Good triangle UFO video

[dmjspace]

A new video of the ubiquitous huge triangle UFOs, which appear to have some cloaking mechanism, possibly one designed to mimic a star field.<br /><br />Another recent report is here. <br /><br />These things have been reported in all 50 states. There's no doubt they exist and are unlike any conventional craft.<br /><br />It's been suggested they are classified blimps because they move so slowly. However, there are no known (admitted) terrestrial craft of this nature. I'm open to the idea they are not ours.<br /><br />I'm also open to the idea that these are experimental military craft. If this is the case, one must wonder what the motive is behind flying them in non-restricted airspace over heavily populated areas.<br /><br />In either case, we have a major dilemma on our hands that is not being addressed by authorities in any manner.

 

[trevz6]

hmm, intresting video<br /><br />however thoes three lights could easy be street lights up a hill.<br /><br />I have personaly seen a tri-angle craft in broad day light clear as a bell.<br /><br />its the only convincing ufo i have ever seen.<br /><br />and matches the famause triangle photo<br />(u know the one) perfectly.<br /><br />

 

[kmarinas86]

This arrangement of lights (possible UFO) has the same "proportions" as the Triangle UFO(s) I saw on the dates of October 25, 2004; November 5, 28, 29, 2004; and December 8, 2004 (link).<br /><br />The frequency of and impressiveness of sightings I've been having have been dwindling since. Dates I have in mind for "recent" sightings of mine are 12/14/04, 12/28/04, 1/17/04, and 1/23/04 - but these sightings are far less powerful in emotional terms, and they are far less impressive to the point where I can't make any distinctive conclusions.<br /><br />If you look at the video and see the <i>diameter of the lights</i> with respect to its <i>width</i> and <i>brightness when zoomed out</i> you notice that the lights are bright but the width is enormous compared to the lights. This suggests a very large width and/or a very low altitude. Notice how the lights themselves have distinct edge with an "aura" surrounding it. This suggests that the brightness of these lights actually represent their actual diameter and <i>not simply</i> the effect of light overexposing.

 

[pizzaguy]

Before I clicked the link, I thought: "it will be another blurry video, where you can see - nothing."<br /><br />Will I <b><font color="yellow">EVER</font></b>get tired of being right? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[skyeagle409]

dmj---It's been suggested they are classified blimps because they move so slowly. However, there are no known (admitted) terrestrial craft of this nature. I'm open to the idea they are not ours. <br /><br />dmj, <br /><br />I know of boomerage-shaped crafts that are ours but unaware of any large triangular-shaped crafts that can mimic the performance levels of the Belgian UFO. <br /><br />Reports of triangular-shaped flying objects have been coming from around the globe. In regards to the "Phoenix Lights" and that large boomerage-shaped object that was seen nearby, perhaps the government was gauging public reaction to UFO sightings knowing the 'lights' would be carried by the national media and be seen my many people. I don't know and can't say for sure but I found it very interesting that the Air Force would conduct such an aerial sensation in full view of the local population of Phoenix and the surrounding areas knowing that many people would take notice. <br /><br />http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/triangles.htm <br /><br />http://www.aufosg.com/page126.html <br /><br />http://users.aol.com/FCharnay/ovn.htm <br /><br />http://www.rense.com/general18/newwave.htm <br /><br />http://keyholepublishing.com/What_Are_The_Triangles.htm <br /><br />****************************************************************************************** <br /><br />ARGENTINA <br /><br />2002 <br /><br />21/07/02. Several police officers observe a triangular shaped UFO over the countryside <br /><br />****************************************************************************************** <br /><br />HARLEMSVILLE NY, USA, TRIANGULAR SHAPED UFO, 01.16.2001: <b></b>

 

[dmjspace]

pizzaguy said: <font color="yellow"> Before I clicked the link, I thought: "it will be another blurry video, where you can see - nothing." </font><br /><br />Yes, that's the problem with the night...it's dark. Unless you live at the North Pole. Is that where you are, pizza? I suppose it might explain the poor social skills...<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> Will I EVER get tired of being right? </font><br /><br />What does it matter if you think the video is too blurry, or too dark, or too fake looking, or too good to be true? <br /><br />There is no picture or video that cannot be discarded by a pseudoskeptic. If it's blurry, it's "nothing"--and if it looks too clear, "it's obviously a fake." <br /><br />You've stacked the deck so no evidence can possibly derail your preferred theory. Now THAT'S tired.

