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.
UFO footage; 10:14 pm September 6th, 2015. Warren Michigan
page: 3share:
a reply to: greenday1978
Great video capture and the commentary was right on the mark.
Thanks for a steady hand!
Absolutely beautiful.
No idea what they are or what they're doing up there, but I've seen those types of lights over the years myself and there is no freakin' way they are Chinese Lanterns unless that's a code name for those particular types of lightships.
Thanks for sharing!
Great video capture and the commentary was right on the mark.
Thanks for a steady hand!
Absolutely beautiful.
No idea what they are or what they're doing up there, but I've seen those types of lights over the years myself and there is no freakin' way they are Chinese Lanterns unless that's a code name for those particular types of lightships.
Thanks for sharing!
a reply to: markymint
The same night, in multiple locations, at different times, including Canada, traveling in the same direction as the OP's sighting. Chinese lanterns do not stay lit long enough to be visible over such a span of distance, and in some locations there was no wind to propel them in any direction.
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
There were also multiple sightings the previous night that mirror the OP. I have looked at the sites of every lantern manufacturer I can find, and the longest duration of the flame I saw advertised was up to 20 minutes. They all say the lanterns can travel "several miles" if there is enough wind to propel them. These sightings occurred across multiple states and even into another country. That alone indicates that what the OP (and all of these other people who reported seeing the same thing on the same night) saw could not possibly be something as simple as a fire lantern.
This is why it is a good idea to look for similar sightings and other info before summarily dismissing something as being "fake" based on one video and a preconceived notion. The people in IN and PA and WI and Canada did not simply see a random group of lanterns traveling from state to state...they simply cannot travel those distances before they burn out, even in high winds. Whatever these things are, they are not lanterns. They cannot be identified, therefore they remain UFO's. Simple as that.
The same night, in multiple locations, at different times, including Canada, traveling in the same direction as the OP's sighting. Chinese lanterns do not stay lit long enough to be visible over such a span of distance, and in some locations there was no wind to propel them in any direction.
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
www.nuforc.org...
There were also multiple sightings the previous night that mirror the OP. I have looked at the sites of every lantern manufacturer I can find, and the longest duration of the flame I saw advertised was up to 20 minutes. They all say the lanterns can travel "several miles" if there is enough wind to propel them. These sightings occurred across multiple states and even into another country. That alone indicates that what the OP (and all of these other people who reported seeing the same thing on the same night) saw could not possibly be something as simple as a fire lantern.
This is why it is a good idea to look for similar sightings and other info before summarily dismissing something as being "fake" based on one video and a preconceived notion. The people in IN and PA and WI and Canada did not simply see a random group of lanterns traveling from state to state...they simply cannot travel those distances before they burn out, even in high winds. Whatever these things are, they are not lanterns. They cannot be identified, therefore they remain UFO's. Simple as that.
a reply to: tigertatzen
Why do YOU think those sightings are connected that is laughable to say the least, they may not be lanterns on the OP video they could be aircraft.
Did you look at the reports different numbers of lights different colours and not same direction as you claim.
That's the reason why possible ufo reports are better with more info ie approx location direction facing equipment settings etc
Lets have a look at one of you linked reports.
First the person says this.
It was hard to tell its altitude – I believe it was lower in altitude than a plane would normally fly.
Then this
I was facing south looking at the light over the lake. There was plane flying below it traveling east.
Also just because there is NO wind at the observers height doesn't mean there is no wind at the objects height
Why do YOU think those sightings are connected that is laughable to say the least, they may not be lanterns on the OP video they could be aircraft.
Did you look at the reports different numbers of lights different colours and not same direction as you claim.
That's the reason why possible ufo reports are better with more info ie approx location direction facing equipment settings etc
Lets have a look at one of you linked reports.
First the person says this.
It was hard to tell its altitude – I believe it was lower in altitude than a plane would normally fly.
Then this
I was facing south looking at the light over the lake. There was plane flying below it traveling east.
Also just because there is NO wind at the observers height doesn't mean there is no wind at the objects height
a reply to: tigertatzen
Yes and?
Maybe you should have directed this to the OP,
They were making claims about top speeds of lanterns and the lights being considerably faster.
I personally think he taped planes, that's exactly what the lights looked like in my opinion.
That last part is very important; lanterns are not going to travel faster than the wind velocity...they're not self-propelled like a drone or something.
Yes and?
Maybe you should have directed this to the OP,
They were making claims about top speeds of lanterns and the lights being considerably faster.
