I am not posting absolutes either until more evidence is available.
edit on 17-3-2012 by seeker1977 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
The main point though is with multiple camera ANYONE could easily discount the entire bug theory.People could make a fairly definiative determination of size and speed.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1977
The main point though is with multiple camera ANYONE could easily discount the entire bug theory.People could make a fairly definiative determination of size and speed.


Fact is, there probably isnt another 6 vids.

If there were, why release the one with the bug in it?? Why not release the one where you could clearly see an alien spaceship??



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy

Originally posted by seeker1977
The main point though is with multiple camera ANYONE could easily discount the entire bug theory.People could make a fairly definiative determination of size and speed.


Fact is, there probably isnt another 6 vids.

If there were, why release the one with the bug in it?? Why not release the one where you could clearly see an alien spaceship??


Kinda oxymoron there eh ?? fact is and probably in the same sentence ?? fact is...bug theorists are just wasting their time because they don't really show a bug and are not convincing others that think it is something else..and vice versa..so everyone is just wasting their time until more evidence is presented either way
edit on 17-3-2012 by primetime2123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1977
 


Sorry, all I see from you is mental gymnastics in order to patch huge holes in this story.

They never claimed to have any infrared camera videos. They only claimed to see "energy" when they do a "photo analysis". They called that analysis "infrared studies".



The rounded top reflects the sun and appears metallic; the bottom is darker and flat, emitting some form of energy which is visible in photo analysis. Infrared studies show the entire object is radiating heat, just like the jets.


source

Take a look at the caption of this image:



"Astronomer Luis Barrera highlighted heat on top and in the band below during his analysis. The black area is some kind of energy, and the neutral blue represents solid mass, according to Barrera."

Riiiiiiiggghhhht. I smell BS.

This reminds me of amateur UFOlogists who apply all sorts of photoshop filters to their images thinking it is going to reveal something. All they are really doing is changing the colors of pixel data that is already there.

I like when they use bilinear interpolation to scale the image, which then adds pixel data that never existed in the first place, then apply all these photoshop filters and think they see some type of energy around the craft. OH WAIT! That is exactly what astronomer Luis Barrera did!



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy

Originally posted by seeker1977
The main point though is with multiple camera ANYONE could easily discount the entire bug theory.People could make a fairly definiative determination of size and speed.


Fact is, there probably isnt another 6 vids.

If there were, why release the one with the bug in it?? Why not release the one where you could clearly see an alien spaceship??

Is this supposed to be a serious argument? Quite honestly, I'm having trouble accepting that people can write up dumb things.


You understand that any video shot from the ground with of an object high up in the sky is not necessarily going to "clearly [show] an alien space ship", right? You might also consider that no one is going to release any further videos just because "loves a conspiricy" [sic] from ATS thinks it is all a "conspiricy"
. If there is more material, I am sure it will be released in due time.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by UFOGlobe
 


why would an astronomer be doing analysis on something zipping about feet from the ground?
i never see the object go into space, nor above the jets....

i think that is your answer on why such HORRIBLE analysis or outright lying or wishful thinking is done on this video....
edit on March 17th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by UFOGlobe
reply to post by seeker1977
 

OH WAIT! That is exactly what astronomer Luis Barrera did!
That does not seem to be a direct quote from Barrera. Doesn't seem to stop you from arguing he said it though. More lameness and presuppositions.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by UFOGlobe
reply to post by seeker1977
 


Sorry, all I see from you is mental gymnastics in order to patch huge holes in this story.

They never claimed to have any infrared camera videos. They only claimed to see "energy" when they do a "photo analysis". They called that analysis "infrared studies".



The rounded top reflects the sun and appears metallic; the bottom is darker and flat, emitting some form of energy which is visible in photo analysis. Infrared studies show the entire object is radiating heat, just like the jets.


source

Take a look at the caption of this image:



"Astronomer Luis Barrera highlighted heat on top and in the band below during his analysis. The black area is some kind of energy, and the neutral blue represents solid mass, according to Barrera."

Riiiiiiiggghhhht. I smell BS.

This reminds me of amateur UFOlogists who apply all sorts of photoshop filters to their images thinking it is going to reveal something. All they are really doing is changing the colors of pixel data that is already there.

