Absolute amazing UFO's seen during solar eclipse

originally posted by: tombaccei
The balloon theory is not reasonable, in my opinion. If enough wind was present to move individual "balloons" in the clusters with the relative speed recorded, than all of the balloons in a cluster would have had to move. If the two clusters were not connected, and such a turbulent wind were present, then the relative position of the two clusters would not have been so stable. If the balloons were not connected, then how can you explain the distinct clusters and the steady inter-cluster distance?

Another thought. It would not be very hard to do some calculations to determine their speed across the disc of the sun at various estimated distances from the observer, which can be correlated to the apparent size as compared to that of the aircraft. Also what was the angle of the sun above the horizon at the observers location at the time of the eclipse? This would allow and additional correlation of altitude to the estimated distance to the objects. I will take a crack at graphing the size, altitude and speed of these objects over various estimates of size this evening if I have time.

Another relevant piece of data would be to note the placement of the moons shadow relative to the horizon, which could determine, to some degree, the direction of movement of the objects.

The similarity of the movement of these objects is subjectively very similar to several recent "ufo" videos, as noted. The movement of shapes in those videos also did not seem to be consistent with swirling or shearing winds either.

I asked the uploader your questions, and here are his answers for them:

It would not be very hard to do some calculations to determine their speed across the disc of the sun at various estimated distances from the observer?, which can be correlated to the apparent size as compared to that of the aircraft.

I've already done some calculations. Given the angular size of the objects in the image, their physical size assuming a distance of 3 miles (the distance to the barrier island) they would be about 5-6 inches in size. Consistent with small latex party balloons.

Also what was the angle of the sun above the horizon at the observers location at the time of the eclipse?

Roughly 7 degrees.

Another relevant piece of data would be to note the placement of the moons shadow relative to the horizon?, which could determine, to some degree, the direction of movement of the objects.

The view is roughly correct orientation, relative to the horizon (altitude-azimuth configuration of the telescope).


He's swinging towards the balloon hypothesis, but now he's got to do that experiment to back up his claims of seeing 5-6 inched sized party balloons, which I don't accept at this point in time, seems like an easy answer for him to assume considering his stance on this topic.

A flock of something...Maybe a Flock of Balloons.

a reply to: Pauligirl

Forgive me if I am wrong here, but I saw MANY "balloons" if they were balloons. You referred to one balloon correct?

a reply to: skyblueworld Wrong as far as I can see because you are assuming that both are are traveling at the same speed . In other words the plane was fast and the whatevers may have been slow.
Try again.

a reply to: bluemooone2

Wrong at what? You haven't quoted the part where you think I'm wrong.

If people want to know who the video uploader is, i'll happily answer in a PM, then you can ask some questions directly to him. Also the first video in my OP is the persons official channel, and has answered questions already in his comments below his video.

originally posted by: skyblueworld
a reply to: bluemooone2

Wrong at what? You haven't quoted the part where you think I'm wrong.

Sorry there , I am guessing that in the calculations it may have been assumed that the speed of both objects were similar because they appear to be moving at the same speed .
If the plane was moving faster and closer to the camera and the other objects were just as big (or even huge) but moving slowly would that be a possibility? All I can say is something may have been assumed in the math that was not so. Run this by the guy if you would something just doesnt mesh here to me.

I may even have that backwards lets assume both are the same size first then run it.

Think about the size of the sun in the sky from our point of view. It's fairly small, these things are tracked along the sun from the view of the telescope.

I would tend to think balloons close to the viewer looking through a scope would apear a lot different, and if the balloons where at a higher altitude, they would be too small to notice. Unless they are very large balloons.

I hope that makes sense, it's hard to explain in words what my brain tells me.

a reply to: Shaded27

That makes sense to me also , Would they not blur more?

Amazing you can definitely see that it's controlled , some of the objects are changing course . Now we almost can say that some of the objects on the NASA Soho are the same we see here in this video .

It could be asteroids but looking at the behaviour you have to dismiss it I think?

a reply to: superman2012

That is true, if it is a plane. I couldn't tell what it was. I'm assuming he has seen many of them through the telescope though and recognized it.

Or he simply looked at the sky with his own eyes to see its plane.


Ask Skyblueworld, they might have some idea as they gave the time stamp and said it was a 747 plane to be compared to the object that was caught earlier that I think is balloons.

originally posted by: iNobody
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Ok, that makes sense, not the Satellites themselves moving across the sky, rather the appearance of their rotation across the sun, yeah, it would be at the same speed the earth is rotating, which is what? I think 1,000 miles an hour.

No its 28 000 km/h for stay in earth orbit.

fwiw I'm going with balloons also. they just seem to have all the characteristics and their altitude can be completely deceptive.

I'm seeing only two big grey rectangles where the videos should be in the OP. Could you provide a direct link?

ETA: Nevermind ... My Firefox disabled Flash for some reason.

Fascinating video. I would think balloons would be too far out of focus to appear in the shot, but I'm certainly no expert, so I think we should reserve judgement until the video's creator attempts his balloon experiment.

I'm going with a bunch baboons on this too. They float up and away out of shot.

Someone said the balloons were 5 - 6 inches in size yet the plane was only a tad larger so either the balloons were an awful lot closer to the camera than the plane OR that's the smallest airliner in the world...ET Airways....

I've watched the vid a few times and - the way the objects are moving as a group and relative to each other - it COULD be 2 different tied bunches of helium balloons that were let go and then floated in front of the shot.

COULD be. As in, "Possibly."

Man what are the odds though?

There have been many amazing large objects floating in sun shots for years which were "unidentified."

Are there any shots from this angle captured by space based imaging systems?

originally posted by: NoNameNeeded

originally posted by: Jaellma
a reply to: bluemooone2
I am a balloon engineer and expert.

These are nothing more than jet propelled balloons with translucent swamp gas used for buoyancy.

Hope that helps.

Great, now I have to explain to my partner why I woke her up with loud snorting laughter in the middle of the night!

You deserve a custom tag! No balloon engineer deserves to be a mere "Member" on here!

Yes, this has to be one of the more clever comments I've ran across in my short time on this site. Your partner should give you a pass for waking her, I'll vouch for its (comment) 'loud snorting laughter' potential.

I think it's a moot point to try to run any type of calculations, simply because you can't KNOW any of the variables required to do so. For instance:

Since we don't know the distance to the object, we can't calculate it's size. If we don't know it's size or the distance to the object, that throws out calculating speed. If we don't know any of these things.....we don't know jack about what we're looking at.

In case the images is too small, the formula can be found here