HD video of UFO Stalking Chilean Jets Over Santiago Air Base

page: 5
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Above, someone wrote:


[That the object was not noticed on film until later] is a telltale sign that whatever these blobs are, they are not spacecraft. No one present saw it. Now before you say "yeah but it was flying too fast", human perception is quite amazing and even an object moving fast enough to just appear in a few frames of a video would have been quite obvious to people on site.


It doesn't matter who wrote that, because I see a few replies going in the same direction, and I'm not singling anyone out... but you all DO realize that 10,000kph is nearly 3 kilometers PER SECOND, right?

And isn't it funny how human perception is "quite amazing" this time around, when the skeptic needs it to be exactly that in order to most effectively deny. Yet why do I have the funny feeling that, were the facts a little different, the same people would be reciting the perils of eye-witness testimony and bemoaning the lousy observational skills of we humans....

It's sorta like how this statement:
"You'd think with all these cell phone cameras around that someone would have caught something by now"
...becomes THIS statement (several times per week):
"That video is evidence of nothing, it's just a blurry blob... and why all the camera shaking?!"

C'mon guys, why not just come right out and say it: "it can't be true, so it's not."




posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

so please explain why only ONE video was released while they hold that carrot out claiming there are more
makes zero sense.
edit on March 15th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)


I would imagine it's because the Chilean authorities are not clamboring to convince people of anything via the Internet. This article came about as a result of the efforts of its author. Maybe the other videos would be inconclusive without the expert analysis to go with them. Who knows? We don't have a lot of information to go on, to be sure.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeaAndStrumpets
Above, someone wrote:


[That the object was not noticed on film until later] is a telltale sign that whatever these blobs are, they are not spacecraft. No one present saw it. Now before you say "yeah but it was flying too fast", human perception is quite amazing and even an object moving fast enough to just appear in a few frames of a video would have been quite obvious to people on site.


It doesn't matter who wrote that, because I see a few replies going in the same direction, and I'm not singling anyone out... but you all DO realize that 10,000kph is nearly 3 kilometers PER SECOND, right?

And isn't it funny how human perception is "quite amazing" this time around, when the skeptic needs it to be exactly that in order to most effectively deny. Yet why do I have the funny feeling that, were the facts a little different, the same people would be reciting the perils of eye-witness testimony and bemoaning the lousy observational skills of we humans....

It's sorta like how this statement:
"You'd think with all these cell phone cameras around that someone would have caught something by now"
...becomes THIS statement (several times per week):
"That video is evidence of nothing, it's just a blurry blob... and why all the camera shaking?!"

C'mon guys, why not just come right out and say it: "it can't be true, so it's not."


can you show us why it cannot possibly be a bug zipping about? im curious why the bug theory has not been debunked yet


what happened to a process of elimination?? or is that no longer needed? just blindly believe what anonymous people say?

until someone can show why it is not a bug, to me it walks, quacks and looks like a bug *shrug*



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
So im the only one who sees this as all a bunch of hooey (for lack of better word
)


I agree with you, this footage alone just is not compelling at all. The claim of other footage from separate cameras at different vantage points of the same object is what's intriguing however the fact that that footage wasn't presented leaves us no choice but to question it's existence.

I'll be watching this one but not holding my breath.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Has anyone noticed this, yet?

The video at Leslie's link is of a bit higher quality (especially when you up it to 720p), and the "object" is much more discernible when you then increase the video to full-screen. The quality of the embedded YT video is a bit degraded. Anyway, here's what I mean - around the :27 second mark of the video, the "object" appears to emerge from the hills in the far background (on the far right...1/8th of the way in) before banking screen-left and shooting off. Since it "appeared" within the frame (rather than from outside the frame) and, seemingly, from behind the hill, it appears to be at that great a distance away, and just might rule out it being a bug. That, along with the testimony of the "experts" and 6 other supposedly corroborating videos. But, for now, I'm looking at the appearance at the :27 second mark.

Also, some of the screen-grabs in the slide-show at Leslie's link are worth looking at, particularly the infrared analysis (18 of 19), which is also available here:



And alternatively here:

images.huffingtonpost.com...

I know I'm very curious in what the other 6 videos have to offer. I'm certainly in no rush to jump to conclusions.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
this is the first exciting ufo post of the year for me. i am posting to bookmark so i can check in later. i hope that these other six videos will surface. then my friends, then we will see if this is a nay sayer bug lol



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
can you show us why it cannot possibly be a bug zipping about? im curious why the bug theory has not been debunked yet



Uhm... with all due respect, you may be unwittingly endorsing a conspiracy here that rivals some of the more bizarre ones I've heard. Personally, for now, and given what they've got to lose, I'm gonna go with the journalist / general / scientists combo (who've definitively ruled out a bug, they say)... until I have a decent reason not to. You do realize that the CEFAA is "official" (something akin to a department within the U.S.'s FAA), and that they've apparently already said they're going to make all evidence available?



what happened to a process of elimination?? or is that no longer needed? just blindly believe what anonymous people say?


