Unusual video or some secret experiment.

[Ivan Seeking]

Does anyone have any idea what this might be? It has plenty of clues suggesting that it is authentic.


My first thought was of a flare that detonated.

 

[russ_watters]

Was any contextual info provided? I don't see any.

It could be a paracute flare that comes apart (that's what people say on the first page of comments), but that's a toughie because it doesn't seem to move much (if at all) wrt the stars in the background. But that could be a distance thing.

Someone else suggested a "candle balloon" - I've never heard of that, but I was also thinking a hot air balloon on fire. Some of the other comments are really funny...

 

[Moridin]

3dsmax and Photoshop to create the grainy effects. One comment on YouTube asked where the sound from the explosion went. Why would it only be seen with NW?

 

[russ_watters]

I doubt that it is a rendering. Such a thing is too difficult to do just for a hoax. It may be a "candle balloon" and a hoax, though.

One thing, if we had information on the lens, you could calculate the distance to the object based on its freefall. Getting ifo like that is why getting all the context info is so important.

 

[chemisttree]

Maybe the Chinese shot it down...

 

[kmarinas86]

I don't know of any candle balloons which have a blue flame. Also candle balloons are usually brighter on the bottom. Notice that just before the light starts falling the brightness decreases - now explain that!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Here is one taken from a police helicopter, in Long Beach, California, on Dec 25th, 2004. There is a local newspaper report to substantiate the story.

They had nothing recent to report, but there's always the famous images captured by LBPD helicopter pilots on Dec. 25, 2004.

At around 11:30 p.m. that night, the chopper's videocamera recorded a strange glowing object floating through the Long Beach sky. They forwarded the tape to local military officials, who couldn't - or wouldn't - identify it.

A copy of the tape was even given to KABC and broadcast around the world, but nobody could figure out what it was. [continued]

http://www.presstelegram.com/ucla/ci_5028150

This appears to be the video


As a guess, to me this looks like it could be great footage of either ball lightning, or something else often reported as such. There are many reports of material like molten metal dripping from relatively slow moving, or stationary fireballs [sometimes this is allegedly observed coming from a structured craft as well]. It was reported as being over the city of Long Beach, but I don't know if the actual distance from the object was known.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Regarding the Long Beach PD video, there are a number of cases mentioned here where molten metal [or similar] is seen coming from a "UFO"

Report from the Field: Scientific Issues in the UFO Phenomenon
[/url]
http://play.rbn.com/?url=usanet/usanet/g2demand/scifi/freedomofinfo/jacques-vallee256k.rm&proto=rtsp
or see the bottom of this page
http://www.freedomofinfo.org/science.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

How does this account for the material seen "dripping" down?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well, as for the dripping material; this could easily be replicated by any number of ways. A small container of vegetable oil dripping onto a flame for instance.
The commercial lanterns use a solid fuel block which when alight could have a liquid fuel drip onto them.

The point is, that devices can be made fairly easily that replicate the effects seen in these video clips

I don't think so. There appears to be an awful lot of material falling. It could be done but not easily I would think. And if you look at the other link provided, they did retrieve metalic materials from similar events. The use of thermite was ruled out in those cases. Also, in the PD video, there seems to be some odd things going on at the core. At one point it even appears that there are two orbs rotating about each other.

so these type of clips can't really prove anything. Now, if I see a clip of a metal disc flying through the air with some scaling to judge it's size and other factors that make it look hard to duplicate, then I would be more impressed and would look into it more closely.

Who said anything about this being flying saucers? Unless this is some elaborate and very dangerous hoax, to me this is strongly suggestive of a very interesting but natural phenomenon - one that might often be interpreted as ET UFOs.

 

[Newbie says Hi]

It could be a paracute flare that comes apart (that's what people say on the first page of comments), but that's a toughie because it doesn't seem to move much (if at all) wrt the stars in the background.

Someone else suggested a "candle balloon" - I've never heard of that, but I was also thinking a hot air balloon on fire. Some of the other comments are really funny...

Wow, are we looking at the same page? All the comments I see are... well, junk.

[edit - Oops, I didn't realize this thread was so old. The comments you refer to are probably in a latter page by now.]

 

[Newbie says Hi]

Does anyone have any idea what this might be?

Well, isn't it obvious? The planet Venus as viewed through swamp gas, or possibly a weather balloon :)

Who said anything about this being flying saucers?

Well, isn't the title of the video "Exploding ufo" ? To me atleast, UFOs = "flying saucers".

