2 UFOs 1 Balloon

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

What did they shoot it down with that thing is intact .

originally posted by: Ravenwatcher
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

What did they shoot it down with that thing is intact .

Just being a "rumor" right now, its anyone's guess.

Looking at this you can see what appears to be a round lens at the left (Front)? It also appears to have prism lens's at the bottom? The surface seems to have wires and hooks along its length. Plus, it does not appear to be designed for high speed usage, the surface is not aerodynamic. So, I doubt it was a package carried by a high speed aircraft.
Now in saying that, it does appear to be some sort of observation apparatus because of the lens's.

Its skin appears to be a metal. I suspect a stainless steel variety, not aluminum. As far as being a stand alone craft, no way to tell. Would have to see the gun camera footage, if it exists..

They are calling it a "metallic balloon" what the heck is that? That isn't a real thing.

Saw on CNN a moment ago that pilots who engaged them couldn't even say for certain what they are. Said they have no idea how they were able to remain aloft.

These are TicTacs

AWACS and refueling tankers in the air from Lake Michigan headed into Canada

originally posted by: JBurns
They are calling it a "metallic balloon" what the heck is that? That isn't a real thing.

Saw on CNN a moment ago that pilots who engaged them couldn't even say for certain what they are. Said they have no idea how they were able to remain aloft.

These are TicTacs

AWACS and refueling tankers in the air from Lake Michigan headed into Canada

Just now 16:00 Feb 12th Another object shot down in Northern Michigan...............

a reply to: JBurns

Well, a blimp is a big, hollow tube. Aerostats are a bunch of tubes, collected together and anchored. A few years ago one broke loose and caused havoc by dragging the anchor cable across a few states. A sheriff emptied a shotgun into the thing to bring it down!

And other airships have been designed. One is like a submarine and inflates a bladder to rise and sink. And there are framed versions of aerostats/blimp/flying subs.

Seems like this is one of those newer versions.

Helium is kind of expensive so there is some financing involved. Which means “state sponsored”. And here we are!

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Im still trying to work out the shadow on that thing... the ground shadow just doesnt read right with the shape of the object and the direction of the lighting to me.

Why is the object segmented like that each piece nestled within the preceding? Why has it got a few large rusted holes that appear to have had surface material stuff flaked off... why is it rusty to begin with? yeah oxidation can happen over night, but that looks extreme (especially in a snowy environment with little atmospheric water).

Why are the holes in the snow and ground like simple smoothed bevels with a smooth gradient between snow and ground (almost like someone just used a 3d texture brush to make depressions in a surface model then used a material to texture it all based on height)... if its real it must have come in near vertical given no real divet or skid marks, so why isnt it more heavily bent in the middle or at least broken since one end has a raised under carriage at one third its length.

More I look at that pic the more bits and pieces I see that scream 3d cgi render to me... even the background leading to the horizon where it has all the dirt has some serious Anisotropy issues you usually see with extreme angle textures in video games, ground like that from a real photo wouldnt look like that at that angle. Why do all the little ground rocks and lumps suddenly stop at the start of the background dirt patchs?

Oh yeah also thats some award winningly clear atmospheric conditions (the very distant mountains sure are clear and detailed), guess they got lucky when they took the photo with a 1 in a million day.

Another one bites the dust. I’ll be flying the next 3 days. I’ll keep an eye out

YET ANOTHER OBJECT DOWNED

originally posted by: MakeSoap
Another one bites the dust. I’ll be flying the next 3 days. I’ll keep an eye out

YET ANOTHER OBJECT DOWNED

The danger of putting a static number in a thread title... The next occurance makes the thread out of date.

The image authenticity of what ever this is has not been established so the wild speculation lamp is lit.

The object looks like it is part of something bigger, like it was ripped off a larger piece.
Also, remember that aerodynamics does not seem to be a requirement in the way these "things" move, if it is indeed one of those "things".

I am so interested and the same time flustered, and I am sure everyone else is here. Truly... wtf is going on?

Is it possible for a large-scale helium filled balloon to be made with transparent material? So, unlike the very large white "Chinese spy balloon" that was recently shot down, the balloon is essentially invisible to the naked eye from a distance, and only the much smaller payload attached can be potentially seen?

originally posted by: charlyv
The image authenticity of what ever this is has not been established so the wild speculation lamp is lit.

The object looks like it is part of something bigger, like it was ripped off a larger piece.
Also, remember that aerodynamics does not seem to be a requirement in the way these "things" move, if it is indeed one of those "things".

I am so interested and the same time flustered, and I am sure everyone else is here. Truly... wtf is going on?

The only party that knows what going on, is who ever put those "Things" in OUR sky's.

