chris beacham
Registered Senior Member
....
....
....
Last edited:
ufo buzzes plane
- Thread starter chris beacham
- Start date
PacingYourName
Registered Senior Member
Looks like a photoshoped white dot too me 
PacingYourName
Registered Senior Member
I agree
Hmm I'm using my universitie's computeres, these are high-end multi-media machines, I don't think they have quicktime player, but they've got like every other god damned player you could think of.
What format is the file? Can you just give a direct link to it rather than trying to embed it in the page? I can't download it if you do that. . . bleh I'll just go find the filename in the sourcecode and see if I can't grab it that way.
***After edit
Well that's odd it keeps crashing programs when I try to view the file, are you sure you encoded that sucka' right? and by the way, really poor coding habbits on that page, you're not supposed to write HTML in all caps, some browsers don't like that.
What format is the file? Can you just give a direct link to it rather than trying to embed it in the page? I can't download it if you do that. . . bleh I'll just go find the filename in the sourcecode and see if I can't grab it that way.
***After edit
Well that's odd it keeps crashing programs when I try to view the file, are you sure you encoded that sucka' right? and by the way, really poor coding habbits on that page, you're not supposed to write HTML in all caps, some browsers don't like that.
Not convincing enough for me. It is unfortunate that movement of the light point only appears to occurr when the camera is moved. As the camera pans upward, the light appears to move downward, as does the thin cloud cover in the background (which does not appear to change relative to the light). It is also curious to me that the subject of the footage does not become centered in the frame after the plane passes... why not continue to record?
:m: Still a skeptic.
:m: Still a skeptic.
Given an exate date/time of the video, I'm sure we would also correlate a planet such as Venus or perhaps Jupiter, which, I believe, recently appeared in the western sky around sundown.
It is even possible that it was a high-altitude research balloon (I witnessed one of these make quite a stir in Lawton, OK in the '90's) or a satellite (reflections are very common, especially at sunrise and sunset).
The object was apparently stationary relative to the camera relative to the clouds and airplane.
It is even possible that it was a high-altitude research balloon (I witnessed one of these make quite a stir in Lawton, OK in the '90's) or a satellite (reflections are very common, especially at sunrise and sunset).
The object was apparently stationary relative to the camera relative to the clouds and airplane.
ITS A @#$%ING STAR OR PLANET GET OVER YOUR SELF!!!
That had to be the worst, most pathetic UFO video I have ever seen!
That had to be the worst, most pathetic UFO video I have ever seen!
Me pmsing -=
=- You
look no matter how you spin it that point of light that you call a "UFO" does not seem to be moving! Only the plane and you are moving! No if this keeps happening go and try to take another shot but this time make sure to prove that this "UFO" is moving
Why, because he's trying to ask you questions about your little clip, which is now aparently beyond questioning? He's offering a preliminary explanation, which, by the fact that he asked a question before stating it, implys that he is keeping his view open to change with new information, and all you can do is tell him to fuck off? How very nice of you.
I agree that the recording is in full zoom when the light point enters the frame. The camera, however, is definately moving afterwards. As the light source moves downwards in the frame, so does the airplane - not in a flying motion - evidence that the camera is panning upwards.
:m: Peace.
look the "UFO" does not move in respect to the clouds.
smonkey will be heart broken! s/he must have spent months acquiring those amazing UFO videos… on the other hand Xev will be delighted, hum I wonder if she had a part to play in this?
Anyways to make this post relevant and to keep it in existence:
who here disagrees that it was a star?, other then the photographer?
and also could the photographer find the pilot and get his interview, I mean it would surely help his case if the pilot confess to nearly running over a ufo!
if so how did the pilot see it, oh wait that works perfectly no you don't need to get the pilots interview
if this video was the best matterial on your CD then I have to say that I pity the man that thinks of buying it.
Anyways to make this post relevant and to keep it in existence:
who here disagrees that it was a star?, other then the photographer?
and also could the photographer find the pilot and get his interview, I mean it would surely help his case if the pilot confess to nearly running over a ufo!
if so how did the pilot see it, oh wait that works perfectly no you don't need to get the pilots interview
if this video was the best matterial on your CD then I have to say that I pity the man that thinks of buying it.
Last edited:
A star/planet is but one possibility. I live next to an airport and see a lot of airplanes, frequently at high altitude, that have very bright reflections off of their windshields during sunrise and sunset. This, I think is as much a plausible explanation as star/planet.
I didn' think of it yesterday, but was reminded as I viewed that very phenomenon on the way home from work this evening.
And therein lies the next problem with this UFO "researcher:" you cannot be both a researcher and a capitalist. There are countless people, perhaps this person and Jeff Willes are two, who fake UFO videos/photos, put together CDs, then try to peddle them to the "believers."