Interesting video of orange orb filmed near Waco TX

I found this video on MUFON here

Reference is: 102343. The only description is "Golden Ball Seen N/NE of Waco" and video is 2:20 long. No other info available.

This video will drop off the recent 20 sightings list shortly, so here's a screen shot of the entry and below is a video link.

No silly music on it! and some audio commentary by the person who shot the video.

I've downloaded this video and then created a Vimeo account to upload it to.



"bright light not moving, there are no planes with gold lights, flickering, but not same as airplanes that go by"

The object fades at 00:48, comes back at 1:00 and then starts to move left to right slowly

There is a star at South East direction (or 4pm on clock face direction) with respect to orb, which shows object moves far quicker and is far larger and brighter than a celestial object

I can't see that this airplane, helicopter, flare!, Chinese lantern! etc.
It could be a drone, but the operator would have had to move the drone away from the observer in direct line of sight to get the object to fade and then come back to it's full luminosity without any up/down or side-to-side movement from the observers perspective.

It looks to me to be very good footage of an Orb!

What are your thoughts? What do you think it could be?

Diaspar

a reply to: Diaspar

To be honest i dont know if i can take MUFON seriously.

A prime example is the one at the top of the list, "i was at the clinic of the UFO".

What exactly does that mean?

You claim that the "object moves far quicker and is far larger and brighter than a celestial object," yet the guy who filmed the object clearly states at the :10 mark, that "this bright light is not moving at all."

It appears to be an orb, because of the magnification used to film it. Check out the screen shots below. The top picture shows the object filmed without zoom, the second picture shows the object filmed with magnification. This object is probably Venus or Jupiter, LMAO!

Jupiter and Venus 'Could Be Mistaken for UFOs'

LINK

UFO? No, It's Venus The planet's glow is often mistaken for an airplane, satellite, or even an alien spaceship.

LINK

Object filmed without zoom:


Object filmed with zoom:

a reply to: Diaspar

There is a star at South East direction (or 4pm on clock face direction) with respect to orb, which shows object moves far quicker and is far larger and brighter than a celestial object

Why ?
Realize how far away that star is ?
And how close that object may be ?
Most commercial airliners have running lights brighter than stars at any distance.
Of course it moves faster than celestial objects.
That appears to be a piece of trash held aloft by air currents.
Common occurrence.

a reply to: Diaspar


Mobile phone video useless at night and object is out of focus and creates the orb effect next

a reply to: shawmanfromny

You claim that the "object moves far quicker and is far larger and brighter than a celestial object," yet the guy who filmed the object clearly states at the :10 mark, that "this bright light is not moving at all."

Yes, it is stationary to begin with, but after the 1:00 mark the object starts to move left to right.

It can't be mistaken for Venus or Jupiter, due to the speed of movement. Planets do not move that much across the sky in such a short period of time...

a reply to: Diaspar

Yes, it is stationary to begin with, but after the 1:00 mark the object starts to move left to right.

Does it?

It can't be mistaken for Venus or Jupiter, due to the speed of movement. Planets do not move that much across the sky in such a short period of time...

Or maybe, just maybe it didn't move and the camera did?

close to the end its zoomed out again, it seems stationary, the movement is due to zoom and slight movements of the camera.

a reply to: Diaspar

Aircraft flying towards person filming and it slowly vectoring. If you look at the footage near to the end you can see the pulsing of the strobes.

It is amazing how many people are fooled by aircraft lights at distance. We have seen this countless times from various people claiming to have filmed UFOs.

For example Alison Kruse in the US.

See following video and listen to the investigators. They can't understand that an aircraft can appear to remain motionless for so long. The aircraft is just flying towards them at extreme distance and then vectoring onto a new course.



Alison Kruse You Tube Channel link

Also why do these people never seem to film with a flight tracking app? Perhaps they do and know exactly what they are filming? Also why no apparent time? No doubt if all the data was available it could be matched up to a exact flight?

The OBOL is the most ubiquitous sighting across history. There are a couple of really good threads here on the subject. The OBOL is what brought me to ATS in the first place.

Of course, when addressing the OBOL, we always have to be aware of Chinese Lanterns and other misidentifications. Having said that, with so many sightings and even “encounters” with the OBOL throughout history, the beautiful ritual lanterns often make me ponder if the floating beauties were first created as a visual homage to the gods of lore and various Magonian “others.”

The following book by Vallee and Aubeck is probably one of the very best books on the subject of UFOs because it's a romp through history of firsthand accounts and official reports sans interpretation.

