Many UFO sightings are explained by reflections within the atmosphere or by celestial bodies such as Venus, or the lights of a helicopter or plane. At night, it can be hard to judge distance so a faraway helicopter carrying a very bright light (which they do) can appear to be a close, silent object.
In daylight, it's not so easy to dismiss the sightings. It's harder still when there's film, even harder when that camera moves around, so it can't be something on the lens. When the film shows others looking at the same object and an amateur cameraman having trouble with focus while zooming, then it becomes very difficult indeed to explain the sighting as 'something ordinary'.
This video shows something in the sky. It's a real something, it's not an artefact of the camera, it's not a plane or a helicopter and if it's a balloon, it's not like any I've seen. It's too long even to be a zeppelin.
It's an object, it's flying and it's unidentified.
Alien, or some Earthly experimental machinery? You decide.
5 comments:
Hmmmmm. I don't know. I've seen things before caught in wind currents that I thought would make a great UFO video. It's pretty much impossible to tell what this thing is. I saw some other interesting "things" at the bottom of the screen while he tried to focus: flashes of light and such. The jury is still out on this one.
It's too fuzzy to tell what it is, unfortunately. Digital video cameras aren't that great at long range.
The lights you saw were internal reflections in the camera's optics - the lenses move when the camera zooms and they catch the sun at certain points. That's why they appear and disappear during the zoom.
It's something in the sky, that's all we can be sure of here.
probably a tube kite that's gotten free
ver: hothyd
There have been some weird kites around in the UK. I saw one shaped like a biplane a few years ago.
A kite could also appear motionless in the air in the right conditions.
So a kite is certainly possible. Not free, because then it would collapse, but the video used in that film wouldn't have picked out a string.
Interesting possibility...
only responding this time to say
ver: = reload
Post a Comment