I personally think he taped planes, that's exactly what the lights looked like in my opinion.
edit on 30209America/ChicagoSun, 27 Sep 2015 21:20:19 -050030pm30269America/Chicago by tigertatzen because: double post
a reply to: wmd_2008
a reply to: wmd_2008
You cherry-picked something that had absolutely zero bearing on my post, taken entirely out of its original context, to make a lame argument that is completely unrelated to the post you're replying to, and you call my theory "laughable"? Really now? That's cute.
1) The links I posted described the lights as "red" or "orange" or "reddish/orange", same as the OP, and there is a distinct pattern. By looking at the sighting times reported, it seems that the lights were seen in NY, then turned down to the SE to PA, then turned again to the W through OH and IA, then turned N and continued up through MI into Canada. I believe that the Canada report time was listed as 0030 on 9/6 in error, and it was actually 0030 on 9/7, a common mistake due to forgetting that after midnight it is actually the following day's date. Here they are, in order:
In NY, 0002, E of the OP, EDT:
In PA, 2030, SE of the OP, EDT:
In PA, 2040, SE of the OP:
In OH, 2049, SE of the OP, EDT:
In Indiana, 2150, SE of the OP, EDT:
Then the OP, in MI, 2212, EDT
In Canada, 0030, NW of the OP, EDT:
That is a clear, discernible pattern and NUFORC states that reports of orange/red/yellow lights in the sky have continued to pour in.
www.nuforc.org...
I don't know if you're aware of this, but many areas in the US do not use the same color identification. For example, school buses are canary yellow, but most everyone here says they're "orange", while things that actually are orange are often described as being "yellow". In other areas, the color of dark orange is often referred to as "red". So for that reason, I included the reports that stated the lights were either red, orange or red-orange.
2) What does the altitude have to do with it? We have already established that sky lanterns can rise well over 1000ft into the air. I myself posted a link from a manufacturer that clearly states it. The altitude is irrelevant to me, and I have not addressed it whatsoever, so I cannot fathom why you would even bring that up as any kind of a point for argument. True to form, you are reaching for anything you can remove from context simply to argue with me and utterly disregarding every salient point I made in the process.
My post was referring to the descriptions of what was observed, on the same night in multiple locations, and specifically that no sky lanterns can burn long enough to be visible across multiple states...they simply do not stay lit that long, and even if there are winds strong enough to propel them such a vast distance, their velocity is only going to be as high as the wind speed that propels them. Unless you are asserting that wind speed that night was high enough to propel lanterns not only across multiple states, but propel them that far within mere minutes whilst the lanterns somehow magically stayed alight the entire time, your argument is completely irrelevant to what I said. Try again...you're slipping.
3) What point are you trying to make regarding the wind speed at "the observer's height" exactly? I am not talking about that. I am referring to wind speed at the object's height...why would the observer's height factor in at all with something that is nowhere near the observer? That would be rather silly, would it not, since the objects are obviously up in the air? But since you mentioned altitude, it does play a part because surface friction extends quite high up into the air...usually 1500-2000ft up, so they'd have to be pretty far up there to escape being affected by surface wind conditions and temperatures.
4) Not sure what the number of lights has to do with anything, either. If they actually were paper lanterns, it would be highly unlikely that the same number would be seen...unless you're asserting that all paper lanterns move in exactly the same direction at exactly the same velocity and burn out at precisely the same time, every single time. Once again, by pointing that out, you are hurting your own argument rather than supporting it.
5) Are they lanterns or are they aircraft? Make up your mind. Aircraft are prohibited from flying lower than 1000ft over populated areas, and multiple craft flying that low would certainly raise some alarms, which did not happen. At 1000ft paper lanterns will be affected by surface friction and lower temperatures and it will slow their velocity. So which is it? You cannot have your cake and eat it too; pick one or the other.
The connection is: similar descriptions of the shape, color and behavior of the objects, the sightings in several cases were within minutes of each other, on the same date, at night, and several of the sightings reported the objects moving in the same direction. Why you find such blatant, distinct parallels "laughable" is beyond me, but the connection is definitely there. I don't know what those are, but I know what they are not, and that is paper sky lanterns.
ETA: Thank you Don'tTreadOnMe for your help!!
a reply to: wmd_2008
a reply to: tigertatzen
Why do YOU think those sightings are connected that is laughable to say the least, they may not be lanterns on the OP video they could be aircraft.
