Video of "UFO Crash Over Finland" - does anyone have any idea what this could be?

Smersh · Dec 19, 2008

Condensation trails have been suggested, but they seem too bright to me. Also seems to be moving much too slowly for a meteor or space junk coming down. An aircraft with all its engines on fire? I dunno ... http://www.ufosightingsvideo.com/4.html  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <h1 style="margin:0pt;font-size:12px">----------------------------------------------------- </h1>Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea." Churchill: "Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it."Website / forums </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Dec 19, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Condensation trails have been suggested, but they seem too bright to me. Also seems to be moving much too slowly for a meteor or space junk coming down. An aircraft with all its engines on fire? I dunno ... http://www.ufosightingsvideo.com/4.html Posted by Smersh</DIV>Looks like a fireball.As far as it moving too slowly, that's really relative to the observer.  It appears to be at pretty high altitude and moving fast to me.  It is a very large fireball, much larger than a fire associated with an aircraft would be, IMO.I think the most valid explanation would be that this is a meteoritic fireball.  Whatever it is, it doesn't appear to be any type of aircraft/flying saucer to me. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

Mee_n_Mac · Dec 19, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Looks like a fireball.As far as it moving too slowly, that's really relative to the observer.  It appears to be at pretty high altitude and moving fast to me.  It is a very large fireball, much larger than a fire associated with an aircraft would be, IMO.I think the most valid explanation would be that this is a meteoritic fireball.  Whatever it is, it doesn't appear to be any type of aircraft/flying saucer to me. Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV> I dunno.  My first impression was re-entry of some rather large space junk but there's something odd about the "heads" (for lack of a better term) at the leading points of the fire trails.  They seem to fly in a very tight formation. I had have guessed that the one to the side would have slower or deviated from the pack.  Then again if it was space junk vs a meteor perhaps it was hanging together (still one piece) at that moment.  Anyone know the date and time of the taping ?ps - at last, a return to normalcy in the U forum. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

BoJangles · Dec 19, 2008

What you are wittnessing is no less than the disturbing footage of Santa and the reindeer crashing in a hellish fireball due to the elves outsourcing maintenance and repairs. No elves could be contacted for comment, and are preparing a statement which should be release by the polar express soon, inside sources point to a number systemic issues, all the result of cost cutting and profiteering of the executive elves at the cost of safety and lives. There also appears to be evidence these practices have been rife, going back as far as the first quarter of 02, when the North Pole started to globalise and lift trade barriers.  Mrs Clause has denied any involvement in the conspiracy and wishes the media to maintain her privacy through this very hard and trying time.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -------------- Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog. With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... *** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research *** </div>

jim48 · Dec 19, 2008

I have been examining the video here in my lab, and with the help of Sparky--my amazing crystal skull--and my Mark IV, Series 80, Hyper-Electric Neutron Gravitator, I have been able to <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/8/6/f894af91-27f7-4eef-a61d-a278a0a91e74.Medium.jpg" alt="" />  enhance the image to its best possible resolution. Isn't it great to have a genuine, honest-to-God scientist out here? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

BoJangles · Dec 19, 2008

That is obviously the later stages of an al Qaeda anti counter terrorist terrorist mission which has somehow failed to reach orbit. Think “24”, Think keanu Reeves, Think that Arab guy off “Lost”, mix them all together and you start to know the gravity of the situation.  A still shot of this cunning device. <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/0/11/6037feae-d411-4627-9bb3-8f6e89c6ffff.Medium.jpg" alt="" /> And don’t be fooled by these skilled and highly trained solders, they ARE human, and prone to same the mistakes as you and i.   <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -------------- Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog. With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... *** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research *** </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Dec 20, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>...</DIV>Santa test-flying a new sleigh design, eh?

<div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

aphh · Dec 20, 2008

It's a few years old video. I'm not quite sure what the conclusion was, but I suspect it was a spent upper stage returning home to Plesetsk, Northern Russia, where they launch satellites for high inclination orbits.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plesetsk_Cosmodrome

MeteorWayne · Dec 20, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It's a few years old video. I'm not quite sure what the conclusion was, but I suspect it was a spent upper stage returning home to Plesetsk, Northern Russia, where they launch satellites for high inclination orbits.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plesetsk_Cosmodrome Posted by aphh</DIV> That seems correct to me. Too slow for a meteoritic Fireball, but looks very similar to many reentries of space junk.For example, see:http://atv.seti.org/http://a1862.g.akamai.net/7/1862/14448/v1/esa.download.akamai.com/13452/flash_stream/ATV_Reentry.swfHere's an interesting page I found of lots of reentries!http://reentry.arc.nasa.gov/images.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

