Can anyone identify this strange celestial body in the sky?

I came across this video and found it intriguing, and it didn't seem to fall within any of the normal categories in which one could quickly place it.

It is not a lens flare, by definition a lens flare is a phenomenon of the lens, thus lens flares will be in front of other objects in the picture/video, and it is easy to see this object is behind the clouds for quite some time.

Taken by the live cam at the S.A.L.T Observatory in South Africa.

I'm not saying its anything, just curious, if this thread makes you angry you should probably seek professional help.

Some have said it is Venus, would Venus ever appear that large from Earth?





S.A.L.T. Observatory, South Africa

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
I came across this video and found it intriguing, and it didn't seem to fall within any of the normal categories in which one could quickly place it.

It is not a lens flare, by definition a lens flare is a phenomenon of the lens, thus lens flares will be in front of other objects in the picture/video, and it is easy to see this object is behind the clouds for quite some time.

Taken by the live cam at the S.A.L.T Observatory in South Africa.

I'm not saying its anything, just curious, if this thread makes you angry you should probably seek professional help.

Some have said it is Venus, would Venus ever appear that large from Earth?

S.A.L.T. Observatory, South Africa

light refraction on the lens

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Shouldn't a lens flare, originating from the lens, be in FRONT of other objects? Isn't that how a lens flare works? How could the clouds be in front of the lens flare?

Here is a typical lens flare, in FRONT of other objects, as you would expect:

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Just curious, what's the black spot in the video where the sun is? Is that a filter?

It's a lens flare.

It's not behind the clouds, where the refraction and the cloud meet it becomes over exposed and is shown as full white. Check out Additive Color, the principle is similar.

ETA: The flares seem to be "in front" in your other picture, due to the dark background.

a reply to: EA006 I think so......or the Sun has melanoma!

Clearly a typical lens flare.

You can quite clearly see the clouds through the flare, not to mention it's the same hue as the main light source.

Yeah, you aren't saying it's anything "PlanetXishere" LOL

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
a reply to: EA006 I think so......or the Sun has melanoma!

Or its an alien portal.

originally posted by: Aarsvin
It's a lens flare.

It's not behind the clouds, where the refraction and the cloud meet it becomes over exposed and is shown as full white. Check out Additive Color, the principle is similar.

ETA: The flares seem to be "in front" in your other picture, due to the dark background.

I don't disagree that what you are describing can happen, but if you watch the video it is clear it is not happening in this case.

There is a second lens flare at the bottom of the video, visible near the end. They're all in line with the sun. The lens flare is not behind the clouds.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

no the object in this case a cloud, can over lap the flare especially with HD and High Quality digital cameras and video recorders

and the example you gave is a darker area behind the flare in the video it is a brite cloud.

originally posted by: Aarsvin
There is a second lens flare at the bottom of the video, visible near the end. They're all in line with the sun. The lens flare is not behind the clouds.

Yes, near the end of the video there is a lens flare, in front of all the other objects as you would expect. That does not make the other object a lens flare, any more than a donkey in a field of horses makes it a horse.

Of course relative to the Sun it is not the Sun and other object that are moving but it is the Earth that is moving relative to those two, and only means whatever the other object it appears to be stationary to the Sun relative to Earth.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Although the sun is not in view of the cameras imager, the suns light is shining directly on the lens itself, thus the refraction.

Heres how that happens. An image to the right "out of sight" is refracted to the left through the lens and appears to the left, just like in the OP pic. Example:

diagram

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Aarsvin
There is a second lens flare at the bottom of the video, visible near the end. They're all in line with the sun. The lens flare is not behind the clouds.

Yes, near the end of the video there is a lens flare, in front of all the other objects as you would expect. That does not make the other object a lens flare, any more than a donkey in a field of horses makes it a horse.

Of course relative to the Sun it is not the Sun and other object that are moving but it is the Earth that is moving relative to those two, and only means whatever the other object it appears to be stationary to the Sun relative to Earth.

Given the footage is from south Africa, i.e the southern hemisphere - is it nibiru ?
Is that your point?

Well..the object doesn't show up until the Suneffects starts to come in frame in the video which would pretty much point it to being exactly what it looks like, lens flare.

PlanetXisntHere

but what if planet x IS a gigantic lens flair
if that sucker gets between the earth and the sun...

If you watch the video, you can discount this being a celestial body out in space for several reasons:

1) The body does not rise up from the horizon, but instead simply "appears" once the sun has reached a certain angle in relation to the camera lens, indicative of a lens artifact.

2) The "body" moves with the sun, but changes "phases" as it does so. This is also indicative of a lens artifact, for if it were truly a celestial body the changing of phases would mean it is either in orbit around the Earth or closer to the sun than the Earth is. If the former were true, then the body would be moving fast enough to not stay in orbit at all about the Earth, and if they latter were true it would be moving to fast to stay in orbit around the sun.

3) Given the apparent size of the object in the video, it would be visible to literally billions of people on the surface, and would certainly of made headlines around the world.

4) The "body" is translucent, you can see the clouds through it.

Where is the rest of the camera's video? Let us see what happens as the sun makes a FULL track across, not have the video just cut out.

originally posted by: Danbones
but what if planet x IS a gigantic lens flair
if that sucker gets between the earth and the sun…

The real danger occurs when peoples minds get between the earth and the sun, causing internet flares, It'll be anarchy…

a reply to: eriktheawful

Thanks Erik, I knew you would have a good take on this.

1. I agree with this point, but this doesn't necessarily indicate that its a lens flare.

2. If this object is Venus, it is obviously closer to the Sun, and I don't understand how you can make that assertion that it would be moving too fast to be in solar orbit? IF we could see Venus or Mercury during the day, isn't that how they would appear?

3. Most of the world will not to be able to view certain objects only seen in the extreme Southern Hemisphere.

4. You have this one backwards, the body is fairly solid, and you can clearly see through the clouds to the object, the object is behind the clouds, contrary to a lens flare.