The Most Convincing UFO Footage I Have Seen.

originally posted by: schuyler
Most convincing? What does it convince you of? What you have here is a "Daylight Disk" on the Hynek Scale, a step up from a "Nocturnal Light," the lowest point on the scale. Yes, it does have a contrail, which would suggest a jet engine or the equivalent. The cameraman says it was "too fast to follow," yet he followed it just fine. He says it "stopped suddenly," but you really can't see that in the video. There's no reason to disbelieve him, but that begs the question. What do you have here?

A light in the sky.

Yes, yes. you have the contrail, but what does that signify? A jet engine and a terrestrial origin.

Secret aircraft? Sure. Aliens from space? Ummm, no. It is a very convincing light in the sky, but that's as far as you can take it without invoking your imagination.

At which point in the OP's title does it say "Most Convincing Alien UFO Footage I Have Seen"?

It could have been a case of mistaken identity of what the object actually was and equally, I see no reason for the camera crew to be telling lies. They apparently saw what they saw...which was an object they could not identify. Both accounts differed slightly.

originally posted by: Iscool
a reply to: alldaylong
Impossible...UFOs don't exist...

If it is flying and cannot be identified, then it is a UFO.
If and when it is identified, then that no longer becomes the case.

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: alldaylong

watched the entire video
wow just wow at first its just a boring dot in the sky then it starts making a weird trail interesting the video is completely new to me
note:could be a plane

Im with you.

As presented, indistinguiable from an airplane.

I think you have to take into account that what the eyewitness's where saying was in fact true.

They claim:-

It was circular in shape.
It was spinning.
It came to a dead stop, accelerated and stopped again.
The rate of acceleration was extra ordinary.
Vapour trail was much thicker than an aircraft.

None of the above are characteristics of an aircraft.

The testimony is compelling.

The video is crap.

Yeah, it was 1971, footage tended to be grainy. Add to that the degradation of the film stock and the transfer to digital, then we have the best we are going to achieve. If it was crystal clear, the post would be straight into the hoax bin, no doubt.

originally posted by: tommyjo

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: tommyjo

That doesn't look at all like the original video.

It does when you take into consideration poor film footage and lighting conditions.

The same applies to this footage from 2007. Note the aircraft reflecting light at the head of the two distinct trails? Notice that there are already 3 trails in the sky where one aircraft had stopped the fuel dump.



Watch the original full footage (Not the shortened You Tube Clip).

OP footage link

Aircraft out of focus and reflecting light moving away from the camera. Fuel dump on then off. Later footage shows the aircraft still travelling away from the camera with the trail still continuing. The short trail is still visible.

I don't see any aircraft in the original video in OP.

a reply to: alldaylong

I guess the end of the clip was a bit better than the beginning, but honestly? It's blah. It looks like 99% of most UFO footage, that being it looks like someone is holding a flashlight about 50 to 100 yards away from you, but just up in the sky. Nothing to get excited about here, folks - nothing at all.

...Sorry, just being honest.

Saw this footage about 20 years ago. It is an Earth grazing meteor. You can see it approaching at a low angle, coming directly toward the camera, then it gets into the atmosphere enough to cause ablation. There are two objects, one right behind the other. There is more to this film, which shows a great oblique angle shot, but I cannot find it. Thanks OP, this was amazing to catch again, as I had been looking for this clip for a while. I wonder where the rest of the footage is?

Excellent,

a reply to: charlyv

pretty much what i said only you put it so much better
"To me that is a meteor, it looks like a dot firstly maybe the trajectory or it has yet to burn up as it enters the atmosphere."

originally posted by: Davg80
a reply to: charlyv

pretty much what i said only you put it so much better

"To me that is a meteor, it looks like a dot firstly maybe the trajectory or it has yet to burn up as it enters the atmosphere."

The most spectacular shots are missing from the newsreel. The camera pans to get them going away and they both ignite red and yellow and you can see one of them actually tumbling as they book away at incredible speed. I am seriously going to see if I can find the rest of that footage, as it was available in 1995, and I know I downloaded the video. Time to check my old hard drive archives! I will link it if I can find it.