lildreamer · Dec 20, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>That seems correct to me. Too slow for a meteoritic Fireball, but looks very similar to many reentries of space junk.For example, see:http://atv.seti.org/http://a1862.g.akamai.net/7/1862/14448/v1/esa.download.akamai.com/13452/flash_stream/ATV_Reentry.swfHere's an interesting page I found of lots of reentries!http://reentry.arc.nasa.gov/images.html Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV> Did any one notice near the last 20 seconds of the film the object actually was descending and hanged a right person was in shadows- everything seemed grey so  indicating to me that it was near dusk...I would say its contrails from a pretty friggin big jet. The setting sun exaggerating the actual trails.near the bottom or point of the vapour trails you can see the running lights of an aircraft....but heck I;m always wrong - could be rentry of blown up rocket that they had to take care of..... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

BoJangles · Dec 20, 2008

I agree, what ever it is, its got 2 of something, lots of fuel and falling fast though not at meteor velocity. My initial vote is for a failed rocket of some description, the object looks small compared to the fiery trail. But if you really look closely it kind of resembles a twin engine jet, heading away from you at an angle into the ground, see how you go with it, i'm not sure if i'm imagining things? though if that was the case it must have been fully loaded and fairly high. what is strange is you don't see any debris flying off, well not with the resolution anyway <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -------------- Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog. With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... *** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research *** </div>

SLOW6 · Dec 21, 2008

its seems funny to me that a UFO would first of all have either blazing jets of fire OR the fact that the thing or being navigating the object can master interstellar space travel and yet somehow crash to Earth? Whats next, They CANT open DOORS?

haha  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> In an infinite Universe, any point can be said to be the centre as there are an infinite number of stars either side of that point...

</div>

DrRocket · Dec 22, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Condensation trails have been suggested, but they seem too bright to me. Also seems to be moving much too slowly for a meteor or space junk coming down. An aircraft with all its engines on fire? I dunno ... http://www.ufosightingsvideo.com/4.html Posted by Smersh</DIV>It is not contrails since the length of the bright streaks remains constant. It is not a burning quantity of heavy hydrocarbon since there is no black smoke.  Neither is there white smoke because of the constant length of the streaks.  It could be hot and rapidly dispersing water vapor illuminated by something that is white hot.  Perhaps an icy meteor?  But the fact that there are two parallel streaks is puzzling, and if it were an icy meteor with a geometry that would produce two streaks I would expect it to tumble and the streaks to appear to intertwine.It could be space junk, but if so the piece of junk ought to be known, since that sort of stuff is tracked.  It reminds be very much of pictures of the Challenger disaster.  This strikes me as the most likely possibility pending confirmation. Has the video been examined to make sure that no tampering has occurred?  I think a video like this could be pieced together from other existing footage. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

lildreamer · Dec 22, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It is not contrails since the length of the bright streaks remains constant. It is not a burning quantity of heavy hydrocarbon since there is no black smoke.  Neither is there white smoke because of the constant length of the streaks.  It could be hot and rapidly dispersing water vapor illuminated by something that is white hot.  Perhaps an icy meteor?  But the fact that there are two parallel streaks is puzzling, and if it were an icy meteor with a geometry that would produce two streaks I would expect it to tumble and the streaks to appear to intertwine.It could be space junk, but if so the piece of junk ought to be known, since that sort of stuff is tracked.  It reminds be very much of pictures of the Challenger disaster.  This strikes me as the most likely possibility pending confirmation. Has the video been examined to make sure that no tampering has occurred?  I think a video like this could be pieced together from other existing footage. Posted by DrRocket</DIV>there is another video same day different angle here is the linkhttp://www.metacafe.com/watch/327153/ufo_in_finland_26_11_2006/what bothers me about the first video is the last 20 seconds - object turns right and you can make out running lights... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

Mee_n_Mac · Dec 22, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>there is another video same day different angle here is the linkhttp://www.metacafe.com/watch/327153/ufo_in_finland_26_11_2006/what bothers me about the first video is the last 20 seconds - object turns right and you can make out running lights... Posted by lildreamer</DIV> So now we have a date, 11/26/2006, to try to track down any re-entry of space junk or Russian launch.  As for the last 20 secs, I didn't see any turn but I did notice a few flashes of something bright and white from the front of the fireball.  I don't know if that isn't just due to the camera sharpening and compression though.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