You cherry-picked something that had absolutely zero bearing on my post, taken entirely out of its original context, to make a lame argument that is completely unrelated to the post you're replying to, and you call my theory "laughable"? Really now? That's cute.
1) The links I posted described the lights as "red" or "orange" or "reddish/orange", same as the OP, and there is a distinct pattern. By looking at the sighting times reported, it seems that the lights were seen in NY, then turned down to the SE to PA, then turned again to the W through OH and IA, then turned N and continued up through MI into Canada. I believe that the Canada report time was listed as 0030 on 9/6 in error, and it was actually 0030 on 9/7, a common mistake due to forgetting that after midnight it is actually the following day's date. Here they are, in order:
In NY, 0002, E of the OP, EDT:
Bright orangish-red light silently moving slowly over lake.
At approximately 12:02 am, Sunday, September 6, 2015, I was driving west on New York State Route 374 between Dannemora and Lyon Mountain. In the hamlet of Chazy Lake, I noticed a bright orange-reddish (more orange than red) light in the sky over the lake.
In PA, 2030, SE of the OP, EDT:
An orangeish-red hovering light appeared, disappeared, reappeared, then faded away into the sky.
I was driving in my car and as I was moving toward the south I noticed an orangeish-red light in the sky. There were several stars visible already, and this was quite a bit larger. .
In PA, 2040, SE of the OP:
What I saw seemed like a small ball of gas rolling across the sky. It was orange and larger than a star. It was about an 8th of the size of the full moon. It appeared to flicker. It seemed like a ball of gas burning and seemed to roll.
In OH, 2049, SE of the OP, EDT:
Orange/red lights in sky traveling Northwest
At dusk, while outside there was an orange/red light in the sky traveling in a northwest direction. Once the light was directly west of my location it disappeared. Then a few minutes later same/another light showed up in the same area/directions of the first.
In Indiana, 2150, SE of the OP, EDT:
Red lights in 2 different groups..first 4..then 3 more..raising up from low altitude in east Elkhart..heading north from prox sr20 @credit 17 area. Red lights. These disappeared quickly as well. We were viewing from boat on the St. Joseparate River.
Then the OP, in MI, 2212, EDT
In Canada, 0030, NW of the OP, EDT:
Three of us were sitting on the front porch. We were talking about the satellites and it appeared North west and was continuing North. It was silent and bright orange light.
That is a clear, discernible pattern and NUFORC states that reports of orange/red/yellow lights in the sky have continued to pour in.
www.nuforc.org...
I don't know if you're aware of this, but many areas in the US do not use the same color identification. For example, school buses are canary yellow, but most everyone here says they're "orange", while things that actually are orange are often described as being "yellow". In other areas, the color of dark orange is often referred to as "red". So for that reason, I included the reports that stated the lights were either red, orange or red-orange.
2) What does the altitude have to do with it? We have already established that sky lanterns can rise well over 1000ft into the air. I myself posted a link from a manufacturer that clearly states it. The altitude is irrelevant to me, and I have not addressed it whatsoever, so I cannot fathom why you would even bring that up as any kind of a point for argument. True to form, you are reaching for anything you can remove from context simply to argue with me and utterly disregarding every salient point I made in the process.
My post was referring to the descriptions of what was observed, on the same night in multiple locations, and specifically that no sky lanterns can burn long enough to be visible across multiple states...they simply do not stay lit that long, and even if there are winds strong enough to propel them such a vast distance, their velocity is only going to be as high as the wind speed that propels them. Unless you are asserting that wind speed that night was high enough to propel lanterns not only across multiple states, but propel them that far within mere minutes whilst the lanterns somehow magically stayed alight the entire time, your argument is completely irrelevant to what I said. Try again...you're slipping.
3) What point are you trying to make regarding the wind speed at "the observer's height" exactly? I am not talking about that. I am referring to wind speed at the object's height...why would the observer's height factor in at all with something that is nowhere near the observer? That would be rather silly, would it not, since the objects are obviously up in the air? But since you mentioned altitude, it does play a part because surface friction extends quite high up into the air...usually 1500-2000ft up, so they'd have to be pretty far up there to escape being affected by surface wind conditions and temperatures.
4) Not sure what the number of lights has to do with anything, either. If they actually were paper lanterns, it would be highly unlikely that the same number would be seen...unless you're asserting that all paper lanterns move in exactly the same direction at exactly the same velocity and burn out at precisely the same time, every single time. Once again, by pointing that out, you are hurting your own argument rather than supporting it.