It sounds like you've maybe not read too much about this case? That's no crime, but... "anonymous", you say? Again, I can name a well-known journalist, a general/gov't official, a professional astronomer... among others. People who have a ton to lose on this. If you equate that all with the word "anonymous", then your skepticism is quite advanced!



until someone can show why it is not a bug, to me it walks, quacks and looks like a bug *shrug*


Perhaps you've just been around longer and are a little more jaded? Fair enough. I just think that those making this claim (who, again, have everything to lose) deserve a fair opportunity to get all the info out there. Is it realistic to expect that all information -- all vids, with all technical specs, scientific analyses, calculations, etc. -- would have been presented in the initial news article appearing on the Huffington Post? I don't think so, personally....

And please do note that on page 1 of this thread, I said I wanted the evidence here to be "as public and as authenticated as possible. This all needs to be extremely transparent...." I suspect we all agree on that.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Interesting, I don't get excited much anymore and I'm not excited yet but like someone else said this is the best ufo case to come around in awhile. I can't wait to see were this goes, hopefully it doesn't turn out to be a bug. I know they already said it's not a bug but people do make mistakes, I just hope that's not the case here.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by deometer
Since it "appeared" within the frame (rather than from outside the frame) and, seemingly, from behind the hill, it appears to be at that great a distance away, and just might rule out it being a bug.


That's just stupid. The bug is black, and the video quality sucks, if it was in front of the hill it would probably be camouflaged/blended into the hill and invisible to us. Also, these bugs are flying so fast that they only show in a few frames. The bug probably did NOT come from behind the hill, it just happened to appear in the frame right above the hill.

Everything you are saying is like deja vu to me. Almost every bug video mistaken for UFOs has this same argument, "oh it appears to have come from behind ________". It's because the objects are so small and dark they blend in with everything, and moving so fast that they only appear in a few frames, and motion blur also effects some of them. It's always the same things that fool people into making bad judgements and calling a bug a UFO. It's Deja Vu to me.


Originally posted by deometer
That, along with the testimony of the "experts" and 6 other supposedly corroborating videos.


...which are probably just more videos with bugs in them.
edit on 15-3-2012 by UFOGlobe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by deometer
 


Wait... are you kidding me?


Originally posted by deometer
Also, some of the screen-grabs in the slide-show at Leslie's link are worth looking at, particularly the infrared analysis (18 of 19), which is also available here:

i.huffpost.com...

And alternatively here:

images.huffingtonpost.com...


Now I KNOW this is a HOAX if they are calling those images an "infrared analysis". Those screen grabs are from a camera only capable of capturing visible light. How do you get infrared images from a visible light camera?? Looks like someone just took the screen shots and played with the colors and called in an "infrared analysis". Now this entire thing seems like a HOAX. At first I thought it was a simple misunderstanding of bugs, but come on, how are you going to call THAT an "infrared analysis".


Something fishy going on here.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
What I find funny is the amount of people unwilling to accept that it could be something unexplainable.

Ive shown the video to a number of people and got replys back from all of them like oh its a bird, its a secret plane, it must be this it must be that. NO ONE not even people on here has gone like wow I really dont know what that could be???

Look at the video, its not an obvious hoax, not a lantern, not a weather balloon, birds and planes have been scientifically dismissed, its not 'obviously' a bug, its not really obviously anything. And there has been comments by the scientific community on the video.

This is a genuine unexplainable video, ripe for analysis and discussion, what this site is apparently ALL ABOUT!!! And all we get is a thread full of people saying its a damn bug!!?? What the hell guys??

If it isnt a plane, a bird, a lantern, weather balloon, then what the hell is it??

Call yourself a consipracy theorist? Tell everybody that you 'believe', then lets get this video analysed properly and with open minds and try to come up with better explanations than 'oh yea definately a bug'.

TBH while theres a chance it could be a bug, it doesnt really look like one........ So again, what the hell is it
edit on 15-3-2012 by Idonthaveabeard because: (no reason given)



Because you still haven't given a definite answer. It COULD be a bird, or a bug. Which is it? No one hs decided what is actually, so how can you decide what it isn't if you don't even REALLY KNOW what it is?

Also how many birds or bugs when zoomed in look like they're made of metal?
edit on 15-3-2012 by OGOldGreg because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by OGOldGreg
 


Why can't it be an unexplained metallic flying craft of some sort?

All of you insisting that it's a bug or bird - you guys are a joke. You're the equivalent of rude old people who just talk over you louder when they disagree with you. Official scientists involved with the Chilean government have vouched that the videos do not show bugs or birds.

Scientists attached to an official government will hold more sway than a random internet stooge 100% of the time. Why do you act like your opinion dwarfs that of professionals? Don't you realize it hurts your credibility (if not destroys it)?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by OGOldGreg

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
What I find funny is the amount of people unwilling to accept that it could be something unexplainable.

Ive shown the video to a number of people and got replys back from all of them like oh its a bird, its a secret plane, it must be this it must be that. NO ONE not even people on here has gone like wow I really dont know what that could be???

