UFO Appears to be Flying Behind the Moon

Thinking further along the lines what of light sources are available, direct sunlight should be incident on the object and that is probably why it blends in with the bright moon and is therefore not visible in the low res. video....

can i ask how you spotted this anomaly?

you shot 14mins of film and this appears at about minute 3 or so. i mean, did you sit down to watch your moon video after you realized there was no eclipse that night?

just curious what the discovery process was here.

Originally posted by C.H.U.D.
Why are you dismissing it as possibly being a meteor or satellite just because it appears elongated?

No. To my mind, it's not elongated enough to make me think it's a meteor. At that level of magnification I feel the UFO is too slow to be a meteor. I also do not think it is bright enough to be a meteor given the obvious overexposure going on. And I think it's a little too convenient that there is symmetrical brightening/dimming as the UFO nears/leaves the moon so I am not convinced this thing is self-luminous.

A run-of-the-mill satellite, lit by the sun, would maintain the same brightness throughout the frame so that's out. I suppose it could be a flaring sat but, again, the odds that the flare would occur right as it passes in front of the moon are too long in my book.

Given the symmetrical luminosity change on either side of the moon I have to attribute the UFO's luminosity to reflected moonlight. Yes, I do think more moonlight will be reflected at the camera as the angle between the object, moon, and camera decreases.

So, adding-up my observations and assumptions I think it's more likely an Earthly critter passed the camera's eye rather than a meteor or satellite.

Just one man's opinion until more input is taken in.


[edit on 22-2-2008 by IAttackPeople]

i'll make 2 assumption here . . . which seem reasonable.

1) the object passes between the moon and the earth, and;

2) the object was illuminated by the sun

so . . . what do we have?

we've got the position of the camera on the earth.

we've got the position of the moon.

we've got the position of the sun.

we've got the point relative to the camera where the object apparently emerged from the edge of the moon.

we've got the point relative to the camera where the object disappeared into the earth's shadow.

we've got the time between the moon's edge and the shadow's edge.

we should be able to project the earth's shadow into space based on the sun's position.

in the high-res file, can we see lunar features at any point during the 14mins? if so, we can fairly accurately plot the track across the moon (and thus plot the track from moon to shadow.

if not, we can assume a level camera and plot the track within an acceptable margin of error.

and we know the altitude range for most satellites. we can use that as our assumed distance.

at that point, we have everything needed to calculate a speed.

if that speed squares up with what we'd expect to see out of a satellite, i think that's the most likely suspect.

and by 'we' i mean someone who wants to bother with the calculation. but it's doable. i think if that speed falls outside of what we'd expect, than this is something pretty odd.

i mean, i think.

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
After seeing the higher-res video...
I do not think it is a:

Asteroid
Meteor
Satellite
Airplane
CGI creation
Reflected light from an external source

If Jose E. saw this, he'd probably call it a "rod". If Jose would call it a "rod" that means it's really a "bug".

That's an interesting conclusion and I wish I could get the Hires stuff to download, but it won't, so I can only base by observations on the original video.

As Devil's Advocate with some knowledge of optics, I'm still concerned about the 'moon'. Does the new video confirm that the large bright lightsource is unequivocally the Moon?
The smaller object which traverses the light appears to me to be illuminated by backlighting from the 'moon'. Notice it fades into view on the right and it fades out of view on the left. This is a perspective effect due to the distance between the 'UFO' and the camera. In other words, it's relatively close, probably a matter of feet, out of focus and not thousands of miles away. The camera sees a fairly narrow cone of light emanating from the 'moon' so the reflection of light from the 'UFO' occurs over very small range either side.
As to what this moving object may be I couldn't guess from the lowres video. It seems unlikely, though possibly a bug or moth flying across the field of view. The time of year tends to make the appearance of an insect questionable, but it's possible.

Originally posted by theyareoutthere
If you are reading this thread late, the reason I was out just filming the moon is because I had the wrong night (Monday the 18th rather than the 20th) for filming the eclipse which I also did on the 20th.

I think from a scientific perspective, it would be useful to see the video you made of the actual eclipse. As Devil's Advocate, I can't understand why the footage you posted doesn't resolve the Moon's surface at any point. If you intended to film the eclipse, wouldn't you have adjusted the exposure accordingly or perhaps attached one of the filters (IR?) you used for your other UFO videos? The Sony camera you used has quite expensive optics and I'm surprised you were happy with the exposure setting, which over-saturated the CCD chip. The image you posted could be a car headlamp for example.

I'd very much like to see the hires video.

WG3

and that technique would also either rule-in or rule-out an object near the camera . . . if the object 'disappears' right where earth's shadow falls, it's pretty slim odds that you're dealing with an object near the camera.

possibly, but slim.

