Bright Red Orb/UAP Filmed In Belgrade, Serbia On April 28

As most of you know already, I'm always looking for a strange sighting to write a thread about. Nowadays It's tough to find credible sightings because of CGI and hoaxsters, but once in a while something interesting comes along. Sometimes the sighting is easily explained as a misidentified drone, plane, flare, starlink satellite or a celestial object. Then there are those rare sightings that are hard to explain.

Yesterday, a bright red light appeared out of nowhere above a neighborhood in Belgrade, Serbia. It caught the attention of several people who managed to film the object from two different locations. On one of the videos, a smaller orb was seen coming from the bottom of the larger object (screenshot below).



This wasn't the first time that red orbs were seen over Serbia. Back in 2015, a video was posted of red orbs that were seen above a city located in Vojvodina, Serbia.

This sighting caught my attention because there were videos from two different perspectives. The object most likely is a flare of some kind, but I'm always puzzled on why a flare would be dropped over a suburban location.

Screenshots from each video:



Video 1:

Video 2:

Question: I know this happened a while ago maybe a year or two years ago. But why did we switch from UFO's to UAP's. I understand the goverment can do whatever it wants and switch the wording and language. But why did we agree to go along with their switch??

also sorry if this is off topic?

a reply to: American-philosopher

I can't say it's the government behind such definitions. When I was reading into the phenomena I often switched between the two definitions. It always irked me when people define UFO as aliens.

Some things are objects, some things are ball lightning, swamp gas, reflections. The list goes on really.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

The first video where two orbs seem to hang around together is somewhat interesting but that could be chinese lanterns hitting hot air or winds. They look like lanterns to me.

The 2nd video seems to be took elsewhere or at a different time? The other 2 look like they have overcast skies.

a reply to: American-philosopher

Anyone, not just the government, can choose either term if they desire.

The word "unidentified" is the key word in both terms. "Flying" refers to an object moving in the air, and "Aerial" means operating in the air.

I really don't see what the big deal is.

WTF? WTF!

a reply to: American-philosopher

The name switch came as an attempt to get the UFO phenomenon out of the woo woo zone.
UAP sounds more scientific.

a reply to: American-philosopher

I think it’s actually a more accurate term. Technically, not everything you can see is an object (rainbows, mirages and such). The word “phenomena” is broad enough to encompass actual objects and other things that can be seen but might not be solid, space-occupying objects.

Finally some good sightings I was wondering when something would pop up again like this, orbs etc

Why when the camera zooms does the object appear diamond shaped? and not the usual out of focus blob ? Is that due to the strength of the light source or colour?

I’ve seen similar ones before, only one mind, it was fireworks night around 1998, it just hung in the sky around 11pm for hours, exactly the same colour as a beacon light for airplanes, it wasn’t an interesting sighing at all, we just got used to the light just hanging in the sky and continued chatting with friends, then we’d realised it disappeared

originally posted by: American-philosopher
Question: I know this happened a while ago maybe a year or two years ago. But why did we switch from UFO's to UAP's. I understand the goverment can do whatever it wants and switch the wording and language. But why did we agree to go along with their switch??

also sorry if this is off topic?

It’s the new rebranding because UFO is 9/10 associated with i think it’s definitely ALIENS 👽

UAP sounds sophisticated and like you’re taking about just
Something strange what I’m definitely not suggesting is aliens

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: American-philosopher
Some things are objects, some things are ball lightning, swamp gas, reflections. The list goes on really.

That's the best answer, except for maybe the swamp gas since I am still looking for a documented example of that so I wouldn't use that example, but the others are good. People saw things in the sky they didn't understand and some of them weren't "objects" of any kind, so UFO is a misnomer in those cases. UAP seems to fit things we see in the sky, even if they aren't objects.

This site has examples of things that can be seen in the sky which aren't objects if you're interested in those:

caelestia.be...

I made a thread about this "UFO" which is not an object, but it looks like an object and it was photographed, so UAP is a better description:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d6554174e811.png[/atsimg]
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: TritonTaranis
Why when the camera zooms does the object appear diamond shaped? and not the usual out of focus blob ? Is that due to the strength of the light source or colour?

Different cameras have different apertures. That particular camera has a diamond shaped aperture which is relatively common. When you zoom in to a light that's out of focus, the shape you see is the camera's aperture. You can tell in this video that diamond shape has nothing to do with the shape of the object:

CAUTION: to all UFO videographers


Not all apertures have diamond shapes though, so with different cameras you might also see other shapes, and at night the aperture should be wide open meaning the shape would usually be round so the shape you would get for an out-of-focus light in that case would be a circle or what some might call an "orb" but they are dots to me, orbs are something else, they are generally bigger than dots. And again just because the out of focus image is round doesn't imply the object is round, any more than the out of focus light in the diamond video implies the object being diamond shaped.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
WTF? WTF!

