UFO chases plane in Brazil. Famous actor aboards films everything.

originally posted by: Okeyd57
I was about to post the same thing. How could it be chasing them if they were viewing it in front of the plane ?

I answered that on the previous page.

...the "chasing" and "following" are probably just a translation problem, as what was said was that the light was accompanying the plane, so "following" here is in the sense of "going along with", not "chasing".

originally posted by: Okeyd57

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Frocharocha

Why did they state it was "following them" but the footage is out the front wind screen. It seems fixed in one location during the video, like a star or venus could conceivably be if on a straight line course flying at it. Being a planet or star would also account for not appearing on aircraft or land based radar.

Conveniently fuzzy close ups, too.

These are strikes against the claim, any for it?

I was about to post the same thing. How could it be chasing them if they were viewing it in front of the plane ?

I know, huh? Maybe they first saw Venus behind them and turned around to chase it? I kind of doubt that, though.. Venus wouldn't have fooled pilots. I think he got a ride in the cockpit, happened to film Venus, later spinning a celebrity tale out of it.

originally posted by: intrptr...
.. Venus wouldn't have fooled pilots.....

How many counterexamples to you need to debunk that naïve notion? Start with Barnaul Airport, linked above.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: intrptr...
.. Venus wouldn't have fooled pilots.....

How many counterexamples to you need to debunk that naïve notion? Start with Barnaul Airport, linked above.

It didn't fool me here leastways, neither did I have a problem with which end of the plane is front.

But thanks Jim, 'pilots' should have a reasonable fix on celestial objects pre flight just in case their instruments fail?More situationally aware, I would think.

a reply to: intrptr

I suppose you didn't see my post just above yours, or if you did you decided to ignore it.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Baddogma

I wish my Espanol was existent,

That wouldn't help you at all.

They speak Portuguese in Brazil, not Spanish.

Most people who understand Spanish can understand Portuguese as well. I know, I was fluent in Spanish at one time. Back then I could follow Portuguese and even Italian reasonably well, as long as it was slow. Now I'm slow with Spanish and extra slow with the similars.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: intrptr

I suppose you didn't see my post just above yours, or if you did you decided to ignore it.

Yes I did, thanks. What sprang to mind is do we have a translation of the cockpit conversation? What I read from body english was a sort of tour of the instrument panel. The pilots, when in view were looking at the instruments, pointing at the instruments, not out the windscreen. Only the person operating the camera (our personage I presume), appeared to be interested in the "object" outside the wind screen.

Thats why I made the also presumption the pilots weren't fooled by Venus (in this case), just the "visitor".

That is not a planet or weather pattern. The witnesses are credible and can identify features of the night sky.

It seems some of our egos are getting the best of us.

There are things that we dont understand. This sighting is one of them.

Finally a video taken from an airliner and it's censored by the federation.

Looks sufficiently amorphous and distant that its shape and characteristics are more affected by the mediums through which it's being viewed (window, lens, and any moisture or climatic elements at play) and camera movement than by its actual shape or nature. Even its "shape changing" just looks like any out of focus light source might "change shape" if I re-positioned a camera or even binoculars out of focus slowly against a window. (E.g. I've actually seen lights I couldn't identify through binoculars before that I know only appeared to change shape in response to my movements and the light "bleeding"/"creeping" through the glass.

So while I'm not saying they weren't seeing something, the footage and apparent changing of shape don't tell me much, unfortunately.

The lack of radar confirmation is also disappointing. The most compelling UFO sightings, imho, remain those with multiple witnesses from multiple angles, coupled with radar tracks, and expert analysis which fails to come up with a logical explanation for the speed, maneuvers, etc. This, alas, doesn't qualify as that.

Still, if they saw something, then they saw something. And that makes it a UFO. I'm not saying whether they did or didn't.

Peace.

a reply to: AceWombat04

Yes, the object changing shape seems to coincide with the camera movements. That's the main thing that makes me believe this is just a star or planet.

originally posted by: intrptr
What sprang to mind is do we have a translation of the cockpit conversation?