MeteorWayne · Dec 22, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It is not contrails since the length of the bright streaks remains constant. Posted by DrRocket</DIV> That by itself is not a useful indicator if it's contrails or not. If you watch a jet flying up there, unless the humidity changes within the layer it is flying in, the contrails will evaporate at a constant rate, hence stay the same length assuming the speed is constant (which it usually is for an aircraft at cruising altitude). That can range from a few degrees to more than 60 degrees with constant lengths. In fact, from my considerable observations, it is far more common that the length stays the same than it is for the length to change.I see that all the time.MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

lildreamer · Dec 22, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>So now we have a date, 11/26/2006, to try to track down any re-entry of space junk or Russian launch.  As for the last 20 secs, I didn't see any turn but I did notice a few flashes of something bright and white from the front of the fireball.  I don't know if that isn't just due to the camera sharpening and compression though.  Posted by Mee_n_Mac</DIV> last 20 seconds of first film - craft is descending then banks right in behind stack...both films indicate dusk - odd first film seems like clear skies but second film indicates foul weather.therefore object could be seen from a distance.and yes we do have a date but I couldn't find any entries so far of space debris or crashed plane - still checking <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

space360tv · Dec 23, 2008

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2gDhPa8Yo4It's all realKeep Looking Up!Don't be afraid of the truth, brace yourselves for disclosure coming soon!God, Coming soonwww.jvim.com watch tv programs www.jhm.org, watch  Is your soul readyjet vrs ufo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_XP5vVuxpM Please start supporting each other we are all we have plus GOD!   <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <img id="0540fc5c-48e1-48df-ac2e-d4df3a7fe7eb" src="http://sitelife.livescience.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/5/12/0540fc5c-48e1-48df-ac2e-d4df3a7fe7eb.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> <img id="f18152d2-fa87-4cf4-bd7c-be5067464d0d" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/1/13/f18152d2-fa87-4cf4-bd7c-be5067464d0d.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> <img id="3eb96b54-cf21-43ad-8848-375afb01e277" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/14/8/3eb96b54-cf21-43ad-8848-375afb01e277.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> Coming Soon a New Heaven and a New Earth, God, Bless you all, Keep Looking Up! </div>

MeteorWayne · Dec 23, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>last 20 seconds of first film - craft is descending then banks right in behind stack...both films indicate dusk - odd first film seems like clear skies but second film indicates foul weather.therefore object could be seen from a distance.and yes we do have a date but I couldn't find any entries so far of space debris or crashed plane - still checking Posted by lildreamer</DIV>Well if we assume these two videos are of the same event, and therefore the 11/26/06 date is correct, it is not a listed reentry.Here's a list of October through December 2006<table border="0"><tbody><tr><td>Molniya-M Stage 3

DrRocket · Dec 23, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>That by itself is not a useful indicator if it's contrails or not. If you watch a jet flying up there, unless the humidity changes within the layer it is flying in, the contrails will evaporate at a constant rate, hence stay the same length assuming the speed is constant (which it usually is for an aircraft at cruising altitude). That can range from a few degrees to more than 60 degrees with constant lengths. In fact, from my considerable observations, it is far more common that the length stays the same than it is for the length to change.I see that all the time.MW Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV>I will agree with your statement, but have you ever seen contrails that prominent and large evaporate that quickly so as to be that short and constant in length ? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Dec 23, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I will agree with your statement, but have you ever seen contrails that prominent and large evaporate that quickly so as to be that short and constant in length ? Posted by DrRocket</DIV> Not really that prominnant, but constant length is more or less normal; changing length implies variable humidity is a constant layer, or a change in altitude passing through different layers.Also notice that behind the main bright trails, you can see a few thin smoke trails illuminated by the setting (or rising)sun. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

MeteorWayne · Dec 23, 2008

and you can make out running lights<div id="Cat:c7921f8b-94ec-454a-9715-3770aac6e2caForum:2f3143ad-161c-461f-b1e1-f88bf188e3cfDiscussion:92c29ce0-44bc-4855-abe4-0f274f644b35Post:0eaec59a-c4aa-48e1-a543-66c63bc58dfb" style="display:none;visibility:hidden">15</div><div class="Discussion_VisibilityContainer"><div class="postVisibilityContainer_896522 Discussion_AltPostContainer"><div class="Discussion_StandardTierPostContainer"><table border="0" class="Discussion_PostTitleTable"><tbody><tr><td class="Discussion_PostTitleTableIcon"><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/forums/comment.gif" alt="" />