I like when they use bilinear interpolation to scale the image, which then adds pixel data that never existed in the first place, then apply all these photoshop filters and think they see some type of energy around the craft. OH WAIT! That is exactly what astronomer Luis Barrera did!






well..I looked up a Luis Barrera in google to see if he is legit..he is a physicist from Chile ..what are your credentials ?? since you are knocking his credibility
edit on 17-3-2012 by primetime2123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by UFOGlobe
 


why would an astronomer be doing analysis on something zipping about feet from the ground?
i never see the object go into space, nor above the jets....

i think that is your answer on why such HORRIBLE analysis or outright lying or wishful thinking is done on this video....
edit on March 17th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)
Right, that is why one of the most famous ufologists, Hynek, was an astronomer too. Gosh, I wonder what Hynek was thinking, studying UFOs when obviously he was never qualified in the eyes of greeneyedleo.

Gimme a break please, what kind of cr*p is this?



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jclmavg

Originally posted by UFOGlobe
reply to post by seeker1977
 

OH WAIT! That is exactly what astronomer Luis Barrera did!
That does not seem to be a direct quote from Barrera. Doesn't seem to stop you from arguing he said it though. More lameness and presuppositions.


Is that all you got? You are just going to deny parts of the article?

It doesn't even matter if he said it or not. Hire any professional in video and image forensics and they will tell you that image is not from a real infrared camera. They will also confirm that interpolation was used to scale that image up, which caused it to create data that didn't exist in the original camera, then filters were applied to it to make it appear as an infrared image.

In other words. It was an amateur and pointless analysis.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy

Fact is, there probably isnt another 6 vids.

If there were, why release the one with the bug in it?? Why not release the one where you could clearly see an alien spaceship??


Well there are definitely another four (at least) and they were in several formats suggesting that the story is accurate, i.e. separate cameras & photographers, however the circumstances under which they were released to Kean seem a little strange.


Cheers.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
why would an astronomer be doing analysis on something zipping about feet from the ground?
i never see the object go into space, nor above the jets....

i think that is your answer on why such HORRIBLE analysis or outright lying or wishful thinking is done on this video....


Exactly! Why did they hire an astronomer to do video/image analysis?

It seems like this entire thing is an attempt for the "Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena" to justify its existence so they are not shut down again. lol


reply to post by primetime2123
 



Originally posted by primetime2123
well..I looked up a Luis Barrera in google to see if he is legit..he is a physicist from Chile ..what are your credentials ?? since you are knocking his credibility
edit on 17-3-2012 by primetime2123 because: (no reason given)


If I told you, you wouldn't believe me.

This topic is not about me, sorry. Move along.
edit on 17-3-2012 by UFOGlobe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
why would an astronomer be doing analysis on something zipping about feet from the ground?
i never see the object go into space, nor above the jets....


Probably because he's got qualifications in Astrophysics. The article says he's a scientist and has an asteroid named after him so I'd guess he's using his physics knowledge on this one.

edit - yeah looks like that's the case :

luis barrera chile physicist - google

edit 2 - here you go :


PhD: Astronomer, Ruhr Universitaet Bochum, Germany.
Work: Full Prof., Physics Dep. UMCE, Chile.
Twitter: @astro_nomer


drbarrera.blogspot.co.uk...
edit on 17-3-2012 by robhines because: added



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by UFOGlobe
Exactly! Why did they hire an astronomer to do video/image analysis?
Your misrepresentations are enormous. According to the quote you presented earlier, the astronomer comments on energy and mass. It does not state the astronomer did any image analysis himself and if he did in what capacity and which analysis techniques were involved. An astronomer as a physicist is eminently qualified to speak on such matters. Whether the newspaper accurately represented his views remains to be seen.


It seems like this entire thing is an attempt for the "Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena" to justify its existence so they are not shut down again. lol
More assumptions. Is this committee in danger of being shut down? If not, then you are merely attempting to poison the well again by suggesting they have a motive to promote this event against all evidence and good will.


If I told you, you wouldn't believe me.
If I told you my credentials you would not believe me either.
Seriously, with such an attitude it is difficult to take you seriously, and I'm not even counting all the fallacies involved in your posts. You also lack patience to wait for further information to be released and consider this a waste of time, which tells us that you are not nearly as interested in the actual information as you claim to be.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join