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">Yes, that's the problem with the night...it's dark. Unless you live at the North Pole.</font><br /><br />Ummm, shouldn't that be the South Pole? <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> After all, summer is in the Southern Hemisphere right now.

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">There is no picture or video that cannot be discarded by a pseudoskeptic. If it's blurry, it's "nothing"--and if it looks too clear, "it's obviously a fake."</font><br /><br />Perhaps he simply wants to see the real thing? How come I get to see triangle craft and he doesn't?

 

[beartooth]

How come from what few of these videos I've seen always seem to be shot by a drunk? Camcorders these days can do a much better job of tracking an object. Is this shaking & distortion part of the UFO mystique?

 

[pizzaguy]

SETI continues to be a kook forum. But it's fun! <br /><br />"Good triangle UFO video" - What's good about three lights in formation? <br /><br />I takes VERY LITTLE to "convince" those who are already convinced.<br />Like any other religion. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[skyeagle409]

SETI continues to be a kook forum. But it's fun! <br /><br /><br />On the contrary, people can learn a lot about UFOs and the government's UFO coverup campaign. A lot of documents have been revealed over the years that proves a goverment coverup in progress. Now, we find that many of Project Blue Book's 'explained' files are in question. In other words, the number of Blue Book's unexplained files should be much higher than what is officially listed.<br /><br />There are people who underestimate the government's ability to hide 'things' from the public.<br /><br />

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">How come from what few of these videos I've seen always seem to be shot by a drunk?</font><br /><br />Not all UFO videos are shaky, but most UFO videos do not involve the use a tripod which restricts movement and takes time to set up. People tend to move their camera a lot when excited. In addition to that, most people who video tape a UFO are not pointing at something that is obviously ground based to them (i.e. street lights, traffic lights, etc.). Even most hoaxes do not involve lights held up by a pole. Most hoaxed UFO sightings have to do with mockups, scale models, and/or digitial video editing. Usually, when there's a night time video, either light must have been generated from the hoveringcraft/mockup/scalemodel itself or video editing was done to "add" the lights in those particular colors, diameters, and brightness.<br /><br />A lot of judging of UFO videos is "art critic" in nature, to but to really criticize (i.e. analyze) such video is to do more than be an art critic. An analyzer should know enough about the image such that an outside person could sketch in their minds the exact scene in *all* of its *discernable* qualities. Moving the video at various rates, without shaking hardly, and pausing movement at strategic moments and actually creates more <i>information</i> for the analyzer to take into account, especially when ground references are needed with respect to an optical zoom in.

 

[skyeagle409]

Pizza---Before I clicked the link, I thought: "it will be another blurry video, where you can see - nothing." <br /><br /><br />Pizza,<br /><br />These days, technology can ascertain much about an object, even if the photos or videos are blurred. The Belgian UFO and Trindade photos are prime examples where the object's size was determined and a reason why the president of Brazil went public on that particular UFO sighting. In the case pf tje Belgian UFO photo, scientific analysis had found that the object was not only as large as a B-747 but while in a hover, but was rotating about its vertical axis as well.<br /><br />I found it amusing that one skeptic suggested that the Tridade UFO was a small twin-engined aircraft. Apparently, he was unaware of that aircraft's normal range and it should be noted the aircraft is not normally fitted for aerial refueling and must have thought that an airport was within range of that aircraft. Another suggested a naval radar aircraft but the photos clearly do not depict any type of naval radar aircraft. It seems that he was unaware of NATO's aircraft profile recognition handbook.<br /><br />

 

[skyeagle409]

marinas---Not all UFO videos are shaky,...<br /><br />You got that right and many are still classified.

