Ufo Recorded During Yoga Excersise.

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Skywatcher2011
 


As i stated before i dont have any relation to the girl on the video so i dont really care of her channel.

But thats why i made the slow motion video which is not on her channel but mine.Its about the ufo not about yoga.....

Ofc you can check out the original video,but its not neccesary.




posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Tardacus
I think it`s hoax, if you watch closely and pause the video you can see that the "object" isn`t moving it fades in and fades out. At several places in the video you can see 2 "objects" at the same time in different places, one is fading in while the other is fading out.
In order for the camera to be showing 2 images of the "object" at the same time in different places,the "object" would have to be traveling faster than the speed of light.
I think it`s CGI.
edit on 27-10-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)


That has to do with video interlacing and video compression. It's something like the same reason why people think they see "reptilian" people on videos -- it's because the video compression can interlace multiple frames together, putting elements of one frame on top elements from another frame.

You see the result as the object showing up twice in the same frame, while people who believe in the "reptilian conspiracy" see the odd result of what happens when two frames of a person are interlaced together.

That said, I still think this could easily be an insect flying in front of the camera (relatively close to the camera).

edit on 10/27/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


Its a technical thing.The more framerate the more picture you get.If you would move very fast there would be less picture made of you,because the camera cant keep up.

If its a bug it should be on more frame/picture.Or it should be very close to the camera.So close that it would have to seem bigger and blurrier.


So if its really an insect i would say its a very tiny and very fast fly.
edit on 17America/Chicago272013:R151010America/Chicago by Gedo:Rinne Tensei because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
It is kind of interesting when you play with the video. I caught this picture below with a screen shot by pausing it during the first slow motion. It almost looks like it is two, but Im guessing it isnt. Just the effect of the slow motion. It does track like that though if you play with it. Also, it does seem to just appear in the beginning.
Just for the record, the first is just above her toes, and if her toes were 6:00 the second is about a inch away at about 2:45. It was easier to see when the pic was full, but like I said, you can play with the video yourself and see it just by pausing.




posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Wait... 220,000 kmph?!

en.wikipedia.org...

You do realize the circumference of the earth is only 40,000 km. Those are some good eyes that can catch an object traveling at a speed that would allow it to travel over 5 times around the earth in less than an hour.

Also the observable horizon for someone at that height is hardly large (where talking around 20km or so, with an object moving at around 55km a second), so the object would be a simple blip at those speeds in my opinion... technically it was just a blip, heck i only saw one frame where it popped up... before you drop opinions on numbers like speed distance and the like at least think about them.

That being said.. like others I cant see a UFO, im errr a little distracted... those are nice legs.

Insect within a foot or so of the camera id say.


Gedo:Rinne Tensei
reply to post by Tardacus
 


Its a technical thing.The more framerate the more picture you get.If you would move very fast there would be less picture made of you,because the camera cant keep up.

If its a bug it should be on more frame/picture.Or it should be very close to the camera.So close that it would have to seem bigger and blurrier.


So if its really an insect i would say its a very tiny and very fast fly.
edit on 17America/Chicago272013:R151010America/Chicago by Gedo:Rinne Tensei because: (no reason given)


Guess thats one way to mangle the definition of motion blur, there are not 'more picture' of you there are more images of you since film is just a series of images recorded and played back at a set speed, if you move fast enough the light bouncing off you strikes more of the frame that is currently being exposed hence your image is blurred on each frame, you are creating multiple exposures of yourself on each frame creating a stretched blurry image of yourself, the faster the cameras speed the less time each frame is exposed meaning it has less chance of capturing you in more than one place along your motion so you appear crisper and more visible, also it means the film appears to move in slow motion (if played back at conventional speeds) ie any average footage of high speed filming.

Granted that isnt exactly what you where trying to explain to Tardacus, although Soyalent mentions interlacing... given its short blip, it was fast enough to appear on only a few consecutive frames before moving out of the cameras field of view, which means nothing really, and going with occams razor, insect is the most plausible, since this sort of thing is seen alot all over the place... unfortunately every time its found someone brings up it could be a UFO.
edit on 27-10-2013 by BigfootNZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by onehuman
 


I have noticed what you described.And dont know what caused this effect exactly.But i think its some technical thing with the camera.Maybe if you think that i modified anything you may download the source video to check it its real.Ofc i wont say the author of that video couldnt modified it.But it would be very strange....
edit on 17America/Chicago272013:R271010America/Chicago by Gedo:Rinne Tensei because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


Too many information and measuremnt result missing,to state anything.So i just guessed.And i can even throw random guesses if i want.Its not forbidden.

I even did it in bracket and havent made a new comment just for that.



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Gedo:Rinne Tensei
reply to post by onehuman
 


I have noticed what you described.And dont know what caused this efect exactly.But i think its some technical thing with the camera.Maybe if you think that i modified anything you may download the source video to check it its real.Ofc i wont say the author of that video couldnt modified it.But it would be very strange....


