fast ufos in the sky over Niagra falls Canada April 13th, 2010

reply to post by ALLis0NE


the dots in the sky in the vid you provided look like bats.


the dots in the sky in the vid the OP provided do not look like bats.

reply to post by Mathius


You should probably state reasons why you think they don't look the same instead of just typing some random belief and no reason to believe.

I'm pretty sure you didn't even bother going to the link I provided. And didn't download any of the higher definition videos they have that show the same exact thing in the OP's video.

There is no difference. Only the camera type and probably altitude.

The OP's video is really misleading, because of the small size of the bats they look like they are 1000's of feet in the air, but they really are not. The low flying birds that passed by in the begging don't help the illusion either.

-edit add-

Also, you are probably one of those types of people who see things differently when they are told what it is before they view it. You looked at the OP's video not knowing what it is, so upon viewing it, it looked mysterious to you. But when you looked at the videos I posted, the title already tells you they are bats, so you see bats, and nothing mysterious. It's a mental thing.



[edit on 19-4-2010 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by ALLis0NE


the dots in the vids of confirmed bats are consistently travelling in an elliptical pattern

the dots in the vids of UFOs are consistently travelling in a straight line and making right angle turns

I dont know why everyone is so concentrated on it being bats.

Its hard to tell in the video since he never zooms out, but I see bats almost every evening and they rarely fly that like (altho sometimes yes) but good luck trying to film that, its usually eratic.


Also for some reason UAV's are dismissed and I find this the most logical explanation. The Predator UAV is a fantastic piece of technology, but keep in mind since it is in use today and known to the public, it is completely obsolete. Without the need for a human pilot any modern UAV could EASILY maneuver like this and id imagine the military has a couple hundred of these bad boys flying around at any given moment, and nobody will ever be able to prove it.

people thinking they are aliens is just a nice free cover up

reply to post by Mathius


Thats all?! The only difference is their flight path?

So, with that logic... That means when you look at two identical cars, they look different when one is driving straight, and the other is driving random turns?



Do you realize that bats fly straight, and elliptical, and every which way they dream?

Right angle turns? I just showed you a bat that did a complete perfect reversal (180) in the blink of an eye. Surely a right angle (90) would be a simple task. Especially when there is 100's of videos of bats doing those maneuvers.



[edit on 19-4-2010 by ALLis0NE]

Someone posted this video of the same exact thing.

First there is a satellite, then there is a bat. But on this video you can actually see the bat wings flapping.



[edit on 19-4-2010 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by ALLis0NE


bats will make gradual turns, and coast, bank with the wind and air pressure. at 10,000 feet. an animal requires a huge amount of energy to maintain that altitude; it's impossible for any known animal to fly at those speeds, at that height, for an extended period of time.

A bat has no instinctual need to fly that high, it would take all it'e energy just to get there, and once it's there it certainly wouldn't be darting about like Buzz Lightyear.

bats do not make right angle turns and zig zag at high speed, seemingly immune to the laws of nature.

bottom line is that if if the dots in the OP vid aren't UFOs, they are cgi or some other form of fakery.

Originally posted by Mathius
reply to post by ALLis0NE

 

bats will make gradual turns, and coast, bank with the wind and air pressure.

Don't tell me how bats fly, I have 100 videos of them doing any maneuver they want. They are really fast and can fly in huge formations and swarms. They can turn on a dime.

What you are doing is limiting their flight characteristics to fit your belief. You need to watch more bat videos, especially when they are all returning to their cave, that is when they fly fast and straight.

Originally posted by Mathius
at 10,000 feet. an animal requires a huge amount of energy to maintain that altitude; it's impossible for any known animal to fly at those speeds, at that height, for an extended period of time.

Bats are able to fly 10000 feet. The bats in the OP's video are NOT 10000 feet high. They are probably not even 60 to 80 feet high. Their small size makes it look like they are really up there with the satellites, but they are not even close.

Originally posted by Mathius
A bat has no instinctual need to fly that high, it would take all it'e energy just to get there, and once it's there it certainly wouldn't be darting about like Buzz Lightyear.

Really, no instinctual need to fly that high? Not even HUNGER?

www.jstor.org...

There is a paper about high flying bats chasing their food. So you can mark that misinformation off the list.

Originally posted by Mathius
bats do not make right angle turns and zig zag at high speed, seemingly immune to the laws of nature.

Again, you need to educate yourself on the abilities of these bats. You are very, very, wrong on many levels.

They are not immune to the laws of nature, they are following traditional aerodynamics. I have a remote control helicopter that can fly crazier than the object in the OPs video.

Bats zig zag ALL THE TIME when they are chasing flying moths and other flying insects.

You need to research your own words before you post.

Originally posted by Mathius
bottom line is that if if the dots in the OP vid aren't UFOs, they are cgi or some other form of fakery.