I didn't understand a word she said in the last video of the OP except when she said WTF? And OMG! those didn't need any translation!

originally posted by: American-philosopher
Question: I know this happened a while ago maybe a year or two years ago. But why did we switch from UFO's to UAP's. I understand the goverment can do whatever it wants and switch the wording and language.

Lots of us ufoologists never went along with the government name change, but there can be no doubt what so ever the new style phrase being used by their heavies (the military) and it stuck pretty well. Give it another few decades we might all well be usingit. As the new gen comes through it will be all they know and 'UFO' will be something other of the yesterday something associated with B&W B movies.

Being honest about it the govts worldwide had to change the name.................... They'd been ignoring the mounting evidence and in a state of denial for decades but with all the modern footage being taken by our new style devices they couldn't keep the lid on the things buzzing around our skies anymore, much easier to come up with a new catchphrase 'UAP' and accept they really do exist as oer own govt heavies in the sky the RAF did in June 2006

On topic they do gve the impression they are coming from exactly the same source.................. Does this mean they are being sent from the same ground source? Some are blinking in and out, is that the weather or real ufo orbs firing up down their gas? The footage to the left of the visitation, the pair there do seem to be linking up into flight formation? It's good footage but difficult to make any decisions as its too short to see if they stay local for any amount of longer time also would be interesting to see if the left ones joined with the others into close formation

a reply to: BiffWellington

The word “phenomena” is broad enough to encompass actual objects and other things that can be seen but might not be solid, space-occupying objects.

Most of what we see can be related to objects. if we are saying aerial phenemnon that could mean mean meteors, comets, and I dont think we need to put into that category of that.

t’s the new rebranding because UFO is 9/10 associated with i think it’s definitely ALIENS 👽

a reply to: TritonTaranis

But as conpsiracy people that is what we worked so hard for is telling people UFO's doesnt neccessarily mean aliens or even extraterstrial.

Looks a bit like the object in my video. The object appears to be orange at first then later red but I reckon its due to mobile camera since I never witnessed a red object.

originally posted by: shawmanfromny
Video 1:

Why was this video removed? That one was intriguing as it was lit up like a flare yet dropping flares??? Flares do not do that...

S&F. that second video from 28/04/2020 is very cool.

originally posted by: abeverage
Why was this video removed? That one was intriguing as it was lit up like a flare yet dropping flares??? Flares do not do that...

I'm not sure why it was removed, but I was searching for a Nimitz UFO video and the top result I got was an ad for either that video or one that looks just like it. Then later I saw your question, and this time searched UFO Serbia to see if the same ad would come up and it did (I'm still getting Nimitz UFO results in that UFO Serbia search though, WTF?).



First, this is literally the first time I've ever seen a youtube ad like that for a UFO video. If I try to follow the ad link I get blocked because the link is so convoluted my security software won't allow it. Look at how long the link is, this may be the longest link address I've seen!


Most youtube video links are short, like this link to the second video in that search result page (replaced . with "dot")

youtubedotcom/watch?v=auITEKd4sjA

But the screenshot in the ad looks like the same video. So, I'm somewhat suspicious about this.

Second about why it may have been removed, seeing as how it's being advertised/monetized, maybe someone copied it and posted it to their own account and the copy was the one linked in the OP? If that happened and the original owner is advertising it he might have complained to youtube and got the copy someone else made removed.

I saw a Chinese lantern video that was sort of like that, except it was more yellow-orange than red. The fuel was dripping off the lantern and somehow, I don't know how, it kept burning after it dripped off the lantern. I think it may have been in the Philippines. So there was a bright light for the main lantern and some smaller lights falling down as the fuel dripped off. I don't know why the dripping fuel kept burning though, I never figured that out. With some fuels it needs some kind of wick to burn, so with those, the dripping fuel would stop burning, I would think. I'm not saying the video in the OP is a Chinese lantern though. You're right a simple flare wouldn't do that, but you could rig some flares if you wanted to. Look at how many hours some people spend planning and making complicated crop circles; it would only take a small fraction of that planning and energy to get creative with some flares.

Maybe someone else with less security software than me can follow the ad link and see if it's the same or a different video, but the screen in that ad looks the same.

originally posted by: TritonTaranis

Why when the camera zooms does the object appear diamond shaped?

It has already been pointed out in the replies, but see following video on how different cameras produce different artefacts.