 

[K.J.Healey]

Upon first sight I thought it was a hot air balloon whose canopy was reflective. Then it looked like it caught fire, which would melt/burn any canopy very quickly and begin to drop. Would also explain what looks to be a gas cloud catching fire upon escape to the top right.
I thought hot air balloon because I see a big sphere/disc and a small basket under it that's connected at pretty much the same distance ratio as a hot air balloon. Any thoughts?

 

[Newbie says Hi]

After watching the video 3 times, I think it is consistent with the object being a hot air balloon -- that caught fire. The material falling is burning pastic, in my opinion. A balloon might also explain why the object hovers in one place when the video starts.

 

[Newbie says Hi]

Dang, Healy beat me to it. I shouldn't have been re-playing the video so much! :)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Please be specific about which video you are referencing: The one in the OP, or the one in post #7.

Clearly the one in post seven isn't a balloon since it would either be rising due to the reduced weight, or falling due to loss of boyancy.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

To me atleast, UFOs = "flying saucers".

That's not the definition. Are you saying than any unidentified object ever seen is a flying saucer?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

\I have looked at many UFO type reports over many years and this is the first time I have ever seen reference to retrieved material in this sense. I doubt the impartiality (and truthfulness) of their information.

As an introduction to the subject, see the ground trace evidence from the 1997 Workshop.
http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/ufo_reports/sturrock/toc.html

The Pdf file seems to just list this material with no further pictures or evidence and the video clip has little flash images spliced in--not quite subliminal , but near.

What you saw were notes from a symposium [same link for video excerpts].

In my experience, the acronym 'UFO' is taken to mean 'flying saucer' by nearly everyone who reads/hears it - irrespective of it's definition.

That is a common mistake made by people who are mostly unacquainted with the subject. The term UFO was coined in the fifties specifically to avoid the impliciation that all UFOs are flying saucers. This was first used by Ruppelt, the head of the USAF project Bluebook. Some people now use the expression "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena", or UAP, as an option.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

There is a fascinating video beginning at the 2:20 mark, in the presentation cited as:

Report from the Field: Scientific Issues in the UFO Phenomenon
Dr. Jacques Vallee
Astrophysicist and computer scientist, now in the private sector

Near the bottom of the page at the following link:
http://www.freedomofinfo.org/science.html

I haven't read about the case, but Vallee claims that there were over two-hundred observers, including personnel on Navy ships. I have seen at least one very similar video before.

Before this, he shows photos of the metallic residue mentioned earlier.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This appears to be the same video in its original format, with "Area 51" dubbed in later.

 

[fournier17]

What do you guys think about this video that was recently filmed at Lake Erie. Two helicopters hovering close together? The color of the lights are weird though. I've never seen an aircraft with these type of lights.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

That sounds like a very reasonable explanation provided that it is consistent with the location of the observation.

Another one that will fool people are high altitude refueling operations. Two bright lights are seen to merge and then separate, which can seem very odd.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Here is one that has been around for a long time. I never have run across the original source of this. If anyone happens to know, please post a link.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Going back to the Long Beach PD video


This report came to mind as well. From post number four in the Credible Anomalies Napster

Earthquake Lights Observed In Canada
...'Fireballs a few metres in diameter often popped out of the ground in a repetitive manner at distances of up to only a few metres away from the observers. Others were seen several hundred metres up in the sky, stationary or moving. Some observers described dripping luminescent droplets, rapidly disappearing a few metres under the stationary fireballs. Only two fire-tongues on the ground were reported, one on snow and the other on a paved parking space without any apparent surface fissure. The colours most often identified were orange, yellow, white and green. Some luminosities lasted up to 12 min.'...[continued]

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074g14.htm
(Ouellet, Marcel; "Earthquake Lights and Seismicity," Nature, 348:492, 1990.)

Something else that caught my attention in the video: The material dropping appears to pace the source almost perfectly. I note hardly any drift or spray due to wind - the material appears to fall straight down wrt the source - but wrt the background clouds, the object appears to be moving fairly quickly. Of course, it is very difficult to gauge any of this.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It is also noteworthy that after about 7 PM that night, there was no measurable wind.
http://www.wunderground.com/history...tml?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

 

[HiggsBoson]

disclose.tv

This is the best site I’ve seen for unusual videos.
http://disclose.tv/

I really like this one… Abduction caught on tape.
http://disclose.tv/viewvideo/296/abduction_caught_on_tape/

 

[GNR8NXR]

I have viewed many planets through refractive and that is not a planet. Could be man made. like UFO