what the hell..... (pics)

Originally posted by yuefo
...and you didn't see the pixilated leaves surrounding it in the extreme close-up either?

No, not really, it is kind of hard to tell. I even see pixelation around the moon. Maybe we can get someone to mess with it some more in photoshop to show the leaves?

He should have showed something on the ground so we could see where Venus was in relation to the horizon. It does seem to be a bit low in the sky, so maybe it could be a tree right in front of him, or maybe on a hill or mountain further away?

It just doesn't look like a tree to me, maybe it's just an optical effect or something though...

I am curious if anyone has an explanation for the color it shows. I had thought maybe the camera caused the color but the venus closeup seems to lack any. I suppose a light behind an object could account for it.

The evenly spaced gaps make me think if it is a tree it must be something like a palm.

Originally posted by Diplomat
Maybe we can get someone to mess with it some more in photoshop to show the leaves?

Yes please, someone? The best look is at 1:23 or thereabouts. And it's at 1:23 through 1:30 that you can clearly, very clearly, see the movements of leaves and branches. I can't be the only person to see this.

Venus Video

Originally posted by yuefo

Yes please, someone? The best look is at 1:23 or thereabouts. And it's at 1:23 through 1:30 that you can clearly, very clearly, see the movements of leaves and branches. I can't be the only person to see this.

You aren't. This is my working hypothesis as well.

Originally posted by triplesod
Well, I don't think we need worry about them speaking to him. Shearder has said nothing to make us think he is insane

Thanks for that triplesod. I have taken some daytime pics. No street lights, campfires etc.

Originally posted by yuefo

Originally posted by greatlakes
In any case, hope the OP sends us those images daylight this weekend and remains honest about the location and evidence he/she finds as well.

Originally posted by yuefo
So you're saying that, even after Buzzingon's post, you're still on the fence on this one?

Meanwhile the OP is thinking, "thread die, please die, make them stop" lol. I'm basing that on the OP's own words.

Quite the opposite. Why would I want it to go away? This is not a challenge to see f anyone can see trees or street lights, but what it is, is really trying to see if it can be identified - which I believe has been proven it cannot be. But you can make your assumptions – it is a free world.

Originally posted by yuefo
Ordinarily I wouldn't bust someone's chops for making a mistake, but after the OP has had plenty of time to see in the daylight what went wrong, he's still entertaining questions and conjectures about the mystery object--until Spoodily asks for a daylight shot. Then the tone suddenly changes:

Initially he doesn't agree to daylight imaging:

i am placing a link to video and with panning etc there are no trees that were blocking the view as you will also see from the video when zooming in and out and moving around.

The trouble is that he's talking about the nighttime vid. A few posts later:

Where did you find I did not agree to day time imaging? I think you have made your mind up as to what it is or isn’t and that is admirable to say the least. But if you actually read the posts I said I would post after the weekend!!

Please just trust me when i say no trees were in the way.

And 2 days after the original taping we read:

Originally posted by yuefo

Again I questioned whether there is a tree SOMEWHERE but I can guarantee noting was in the way OR it would be seen in the pic where it appears turned.

He's giving us a guarantee there, right? But all is not well, because a few posts later IAttackPeople says:

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
I'm with Spoodily. I'd like to see a daytime photo of where you pointed your cam that night.

Time to discreetly retreat--the OP's next post after IAttackPeople's request surprisingly reads:

Correct. I gave a guarantee that there was no tree in the way. ALSO, I moved to be sure there was no tree in the way. However, there are small trees and in the pics I post any zoom to a slight angle will clear the tops with ease and without using the digital zoom.

Originally posted by yuefo

Originally posted by shearder
Quite honestly i doubt i will take it further. It is really a personal thing to try and figure out what it is/was.

But IAttackPeople asks whether the OP is sure it's not a tree, and he replies:

Absolutely. If you listen to the remark i made (to myself) questioning the possibility of branches so i moved the camera about 20m further away and the second clip i posted today was at the new spot. Same result.

Still not having delivered on the daylight photos, the OP illogically theorizes:

As mentioned, I will post the daytime pics shortly. Keep in mind that there are trees around, as there would be in any good garden or area, but I made sure I was not pointing in the direction where a tree could obscure the view.