5) Are they lanterns or are they aircraft? Make up your mind. Aircraft are prohibited from flying lower than 1000ft over populated areas, and multiple craft flying that low would certainly raise some alarms, which did not happen. At 1000ft paper lanterns will be affected by surface friction and lower temperatures and it will slow their velocity. So which is it? You cannot have your cake and eat it too; pick one or the other.
The connection is: similar descriptions of the shape, color and behavior of the objects, the sightings in several cases were within minutes of each other, on the same date, at night, and several of the sightings reported the objects moving in the same direction. Why you find such blatant, distinct parallels "laughable" is beyond me, but the connection is definitely there. I don't know what those are, but I know what they are not, and that is paper sky lanterns.
ETA: Thank you Don'tTreadOnMe for your help!!
edit on 30219America/ChicagoSun, 27 Sep 2015 21:21:54 -050030pm30269America/Chicago by tigertatzen because: (no reason
given)
edit on 30249America/ChicagoSun, 27 Sep 2015 21:24:40 -050030pm30269America/Chicago by tigertatzen because: (no reason
given)
edit on Sun Sep 27 2015 by DontTreadOnMe because: fixed quote tag
edit on 300710America/ChicagoSun, 27 Sep 2015
22:07:13 -050030pm30269America/Chicago by tigertatzen because: eta
a reply to: InhaleExhale
I directed it at you because you asked the question:
Yes and?
Maybe you should have directed this to the OP,
They were making claims about top speeds of lanterns and the lights being considerably faster.
I directed it at you because you asked the question:
How fast can a lantern travel?
a reply to: tigertatzen
Seriously DO YOU thinks those lights on the reports are the same objects that seems to be what you are claiming?
One of the reports was from Amelia OH,
There seems to be a major airport 25 miles approx from them .
Or this one sounds like a LANTERN to me
Or how about this on your second last link
Some of those reports mention taking pictures/video any links to those ?
As for the 1000ft aircraft limit over a built up area that would depend on the LOCATION of the airport they fly in and out of wouldn't it.
In the OP, if an approx location & direction was given that could be compared with local airports/flight paths.
As for my comment re wind.
Seriously DO YOU thinks those lights on the reports are the same objects that seems to be what you are claiming?
One of the reports was from Amelia OH,
At dusk, while outside there was an orange/red light in the sky traveling in a northwest direction. Once the light was directly west of my location it disappeared. Then a few minutes later same/another light showed up in the same area/directions of the first. This reoccurred estimated 6 times for the next 30 minutes. I went from my back yard to the front and attempted to capture the object on my phone.
I was able to capture it in photo and video.
There seems to be a major airport 25 miles approx from them .
Or this one sounds like a LANTERN to me
What I saw seemed like a small ball of gas rolling across the sky. It was orange and larger than a star. It was about an 8th of the size of the full moon. It appeared to flicker
Or how about this on your second last link
Occurred : 9/6/2015 00:02 (Entered as : 09/06/2015 0:02) Reported: 9/5/2015 10:35:49 PM 22:35
Some of those reports mention taking pictures/video any links to those ?
As for the 1000ft aircraft limit over a built up area that would depend on the LOCATION of the airport they fly in and out of wouldn't it.
In the OP, if an approx location & direction was given that could be compared with local airports/flight paths.
As for my comment re wind.
originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: markymint
The same night, in multiple locations, at different times, including Canada, traveling in the same direction as the OP's sighting. Chinese lanterns do not stay lit long enough to be visible over such a span of distance, and in some locations there was no wind to propel them in any direction
edit on 27-9-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)
a reply to: wmd_2008
I would say the fact that I took the time to map out the sightings and present them on the thread makes the answer to that question pretty self-explanatory.
There are airports all over the world, so what's your point?
I already linked you the NUFORC page, as well as a detailed chronology of events. You can look up picture/video links all by yourself...I promise, it's not hard. I will not feed you more info just so you can argue over whatever little nitpicky thing you are able to find, which you seem to be running out of as evidenced by this dead horse you continue to beat.