 

[kmarinas86]

http://www.hbccufo.org/videos/Triangle.wmv<br /><br />In the video, the color of the top triangle light, for whatever reason, actually changes from <b>amber</b> to <b>cyan</b>. There is an easy way to see this. After loading the video in Windows Media Player, stop it (if necessary) and then <i>adjust the Video Settings</i> to <b>Full Saturation</b>, <b>40% Contrast</b>, and (<b>-30% brightness</b>). Once the video, while playing, is stopped, you are then able to <i>speed the video up</i> to <b>2 times speed</b>, which is probably necessary to see the effect over a short duration of time, and watch the color of the top light change.<br /><br />Notice that compression algorithms add blotches of red and blue color, but this does not detract from the overall change of solid color in the top light itself. This shift in color is hard to see if you play the video slowly because playing it slowly does not allow your perceptual view of the video to "cancel out" the blotches of red and blue color. <i>Play it at 2 times speed</i> and this will not happen.

 

[dmjspace]

beartooth said: <font color="yellow"> How come from what few of these videos I've seen always seem to be shot by a drunk? Camcorders these days can do a much better job of tracking an object. Is this shaking & distortion part of the UFO mystique? </font><br /><br />It's funny you should bring this up. From what I've seen of UFO analysis by qualified scientists, this shaking is actually strong evidence in favor of a genuine video, for reasons described by kmarinas.<br /><br />It's like I said, if you're a diehard skeptic (which beartooth may or may not be), no evidence is good enough. It's either "too shaky" or "too clear" or "too dark" or "too something".<br /><br />No other arena of science needs perfect evidence to be examined seriously. You take what you get and you work with it. <br /><br />At today's level of technology a lot of good information can be derived from the images and videos we have. <br /><br />Taken with the voluminous testimony of military people, the sum of the evidence makes it clear UFOs are real craft.<br /><br />In any case, here are some much clearer, steadier videos of triangles, which may or may not be the same craft.

 

[pizzaguy]

<font color="yellow">Why do you imagine that extraterrestrials are flying about at night with all their lights on? Do they want to be seen or not? If they want to be seen, why do they not land openly?<br />If they do not want to be seen why do they not turn their lights off? </font><br /><br />Such sensible questions in such a nonsense forum.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1"><em>Note to Dr. Henry:  The testosterone shots are working!</em></font> </div>

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">Why do you imagine that extraterrestrials are flying about at night with all their lights on?</font><br /><br />This is a rhetorical question that solves nothing because it proposes no solutions and does not disestabilish any evidence that is more relevant to the ET-UFO Hypothesis.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Do they want to be seen or not?</font><br /><br />Obviously, if the ET-Hypothesis is true, which your question inferrs that as a "given," then <b>of course</b> they want to be seen. Rational thinking people have their lights on if they want to be seen. Must you be suggesting that ET is irrational in thought?<br /><br /><font color="yellow">If they want to be seen [in front of the whole world], why do they not land openly?</font><br /><br />Given that the ET-Hyptohesis is true, if you are suggesting that they must land in order to be seen directly, you then have to ask why do they want to be seen directly <b>in front of the entire world</b>; It <b>must</b> for a purpose that is far more valuable than <i>an<b></b>al-probe "research" which does not offer any novel scientific evidence</i>. When is the right time to wake people up come down from heaven and say, "We have arrived," to billions of people?<br /><br />Given the Raelian ET-UFO Hyptohesis, its rather implausible that an<b></b>al-probing "research" done by the Elohim(?) actually leads to "new discoveries" of their own. On the other hand, it's probably the best way <b>invite the people's curiousity</b> about ET on a <b>personal</b> level.<br /><br />However, this curiosity sometimes leads to the formation of delusions when people cannot seperate real facts from experience (as a result of logical fallacies). And in some these cases, among others, curiousity can actually <i>turn into fear of the unknown</i> which leads to a deterioration of wisdom. Curiosity + Intelligence = Wisdom. Lowering the Intelligence means to decrease good perception and increase bad p

 

[skyeagle409]

eburacum---Why do you imagine that extraterrestrials are flying about at night with all their lights on? <br /><br />Perhaps, the lights might be a by-product of their propulsion system. <br /><br />eburacum---If they want to be seen, why do they not land openly? <br /><br />Actually, there have been UFO landing cases. <br /><br />http://ufocasebook.com/Zamora.html <br /><br />eburacum---If they do not want to be seen why do they not turn their lights off? <br /><br />If you have been following the Washington UFO story you would have found the UFOs were doing just that on the first night when interceptors were scrambled. From a report: <br /><br />****************************************************************************************** <br />"When the F-94s soared over Washington, the strange blips disappeared from the radar screens at National. The F-94 pilots cruised around the area for a while but saw nothing. When they headed back to New Castle, the blips reappeared." <br /><br />****************************************************************************************** <br /><br />'Flying saucers' with an atitude. <br /><br />