It IS a personal thing to find out what it was. In saying I would not take it further must NOT be taken out of context as, if you re-read the post, I will not be posting or sending to newspapers etc. If you know what it is and you feel it is a tree or a campfire then so be it. I won’t dissuade your way of thinking. It’s your opinion.

Originally posted by yuefo

But again, if there was a tree involved would it not block out venus MORE when zoomed out and the object would easy be seen as being obscured by the tree or it would have taken some serious maneuvering to ensure the branches only come into play when fully zoomed in.

And you have to ask why in the world such a suggestion is even being made if there are no obstructing trees to begin with, but nevertheless it's presented again in a subsequent post:

Because there ARE trees in the area and you will see by the daytime pics I did NOT try and hide this fact. Oh I could have just thought “F--- IT” and go to a nice open field. But I didn’t. I am a person of integrity and I do not have control over what you think or others or what you try and make others believe. But you go right ahead – I will not stop you. We are creatures of habit and sometimes it is just too blatant.

Originally posted by yuefo

i think some of the ideas are pretty compelling but campfire it isn't and if it were branches, would it not show MORE when zoomed out and more obstructive to what i was viewing?

Again, why does the OP make this observation if there were no trees in the first place...need I go on? I take no pleasure in embarrassing anyone, but on the other hand, it's kind of egregious to make a mistake and string everyone along with total BS instead of simply coming clean. Honesty shows character and people respect that. Well I'm done.

As I mentioned, there ARE trees but not in the line of sight of what I was filming. So if I say “ok guys, I messed with you all” just so I can care about what you or others think? I am trying to prove that there were no trees in the way, I have assured that there were none and the attempt to enhance the pic I posted to show trees is a grand attempt and if someone sees leaves there then who am I to say they did not see leaves. It’s the same as someone seeing a face in the clouds and saying it is Jesus. You see what you want. I did not post to gain fame or make friends or gain favour. I posted because I DID rule out trees by moving to a different spot. But again, who am I to tell you there were no trees in the way? As the enhanced pic shows, there are leaves so I will leave you to make up your own mind.

Originally posted by shearder
This is not a challenge to see f anyone can see trees or street lights, but what it is, is really trying to see if it can be identified - which I believe has been proven it cannot be.

What are you basing your proof on? I'm missing it.

Originally posted by yuefo

Initially he doesn't agree to daylight imaging:

Where did you find I did not agree to day time imaging? I think you have made your mind up as to what it is or isn’t and that is admirable to say the least. But if you actually read the posts I said I would post after the weekend!!

I said "Initially." Initially you referred him to your nighttime video, did you not? I did indeed read that you were posting after the weekend, but that wasn't my point.

If you know what it is and you feel it is a tree or a campfire then so be it. I won’t dissuade your way of thinking. It’s your opinion.

It's an opinion based on the video you supplied. I don't "feel" it's trees we're seeing, I'm convinced, as you should be.

Oh I could have just thought “F--- IT” and go to a nice open field. But I didn’t. I am a person of integrity and I do not have control over what you think or others or what you try and make others believe.

I think your intention IS to act with integrity. However, like I said before, at some point in this process I think you made a bad decision to not admit the mistake. That probably would have been the next morning when you looked at the camera angle in the daylight. I said nothing about it until 2 days later when you had ample time to identify the mistake and either drop the thread or come clean. You did neither. And even now, you still had the opportunity to be forthcoming.

I have assured that there were none and the attempt to enhance the pic I posted to show trees is a grand attempt and if someone sees leaves there then who am I to say they did not see leaves.

But again, who am I to tell you there were no trees in the way? As the enhanced pic shows, there are leaves so I will leave you to make up your own mind.

That was a "grand attempt"? You don't really believe that, do you? Hopefully we'll get a much better enhancement soon. I'll be curious to hear what you have to say at that time.

I have uploaded daytime pics.

www.savefile.com...

