Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Swarm of Lights Appear Over Argentina and Chile And Is Filmed From Six Cameras.

page: 23
190
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 17 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   
[continued]

richar100057 4 days ago
que grande, hay varios videos de las mismas luces y pasaron el mismo dia a las 21.55 en bs aires y hay otro video en junin de los andes, que loco, muy bueno el video.

Brodzy123 4 days ago
Saying something is ginormous isn't really jumping to a conclusion...if something appears to be ginormous then you're probably going to deem it as ginormous...because its ginormous. Also you've just jumped to a conclusion by saying its most likely space debris...bit hypocritical?

TheSpookymink 4 days ago
A meteor moving horizontally across a landscape? It's a single solid object, you can see the outline and the lights remain in the same place as the object is moving. Meteors come down on a curve vertically, they don't float along horizontally. Ok dafty.

kindahottish 4 days ago
You're the dafty mate when you jump to such conclusions as "this thing is ginormous". It's quite clearly a collection of numerous objects, not a single solid object. And my best guess is that it's space debris burning up upon re-entering earths atmosphere. An almost identical incident happened over the UK last year and was seen all over the northern part of the country. It was parts of an old satelite falling back to earth. Type in "Dalbeattie meteor" on youtube for HD evidence identical to this

Luis Giordano 4 days ago
Son METEOROS = TRAZAS LUMINOSAS que dejan los astros que cruzan a gran velocidad la atmósfera. Estos son producidos por METEOROIDES. Si es una misma "familia" de cuerpos que entran, se denomina LLUVIA DE METEOROS, pero en este caso, como están TAN CERCA UNO DEL OTRO y moviéndose a la misma velocidad, es seguro que se trate de UN SOLO METEOROIDE QUE SE FRAGMENTÓ AL ENTRAR EN LA ATMÓSFERA. Los fragmentos que logren llegar a la superficie, son los que se llaman "METEORITOS" . JLGiordano@hotmail.com

TheSpookymink 4 days ago
I haven't seen anything quite like this, this thing is ginormous. It's a UFO, and an impressive one. All the dafties need to get it into their heads UFO = Unidentified Flying Object and until the object is identified it remains a UFO.

suren105 4 days ago
it just looks like a meteor shower.. or a big meteor that exploded to tiny peaces and is passing over earth..

ronpack 4 days ago
It was definitely moving fast and seemed quite large. I want to think it's man-made since it didn't seem to do anything that defies the laws of physics. This is the first time I have ever seen a video of something like this. I did see an orange colored UFO along with my family last December on the east coast of USA, though. But all it was, was a bright light in the sky that dimmed and got brighter many times while moving across the sky for about 30 seconds. Was high enough to go behind a cloud.

jorge f 4 days ago
Para mi no es un meteorito por que la velocidad de ingreso era muy lenta, yo lo presencie y mas parecía como otro objeto o chatarra espacial que venia cayendo a menor velocidad.

Stacy A 5 days ago
yeah sure bec everyone knows meteor showers move slowly thru the sky with synchronized blasts of light. Come on, you know you really want to call it a weather balloon. Don't be so afraid of the unknown.

Raliuga999 5 days ago
¿Desde cuando los meteoritos son tan lentos? y si estan cayendo tantos ¿no deberiamos estar mas alarmados? donde quedo eso de que con solo la energia cinetica un meteoro de 1 metro seria capaz de destruir un pueblo o debastar una gran zona. ¿que dice la NASA?

ADD more =========

More collected at May 17, noon CDT

Alexander R 17 hours ago
Son rastros de un cohete, de cualquier manera luce increíble y parece cualquier otra cosa.
Saludos.

s4mweller 19 hours ago
I hope that you are correct. However, personally, I don't think the first object is a blimp. It is far too big, and it is travelling too fast. Also, at the height at which it appears to be, I would have thought that it should be possible to hear the engines.

collomps 22 hours ago
This is CYGNUS MASS SIMULATOR disintegrating on upper atmosphere 05/10/13 01:30 UTC. Was launched by Antares rocket, this is what you see in the video:

Ashingda 2 days ago
The light seems to flicker, It might be similar to the northern lights or how it's energy system works to keep it flying or something.


