Er, newsflash, jet liners are capable of travelling such vast distances! 'other' aircraft can't fly over an airfield 30 miles away. Big deal, that's 30 miles, which is a huge distance for air traffic controllers. Suddenly you have FAA confirmation that the skies were clear? Convenient this information is only offered now! Of course, if the aircraft was at 20,000ft, viewing it at a 45 degree angle puts it several miles away. So no, there woudn't have been an aircraft 'in your area' but there was one elsewhere! Blind, nope, I can clearly see an aircraft in that footage! You mean, with wings, and a tail, like the ones clearly visible if you freeze frame the video footage right at the beginning? Of course, that other airplane is in focus, so it will look different. I live on a flight path, and see reflection from passenger aircraft fairly regularly, and it looks just like your footage, except I can seem them better because my eyes focus better than your camera did. Oddly, my caffeine intake does not cause me to hallucinate UFOs. It seems to sharpen my senses and helps me see what is plainly in front of me. AIRCRAFT Ta ta!
Who at the FAA said that? Did you interview them via telephone or written correspondance? What was the lat/long of the sighting? What was the date/time? Who made the independent confirmation of this data?
When stepping the video frame by frame, i don't find it moves at variable speed. At the end it looks like it entered the cloud slowly rather than moving so faster that it disappeared from the view.
I dont think the plane disappears at the end of the footage. Just a quick tight zoom of the lense gives that appearance before the auto re-focus kicks in, which, I'm guessing, you would see if the footage was any longer. Just my opinion based on the evidence presented.
The local airport looked at the video and could not identify the object and pointed out that there is a hospital with a helicopter pad within 3 blocks of the building the video shot at. In other Words, a no fly zone.........it's was 3:30.......if you had botherd to actually read the article you'd know that as far as putting this link up, I just wanted to see peoples reaction...... the people that really know what it is don't even post.....the curios, star one for example, thought they had an idea of what it is and then change their mind after the dissinformation campaign begins because they don't want to be prosicuted for their feelings in a room full of people saying the same thing. and the people that don't have a clue and thoose who don't want the truth to get out say duuhhh... It's an airplane That's like taken a picture of a house cat and saying it's an elephant. p.s. The footage was shot during the day with autozoom,,,if you know anything about cameras you'd know that the olny time the camera will lose focus is at full DIGITAL zoom or at night when there is nothing to focus on.... It is not a portrait camera... it does not go out of focus anyways I've had my fun........ watch out for Airliners What has happend here is quit simple and intersting. A UFO was caught on film and most people will just say whatever they can think of proving that dissinformation works. When The real thing is sitting right if front of your face... you doubt it. Congrats Big Brother later
as far as putting this link up, I just wanted to see peoples reaction...... If that were true, and it is not, then you would have approached each person’s reaction with the same level of understanding. Instead, you insulted those who offered rational explanations and lauded those who think the same way you do. That was your real intent.
UFOHunter says: WTF? No one said that UFOs don't exist! You came here to pick a fight over a film of a dot in the sky. That's childish.
Er, to what ceiling? Few helicopters are certified to above 20,000ft, so a commercial airlane that flies higher than this wouldn't be a problem. It would only be a problem if for some reason a helicopter is going to try and land on it's 'H' at the hospital from 20,000 feet up (Unlikely, surely it's an air ambulance, delivers people as quickly as possible, and therefore flies as low as possible) and the FAA impose a maximun ceiling limit (unlikely), and your estimate of altitude is correct (unlikely). Also, as has already been covered, it's not where the footage was taken that is important, get over that, it's where the other aircraft was. At tens of thousands of feet altitude, viewing at 45 degrees, it was several miles away! and NOT in your 'no fly zone' anyway, so stop throwing red herrings! The fact that your local airport couodn't identify the aircraft doesn't mean anything either. It it was from/to their airport, it would have been much lower, and taking off or landing, which it didn't appear to be. Hard to say though, given the camera shake and poor focus. Autofocus usually only works for close up subjects, usually an IR or ultrasonic rangefinder are used. No way would it work for an object 20,000ft+ away! The footage clearly shows an airliner in focus, and then it goes out of focus during the zoom. The camera may use some heuristic to keep focus (based on the fact that after a certain distance, only an approximate focus is needed, as light is approximately hitting the lense perpendicularly from a distant source, and this varies really negligeably over distance for a fixed magnification, so it only has to compensate for the zoom, but while the zoom is changing, so will focus, and that IS EXACTLY WHAT WE SEE! Your 'elephant' and 'cat' analogy is flawed, as you are using two clearly recognisable items. Not a clearly visible aircraft being de-focussed into a bunch of reflections. So, let's have some real objections to the aircraft explanation. Ones that stand up to analysis at least. IE, what does this craft do that an aircraft can't?
