• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

UFO in London April 15, 2009 - Opinions Please!

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

J

jimbo83478

Paranormal Tyro
Not sure what to make of this - can the video experts weigh in please?

thanks,
jimbo


<object height="344" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OqWB8eihHb8&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></object>
 
I agree it's prob something like a reflection on the window pane...note how quiet the filmers are of it. Then at the end you hear
one guy say: 'It's gone' in a very calm, matter of fact, soft voice.

And WHY don't they go outside or at least open the window and film it? *shrug*

Edited to add: I also made a mistake (DUHhh, huh? :rolleyes:) I know now that indeed that window IS open... :o). I guess I missed eatin' those delicious foot sandwiches....:o
 
Well...what would you have said? I don't think it is completely accurate to scrutinize the observers reaction in these kinds of videos because everybody is different - I think there is a gray area where behavioral norms are relative and judgments are largely subjective. If you have an objective rule book for bogus reactions to UFO sightings, please post it.


Maybe more precise areas of judgment will be: 1) that which is possible to visually create, and 2) the camera's movement/placement...no?
 
Any time I see a video with so much camera movement in so short a time, I dismiss it out of hand - that kind of movement is clearly being used to imply movement on the part of the lights, where none is present.
 
paulkimball said:
Any time I see a video with so much camera movement in so short a time, I dismiss it out of hand - that kind of movement is clearly being used to imply movement on the part of the lights, where none is present.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but I dont think thats the case here. I dont for a second believe that its a genuine anomaly but I disagree that they were trying to imply movement of the lights.
 
I skimmed through the comments, and looked at the person's profile. The comments touches on how it was recorded, though I must admit, it confused me. Anyway, I wanted to mention this in case you all are truly interested in this vid. I am not, so only skimmed.
 
What am I missing that you guys arent?

1. Pause the vid at 0:18secs. Youll see on the left of frame there is a window pane. And it appears to be open.

2. Obviously the lights/objects arent moving... you can see quite clearly the roofs of the houses underneath as a reference point.
 
Gareth said:
What am I missing that you guys arent?

1. Pause the vid at 0:18secs. Youll see on the left of frame there is a window pane. And it appears to be open.

2. Obviously the lights/objects arent moving... you can see quite clearly the roofs of the houses underneath as a reference point.
Click to expand...

It doesn't look like a window pane or an open window to me. It looks like the window from an adjacent bay window protrusion similar to the bay windows from the buildings across the street. Freeze the video and look at the design of the other buildings.

There appears to be an atmospheric glare or slight lens glare from one of the suspected "objects". As the objects zoom off the glare remains for a fraction of a second. This should not happen if the glare is associated with the object. It probably indicates dust on a window glass or an internal reflection from behind glass.

There are snap zooms that seems to indicate some kind of editing going on. It doesn't look like a digital zoom or optical zoom which should be smoother. I could be wrong if there are cameras that can do snap zooms. If not it is highly suspicious since the music is continuous and the video is not.

There is slight movement of the objects just before they take off. It is a move slightly up and left by a few pixels and looping around before the zoom. The objects move in unison. It's a suspicious move as if someone had grabbed a fixed set of LEDs and tried to move the them to simulate a fly off. Or this could be the hoaxer failing to get a perfect match move lock in a video composite.

The flying off streaks don't look right. It streaks off but the light trail is stuttered instead of a continuous streak like the streaks earlier in the video. Plus the streaks lead the object instead of the other way around. That is, the objects appear to burn in video as it moves off. Again this doesn't happen in the rest of the video with all the movement going on. The streaks also abruptly end instead of trailing off the video frame.
 
Somebody with expertise will have to chime in here.

I know it is not a high resolution vid to begin with, but if you go through frame by frame (or as slow as you can) it appears to me that there is an extraordinary amount of pixellation or blurriness around the green lights at points, like it has been smudged or something.

But, I have no way of confirming that what I am seeing is not something that could occur naturally for some reason.
 
Grainy, crapy video of lights at night.... haven't we been through this time and time again? It, like all of its kind, is worthless. I am no image expert, but what I have learned tells me that the only time you should even start to look at video is if someone has met the following criteria.

1 -- There is an established provenance for the footage
2 -- There is enough detail of the surroundings to triangulate the object in space and do math to figure its dimensions and distance.
3 -- It needs to display unconventional flight characteristics or be of sufficient provable size to rule out prosaic explainations.
4 -- Ideally the Video camera needs to be steadied. Tripod, fence post, car hood. Something solid to greatly minimize camera movement. Hand held video is crap.
5 -- If available, turn off autofocus. Get several minutes of good steadied wide angle and closeup shots.
6 -- Take accompanying still photos. I havn't seen a video camera in 3 years that didnt allow you to take stills along with video.
7 -- Record until the object departs. Send someone to get a new tape ready just in case.
8 -- Get a taped interview of the people around that saw the same object.

Show me something like this and I would be excited. Until then, the video is bullshit and should be treated as such. Of course, thats just my opinion.
 
The video is absolute bullshit.

It should be obvious by the short time plus the inability to frame a stationary object (like someone mentioned).
 
I think 0:27:02 is the first good moment to make a judgement.

Let's assume these objects are real and they move at this very moment, my question - at what direction? If they move to the left why these rays of light shot to the right? Do they have a propulsion system like, let's say, SR-71 has? :D If so - where is a sonic boom?
It seems like there is a glow between the top object and the right one and it's gone right after their 'engines'::) had been started. It looks suspicious to me. If these objects move very rapidly to the left we suppose to see the end of its tale on a place where they're located a 1/10 sec ago but it's not what we see on this video.

Why the camera has been shook to the right right after it's gone? I assume a person did realize/think it was in the sky, not on a ground - why bother to look for it on a ground?

I've used my camcorder for several years and I have to say it is easy to keep it stable when you shoot objects which occupy that square of your view, I can't see any reason for shaking except if you want to make a hoax.

The second moment is 0:21:01....0:23:02. Don't look at the lights, look to the right from them frame by frame (using MPEG Streamclip - Squared 5 - MPEG Streamclip video converter for Mac and Windows or any other media player which is capable to allow to watch it frame by frame) Can you see that a sky dark color has been changing a little bit? I guess it's because we are looking at a game of light on something, I think it's some sort of film on which these 'UFO' had been projected.

PS. To look it frame by frame grab the video using either via Media Converter :: Firefox Add-ons in FireFox or simply by dragging a video link from Activity window to Download window in Safari or via MPEG StreamClip and convert it to Mpeg4. BTW, I've applied video stabilization for this video in iMovie'09 but it didn't help....
 
Back
Top