We do, we even have two versions, one from Thorsen (here) and the other from psyghost (here), the first on page 2 and the second on page 4.

Reading the thread helps.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: intrptr
What sprang to mind is do we have a translation of the cockpit conversation?

We do, we even have two versions, one from Thorsen (here) and the other from psyghost (here), the first on page 2 and the second on page 4.

Reading the thread helps.

Reading whole UFO threads isn't helping me much, these days. But thanks for the direction to those translations, I still say its a hoax, by an actor, with a camera.

The object I saw in the camera view finder, how it 'behaved' and the remarks they made in the audible about it didn't give me pause to reflect any other than celestial phenomenon, probably Venus.

Remember I seen one thingy, It has to obviously violate the laws of physics on some level to even become close to overcoming my experience and objective reasoning. What can't be reasonably eliminated has to take precedent.

It didn't move relative to the camera angle, wasn't seen on radar, variable intensity at night due to clouds, 'sounds like' Venus.

Other tells like "You're going to be famous, haha." lol

originally posted by: AceWombat04
Looks sufficiently amorphous and distant that its shape and characteristics are more affected by the mediums through which it's being viewed (window, lens, and any moisture or climatic elements at play) and camera movement than by its actual shape or nature. Even its "shape changing" just looks like any out of focus light source might "change shape" if I re-positioned a camera or even binoculars out of focus slowly against a window.

Another factor would be pixeliztation.

While the original video was supposedly filmed in HD, the video we see in the OP is at 240P (that's the resolution that the actor uploaded to his Facebook page, and was subsequently used in the YouTube version posted by the OP). The original photographer also seemed to use digital zooming for the tightest zoom shots.

That digital zooming would enlarge the pixel size, so even if the original "blob" was mostly circular, it would dance around multiple pixels as the camera moved, giving the appearance of being geometrically shaped.

originally posted by: intrptr
Reading whole UFO threads isn't helping me much, these days. But thanks for the direction to those translations, I still say its a hoax, by an actor, with a camera.

I wouldn't call it a hoax, as that shows intent to fool other people, but I don't see a thing that makes me think it was any thing special, even if the actor that filmed it says (in his Facebook page) that the light disappeared suddenly, as there are many ways for a light in the sky to disappear suddenly.

Anyway, for those that do not speak the language, here's my version of what they say, added to the video.



Edited to add that it looks like they had just left Rio de Janeiro, as they were just some 100 km from Rio at the start of the video.

a reply to: ArMaP
Thanks, nicely done.

"You can see here that it's not on the radar here"

They'd need a major upgrade on their radar to pick up Venus.

a reply to: MonteSleight

That is not a planet or weather pattern. The witnesses are credible and can identify features of the night sky.

You can be credible and wrong at the same time.

It seems some of our egos are getting the best of us.

Nope just ATS doing what we do.

There are things that we dont understand. This sighting is one of them.

Yes there is, and no this isn't one of them.

a reply to: ArMaP

Thank you so much for making that video with the translation.

I've seen something similar, in daylight, in a bright blue sky. Didnt have a camera and wont even bother trying to explain what I saw.

I guess, this is just one of those things you have to see with your own two eyes.

Not saying it's aliens, but it is something unidentified. And flying.

Oh yay, another blurfo. Stop the press.

a reply to: ArMaP

Reviewing that I have a deeper interest and respect for the cabin crew conversation. Thanks for adding that verbatim translation, it helps a lot. To identify they are indeed all asking about it, it is "morphing" (he describes Movement). it also is clearly out of focus, right at the end it resolves to a finer dot than it appears during most of the video.

That could detract from unintended manipulation, somewhat. it also is a lot steadier than I expect a hand held camera on full zoom to be. Thanks for putting that up, according to the radar display in the cockpit, a close up shows the direction they are heading was, ….?