No, the FAA most certainly does not care what airport the aircraft come from. That is irrelevant. It is prohibited to fly below 1000ft over a densely populated area, no matter what airport you fly in and out of. Warren, MI has a population of over 130,000 people. Also, the requirements for VFR at night in the US are that the pilot has undergone training for night VFR and that he or she has performed three night landings within a period of the past ninety days prior, and VFR has to be cleared by the tower. You were the one who suggested the OP was possibly filming aircraft:
I simply told you why that is highly unlikely...they were obviously not taking off or landing, so they would be violating federal law as well as magically having the ability to float, if they were indeed aircraft. Additionally, aircraft do not have red/orange lights inside them, nor do they pulse or flicker.
If they were aircraft, as you suggested yourself, they would have had to have possessed the ability to hover and move in any direction and had red-orange lights, and we would have seen the nav lights and strobes, none of which are red-orange in color nor light up the inside of the aircraft like a candle inside a jack-o-lantern, flickering and pulsing. Like I said, make up your mind. They could be many things, but they are not many things all at once.
Why on Earth would you think the airport would matter one whit? Some of the ridiculous things you say are simply mind-boggling....but I suspect that you've already been apprised of that, and probably more than a few times.
And it would mean absolutely nothing, because they were not on a flight path. They also were not taking off or landing, which would have been the only reason an aircraft would be flying low over a populated area, especially at night, because pilot visibility would be significantly compromised, posing a danger to whoever was aboard the flight. That is also the reason for the minimum safe altitude...if they fly too low, they can hit something if they fail to see it.
I have already addressed the wind issue in great detail. If you were not trying so hard to find obscure points to challenge what I'm saying in the absence of anything else, you would have seen that.
Unless the objects were 2000 feet or more up in the air and not self-propelled, they would still have been influenced by surface winds, which in several of the reported locations were next to non-existent. That information is also available if you care to look it up. If they really were sky lanterns and they were higher than 2k feet, they'd be subject to whatever wind activity was going on up there at the time, but they still would not be able to travel more than a few miles before they burned out and became nothing more than windblown debris, like a paper bag, because what makes them rise into the air in the first place is their fuel cell being lit.
And finally, this:
NUFORC is located in Seattle, WA, which is PDT. It is three hours behind EDT which is where the sighting occurred. It still would have been 9/5 in WA at the time the report was filed from New York. The witness clearly states that the sighting occurred on Sunday, September 6, 2015. What...did you think because it had the previous day's date as the reporting date that the witness somehow traveled back in time or something? Stop reaching for something to argue about, and you might learn something. This is an extremely annoying habit you have, and it is becoming tiresome.
Seriously DO YOU thinks those lights on the reports are the same objects that seems to be what you are claiming?
I would say the fact that I took the time to map out the sightings and present them on the thread makes the answer to that question pretty self-explanatory.
There are airports all over the world, so what's your point?
Some of those reports mention taking pictures/video any links to those ?
As for the 1000ft aircraft limit over a built up area that would depend on the LOCATION of the airport they fly in and out of wouldn't it.
I already linked you the NUFORC page, as well as a detailed chronology of events. You can look up picture/video links all by yourself...I promise, it's not hard. I will not feed you more info just so you can argue over whatever little nitpicky thing you are able to find, which you seem to be running out of as evidenced by this dead horse you continue to beat.
As for the 1000ft aircraft limit over a built up area that would depend on the LOCATION of the airport they fly in and out of wouldn't it.
No, the FAA most certainly does not care what airport the aircraft come from. That is irrelevant. It is prohibited to fly below 1000ft over a densely populated area, no matter what airport you fly in and out of. Warren, MI has a population of over 130,000 people. Also, the requirements for VFR at night in the US are that the pilot has undergone training for night VFR and that he or she has performed three night landings within a period of the past ninety days prior, and VFR has to be cleared by the tower. You were the one who suggested the OP was possibly filming aircraft:
Why do YOU think those sightings are connected that is laughable to say the least, they may not be lanterns on the OP video they could be aircraft.
I simply told you why that is highly unlikely...they were obviously not taking off or landing, so they would be violating federal law as well as magically having the ability to float, if they were indeed aircraft. Additionally, aircraft do not have red/orange lights inside them, nor do they pulse or flicker.
If they were aircraft, as you suggested yourself, they would have had to have possessed the ability to hover and move in any direction and had red-orange lights, and we would have seen the nav lights and strobes, none of which are red-orange in color nor light up the inside of the aircraft like a candle inside a jack-o-lantern, flickering and pulsing. Like I said, make up your mind. They could be many things, but they are not many things all at once.
Why on Earth would you think the airport would matter one whit? Some of the ridiculous things you say are simply mind-boggling....but I suspect that you've already been apprised of that, and probably more than a few times.