Originally posted by waveguide3
As Devil's Advocate with some knowledge of optics, I'm still concerned about the 'moon'. Does the new video confirm that the large bright lightsource is unequivocally the Moon?

No. Just a bright disk but it is the right shape for the moon two days from full.

Also, we see stars when the cam "slips". And the ambient noise sounds "outsidey".

It seems unlikely, though possibly a bug or moth flying across the field of view. The time of year tends to make the appearance of an insect questionable, but it's possible.

That's a good point. Perhaps theyareoutthere or other Texan can give us info on what is buzzing around this time of year.

As Devil's Advocate with some knowledge of optics, I'm still concerned about the 'moon'. Does the new video confirm that the large bright lightsource is unequivocally the Moon?
The smaller object which traverses the light appears to me to be illuminated by backlighting from the 'moon'. Notice it fades into view on the right and it fades out of view on the left. This is a perspective effect due to the distance between the 'UFO' and the camera. In other words, it's relatively close, probably a matter of feet, out of focus and not thousands of miles away. The camera sees a fairly narrow cone of light emanating from the 'moon' so the reflection of light from the 'UFO' occurs over very small range either side.
As to what this moving object may be I couldn't guess from the lowres video. It seems unlikely, though possibly a bug or moth flying across the field of view. The time of year tends to make the appearance of an insect questionable, but it's possible.

I dont think it is anything that is earthly in origin.
If it had been, close to the lens, it would not have been swallowed up by the moons lumination or going behind the moon , it would probably have been like a shadow passing by.
At this time : 00:2:08.9; i think that is something flying close to the camera.
That looks like a blurred shadow.

I think from a scientific perspective, it would be useful to see the video you made of the actual eclipse. As Devil's Advocate, I can't understand why the footage you posted doesn't resolve the Moon's surface at any point. If you intended to film the eclipse, wouldn't you have adjusted the exposure accordingly or perhaps attached one of the filters (IR?) you used for your other UFO videos? The Sony camera you used has quite expensive optics and I'm surprised you were happy with the exposure setting, which over-saturated the CCD chip. The image you posted could be a car headlamp for example.

Nothing of the moons surface is visible due to digital zoom used instead of optical.
I only thought that the low resolution of the YT vid was because it was cropped down.
But the res isn't much better in the 'high' res video.

As i remember it, the moon was very bright that night, atleast where i live, i couldn't look at it for more than 4-6 secconds, then i had to turn away 'sunglasses' would have been good
Usually you can make out the 'seas' and stuff with your eyes but not this night, it was impossible.

Going back to the 'high-res' video.
As it is, the moon is not exactly shperical in shape, but close enough.
When we see a full moon and it's illumination we can not think the moon to be a flat object, also parts of its sides get illuminated.

When this object gets into the halo of the moon it could very well be on a course that makes it pass the dark side of the moon.
It could also explain why the objects side visible to the camera shows as illuminated.

But to what it is, i have no friggin clue!
If i am not making sense, beat me, who knows it might help

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
No. To my mind, it's not elongated enough to make me think it's a meteor.

Well, by the same token, the shutter-speed/speed of the object can also make the object appear to be less elongated with the right combination, which is why I say the elongation (or lack of it) can't really tell us much about the object, and certainly should not be used to rule out any possibility IMO.

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
I also do not think it is bright enough to be a meteor given the obvious overexposure going on.

Meteors (and satellites for that matter) can exhibit a wide range in brightness, so to say it is not bright enough to be a meteor is not logical IMO. All the moon is doing here is giving us a reference brightness. It's obvious that the object is of negative magnitude, but not close to the brightness of the moon (about -12 mag. at the time).

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
And I think it's a little too convenient that there is symmetrical brightening/dimming as the UFO nears/leaves the moon so I am not convinced this thing is self-luminous.

I agree, it does seem an unusual coincidence that the object happens to brighten/dim where it does, but that does not preclude the possibility of it being a meteor/satellite completely.

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
A run-of-the-mill satellite, lit by the sun, would maintain the same brightness throughout the frame so that's out. I suppose it could be a flaring sat but, again, the odds that the flare would occur right as it passes in front of the moon are too long in my book.

But it could still happen... and is a good deal more lightly than a UFO passing behind the moon!

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
So, adding-up my observations and assumptions I think it's more likely an Earthly critter passed the camera's eye rather than a meteor or satellite.

I don't think it can be a bug. What is the chance of a bug flying in a perfectly straight line? Not even JE's rods do that IIRC! Further more, if it is a bug, why is there no sign of wings? They are always visible in the rod photos from what I recall!