I dont think you messed with anything. I just thought it was interesting how it did that. Camera tech is not my field! I do think from watching it like that though, that it doesnt appear to ever go in front of her. The distance always seems to be behind her. So, Im having a problem with insect in front of camera, but thats just me.



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Gedo:Rinne Tensei
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


Too many information and measuremnt result missing,to state anything.So i just guessed.And i can even throw random guesses if i want.Its not forbidden.

I even did it in bracket and havent made a new comment just for that.



When reporting or bringing anything like UFO's to the table, never guess and throw out numbers (unless they relate to things that help a person understand the event such as distances, time frames etc.

Better to say nothing than to guess.

Sure its not forbidden, but it can make you look stupid or hurt your case throwing out unverifiable or hap hazard numbers like you did.



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Its a bug, i dont see the need for such a debate over something that is clearly a bug.

Anyone would think the majority of users on here are locked in a basement and never experience the real world by the content appearing on the boards lately. Its a bug.

220,000kmph.....
This is exactly what i mean, making such absurd estimates, clearly having no idea about how fast that really is.




edit on 27-10-2013 by AmberLeaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


But it may help to understand how i think and see about it.I said 200k to 220k kmph and you can calculate how far and how big this UFO should be in order to receive this kind of result.


edit on 17America/Chicago272013:R581010America/Chicago by Gedo:Rinne Tensei because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:37 AM
link   

wmd_2008

Gedo:Rinne Tensei


(I think the object estimated speed was somewhere between 200,000-220,000 kmph)



So 35 miles a second


That wouldn't even capture on any normal hand held device would it?

you would need the super fast photography equipment to even get a glimpse of something moving that fast,


and then if its a physical object what type of sonic boom would it create?



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Gedo:Rinne Tensei
 



Only on this site would you all disregard the hot chicks firm body....The hell with aliens - I wanna probe her.

edit on 29-10-2013 by designoffset because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Gedo:Rinne Tensei
 





Although you can try to watch the original one and see if you can even observe it without slow motion. Only if you want to test yourself.


I have and did see it, just as a spec in one position though so couldn't see the path without slowing it down.




You can guess the speed of something if you take the,object speed and size and how far it is to the camera...i just guessed those datas and concluded it.


Yes you can calculate, no need to guess if have those bits of data you mentioned,

However, you said you just guessed that data to begin with so your estimated speed of 220000kmph could be 219998kmph off when using such solid data as you have.




Please ignore my guess results if its disturbing you.



I did,

but what disturbs me is you would give an estimation and explain as you have making what you initially estimated to be joke really.

It tarnishes your credibility in my eyes that if you are a serious researcher and have a serious interest in this field you would never try to glamorize what your sharing to make seem more extraordinary than it is.



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Gedo:Rinne Tensei
 


I do agree with one thing.
Yes, that woman has learned yoga quite well.
Oh my goodness.



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Gedo:Rinne Tensei
 





And i can even throw random guesses if i want.Its not forbidden.


Not forbidden, but it would help you don't describe your random guess as an estimate or what you actually said is




(I think the object estimated speed was somewhere between 200,000-220,000 kmph)


I read that as you thinking its been estimated at that speed,

You have said its just based on guesses you made.

There was no point in saying it in such way other than to confuse readers of have them question it.



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Gedo:Rinne Tensei
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


But it may help to understand how i think and see about it.I said 200k to 220k kmph and you can calculate how far and how big this UFO should be in order to receive this kind of result.


edit on 17America/Chicago272013:R581010America/Chicago by Gedo:Rinne Tensei because: (no reason given)



Have you calculated how far and how big this UFO should be from your guess?

If so please share,



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 11:14 AM
link   
What UFO?



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   
reply to post by onehuman
 


yep, thats what i saw too, 2 objects at the same time in different phases of fading in or out with clouds between them.

there is no blurring as one would expect to see from a fast moving object, you can clearly see the object fades into view by slowing becoming darker then the background then fades out of view by slowly becoming lighter until it is the same color as the background.At several points in the video you can clearly see 2 objects in different places in the sky, with no blurring between them doing the fading act.

if it was a real object reflecting light back to the camera,and we can see it in 2 places at the same time, then it "moved" faster than the reflected light traveling from it to the camera.
as the last bits of reflected light are reaching the camera lens from where the object was at point A the first bits of light are reaching the camera lens from where the object is at point B,because we can see 2 objects in different places at the same time.I don`t think it`s even possible for that to happen which is why i think it`s a hoax (CGI) and not a real object.


edit on 31-10-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)
edit on 31-10-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 10:06 AM
link   
LOL clearly a bug, are you serious dude or just tryin to get hits on your friends channel?!!


reply to post by Gedo:Rinne Tensei
 





top topics
 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join