Multiple Videos of Spherical Craft in the night sky

[black sky watch]

Since you are well up on all this, instead of me proving it's NOT a satellite, how about you proving it IS? You already know the date and time, and know I'm facing north, and even the general altitude. I'll give you anything else you need.
I have a P8079HP right here. I've made a camera, but am still waiting to put it in service. I wouldn't say it's any more sensitive than the camera I use.

 

[Ian]

I could have a look at Heavens-above.com since they have listings past and future with the proviso:

Warning! You have selected a time quite far from the present. Please be aware that prediction accuracy deteriorates as you go further into the future or past.

However, since you have all the data how about you have a go and see what you come up with?

I can't prove it definitely is a satellite any more than you can prove it is not - it just seems far more likely to be a satellite than anything else. But since it's you who posted on the forum that you thought it was something else, the onus on your argument is for you to do the best you can to come up with supporting evidence. (Extra ordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan)

Put all your data into the website and tell us nothing is listed - possibly with a screen shot to support your case.

Seems I'm not the only one here who doubts the non-satellite argument.

Please post some videos of lights doing something unambiguously strange.

BTW, you never explained how you came up with the estimated height of 3000 feet. The 'size of a quarter at arms length'? That's very big. Enormous in fact. Much bigger than the full moon.

Carry on...

 

[black sky watch]

Well if I can't prove it's not a satellite, why bother? I know it'll only be the first of many hoops you will have me jump through anyway. The onus is on you for coming in here and blasting away, having no other possible explanation but that it must be a satellite.

I already have posted videos of "lights doing something unambiguously strange". Link below. Just because it doesn't make a right turn doesn't mean it's not.

If fact, you may be interested to know what Nick Pope said about it. He said, "It's an intriguing piece of footage and no obvious conventional explanation comes to mind."

So if you can just dismiss #4 as being sunlight reflecting off a satellite, I wonder why I bother writing here.

 

[Ian]

Come on, now you're just being silly. There are literally hundreds of videos of lights in the sky. They are not news any more.

And as you ask, I occasionally write here to give an alternative view - as may others do also. Nevertheless, maybe on this occasion my time was wasted as most Paracast forum members are pretty clued up at what to look for and are up to speed on this subject. They probably don't need me to point out the bleedin' obvious.

You missed a bit from above:

"BTW, you never explained how you came up with the estimated height of 3000 feet. The 'size of a quarter at arms length'? That's very big. Enormous in fact. Much bigger than the full moon."

 

[Ian]

A thought...

There are a lot of deep, critical thinkers on the Paracast forum. It's not at all like any others I know of, and that's why I like it. But have you thought of posting your videos onto other forums that could generate some supportive comments for you?

You probably have a list of other UFO forums, but here a a few of my suggestions:

Bill Ryan's Project Avalon. I believe Bill to be a complex but honest character and his multi-area forum has an active UFO section.
Kerry Cassidy's Project Camelot. Another very active UFO and conspiracy forum. Always on the lookout for Nibitu/Planet-X. Maybe you have some of that evidence.
Above Top Secret, thought by many to be infiltrated by shills and disinfo agents. I don't know. Anyway, post your videos there and see what happens!
Then there's http://www.thirdphaseofmoon.net/ run by the 'brothers who shall not be named' (on this forum anyway!). They'll publish anything, jazz it up with some music and place it with the rest. It'll make a change for them to have a video that is a genuine recording and not some CGI cooked up in a teenager's bedroom!

Perhaps if you capture a triangular UFO with your night-vision kit you could post that here? There are at least two that I have seen on Youtube that may be genuine videos.

 

[black sky watch]

Go to 5:30 on this video.

 

[Ian]

Seeing as no one else has considered your above video worthy of comment, I will.

Most objects just look like yet more 'lights in the sky' - aka satellites. Maybe some flares in there too this time.

The triangle is one already widely seen on Youtube. There is at least one other supposedly over Paris that just blinks out.

The most interesting content is the military night-vision image, although I'm not convinced it's not just an artefact generated by the camera, and in the heightened state of alert of the soldiers, they made it sound more exiting than it probably was.

I thought you had taken some good videos yourself? Why not post them here to show this forum? This video doesn't bring anything to the party, now does it?

(What is that crowd on? All 'whooping and shouting' like drugged-up teenagers...)

In addition, I think Dr Greer might like to tell us what frequency the 'transmissions from Orion' (at 9' 40") were received on and how he identified the transmission source. He could also provide the type and models of said receiving equipment - just so people like me don't leave thinking it was someone's mobile phone going off... (Remind me how many light years distant the signals travelled? This is another of his ridiculous claims with no supporting evidence at all. It's enough to give the subject a bad name...)

Greer may have some good ideas and credible information. But I haven't just bobbed down the Thames on a water biscuit, and this sort of stuff makes him and his followers look really stupid.

 

[Constance]

Ian, you copy too many of Jim Oberg's rhetorical devices not to have been trained up by him in debunkery. Just my perception, probably worthless since as Oberg assures us our perceptive capabilities aren't worth crap.