How do you explain there being 4 objects then one braking off leaving 3 then the one that has detached turning red???? I really cant see the object being a plane ,despite the first few frames (which wernt that clear anyway although ill have a look with a better playback program tonight) ????
that photo is not proof of anything. your emotional attachment to defending your ignorance IS. it's just un-identified. it's not necessarily a flying object. as such, time is better spent psychoanalyzing you, such that maybe we can help you overcome your apparent emotional problems. why do you feel it so necessary to defend this picture?
LOL. Moralism again eh spooky? Who said that - you or the troll? When a person irrationally defends a picture - and you are aware of it, is not: "why do you feel it so necessary to defend this picture?" a fair and pertinent question?
by helping him with his emotional problems? you dont know the fucker, you dont give a shit. you just look down condescendingly at the guy and pretend concern. who the fuck are you trying to fool here? what about the rest of you fuckers here? what pathology drives you guys to analyse a goddamn blurry pic? i suspect small penises and insecure minds
/by helping him with his emotional problems? yes. /you dont know the fucker and you, apparently don't know me. /you dont give a shit. projecting spooky? how do you knew what I give a shit about? /you just look down condescendingly at the guy and pretend concern. apparently, you share some problems with him eh? /who the fuck are you trying to fool here? I'm getting sick of your paranoia induced retardation spookz. what is your malfunction? If you sense a snide tone it's because I'm 99% sure this dude, or anyone in the same situation - such as yourself for instance, would NEVER admit to being irrational regarding this topic as they likley convinced themselves they had some form of a point before or as they posted. it's likely a fragile ego demands that they refuse to accept input contrary to their assertions for a number of defensive reasons. could be that to one perspective, another is wholly irrational, though it is perfectly rational to itself. I see in this thread where he has emotionally attached himself to the defense of this picture being a UFO. That is irrational, but he can't see it because in the context of his experience it seems perfectly valid. It technically is to him, but that doesn't do much to help him resolve why others are so critical of him. Instead of an honest inquiry of himself, he wards off reasonable questions in deference to this defense of why it's rational to him - avoiding the possibility to understand why it isn't rational to other people. That's a perfectly valid choice, but will inevitably incite criticism which incites more defense and around and around we go. Sure that's valid but not real productive in terms of understanding or growth. but you know what i'm thinking don't you spookz? you know you don't have the capacity that I do for some things, as you have stated it directly. I don't expect deference, but I do expect a tiny bit of fucking respect as a dude with a decent goddamn intent. my method is rough sometimes, but it could be that it just appears that way to you, because ultimately you really can't fathom what I'm thinking until I state it and even then you apparently have a really hard time. /what about the rest of you fuckers here? what pathology drives you guys to analyse a goddamn blurry pic? generally a retarded claim like "proof of UFO'S" serves as easy goddamn bait for people to come in for looksy. you can't figure that out on your own? maybe you don't want to as it's your troll in control rather than your purported peacemaker. /i suspect small penises and insecure minds spookz, shut the fuck up. your mental illness wears me slick. the first step spookz, is recognizing that you have a problem. i tell you this as a friend: you seem to have a problem. go back and read our interaction spookz. generally it consists of you accusing me of some bullshit that your paranoid ignorance concocts and out respect, I have to spend half my life trying to explain why you've taken something wrong. you are losing my respect, please cut the bullshit.
Its a fucking plane. It LOOKS like a plane. It travels like a plane. It IS a plane. Plane plane plane. I have the upmost respect for those seriously investigating the UFO phenonemon as I believe there is good reason to do so. But this footage is of a plane.
They are not separate objects, the bright dots maintain their positions relative to each other for the entire clip, only varying in brightness and colour, exactly as you would expect reflections along the side of a nice shiny aircraft to do as it flies along. I see similar things regularly, living on a flight path. IT IS A PLANE. It is clearly a plane in the first few seconds, you can see a wing and the tail. freeze frame it, and look at what is there, note how the clouds go out of focus as the zoom is pulled. IT IS A PLANE.
wes what is your malfunction? simple. to screw with you debunkers. it is quite obvious there is emotion and irrationality at play in both the kooks and pseudo skeptics. i see dogma and fanaticism on both sides. debunkers rant on the kooks. pardon me if i seize the opportunity to rant back. if you cant hack it...... generally a retarded claim like "proof of UFO'S" serves as easy goddamn bait for people to come in for looksy. jeez, then stop whining when i bite into your bait why the hell do you get so bent out of shape? in the end it is mostly rhetoric. i only see words. who is behind em is not my concern. youse way too fragile. When a person irrationally defends a picture - and you are aware of it, is not: "why do you feel it so necessary to defend this picture?" a fair and pertinent question? not really. once your point has been made, the evidence refuted, the case is resolved. delving into motivation and psycho analysis over a goddamn forum is what i construe as trolling for brownie points. i in turn will question your sanity kapeesh?