Another video with comments:

STRANGE LIGHTS IN THE SKY OF CHILE AND ARGENTINA MAY 10, 2013 (COMPILATION VIDEO)
3:59 www.youtube.com...

kansas66701 4 days ago
It seems to be a UFO, as the way the lights are blinking. How can this possibly be fireballs?? The shape remains the same and those are lights, not gas!, IMHO

Lori Sweet 5 days ago
THAT IS A SOLID OBJECT...LOL @ Space junk..thats funny. That is a craft flying...either military or U.F.O. Thanks!

fahernandezp1 5 days ago
I don´t think they were meteorites. Meteorites normally light up relatively shortly in the sky, these lights flew like in coordination and for a long time, it seems they were at the same distance from eachother during the whole trayectory. Weird.



edit on 17-5-2013 by JimOberg because: add more




posted on May, 17 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Jim,

That is an amazing contribution of data. It's work that crossed my mind, and I am very appreciative of the work you have put in.

Thanks again for making this a special thread.

Have a great weekend.
edit on 17-5-2013 by Bybyots because:




posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
To date still no one has explained the following.

-The light flickering on the object
-The reasons why if it was an Orbital's falling satellite had no comet trail? all falling satellites have a trail behind them.
-Mainstream Media News outlets silence for two weeks on the Lights.
-How could an falling satellite being witnessed in two countries with multiple accounts?

Either way still none has explained any of it, other then official claim that it was either an meteor or an simple falling satellite.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 03:04 PM
link   
nice one op! i hadnt logged on in a year, well i did for this thread.

formation fly suits?! looool omg thats ALOT of fly suits, staying together, everyone must be the exact same weight huh? and man they are strong! holding hands aginst the wind like that, perfectly, horizontally, for a long distance. nice.

space debris? THERES NO TAIL/TRAILS. people keep posting the same stupid video of debris entering, when thats CLEARLY not what we're looking at, look at ANY satellite reentry/ space debris falling video, THEY HAVE TAILS.....EVERYTIME. my god, is it that hard to tell the difference? honestly?
yes space debris falls differently each time, i've seen it many times, but they ALWAYS HAVE A TAIL,

meteors. this is the funniest one. those meteors last a LONG time NOT sparking up, like even meteors entering at a shallow angle of decent do, while not having tails, the most associated thing with a meteor, in fact, its what you WATCH when viewing meteors. whats a child gonna see/recall when viewing/asked about a meteor? the tail. whats a grown man gonna mention/keep a lookout for? the tail.

Now for satellite, now it could be that, my first thought was a blimp, but then you see that this things WEIRD, it looks like one SOLID outlined craft, just beyond your/the cameras cusp of view, but you can faintly make it out. second, most satellites ALSO have a tail opon re-entry, check it, its not hard to see, there's even some videos earlier in the thread.

So while i think it could be terrestrial in origin, don't just pass off something as meteors so simply please. first it was its CERTAIN its meteors from a majority, then o, its a satellite! well what if they lied? its been done time and time again. it looks to be one solid shadow type craft, kind of like the phoenix lights, you can faintly make out something aginst the darkness, almost like its PART of the darkness, but seperate from it.

The lights are going on and off, in am amber looking color, truth may be stranger than some think. who knows, i just know that the thing is koo, i hadnt seen a good vid like this in a while.

Last, the 6 diff camera angles. thats a bit suspect to me at the least, when taking in all angles (pun). its odd they could gather all those vids like that, unless they we're separately posted and then gathered.

All in all i can say its interesting at the least.i viewed the videos last night, and then not again until now. opon further review, its definitly not any of those things, meteors, gliders, heck even chinese lanterns don't look like that.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I'm not sure why some people think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, that it cant be a hoax. It would be very easy for two people from separate countries to set something like this up.

The best ufo I've ever seen, was an unidentified blimp at the time. This very much resembles what I saw that night, but with less lights.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


I could read YouTube comments all day long... just wow.

I was thinking about this. How hard do you think it would be to recreate this effect? we are talking about several points of light moving together and this being perceived as one large object with a defined structure. A few pages back I posted a video of 50 synchronous quad copters with lights on them. You can get some pretty interesting effects. Seems like you would only need 10 or so moving in a straight line to trick people into "seeing" something.