As you can see there are trees, I can hear someof you going "AH HA!!". Well based on the trees that are there and the lights that are there, and the fact that the camera was tilted I will leave it out there for you to make up your own mind. There are no street lights in the area nor large trees that would block the moon etc. As can be clearly seen from the pics, if any zooming was through trees it would be easy to see the leaves from both areas. Also, the object would have had different leaves and would have looked totally different. Perhaps the guys that used Photo Shop to see leaves can also interrogate the pic, i sent before, where the object appeared turned 90* to the left and showed the bluish glow on the left side. Why, if it was leaves or camera anomaly, would th bluish glow not remain in the same position.

Like they say, "can't see the wood for the trees Bob".

Thanks for all the feedback and I will let you all make up your own minds now. I have put myself "out there" and i do not hold anything against anyone. I have shown what i had, my aim, as you will see, if you read the posts again, is not to convince it is a space craft etc but to find out WHAT it is and if some feel they need to stretch that requirement to suite their needs then so be it - I cannot control free will.

Also, if someone U2Us me a mail address I will send the DVD with original footage.

Regards,

Russel (get it?)

Originally posted by yuefo

Originally posted by shearder
But again, who am I to tell you there were no trees in the way? As the enhanced pic shows, there are leaves so I will leave you to make up your own mind.

That was a "grand attempt"? You don't really believe that, do you? Hopefully we'll get a much better enhancement soon. I'll be curious to hear what you have to say at that time.

Nope, i was being sarcastic re. the grand attempt comment. However, yuefo, i DO appreciate what you and others are trying to do and had it not been me posting this then i would have been interested in the outcome. However, as i said i tried to rule out leaves by moving. When i moved the object appeared exactly the same - same tree moved with me?

If it is proven beyond all doubt it is leaves and branches then I will be most surprised and I will apologies and accept the ridicule like a man and then only i will know the truth and that is of no consequence to anyone. However, had i not moved i would have surrendered to the possibility.

Please know, you and others, i hold no ill feelings and as i said, i appreciate what is being done. I did not state what i thought it was and put myself out there to see if i could perhaps find out what it may be. I also believe in these days and times we would not be privy to having the information required to identify anything not normal. Again, if it is leaves, i will not try again to disprove. I will accept the inevitable remarks and move on. I will not live by others ideas and beliefs but i will respect such as a denial of ignorance.

Good of you to take all these extra images shearder. Unfortunatley posting a thread on here about such a siting is going to come under alot of scrutiny in these times of endless hoaxes or technological/visual error and illusion. If you are truthful, hang on in there!

Originally posted by nothingistrivial
Good of you to take all these extra images shearder. Unfortunatley posting a thread on here about such a siting is going to come under alot of scrutiny in these times of endless hoaxes or technological/visual error and illusion. If you are truthful, hang on in there!

Yes you are very right and i have seen that and appreciate the scrutiny. I hope it helps and I am sure something will be found out of place by someone and i will have to, again, find a way to enlighten further. My only problem is time lol - not too much of it with a 4 month old and working the hours i do - but hey, i guess i should be happy i have a time problem in a way

Thanks again for your post nothingistrivial.

Originally posted by shearder
If it is proven beyond all doubt it is leaves and branches then I will be most surprised and I will apologies and accept the ridicule like a man and then only i will know the truth and that is of no consequence to anyone. However, had i not moved i would have surrendered to the possibility.

I admire that you photographed the actual location and went to the trouble of uploading the extra photos. You could have of course photographed a treeless area but you didn't. This illustrates that I was correct in saying you have integrity. I doubt you will have to accept ridicule. I've done far worse.

Btw, you have a lovely place there--I'm envious.

Originally posted by yuefo

Originally posted by shearder
If it is proven beyond all doubt it is leaves and branches then I will be most surprised and I will apologies and accept the ridicule like a man and then only i will know the truth and that is of no consequence to anyone. However, had i not moved i would have surrendered to the possibility.

I admire that you photographed the actual location and went to the trouble of uploading the extra photos. You could have of course photographed a treeless area but you didn't. This illustrates that I was correct in saying you have integrity. I doubt you will have to accept ridicule. I've done far worse.

Btw, you have a lovely place there--I'm envious.