OP: If the station you originally saw this on still exists, perhaps they have the entire shoot. Just wondering..

Must be some type of craft, looks to slow to be a meteor.
I find it interesting the the "contrail" only starts midway during the video. It adds to it's credibility.
At the very end of the video you can see that the contrail isn't perfectly straight, but it looks like some lens deformation...

a reply to: fromtheskydown

What if alien vehicles could cloak themselves as planes etc. Is anything identifiable unless you can inspect it closely.

originally posted by: SirBlackKnight
Must be some type of craft, looks to slow to be a meteor.
I find it interesting the the "contrail" only starts midway during the video. It adds to it's credibility.
At the very end of the video you can see that the contrail isn't perfectly straight, but it looks like some lens deformation...

You're quite correct.

Moving far to slow for a meteorite. Unless it has the brakes on of course.

originally posted by: WUNK22
An object in upper atmosphere, meteorite? Burning up?

SR-71 (or some other jet) first seen from the rear -- so it seems stationary -- and then making a rapid turn just as it hits a moist spot in the atmosphere?

originally posted by: alldaylong
Moving far to slow for a meteorite. Unless it has the brakes on of course.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

How far away is it? How fast is it going? You have no idea and there's no way to calculate it from this video. Maybe if the unedited video can be found and if it is a bolide you might estimate the point where the trail starts forming which tends to happen in a range of altitudes where the density of the atmosphere is sufficient for that to happen, but knowing the approximate altitude still wouldn't give you distance or speed.

I can't confirm if charlyv is right about it being a couple of bolides but I didn't see any obvious reason to rule it out an I can confirm it looks like the video is edited, so unedited and more complete footage would be better no matter what it is. I hope he finds it.

a reply to: Arbitrageur


You're convinced that it's not a UFO. You're entitled to that opinion.

My opinion is different. So please entitle me to mine.

a reply to: alldaylong
I haven't identified it but why are you making up claims about the speed that you can't possibly support? If you can explain how you know what the speed is please do, but I don't think you can.

What's especially puzzling is your comment implies that bolides should be traveling very fast and what did the witnesses say? That it was traveling very fast.

a reply to: alldaylong

The video was analyzed by the meteorite list 20 years ago and there was some great discussion on it. I will find it if I can.
It was determined to be an Earth grazing, double bolide . It is actually a textbook example. The missing video shows the fireball tumbling. It was big, and one of the members, a scientist, even got a rough orbit from the presentation.

Coming toward you, the speed is not noticeable, and then you see it enter the mesosphere (50-80 miles altitude) and begin its ablation tail. Once you get an oblique angle on this, the speed is very noticeable, as it is traveling between 20-70km/s . Like said above, half this video is missing. A close approximation to what this looked like from the side, but farther away, would be the great daylight Earth Grazing fireball of 1972, over the Grand Teton's , shown here: Grand Teton Fireball

a reply to: Arbitrageur

The cameraman who filmed the object states that the object came to a halt, and then began moving again
I have no reason to disbelieve that what the cameraman has stated is anything but the truth.

To my knowledge meteorites do not stop and start. Unless you can show video evidence of one doing so.

Duplicate post.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Arbitrageur

The cameraman who filmed the object states that the object came to a halt, and then began moving again
I have no reason to disbelieve that what the cameraman has stated is anything but the truth.

To my knowledge meteorites do not stop and start. Unless you can show video evidence of one doing so.

The Cameraman had no idea what he was looking at. He saw the object stationary in the sky before it entered the atmosphere, dropping lower and then moving slowly directly toward him. That is what he thought was something coming to a halt. Once it entered the atmosphere, it started to grow a tail and that was when he started seeing it moving. The more it got closer, the faster it started to move until his position became oblique to the object in which it whipped by him at incredible speed. As discussed, it has already been classified a meteor, so it is really a mute point now. Look at the presentation, and you will see what I am talking about. I am glad you brought this up here, however, holding on to a notion that it was anything else but a meteor defies logic and science. If you want to call it a UFO, it is certainly your right to do so.