BTW, I don't think your face is autistic.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimboSliceLV
I'm not sure why some people think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, that it cant be a hoax. It would be very easy for two people from separate countries to set something like this up.

The best ufo I've ever seen, was an unidentified blimp at the time. This very much resembles what I saw that night, but with less lights.


And as usual i cant seem think why some people would think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, how it can be a failing satellite where its company even themselves stated the satellite would stay in orbit for several months.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 



how it can be a failing satellite where its company even themselves stated the satellite would stay in orbit for several months

I just got a brand new mustang that ford claimed gets 31Mph on the highway. The best I can get is 26 maybe 27. I'm also supposed to get 7 hours out of my laptop battery, I get like maybe 4. I also have a pair of unbreakable sunglasses that broke. Go figure. Don't even get me started on the non stainable underwear!



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
And as usual i cant seem think why some people would think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, how it can be a failing satellite


From the video itself and the drawings at 7 and 13.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Regarding the issue of 'tails' for meteors and reentry fragments....

Here's a typical reentry track [NOT for the Cygnus]:





At atmospheric entry, about 80 km up, the vehicle is going about 8000 meters/sec,
so it moves downrange about 500 km/minute.

As it begins to encounter real drag, it becomes surrounded by a glowing plasma sphere.

As it slips lower -- 78 km, 75, 72 km -- the thicker air leaves a thicker tail of plasma
and ablation products behind it.

During this period it can cross the entire sky of different observers strung out
along a great distance. Especially if it's low in the sky even at culmination -- say, 30 degrees.

As it slows, the heating peaks and then diminishes. The tail fades. When it's down to
maybe half its speed, the plasma sphere around it dims and dies out.

It continues, dark and still flying forward at hypersonic speed, for hundreds of km more.

Please don't imagine that because you've seen one brief video of one fireball, you can proclaim
what all fireballs at all entry angles throughout ALL their descent profiles, must look like.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
And as usual i cant seem think why some people would think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, how it can be a failing satellite where its company even themselves stated the satellite would stay in orbit for several months.


Thanks for admitting that the problem is in your inadequate ability to understand orbital decay. There's no shame in that, it is weird and unearthly and counter-intuitive. Being able to pinpoint the problem -- in your own level of understanding -- is an important step in solving it. Let me try to help.

Any estimate of orbital lifetime, especially fo a first-time-ever inert vehicle design in a low orbit, is inherently 'uncertain'. That's because as it tumbles aimlessly along its orbit, it faces different aspects 'into the wind' -- nose forward, side forward, any combination -- and that varies the air drag unpredictably.

The "D" object that reentered over Chile was tracked continuously from launch day, and the data was openly published. Satellite watchers knew where it would be, could observe it visually when possible, and could estimate the likely range of reentry times and positions, to a better and better degree as the death date approached.

This was being done. The satellite didn't just sputter along, die in its track, and drop straight down out of the sky.
You can see this process for many satellites at the SeeSat website and on Heavens-Above.com to convince yourself it was possible.

The fly in the ointment is the silly USSTRATCOM reluctance to admit that their initial identification of the 6 objects -- 2 big and 4 small -- carried into orbit by the booster, which was which, had a confused garble over who 'D' really was. As Orbital Sciences statement shows, the payload's owners never had any confusion over it.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
And as usual i cant seem think why some people would think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, how it can be a failing satellite


From the video itself and the drawings at 7 and 13.


I can see your still even attacking me even on this thread how not surprising.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
And as usual i cant seem think why some people would think just because the UFO was seen in two countries on the same night, how it can be a failing satellite


From the video itself and the drawings at 7 and 13.


I can see your still even attacking me even on this thread how not surprising.


Wouldn't a grown-up response be to just provide a checkable link?

Otherwise, do you understand how people might come to suspect there ARE no such drawings and you're simply playing IRS-agent-blame-evasion?