Yes, it might be something closer than a meteor/satellite, but I have serious doubts about it being a bug, and I still think meteor/satellite are significantly more likely possibilities.

-

I've extracted two frames from the original footage and combined them into a single frame, showing the relative distance object has traveled in 4 frames. (Edit: obviously 3 frames - not 4! sorry!!) The frame rate is 29.97 FPS, and we can assume that if it's a meteor it'll be at around 90km above sea level, so if someone would like to plug these numbers in and have a go at estimating the speed of the object, please do so!



Edit for typo


[edit on 22-2-2008 by C.H.U.D.]

[edit on 22-2-2008 by C.H.U.D.]

I appreciate everyone's input on this topic. I'm having a problem with the (long) version, so I will have to wait to see if he posts a shorter version. However, my input will be minimal as I am technically limited in photographic knowledge and this migraine has allowed me only a few minutes at a time on the computer today.

Even after 9 pages of posts, I still don't know where I stand on this. Common sense and reason tells me that this is simply something earthly in front of the moon. But I don't know, part of me still needs more evidence to convince me of that. And for the sake of sounding really ignorant, stranger things have been buzzing aroung Texas lately (ok, I know...).

So anyway, I apologize for not being able to technically add something to this.

I knew that ATS would be the right place for this video.

reply to post by hsur2112


There is now a shortened verson of the video. I cut it down to 4 or so minutes and in doing so Nero lets me make an avi out of it. It is now posted at www.ebesarehere.com... On there you will find a link to it. I will have the long one removed shortly especially since everyone is having a hard time getting it downloaded.

reply to post by SecretGoldfish

I spotted this in my viewfinder which was about a foot in front of me. I was not right up next to the camera and tripod, therefore I had one eye so to speak looking up at the moon wondering when the eclipse was going to start and one eye on the viewfinder so to speak. My one regret is that I was not right at the camera with my fingers on it to zoom in further and move the camera to the left to try and track this thing. Of course it may or may not have made any difference. In the high-res long version I do zoom in further and get the details of the moons surface.


[edit on 22-2-2008 by theyareoutthere]

Originally posted by C.H.U.D.
I did watch the second part of the video - but that says nothing, apart from "information that was not recorded in the first place can not be conjured out of nowhere by a bit of post-processing"

Xcept that the negative version shows that the 'object' goes BEHIND the moon

reply to post by hsur2112


It looks like there are clouds in front of the moon in some of those shots - which would mean the object simply crossed behind the clouds - not the moon. That's my take on it anyhow.

J.

reply to post by IAttackPeople


Bascially there is nothing buzzing around this time of year. There are some birds but not like in the spring and summer. I have not seen any bugs for months. Oh, wait a minute, I did see a fly of all things a couple weeks ago. Does everyone agree that this is not an airplane? I think it is too fast to be an airplane. I believe we are having a ufo flap here in Texas. Down in Stephenville for example. Stephenville is about 75 miles or so south from where I live.

Oh and I did see an orb or ufo the very next day around 4:30 pm which I also posted on youtube. This was seen with my ir filter. I would be glad to post some eclipse footage but not sure where to start on that since I filmed basically the whole thing.

I just noticed something and this may just be my imagination but I believe this object changes it course slightly. When it first appears it is coming at a downward angle and right before it reaches the moon it appears to level off some. Then after coming out on the other side of the moon it appears to be a different angle. Watch it frame by frame if you can and see if I am seeing things.

reply to post by theyareoutthere


It's a LEO. Still downloading high res, but looks to me like a LEO. Bugs aren't visible from the ground, and even then UV or IR film is needed.

reply to post by Matyas

What is a LEO?

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
Given the symmetrical luminosity change on either side of the moon I have to attribute the UFO's luminosity to reflected moonlight. Yes, I do think more moonlight will be reflected at the camera as the angle between the object, moon, and camera decreases.

This is a very good point. I've was thinking of this earlier and trying to do some research on reflectance from lightsources that are relatively far from the an object being illuminated and an observer.

The light source (the Moon) is so far from the object, but the object is relatively close to the observer (camera). As the object moves closer to the camera, its position relative to the Moon does not change (for all intents and purposes). This is like when you drive your car -- the moon seems to 'move with you' because it is so far away. Therefore, the object would have been reflecting moonlight back the whole time, but the camera would not see that reflection until the object was closer to an area between the Moon and the camera. It all has to do with the angle of the Moonlight striking the object being equal to the Moonlight reflecting from the object.

Thus, as IAP said "more moonlight will be reflected at the camera as the angle between the object, moon, and camera decreases."

Here is a sketch I made that hopefully can clarify what I'm trying to say:
(click on it to see the whole thing.)