Wonders in the Sky: Unexplained Aerial Objects from Antiquity to Modern Times

a reply to: tommyjo

Thank you for your input tommyjo and the video.

Also why no apparent time? No doubt if all the data was available it could be matched up to a exact flight?

I do agree with exact location, direction and time it could likely rule in or out a flight, but i've posted all that was available.

I understand that a lot of these of similar type can be a flight vectoring to a new flight path as you say, but what made me think different on this one was how the object is at it's full brightness, then fades only to come back up to full brightness, before moving left to right from the observers perspective.

How would an aircraft go through these changes in brightness in your opinion or from what you've seen in the past?

Thanks

a reply to: The GUT

Thanks TG.

The OBOL is what brought me to ATS in the first place.

And this was the same for me in piquing my interest a few years back when i saw 2 of these on consecutive nights following the exact same path, approx 200 feet up, approx size of a basketball, moving slowly, silently but deliberately across the sky.

It annoys me to this day that i didn't have my phone on me to record at least one of them, but i was only outside for a quick cig, don't take my phone for that.

I'm not going to utter those immortal words "i know what i saw, it was real, i didn't imagine it" just suffice to say it got me interested in looking at and for other instances of this phenomenon.

originally posted by: The GUT
The OBOL is the most ubiquitous sighting across history. There are a couple of really good threads here on the subject. The OBOL is what brought me to ATS in the first place.

Of course, when addressing the OBOL, we always have to be aware of Chinese Lanterns and other misidentifications. Having said that, with so many sightings and even “encounters” with the OBOL throughout history, the beautiful ritual lanterns often make me ponder if the floating beauties were first created as a visual homage to the gods of lore and various Magonian “others.”

Hard to say. But I certainly agree that they're too easy to write off. Good skeptic that I am, it bugs me when these things are explained away too quickly as drones or Chinese lanterns or CGI. (Not everyone is a computer graphics expert!) I don't like finding myself jumping to the easy answer, especially when I have seen recent videos where they're doing things like rapidly rotating and spinning out sparks. Also the ones flying in pairs and surrounded by little twinkling things. It's just not fair to dismiss them so fast.

It's that problem where if you come in as a skeptic you're going to feel superior about being right 99.9 percent of the time. But I think a better skeptic is going to even be skeptical of themselves, and always be looking out for that 0.1 percent that is legitimately baffling, and accept them as such.

originally posted by: Diaspar
a reply to: tommyjo

Thank you for your input tommyjo and the video.

Also why no apparent time? No doubt if all the data was available it could be matched up to a exact flight?

I do agree with exact location, direction and time it could likely rule in or out a flight, but i've posted all that was available.

I understand that a lot of these of similar type can be a flight vectoring to a new flight path as you say, but what made me think different on this one was how the object is at it's full brightness, then fades only to come back up to full brightness, before moving left to right from the observers perspective.

How would an aircraft go through these changes in brightness in your opinion or from what you've seen in the past?

Thanks

Thanks for the reply. There could be cloud obscuring briefly resulting in the fade.

originally posted by: Diaspar

And this was the same for me in piquing my interest a few years back when i saw 2 of these on consecutive nights following the exact same path, approx 200 feet up, approx size of a basketball, moving slowly, silently but deliberately across the sky.

Interesting sighting, Diaspar.

The fact that it followed the exact same path on both nights serves as the 'repetition' so important in scientific observation, ie reinforcing the data from the original sighting. In other words, that orange bugger WAS indeed there, and wasn't Trump, so what was it?

I assume there were no simultaneous aircraft sounds on both nights. Was it quite a populated area, and did you find out if anybody else in the vicinity witnessed it on either day? Could you see any details on the orb, or did you perhaps get the feeling that it seemed to be a kind of 'container' or 'shell', since some witnesses claim to see a form of liquid moving around inside?

Sorry for the questions - orbs fascinate me.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

In other words, that orange bugger WAS indeed there, and wasn't Trump, so what was it?

Indeed, i can confirm the Trump Blimp had not been invented at this point!

I assume there were no simultaneous aircraft sounds on both nights.

Deadly silent, eerily so

Was it quite a populated area, and did you find out if anybody else in the vicinity witnessed it on either day?

Not hugely populated and the position where i saw it there is virtually no light pollution. T'was on a cloudless night. No moon in view either.

Nope, no other witnesses that i know of. But sometime after that whilst searching online i found a description from someone who lived about 15 to 20 miles away who described a very similar thing in their area. No video or photo again though unfortunately. Their incident happened about a week or so after mine.