 

[Ian]

Sorry, no idea who Oberg is. But I can Google him I'm I expect. (Not sure which rhetorical devices I used... )

Anyway, if you look up 'debunking'*, you'll find it is not a negative attribute when examining so-called evidence - non of which in my opinion clearly relate to UFOs appears in the video - unless anyone thinks the bleeping noises really are from Orion, picked up on some out-of-shot gadget from Radio Shack...

I was just asking the OP for something substantial (a tall order I agree) as members of this forum have a pretty high bar when it comes to evidence.

* I suspect the US use of 'debunking' is more associated with mockery than in the UK, where I think it's more linked to 'exposing' or 'demystifying'.

 

[black sky watch]

When this thread ends, you will have more time to work on your P8079HP camera. The temperature will be pretty nice outside at night in a few months. Time to get rolling! You'll be able to capture your own anomalies, and hopefully we'll get to see them.

I have mine completed and ready to use. I kept the cost down by making it out of plastic. It doesn't mount on a tripod. Rather, it's held like a rifle. That way objects are easier to track. Has a pretty good 'feel' to it as well. Lightweight and easy to handle. If you're interested, I can post photos of the rig.

Have you thought about using a long lens? I think you're going to want it before it's all said and done. Because if you don't, the 'lights in the sky' are going to be very small, basically worthless.

Only problem with mine is, it needs an operator, and there's only one here most of the time. I'd be thoroughly hacked off if some big ones decided to show up one night, and I didn't have my tried and tested rig in my hands!

 

[black sky watch]

I have to add a comment here. I was out watching and filming the sky for an hour the other night, and I did not see ANY round objects fly by. I had ran the numbers on my skywatch sessions recently, and found out that a round object flies by every 6 minutes or so. Yet this night there were none. Not one! Should have been 10 or so.

Another aspect of that night was that a full moon was just above the horizon to my right, and the sun had recently set on my left. Between the two, there would have been plenty of light to illuminate any object in the higher elevations, where satellites reside. So there was little chance that I would have missed any such objects flying by.

Oh I saw the usual amount of planes and birds, but my question is why the lack of these round objects. Satellites don't get the night off if you know what I mean. Would the 'must-be-satellites' commenters give their take on this please? Thanks in advance.

 

[Polterwurst]

Go to 5:30 on this video.

First off, I think there are some genuinely anomalous light objects in the footage, even among the Greer stuff (although I'm convinced any "transmissions" from Orion are totally bogus and that Greer himself is a self-aggrandizing charlatan who is not beyond making up or faking evidence). And I can't blame these people for "whooping and shouting", considering that they are obviously convinced of interacting with non-human intelligence.

I think Mrs Kruse (some of whose stuff is in there, too) does have some really good evidence. Gene and Chris should definitely try to contact her for a paracast. My personal impression is that she's honest and sincere and not faking any evidence although she's obviously (honestly) convinced "it must be aliens" and that the lights sometimes mimick "our airplanes"

BUT it's never a good idea to shine laserpointers at lights in the night sky, no matter how convinced you are that these are not man-made aircraft. Pilots are regularly being blinded by laserpointers and planes have had to be grounded because of them, so just please DON'T.

Still, some of these objects clearly do show movement that can't be explained by them being satellites, planes, etc. The flaring up effect that sometimes seems to be in answer to the laserpointers is hard to explain away by iridium or military flares. And the sheer amounts of objects, sometimes going in arcs or circles and wobbling around, does make explanation like satellites and planes improbable, while bats, birds or insects probably would not be in focus while the stars mostly are. There are pairs of satellites that fly in relative succession of each other, but I don't think they would look anything like what we see here. Obviously I can't exclude CGI, but why anybody should bother to fake simple lights in the night sky is beyond me.

 

[black sky watch]

Sorry, no idea who Oberg is. But I can Google him I'm I expect. (Not sure which rhetorical devices I used... )

Anyway, if you look up 'debunking'*, you'll find it is not a negative attribute when examining so-called evidence - non of which in my opinion clearly relate to UFOs appears in the video - unless anyone thinks the bleeping noises really are from Orion, picked up on some out-of-shot gadget from Radio Shack...

I was just asking the OP for something substantial (a tall order I agree) as members of this forum have a pretty high bar when it comes to evidence.

* I suspect the US use of 'debunking' is more associated with mockery than in the UK, where I think it's more linked to 'exposing' or 'demystifying'.

Hello old friend...
(That's what happens to adversaries when you factor in time, don't you think?)
Is my new video of an Orb flaring twice 'something substantial'? If not, how do you explain it?

 

[Ian]

Nice catch, but have you categorically ruled out Iridium flares? Exact location and exact time?
Yes, one Iridium satellite can flare twice like that - but you can check for yourself. No need to believe me...

 

[black sky watch]

Nice catch, but have you categorically ruled out Iridium flares? Exact location and exact time?
Yes, one Iridium satellite can flare twice like that - but you can check for yourself. No need to believe me...

Here are the results from heavens-above .com as of today for my coordinates, for the date and time in question (March 15, at approximately 9:30pm).

Turns out there are no flares at all on that date for my location. Not even a single flare, much less a double.

Well I'm trying to show 2 pictures here, but it's like pulling teeth. Maybe I can only insert one picture at a time. I'll have to make another post for the other. But they will show that March 15 is not even listed. March 13 has a flare, then it jumps to March 16.

I've given up on the pictures...too much trouble.