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 03:52 PM
link   
*** PLEASE, KNOCK OFF THE BICKERING AND STICK TO THE TOPIC!!!***

The topic is not each other and that needs to end right now. If not, Post Bans may follow for ALL involved.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by spacedoubt
 




Our atmosphere can be disturbed by heating, cooling, solar winds, etc. So sometimes our atmosphere's influence can reach up a little higher into the orbits of the low craft. In this case, I think it was a little thicker. Therefore decaying the orbit of this "Mass Simulator" earlier than predicted. Does that make sense?


Do explain the no comet like trail if it was the "Mass Simulator" decaying. As usual all decaying satellites leave a comet trail behind and this object was no different yet this object had no comet trail.
edit on 18-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Do explain the no comet like trail if it was the "Mass Simulator" decaying. As usual all decaying satellites leave a comet trail behind and this object was no different yet this object had no comet trail.


I tried to, here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
If you need more detail, please say where.

I really would like to see those drawings, please.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


In your own words from the post.



Here's a typical reentry track [NOT for the Cygnus]:

So basically its a sketch 'tails' for meteors and reentry fragments but not for the Cygnus MS, yet in it you tried on explaining.



As it begins to encounter real drag, it becomes surrounded by a glowing plasma sphere. As it slips lower -- 78 km, 75, 72 km -- the thicker air leaves a thicker tail of plasma and ablation products behind it. During this period it can cross the entire sky of different observers strung out along a great distance. Especially if it's low in the sky even at culmination -- say, 30 degrees. As it slows, the heating peaks and then diminishes. The tail fades. When it's down to maybe half its speed, the plasma sphere around it dims and dies out. It continues, dark and still flying forward at hypersonic speed, for hundreds of km more.


Where did you copy and paste that from?




Please don't imagine that because you've seen one brief video of one fireball, you can proclaim what all fireballs at all entry angles throughout ALL their descent profiles, must look like.

So in other words fireballs dont come in trails? none at all? well that must be new to me, yet all meteor, Satellite Re-Entrys always do have comet trails behind them no matter how hard you try to disprove this fact. Even comets, meteors.




I really would like to see those drawings, please.

Do you even read your own posts or just use them to attack users on who disagree with you? the drawings i was mentioning of was posted by you on page 18 at this thread.

Even though i did say from "From 7 to 13" I was close enough.

From the post.




Lots of rational, level-headed people also interpret it that way. But in cases that I think i've documented, sometimes they are wrong. The 1963 Kiev mass sighting, for example. Some witnesses drew fireball swarms:




And also do you know how to use the image linking?


edit on 18-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-5-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by JimOberg
 



I really would like to see those drawings, please.

Do you even read your own posts or just use them to attack users on who disagree with you? the drawings i was mentioning of was posted by you on page 18 at this thread.

Even though i did say from "From 7 to 13" I was close enough.

From the post.




Lots of rational, level-headed people also interpret it that way. But in cases that I think i've documented, sometimes they are wrong. The 1963 Kiev mass sighting, for example. Some witnesses drew fireball swarms:




My apologies, I thought you meant there were drawings of the object seen over Chile and Argentina on May 9.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by JimOberg
 


In your own words from the post.



Here's a typical reentry track [NOT for the Cygnus]:

So basically its a sketch 'tails' for meteors and reentry fragments but not for the Cygnus MS, yet in it you tried on explaining.


I'm sorry, I cannot understand your point at all. The sketch was meant to show the distance across Earth's surface that a satellite reentry traverses, in answer to your question of how a reentry could be seen in TWO countries.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
USSTRATCOM has quietly modified their identification of the six objects tracked from the Antares/Cygnus launch, now consistent with independent observers and Orbital Sciences Corp.

Re: LIVE: Orbital Antares A-ONE LAUNCH ATTEMPT 3 UPDATE THREAD
gwiz: 05/18/2013 09:21 GMT »
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

USStratCom have now altered their identifications, A is now Bell, D is now Cygnus simulator.


This catches them up to the amateur group reported here:
JONATHAN MCDOWELL // 05/13/2013 23:39 gmt
forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

Yes, I agree with Ted. My best guess right now:

Object My guess USSTRATCOM

A 39142 Alexander? Cygnus
B 39143 Bell? Dove
C 39144 Dove Alexander
D 39145 Cygnus Bell
E 39146 Graham? Graham
F 39147 Stage 2 Stage 2






top topics



 
190
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join