Could you see any details on the orb, or did you perhaps get the feeling that it seemed to be a kind of 'container' or 'shell', since some witnesses claim to see a form of liquid moving around inside?

No details. It was bright and couldn't make out any details beyond the brightness.

To give an indication how bright, i've been to the middle of the Sinai desert (Egypt) at night where there is zero light pollution. Literally zero. Boy do you see an amazing panorama of the night sky. We took pictures of Jupiter through cameras looking through telescopes. I can tell you it was far far (emphasizing far) brighter than anything in the sky that night. I had a similar experience on the coast in Goa (India) of seeing the night sky with zero background light. Same again. So basing that off of 2 separate occasions.

The first night when i saw it i was the typical mouth open frozen person that we hear about so many times. Probably couldn't have got my phone out even if i had it. But second night, although not expecting it otherwise i would have had my phone, i tried to get a much better look as i wasn't so surprised. But just couldn't make any details out.

Sorry for the questions - orbs fascinate me

No worries, me too. Hopefully one day soon (or at least one day) we'll get some answers as to what these are. Perhaps even some concrete proof and footage...here's hoping...

It certainly has nothing to do with Venus...

Venus, the brightest planet, looms low in the east before sunrise in early July 2019. Day by day, Venus sinks closer to the sunrise, so this world must contend with the sun’s glare throughout this month

Courtesy: EarthSky

originally posted by: Diaspar

The first night when i saw it i was the typical mouth open frozen person that we hear about so many times. Probably couldn't have got my phone out even if i had it. But second night, although not expecting it otherwise i would have had my phone, i tried to get a much better look as i wasn't so surprised. But just couldn't make any details out.

Thanks for filling me in, especially about the brightness of the object, which sounds genuinely startling.

The "Pics or it didn't happen" meme we sometimes see is bloody annoying, isn't it? I haven't witnessed UFOs or orbs myself, but I can quite imagine that the spectacle - if as impressive and confusing as yours - would absorb your senses completely, the very last thought being, "Oh, I'll just pop indoors for my camera/phone... please don't go anywhere until I return".

And on the second occasion, you'd be calmer yet even MORE intrigued about its nature, keen to spot any details you may have missed the first time, so the "Oh, I'll just pop indoors" option is equally unlikely to happen.

If there had been a third time, options become more flexible and ambitious - perhaps even a camera/tripod set-up! Well, sort of, lol.

By the way, ATSer Skeletonized kindly alerted us to some of the relatively recent work at Norway's infamous Project Hessdalen which has been the subject of scientific observation since 1983.

Bjørn Gitle Hauge noted that:

"In 2016 we took a new photo of the phenomenon in the same place at the same time (as a year before), and we also did the same this winter. We may have found a spot where this phenomenon originates.."

"..exposure time is four seconds with a five second self-timer (?)"

"..We're looking at a, somewhat compressed(?), glowing sphere which is about 1,5 meters in diameter. It's about 100 meters away from the camera and has a volume of a bit of more than a cubic meter."

One theory reached is a form of cloud composed of a charged aerosol that "illuminates like an old 100 watt light bulb", and since the whole area is full of minerals and abandoned mines, the mines fill up with water, leading to copper, zinc and sulphur draining out into the river Hesja.

As I said, Skeletonized should take the credit for the above information. Whether orange orbs such as the one you and GUT have witnessed are due to such chemical reactions is an interesting route to explore.

Here is the Hessdalen pic I posted in that same thread, which was shown at the European Geosciences Union:





Does that perhaps give you any tingling sensations of recognition, Diaspar?

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Images are no good unless time date location approx angle of elevation are given.

They should also be manual exposure and focus to ensure a good image.

Distance speed and size cannot be accurate unless you have a known object at the same distance.

It really is that simple.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Images are no good unless time date location approx angle of elevation are given.

They should also be manual exposure and focus to ensure a good image.

Distance speed and size cannot be accurate unless you have a known object at the same distance.

All true, my friend, but any image at all is better than NO image in the search for answers/theories.

If Diaspar, for example, does manage to take a pic of the object should it appear for a third time, perhaps he'll take those more defining factors into consideration.

Meanwhile, the Hessdalen crew's theory regarding mineral deposits is certainly something to chew on with regard to WHY these phenomena occur at all after 36 years of study there.

Whether their own images are in any way similar to Diaspar's, we'll just have to wait for his reply.