In the OP, if an approx location & direction was given that could be compared with local airports/flight paths.
And it would mean absolutely nothing, because they were not on a flight path. They also were not taking off or landing, which would have been the only reason an aircraft would be flying low over a populated area, especially at night, because pilot visibility would be significantly compromised, posing a danger to whoever was aboard the flight. That is also the reason for the minimum safe altitude...if they fly too low, they can hit something if they fail to see it.
As for my comment re wind.
originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: markymint
The same night, in multiple locations, at different times, including Canada, traveling in the same direction as the OP's sighting. Chinese lanterns do not stay lit long enough to be visible over such a span of distance, and in some locations there was no wind to propel them in any direction
I have already addressed the wind issue in great detail. If you were not trying so hard to find obscure points to challenge what I'm saying in the absence of anything else, you would have seen that.
Unless the objects were 2000 feet or more up in the air and not self-propelled, they would still have been influenced by surface winds, which in several of the reported locations were next to non-existent. That information is also available if you care to look it up. If they really were sky lanterns and they were higher than 2k feet, they'd be subject to whatever wind activity was going on up there at the time, but they still would not be able to travel more than a few miles before they burned out and became nothing more than windblown debris, like a paper bag, because what makes them rise into the air in the first place is their fuel cell being lit.
And finally, this:
Or how about this on your second last link
Occurred : 9/6/2015 00:02 (Entered as : 09/06/2015 0:02)
Reported: 9/5/2015 10:35:49 PM 22:35
Posted: 9/11/2015
Location: Chazy Lake, NY
Shape: Light
Duration:5 minutes
Bright orangish-red light silently moving slowly over lake.
At approximately 12:02 am, Sunday, September 6, 2015, I was driving west on New York State Route 374 between Dannemora and Lyon Mountain. In the hamlet of Chazy Lake, I noticed a bright orange-reddish (more orange than red) light in the sky over the lake. It caught my eye because I’ve never seen anything that color in the sky before. It was hard to tell its altitude – I believe it was lower in altitude than a plane would normally fly. The brightness of the light was around the magnitude of the planet Venus. It was the brightest light/object in the sky. The night sky was crystal clear and there was no wind.
I pulled off the side of the road where there were no street lights and exited my vehicle to get a better look at the light. I was facing south looking at the light over the lake. There was plane flying below it traveling east and another plane farther to the west of the light flying south. Once the planes were out of view, I listened and could hear no sound coming from the light.
I watched it for a few minutes to see if it was actually moving. It was moving – very slowly – to the east. I could tell it was moving because I compared its position to the trees below it. I then got back in my vehicle and drove home.
NUFORC is located in Seattle, WA, which is PDT. It is three hours behind EDT which is where the sighting occurred. It still would have been 9/5 in WA at the time the report was filed from New York. The witness clearly states that the sighting occurred on Sunday, September 6, 2015. What...did you think because it had the previous day's date as the reporting date that the witness somehow traveled back in time or something? Stop reaching for something to argue about, and you might learn something. This is an extremely annoying habit you have, and it is becoming tiresome.
originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: InhaleExhale
Yes and?
Maybe you should have directed this to the OP,
They were making claims about top speeds of lanterns and the lights being considerably faster.
I directed it at you because you asked the question:
How fast can a lantern travel?
I asked OP to expand on their claims by asking that question.
If they would have answered it would have lead to more questions, like what were the conditions like in the area, did they even bother to check, did they check to see what planes might be in the area and if that could be ruled out, etc.
To claim it moved faster than the top speed of a lantern will lead to questioning by readers like myself, not because we don't know the answer to the questions we ask but to see if the ones making claims know what they are talking about.
they seem to think they have something amazing on film, I think its lights in the sky that belong to plane or lanterns.
If the OP makes claims of speed and says you can work it out from the footage then there is nothing more to discuss, another silly lights in the sky thread, yes its unidentified but I am almost certain its nothing out of the ordinary.
Selfridge ANG Base is about 8-10 miles NE of Warren. Typical Guard and Reserve training days are the first weekend of the month. The 127th AW
website shows lots of VIP visitation for Sept., starting with "Members of Congress" the 2nd and later on POTUS the 9th and then "National Leaders" on
the 17th. Obviously, a very busy bit of HIGHLY controlled airspace for the time period. a reply to: greenday1978
edit on 28-9-2015 by cavjafo because: info update
a reply to: tigertatzen
You should write books because you seem to do War & Peace with every reply!