lildreamer · Dec 23, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> and you can make out running lights15    and you can make out running lights... Posted by lildreamer   As for the last 20 secs, I didn't see any turn but I did notice a few flashes of something bright and white from the front of the fireball.  I don't know if that isn't just due to the camera sharpening and compression though.   If you watch the Jules Verne reentry video, you can also also see bright flashes. Meteor Fireballs also do the same thing. As pieces break off, they incinerate much faster due to the larger surface area. Quite expected. Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV>whats with the new copy format to repsonses MW - huge wow...I watched the ESA ATV jules Verne Re-entryhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2OiAk1l2vsthough there are similarities my opinion is the bright flashes seem to be at regular intervals for our Finland UFO video 1For Jules Verne the fireball breaks up rather spectacularly but with the FUFO V1 it shapes stays consistent and does not break upI mistook the banking of the right - due to camera angles changingBut looking at the movie as best as I could it looked as though its a controlled descending path and its trying to land.  I think the last 20 seconds of the film has copious amount of evidence to indicate a controlled descent - but once again that's my opinion.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Dec 24, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>...But looking at the movie as best as I could it looked as though its a controlled descending path and its trying to land.  I think the last 20 seconds of the film has copious amount of evidence to indicate a controlled descent - but once again that's my opinion.  Posted by lildreamer</DIV>"..trying to land.." No.  Actually, I ordered a pizza on that day and obviously, it was trying to find my house after it had just finished visiting a dog-show and before it was do on the set of "Huh?" to play in the starring role...IOW, you're ascribing something that can not be discerned from the evidence available.I still believe it is at a very, very high altitude and moving fairly quickly which would be consistent with entry into the atmosphere from orbit/space.  There appears to be several primary objects, at least three, to me and they're all moving at a similar velocity which would be consistent with a high-alititude breakup, IMO.  We also do not see those velocities change for the different bits&pieces like we would have noticed in lower altitude video over the same time-period.  (Unless they all shared similar physical properties regarding their aerodynamics) Our perspective doesn't afford us that level of detail until the changes become more pronounced.  That say's to me, in my admittedly ignorant state, it's high up and far away, scooting along a good clip.It is also useful to note MW's assertion regarding the contrails being illuminated by sunlight.  Yet, it appears the video was taken at dusk, right?  That would mean it would still be at relatively high-alititude as far as I know.  How is a high-altitude fast-mover like this, breaking up on entry into the atmosphere seen to engage in behavior that mimics "looking for a place to land.?" <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

lildreamer · Dec 24, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>"..trying to land.." No.  Actually, I ordered a pizza on that day and obviously, it was trying to find my house after it had just finished visiting a dog-show and before it was do on the set of "Huh?" to play in the starring role...IOW, you're ascribing something that can not be discerned from the evidence available.I still believe it is at a very, very high altitude and moving fairly quickly which would be consistent with entry into the atmosphere from orbit/space.  There appears to be several primary objects, at least three, to me and they're all moving at a similar velocity which would be consistent with a high-alititude breakup, IMO.  We also do not see those velocities change for the different bits&pieces like we would have noticed in lower altitude video over the same time-period.  (Unless they all shared similar physical properties regarding their aerodynamics) Our perspective doesn't afford us that level of detail until the changes become more pronounced.  That say's to me, in my admittedly ignorant state, it's high up and far away, scooting along a good clip.It is also useful to note MW's assertion regarding the contrails being illuminated by sunlight.  Yet, it appears the video was taken at dusk, right?  That would mean it would still be at relatively high-alititude as far as I know.  How is a high-altitude fast-mover like this, breaking up on entry into the atmosphere seen to engage in behavior that mimics "looking for a place to land.?" Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV>stills take from first film <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/0/14/200cdeb4-f60e-4e09-aee8-5f94a46c2c10.Medium.jpg" alt="" /> <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/1/7/01070aab-8824-42fa-b7c6-08636e50306b.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/12/12/1c78d34b-48ae-4aae-acbf-5fd03c700d88.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/0/3bfaa684-baad-44b3-9068-fdf9755e7c8a.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/15/5/0f1a69ce-4c4c-4333-a529-7fed7747590a.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/14/ab40bd14-9ea2-4c3b-be42-0e7ffb26c08e.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/4/9/24923c5c-7d4d-45d4-a9ed-d415ed4383e5.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/4/15/944ec185-106a-4300-af47-0813ffa2a6ca.Medium.jpg" alt="" />http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Forums/# I'll have to concede - its space debris coming down, but what bothers me or  is throwing me off is the angle of descent. I've seen few "rocks" fall from the sky but not as much as MW<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif" border="0" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /> has in his nights out...The angle that the debris is descending seems wrong to me should it not be coming in like an arc like the top of a circle rather than the arc of a bottom of circle.. unless we are seeing an illusion because there's no visual markers to judge with???Anyways ...I stand corrected once again, and I'm always willing to admit I'm wrong <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

Video of "UFO Crash Over Finland" - does anyone have any idea what this could be?

Smersh

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

BoJangles

Guest

jim48

Guest

BoJangles

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

aphh

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

lildreamer

Guest

BoJangles

Guest

SLOW6

Guest

DrRocket

Guest

lildreamer

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

lildreamer

Guest

space360tv

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

DrRocket

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

lildreamer

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

lildreamer

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page