The logic escapes in a highly advanced power would put something in the air that is already a political hot potato. We all know all the stories of UFO's evading our aircraft in a spectacular manner. Its illogical all of a sudden we can shoot these things down at will.

The only logical off ramp is, they were intentionally allowed to be shot down. Maybe they are playing cat and mouse, or maybe they just got bored and wanted to see what would happen. Maybe even with the covert intention to show us how incompetent our government really is. Doubtful these craft were manned, and probably very expendable.

Maybe even to send a message to us, to show us how dangerous we really are. Well, not all of us, just that ruling elite that pulls the strings, and the triggers...

Ok, I get it. I think.
The Sun is acting up. Parts are breaking off. Solar flares are hitting us. Our magnetic field is getting confused, and now a lot of space junk and satellites are coming down?

Or it's aliens ans we're totally screwed.

Or it's the NWO and Project Bluebeam and we're totally screwed.

The thing to me that says these arent UFOs (as we class them), is they described it... for decades people talk about them being all secretive about this stuff then suddenly they down an unknown or two and describe it 100% like your typical UFO from 50 years ago.

If these were actual real UFO's, of the alien variety... then they'd have called them balloons off the bat and you'd have heard nothing more about it (hell you'd have never even have heard about them downing anything really), given their supposed track record with such things established within conspiracy and ufo circles for a long long time.

If by some amazing fluke these ARE alien (in which case they are pretty low tech), then those who've downed and recovered them have just gotten a wind fall in potential anti-grav tech at most.

a reply to: BigfootNZ
Thankyou for a clear explanation of the photo. I agree. The picture was sewn together somehow.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

An "expert" postulated on FoxNews that the "owners" of this technology is letting us shoot it down so we can study them, and be intimidated and scared stiff.

After we're scared, what's supposed to happen next, I wonder?

It's interesting if these were ufo's or uaps but a bad decision to shoot them down if they truly were.

hate to burst your guy's balloons, but, alas, they are now confirming them to be balloons.

They seem to want us to come to the wrong conclusions using unidentified --> why though

Who confirmed balloons...? Are they still referincing the BS coming out of Schumers lying elitist mouth?

originally posted by: BigfootNZ

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

Im still trying to work out the shadow on that thing... the ground shadow just doesnt read right with the shape of the object and the direction of the lighting to me.

Why is the object segmented like that each piece nestled within the preceding? Why has it got a few large rusted holes that appear to have had surface material stuff flaked off... why is it rusty to begin with? yeah oxidation can happen over night, but that looks extreme (especially in a snowy environment with little atmospheric water).

Why are the holes in the snow and ground like simple smoothed bevels with a smooth gradient between snow and ground (almost like someone just used a 3d texture brush to make depressions in a surface model then used a material to texture it all based on height)... if its real it must have come in near vertical given no real divet or skid marks, so why isnt it more heavily bent in the middle or at least broken since one end has a raised under carriage at one third its length.

More I look at that pic the more bits and pieces I see that scream 3d cgi render to me... even the background leading to the horizon where it has all the dirt has some serious Anisotropy issues you usually see with extreme angle textures in video games, ground like that from a real photo wouldnt look like that at that angle. Why do all the little ground rocks and lumps suddenly stop at the start of the background dirt patchs?

Oh yeah also thats some award winningly clear atmospheric conditions (the very distant mountains sure are clear and detailed), guess they got lucky when they took the photo with a 1 in a million day.

Yep... the snow layer looks flat on top of the ground soil. Could definately be an opacity layer. They forgot to adjust the normal map for for both except for some of the stones.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: BigfootNZ
Thankyou for a clear explanation of the photo. I agree. The picture was sewn together somehow.

Dont take my take on it 100%... I could be wrong with my opinion and cursory analysis

I just muck around with CGI alot and 3d graphic programes and art forums for 30 years (never really got fully into it, but its a big interest and hobby for me in that time), it helps me spot fakes usually knowing what to look for and the like (and making similar stuff myself helps), but ill never say what I conclude is 100% fact, since it isnt... just my opinion from mild experience.

Others should come up with their own thoughts on it though... and again, it could be an actual real picture and im misjudged in the flaws i saw that threw it into the CGI pic bin for me.

If it turns out to be a real pic (if there were other shots of it from other angles with people in it or video that would be good), then ill readily admit my opinion as wrong.

a reply to: BigfootNZ



Update from the Pentagon...Sunday evening 2.12.2023

JUST IN - Pentagon does not know to what keeps these "objects" aloft, unknown propulsion systems.

"We're calling them objects, not balloons, for a reason," says U.S. Air Force General Glen VanHerck.

More at: redstate.com...