Look at the video, its not an obvious hoax, not a lantern, not a weather balloon, birds and planes have been scientifically dismissed, its not 'obviously' a bug, its not really obviously anything. And there has been comments by the scientific community on the video.

This is a genuine unexplainable video, ripe for analysis and discussion, what this site is apparently ALL ABOUT!!! And all we get is a thread full of people saying its a damn bug!!?? What the hell guys??

If it isnt a plane, a bird, a lantern, weather balloon, then what the hell is it??

Call yourself a consipracy theorist? Tell everybody that you 'believe', then lets get this video analysed properly and with open minds and try to come up with better explanations than 'oh yea definately a bug'.

TBH while theres a chance it could be a bug, it doesnt really look like one........ So again, what the hell is it
edit on 15-3-2012 by Idonthaveabeard because: (no reason given)



Because you still haven't given a definite answer. It COULD be a bird, or a bug. Which is it? No one hs decided what is actually, so how can you decide what it isn't if you don't even REALLY KNOW what it is?

Also how many birds or bugs when zoomed in look like they're made of metal?
edit on 15-3-2012 by OGOldGreg because: (no reason given)



Because I havent decided anything yet, thats my point!!!

My main complaint is towards this so called 'bug brigade' who have just decided that its a bug and nothing will sway them. Nobody is bothering with what looks like a worth while video to question, everyone has just decided its bugs and thats it! THATS my problem



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Sorry I guess I misread and took that the wrong way. I don't know why i'm arguing with you cause I agree that it is NOT a bird or a bug. Sorry for the miscommunication.

My reasoning beind what I said earlier about the planes. In 3 shots its moves clear across the screen, the F15's dont even move. I don't care about distance it's not gonna move fast than an F15. And if it was far enough away that it would appear like that, you wouldn't be able to see it cause its so small anyway. I don't understand how even after the closeup of a metallic looking object some of you still think it's a bug or a bird. I don't think that it could be any more clear that it is most definitely not a bird or bug.

Not saying it's a UFO, but i'm pretty positive we can say its not a bird or bug.

Also once again sorry about the confusion. I am retarded



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by OGOldGreg
Also how many birds or bugs when zoomed in look like they're made of metal?


There are a very large number of flying beetles that have very reflective metalic look to them:



In the right light, this beetle would look like a metallic disk shaped UFO when flying in front of a camera really fast.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by tagasbob
Official scientists involved with the Chilean government have vouched that the videos do not show bugs or birds.

Scientists attached to an official government will hold more sway than a random internet stooge 100% of the time.

Don't you realize it hurts your credibility (if not destroys it)?


Do you realize you are making an "argument from authority"? You are "appealing to authority".

en.wikipedia.org...

Not only is that a logical fallacy, but it pretty much destroys all of your credibility.

On top of that, you don't even know for a fact that any government official is involved. All you know is what was spoon fed to you by people trying to sell UFO books.
edit on 15-3-2012 by UFOGlobe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Super fast zipping around of metallic looking bug thing
Frame rate makes it pretty difficult to rule out some insects, but I dunno, there's a key shot in there that affirms something for me personally. Same as that old Fort Worth footage of a live capture. The "swoop" motion I call it. I just can't picture bugs doing a nose dive and levelling out, they usually zip up, left, right, then drop using the air.

We know aircraft woosh downwards and outwards when they fall quickly in an attempt to avoid crashing to the ground. Maybe non-terrestrial craft do to. And there is indication this manaouvere can screw up, ie Roswell. So maybe there is something to it. But that's just optomism, I thought the same about the Fort Worth footage. It's a very hard video to judge IMO, but it certainly opens some new questions & wild theories up



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
When you get down to the basics of this debate, the bug brigade are saying its a bug because they think it looks like a bug. We are saying it isnt a bug because we think it doesnt look like a bug.

Neither one of us can be proved correct, at least not by that video, there is no clear indication either way.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeaAndStrumpets
... I can name a well-known journalist, a general/gov't official, a professional astronomer... among others. People who have a ton to lose on this. If you equate that all with the word "anonymous", then your skepticism is quite advanced!


From Source link:


Astronomer Luis Barrera from the Metropolitan University of Sciences in Chile, who has an asteroid named after him, was one of eight highly skeptical scientists who analyzed the footage. He was able to rule out a meteoroid, pieces of meteors or comets, space junk, a bird or an airplane.

Funny that the only scientist/astronomer directly quoted would leave "bug" or "insect" out of the statement. Leaving a back door open mebbe?

In addition, it's not totally reassuring that Kean has stated in her tweets--as posted by orkojoker--that she basically just "trusts" her sources and hasn't verified the 7 videos personally.

Dont'cha think that leaves some room for taking this with a grain of salt until the info is confirmed or debunked otherwise?

For those of you claiming that only "debunkers" might have doubts here, I call B.S. A lot of folk who lean towards belief are maybe just better researchers and less gullible than yourself? Yes, I think so.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
We're not going to know for sure it isn't bugs until the rest of the videos are released. It's all speculation up until that time.





top topics
 
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum