It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: Realtruth
I can't take anyone seriously who starts touting the "chemtrail" hoax. He's either correct in that it was a planetary object, or it could also be a balloon (which is what it looks like).
Either way, "chem-planes"? Spraying? Definitely something wrong there...
originally posted by: Realtruth
I won't totally discount someone just because they have a belief in chemtrails.
I have to keep my cup half full.
originally posted by: _BoneZ_
a reply to: Realtruth
I can't take anyone seriously who starts touting the "chemtrail" hoax. He's either correct in that it was a planetary object, or it could also be a balloon (which is what it looks like).
Either way, "chem-planes"? Spraying? Definitely something wrong there...
Do you have some reason to think it's not a balloon? For supposedly such good equipment, both the "dot" and the clouds look out of focus, though it could be the result of his using digital zoom instead of a better telephoto lens. This other photographer seems to have a better telephoto lens which is what's needed to get pictures of something farther away:
originally posted by: Realtruth
Interesting is an understatement with this latest UFO discovery video and commentary. I've already watched it multiple times. Get's really interesting around 4:30 into the presentation.
What the object is I don't know, so we'll leave it up to ATS experts.
The so-called "movement" of the edges probably isn't movement of the object. It could be the same type of distortion in the atmosphere that makes stars "twinkle" plus digital artifacts.
originally posted by: nothingwrong
reply to post by H1ght3chHippie
No, not at all. I am saying that a tiny white dot in the sky is a pointless photo to post here, as it tells us nothing. If after all the processing I still had a small white circle I would have been very sure it was not an aircraft as I have done everything possible to get a good picture.
Here is another tiny white dot I saw in the sky some years ago:
This picture was taken on the same camera, with the same lens, and processed in the same way on the same computer. With the naked eye both were just a tiny white dot in the sky. After proper photography and processing I got 2 very different results.
For the record, we decided this was a weather balloon. But only because of the quality of the photography.
So yea - I guess to a point I am saying that it is pointless using a camera phone to photograph a small white dot, as we can not learn anything from it.
originally posted by: antar
I have been observing it too, our local news station told us that it is the ISS.
originally posted by: PhoenixOD
I love the way that just because something is bright and to far away to see what it is it automatically gets labeled an 'orb'. Because 'Orb' sounds more alien-ish.
Just using the word in the label of a video shows upfront the poster is prepared to jump to conclusions or has an agenda.
The term orb describes unexpected, typically circular artifacts that occur in flash photography—sometimes with trails indicating motion
originally posted by: _BoneZ_
originally posted by: antar
I have been observing it too, our local news station told us that it is the ISS.
That's not possible since the ISS circles the Earth at 27,724 kilometres (17,227 mi) per hour, completing 15.7 orbits per day. On average, it takes about 3-5 minutes for the ISS to travel across the sky from horizon to horizon. The object in the video is observed for hours. Therefore, can't be the ISS.