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">Why do you imagine that extraterrestrials are flying about at night with all their lights on?</font><br /><br />This is a rhetorical question that solves nothing because it proposes no solutions and does not disestabilish any evidence that is more relevant to the ET-UFO Hypothesis.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Do they want to be seen or not?</font><br /><br />Obviously, if the ET-Hypothesis is true, which your question inferrs that as a "given," then <b>of course</b> they want to be seen. Rational thinking people have their lights on if they want to be seen. Must you be suggesting that ET is irrational in thought?<br /><br /><font color="yellow">If they want to be seen [in front of the whole world], why do they not land openly?</font><br /><br />Given that the ET-Hyptohesis is true, if you are suggesting that they must land in order to be seen directly, you then have to ask why do they want to be seen directly <b>in front of the entire world</b>; It <b>must</b> for a purpose that is far more valuable than <i>an<b></b>al-probe "research" which does not offer any novel scientific evidence</i>. When is the right time to wake people up come down from heaven and say, "We have arrived," to billions of people?<br /><br />Given the Raelian ET-UFO Hyptohesis, its rather implausible that an<b></b>al-probing "research" done by the Elohim(?) actually leads to "new discoveries" of their own. On the other hand, it's probably the best way <b>invite the people's curiousity</b> about ET on a <b>personal</b> level.<br /><br />However, this curiosity sometimes leads to the formation of delusions when people cannot seperate real facts from experience (as a result of logical fallacies). And in some these cases, among others, curiousity can actually <i>turn into fear of the unknown</i> which leads to a deterioration of wisdom. Curiosity + Intelligence = Wisdom. Lowering the Intelligence means to decrease good perception and increase bad p

 

[skyeagle409]

eburacum---You could film miles of videotape of similar appearance over the North York Moors; but the objects would all be natural or man-made. <br /><br />Wrong!! The miiltary wouldn't think twice about hovering a top secret 'Black' project aircraft in foreign airspace illegally and doing so over a major metropolitan city at low altitude in full view of the local habitants. After all, there are valid reasons why "Black' projects are classified! All it takes is common sense to see the light!<br /><br />eburacum---It is certainly possible that some of the lights belong to experimental craft;<br /><br />It's possible but your comment doesn't make it so. If the UFO overflew a prohibited flight or through terminal controlled areas without permission from ground controllers as been the case in many UFO encounters or flew in formation with an airliner in positive controlled airspace without permission from FAA ground controllers and interfered with the aircraft's avionics, then chances are excellent the UFOs were not the result of classified vehicles of any kind.<br /><br /> eburacum---...but no doubt all will be revealed in the fullness of time. <br /><br />I seriously doubt that considering that mankind didn't have any large UFOs the size of aircraft carriers, sometimes larger, that could outmaneuver an F-16. That has been the case in some encounters and you would have to rewrite the laws of physics in regards to radar technology to explain away such encounters as natural phenonmena or classified aircraft.<br /><br />It's pretty obvious from the documentation of the data evidence that thousands of UFO incidents similar to what happened over Washington D.C., could not have been the result of natural phenomena or classified aircraft operations of any kind but it seems the skeptics can't face reality for what it is.<br /><br />I find it peculiar that some skeptics suggest that certain UFO incidents are the result of natural phenomena, delusions, hoaxes or classified aircraft when the

 

[dmjspace]

eburacum said: <font color="yellow"> I have no doubt that all these lights are either man-made or natural </font><br /><br />What are you basing this certainty on?<br /><br /><font color="yellow"> If they do not want to be seen why do they not turn their lights off? </font><br /><br />We only have two options:<br />1. They want to be seen<br />2. They don't care if they're seen<br /><br />Neither option is consistent with any conventional military exercise.<br /><br />How do you reconcile this plain fact with your above statement of certainty?