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.

 

Chilean UFO travelling at 4,000mph 'captured on film from seven angles'

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Hello everyone,

As you might have noticed, I didn't mention the word "proof" or evidence of a UFO and I am one of those who believe that UFO doesn't necessarily mean aliens and that in order to get a 100% proof of a UFO it has to be caught from different angles coming from different people AND it has to be very clear, nice and BIG in the frame with unmistakable detail, not just a flying speck that could be a million things.

That said, what I am offering today is something I found on the daily mail of a "speck" travelling at crazy speeds that the camera's fps can't keep up with it. Now why do I think this is interesting?

1- Because it's on the daily mail "the United Kingdom's second biggest-selling daily newspaper after The Sun".
2- Because it claims it's taken from 7 different angles. ( can't seem to find the other 6?)

If someone here could help me find the rest of the videos (angles) I think that would boost the credibility of the footage considerably.

Now, if the video is a hoax, which I am leaning to, then why would the dailymail post it on their website? I personally have seen much better fake UFO videos. Is this part of the gradual global awakening strategy we hear about all the time? Or is the dailymail just trying to get some attention because they know it's the trend nowadays?

The reason I am leaning to dismiss this as a hoax is that cameras have, apart from (frames per seconds), shutter speeds, which is how fast the each frame is shot. If the object is that fast then it would be impossible for a bad camera like the one in the video to get a clear shot of that speck. It would rather look like a smeared line on the frame, or maybe not even that... just nothing. Cameras like these can't even shoot a ball kicked by a soccer player because it's sometimes too fast for the shutter speed.

So, why am I posting this if I believe it might be a hoax? Well, again:

1- I would like to get some ideas from you guys on why the dailymail posts that on their website NOW when they used to ignore even more powerful footage earlier.

2- I would like to see if someone can help us find the other 6 angles.

L et's hear some insights.
edit on 17-3-2012 by TheAlmo because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
already covered on the thread below yours thread



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Versa
 


Ummm... I guess I should just stop using ATS's search engine then?

Thanks



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:31 AM
link   
I stoped reading after you mentioned the Daily Fail.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
I'm not an expert, and i'm still looking into it... but how big would that object be for it not to cause drag and burn up through friction in the earth's atmosphere?

Does anyone have a calculation to find this out?

Of course, if someone found this out, it would describe how big the object was - assuming the object's speed was actually clocked, and not assumed



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAlmo
reply to post by Versa
 


Ummm... I guess I should just stop using ATS's search engine then?

Thanks


haha i agree... The top/new topics change in real time - I never saw the article you linked, so there's no need for your comment, really.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   
They dont know the size of the object, they dont know the distance of the object, SO they CANT work out a speed it's that simple.

That could be a small object like an insect close to the camera or something in the distance THEY dont have the info to calculate anything.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Topic already being discussed here.

Thread closed.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join