Thanks for that post yuefo - MUCH appreciated. Thanks for the compliment, pity it is winter now but in summer with everything green it is truly beautiful to say the least. I have 8500sq/meters of ground. Really nice in summer to entertain.

I appreciate your vote of confidence re my integrity and I guarantee i will not disappoint as far as that is concerned.

Just some unrelated pics (3) of my place. There is a nice area in pic 48 for star gazing - once again, at the mercy of neighbor flood lights at times.

www.savefile.com...

[edit on 25/6/2007 by shearder]

Hi shearder

I am interested in seeing the raw footage and sharing it with others.

I am pretty new to this forum (a few days) so I haven't made enough posts to private messsages you. (20 are needed)
Anyway I would like to be in contact.
mbrown_music at yahoo com au

Cheers

I have an idea - what i will try tonight is set the camera on super nightshot, this is very intensive on the camera and slows the camera imaging/recording down considerably due to shutter rates etc and whatever else it does, which is understandable, and hopefully Venus is close enough and high enough. I will record at around the same time between 18:30 and 19:30. I will pan around, which will not be clear till the camera comes to rest and then move to the next spot and do the same. I will pan to the lights, trees and horizon and zoom in and out to try and recreate the original. I guess being amature at this the post and replies have taught me what i need to do to be more convincing - so if that is what i have learned through all this, i am a wiser man now if nothing else

[edit on 25/6/2007 by shearder]

Originally posted by shearder
I have an idea - what i will try tonight is set the camera on super nightshot, this is very intensive on the camera and slows the camera imaging/recording down considerably due to shutter rates etc and whatever else it does, which is understandable, and hopefully Venus is close enough and high enough. I will record at around the same time between 18:30 and 19:30. I will pan around, which will not be clear till the camera comes to rest and then move to the next spot and do the same. I will pan to the lights, trees and horizon and zoom in and out to try and recreate the original. I guess being amature at this the post and replies have taught me what i need to do to be more convincing - so if that is what i have learned through all this, i am a wiser man now if nothing else

[edit on 25/6/2007 by shearder]

Excellent idea Shearder! And may I also suggest 2 things... take a flashlight and do as someone suggested and shine up at it (assuming you are able to capture something similar as before) and also setup the camera purposefully pointing at Venus and the moon etc behind a tree (or with partial tree leafs blocking) and film that. Then you can show everyone either A.) the tree leaf theory reproduces the image and is correct or B.) It looks entirely different and the original footage must be something else!

Edit to add: Also try the suggested with whatever settings you used the first time around if possible to re-produce the same results....

[edit on 25-6-2007 by tnt3kgt]

Shearder, thanks for the daytime pics, it helps us help you in finding answers to your strange photo captures

Is there anyway you can re-place the camera in the exact same spot as it was when you first captured these strange pictures, but during the day and take pictures (even if its of the blue sky with nothing in it) to help see if for sure there were no tress blocking your night time view. Maybe even set the camera back in the same spot as it was originally and make a video of the camera zooming in and out exactly how you did at night but only this time in the day so to also see if anything comes in front of the lens?

You seem to have lots of great sky to look at, I am envious, my own back yard has such a limited view of the universe.

Bzzzzzzz

Good honest posting of the daytime images with the trees shearder, your integrity is upheld to the fullest in my book.

As far as the new video test, might I suggest trying to purposely shoot venus through some of the trees, one close to you and one in the distance (that one may be hard). Perform some zooms as well, using nightshot and without...


[edit on 6/25/2007 by greatlakes]

Originally posted by yuefo

So you're saying that, even after Buzzingon's post, you're still on the fence on this one?

Meanwhile the OP is thinking, "thread die, please die, make them stop" lol. I'm basing that on the OP's own words.

Well. Aren't you smug and obnoxious?

By the way, where did the OP say "thread die, please die, make them stop"? You told us you are basing that on his own words, so please direct me.

That stupid laughing smiley face looks so arrogant in your posts, sort it out!

Originally posted by shearder
I have an idea - what i will try tonight ....

[edit on 25/6/2007 by shearder]

Shearder, you are very gracious endulging us with our requests! Thanks for your efforts.