With dots of light at night on a camera phone YOU or the OP cant say how far away they are can YOU!
If aircraft they could be miles in the distance on approach OR just took off hence my comments re flying in or out from an airport as that also seemed to confuse you.
I live within 35 mile radius of 3 major airports, I can see planes coming into land at the nearest which is around 22 miles away, flying in over a city of about 700,000 population and the main approach is over built up areas.
The reports you linked to said red or orange lights also different numbers of lights so it is HIGHLY unlikely all those reports are of the same objects!
One report had all the hallmarks of a lantern ball of light that flickered another all the hallmarks of aircraft approaching taking off from an airport same type of lights same direction over a 30 minute period.
That's why it's IMPORTANT that when people report these things ALL the information possible is required to help solve the puzzle ie equipment,exposure details, approx location,direction facing & accurate time
You should write books because you seem to do War & Peace with every reply!
With dots of light at night on a camera phone YOU or the OP cant say how far away they are can YOU!
If aircraft they could be miles in the distance on approach OR just took off hence my comments re flying in or out from an airport as that also seemed to confuse you.
I live within 35 mile radius of 3 major airports, I can see planes coming into land at the nearest which is around 22 miles away, flying in over a city of about 700,000 population and the main approach is over built up areas.
The reports you linked to said red or orange lights also different numbers of lights so it is HIGHLY unlikely all those reports are of the same objects!
One report had all the hallmarks of a lantern ball of light that flickered another all the hallmarks of aircraft approaching taking off from an airport same type of lights same direction over a 30 minute period.
That's why it's IMPORTANT that when people report these things ALL the information possible is required to help solve the puzzle ie equipment,exposure details, approx location,direction facing & accurate time
a reply to: chaztekno
Whilst I don't disagree, it is virtually impossible to film insects. I'm not brazenly arguing you should - but I do suggest toying with trying to film insects for yourself to understand just how much of an impossibility it is to do so. It would be possible perhaps to film one that's a distance away from the camera, but then being an insect, it would be so small that it wouldn't show up like this. Fastwalkers are verified by hundreds of witnesses, military organizations, trained pilots, radar operators and a bunch of IR videos. It's the one tangible lead we HAVE got.
Whilst I don't disagree, it is virtually impossible to film insects. I'm not brazenly arguing you should - but I do suggest toying with trying to film insects for yourself to understand just how much of an impossibility it is to do so. It would be possible perhaps to film one that's a distance away from the camera, but then being an insect, it would be so small that it wouldn't show up like this. Fastwalkers are verified by hundreds of witnesses, military organizations, trained pilots, radar operators and a bunch of IR videos. It's the one tangible lead we HAVE got.
a reply to: InhaleExhale
Well, I shall be sure in the future to refrain from responding to any more of your questions. I was under the impression that this was still a discussion forum and that we all were free to comment on any other member's posts, but that's cool. I was trying to be helpful because I thought it was a genuine question, and was curious about it myself. My bad.
I asked OP to expand on their claims by asking that question.
If they would have answered it would have lead to more questions, like what were the conditions like in the area, did they even bother to check, did they check to see what planes might be in the area and if that could be ruled out, etc.
To claim it moved faster than the top speed of a lantern will lead to questioning by readers like myself, not because we don't know the answer to the questions we ask but to see if the ones making claims know what they are talking about.
they seem to think they have something amazing on film, I think its lights in the sky that belong to plane or lanterns.
If the OP makes claims of speed and says you can work it out from the footage then there is nothing more to discuss, another silly lights in the sky thread, yes its unidentified but I am almost certain its nothing out of the ordinary.
Well, I shall be sure in the future to refrain from responding to any more of your questions. I was under the impression that this was still a discussion forum and that we all were free to comment on any other member's posts, but that's cool. I was trying to be helpful because I thought it was a genuine question, and was curious about it myself. My bad.
a reply to: wmd_2008
I do write books, so thanks for the endorsement.
I never said I knew how far away they were and neither did the OP. I live in a city with a population of over 4 million people, was married to a military air traffic controller for sixteen years, and happen to know what a plane looks like on approach and departure, so you are wasting your words and my time by trying to argue with me using wiki info you pulled off the internet because you have a problem admitting you might actually be wrong about something.
I am done arguing with you about the reports. It is a waste of my time and energy and I have given you quite enough of that, thank you very much.
a reply to: tigertatzen
You should write books because you seem to do War & Peace with every reply!
With dots of light at night on a camera phone YOU or the OP cant say how far away they are can YOU!
If aircraft they could be miles in the distance on approach OR just took off hence my comments re flying in or out from an airport as that also seemed to confuse you.
I live within 35 mile radius of 3 major airports, I can see planes coming into land at the nearest which is around 22 miles away, flying in over a city of about 700,000 population and the main approach is over built up areas.
The reports you linked to said red or orange lights also different numbers of lights so it is HIGHLY unlikely all those reports are of the same objects!
One report had all the hallmarks of a lantern ball of light that flickered another all the hallmarks of aircraft approaching taking off from an airport same type of lights same direction over a 30 minute period.
That's why it's IMPORTANT that when people report these things ALL the information possible is required to help solve the puzzle ie equipment,exposure details, approx location,direction facing & accurate time
I do write books, so thanks for the endorsement.
I never said I knew how far away they were and neither did the OP. I live in a city with a population of over 4 million people, was married to a military air traffic controller for sixteen years, and happen to know what a plane looks like on approach and departure, so you are wasting your words and my time by trying to argue with me using wiki info you pulled off the internet because you have a problem admitting you might actually be wrong about something.
I am done arguing with you about the reports. It is a waste of my time and energy and I have given you quite enough of that, thank you very much.
a reply to: chaztekno
Or a bat chasing insects.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
Looks and flys like an insect tbf
Or a bat chasing insects.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
a reply to: tigertatzen
How do you judge the speed of something if you don't know how far away it is?
I never said I knew how far away they were and neither did the OP.
How do you judge the speed of something if you don't know how far away it is?
a reply to: Phage
You can't. At best, all I can imagine you could do is take a guess at it. I think the OP posted some kind of calculation early in the thread...or someone did, anyway. What made you ask me that?
ETA: I should have said: You can't, as far as I am aware of. There might be a way but if there is, I don't have that information.
How do you judge the speed of something if you don't know how far away it is?
You can't. At best, all I can imagine you could do is take a guess at it. I think the OP posted some kind of calculation early in the thread...or someone did, anyway. What made you ask me that?
ETA: I should have said: You can't, as far as I am aware of. There might be a way but if there is, I don't have that information.
edit on 30024America/ChicagoTue, 29 Sep 2015 04:02:56 -050030am30271America/Chicago by tigertatzen because: (no reason given)
new topics
-
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games: 1 hours ago -
Does anyone have a link to download apple pay for androids
General Chit Chat: 1 hours ago -
Most INSANE internet rabbit hole
Secret Societies: 2 hours ago -
Joe Rogan conspiracy (maybe)
ATS Skunk Works: 6 hours ago -
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three: 8 hours ago -
Nigel Farage now the Most Favoured UK Politician
Regional Politics: 9 hours ago
top topics
-
Little Johnny and Larry should team up
General Chit Chat: 16 hours ago, 13 flags -
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three: 8 hours ago, 12 flags -
Most INSANE internet rabbit hole
Secret Societies: 2 hours ago, 6 flags -
Nigel Farage now the Most Favoured UK Politician
Regional Politics: 9 hours ago, 4 flags -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three: 16 hours ago, 3 flags -
Joe Rogan conspiracy (maybe)
ATS Skunk Works: 6 hours ago, 3 flags -
Does anyone have a link to download apple pay for androids
General Chit Chat: 1 hours ago, 0 flags -
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games: 1 hours ago, 0 flags
active topics
-
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three • 157 • : KrustyKrab -
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games • 2 • : CriticalStinker -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3359 • : Thoughtful3 -
Elon Says It’s ‘Likely’ He Buys Tanking MSNBC
Political Ideology • 75 • : derfreebie -
President-Elect DONALD TRUMP's 2nd-Term Administration Takes Shape.
Political Ideology • 241 • : WeMustCare -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three • 14 • : DaydreamerX -
Does anyone have a link to download apple pay for androids
General Chit Chat • 6 • : bluemooone44 -
Most INSANE internet rabbit hole
Secret Societies • 2 • : BeyondKnowledge3 -
Nigel Farage now the Most Favoured UK Politician
Regional Politics • 8 • : angelchemuel -
Inca stone masonry at Sacsayhuaman, Ollantaytambo and the Sun Temple
Ancient & Lost Civilizations • 9 • : Astrocometus