LOL, sure. Ive seen these bats fly like this with my own eyes. I live next to a park and see it all the time in moon lit nights. If the OP would have had a better microphone and didn't add music, he could probably hear the bat calls.

Anyway, I already know what you are going to say now, so there is no reason for me to continue talking to you. If you go from UFO to FAKE, and don't stop in the middle, I guess you have a lot to learn and there is no way for someone to teach you. You learn the hard way.

good day.


[edit on 19-4-2010 by ALLis0NE]

www.jstor.org...

Quote from the source:

Increasing evidence shows that many species of bats actively forage for insects at altitudes of 100-3000m.

Recording of "feeding buzzes", the high pulse-repetition rates associated with attacks on insects, by bat detectors sent aloft on helium-filled kite balloons, confirm that bats were actively pursuing insects at altitudes of 300-800m.

Bats with high-aspect-ratio wings and high wing loading usually are considered to be species that fly high and fast.

Further more, these bats, usually species in the Molossidae or Emballonuridae, typically produce long, narrow-band echolocation calls dominated by lower frequency components. this combination of characteristics makes them well suited to flying in open areas, such as at higher altitudes, where there is less clutter (echoes from other than the target of interest).

Neat stuff... They call those movements you see in the OP's video "feeding buzzes".

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
That's Venus, which is a planet and not a star. A star looks like a pinpoint even from very good backyard telescopes...

So are you saying there will be no increase in angular size with magnification under any circumstance? I will agree with you that stars will remain pinpoint sources with little magnification.

don't dismiss me like i'm some insect that you don't feel like preying on any more.

while I agree that you know more than bats than I do, I don't agree that the OP vids are bats; especially when you compare the vid to all of the ones you have provided INCLUDING the most recent one. in the Aug 09 vid, you can tell almost right away it's not a UFO, not just be the flapping of the wings, but by the way it's darting about.

in the OP vid the dots travel at extreme speed in a perfect staight line. sudden STOPS in midair, and right angle turns with unnatural acceleration... come on. look at the vid again.

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
What you are doing is limiting their flight characteristics to fit your belief.

You are doing the same thing.

You need to watch more bat videos, especially when they are all returning to their cave, that is when they fly fast and straight.

Well then, shouldn't it be easy to replicate this footage?

Bats are able to fly 10000 feet. The bats in the OP's video are NOT 10000 feet high. They are probably not even 60 to 80 feet high. Their small size makes it look like they are really up there with the satellites, but they are not even close.

Since altitudes have not been quantified, how do you "know" this? Did you do the calculations?

I already noted some pages back that certain species of bats can go rather high. This does not prove that these bats are out there at that location at this time of year. Nor does it prove that this is what the video shows, at best it makes the proposition more tenable.

In short, I see lots of supposition, arguments by proclamation.

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Someone posted this video of the same exact thing.

First there is a satellite, then there is a bat. But on this video you can actually see the bat wings flapping.

The OP's video is much clearer than this one, yet you can see wings flapping in this? You must have superman vision!

You've lost me here. You link to a supposed video of a UFO which you claim is a bat therefore the other video also shows a bat.

While I would not dismiss - and it may even be true - that the object is some flying animal, perhaps even a bat hunting, the evidence presented in support of that explanation is abysmal.

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
www.jstor.org...

Neat stuff... They call those movements you see in the OP's video "feeding buzzes".

I think what your referring to as feeding buzzes are echolocation calls and not movements. I could say you are spreading fallacies like you did me but I won't. You misinterpreted what you read. That's ok.

reply to post by FlySolo


Oops that was a funny error. I multi-task so much I just make silly mistakes, and admit to them.

I meant to say the movements they are making are attacks on insects, while they are doing feeding buzzes.

Silly me.

I was highlighting the fact they are hunting at high altitudes and attacking insects. Some how I scrambled up words and didn't pay attention.

reply to post by ALLis0NE


That's fine, I knew what you meant. I also can admit when I'm wrong for the record and i would like to reiterate what I said last night before greeneyedleo removed my post. Page 6 I said they fly in swarms during feeding, not because they work together but because it was a feeding area and insects are plenty. Something along those lines. It was also a comment directed to the first bat clip which did show a feeding frenzy and wasn't related to the original OP clip. The thread took on multiple angles and by that time and my comment was now out of context whereas I never claimed they allways fly in swarms.

Moving along...

Originally posted by jclmavg

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
What you are doing is limiting their flight characteristics to fit your belief.

You are doing the same thing.

How am I limiting their flight characteristics? If anything, with the last few videos I have posted I have done nothing but highlight their seemingly unlimited flight characteristics. They are living things and are ace pilots.

Originally posted by jclmavg
Well then, shouldn't it be easy to replicate this footage?

I already posted a video of the same exact thing. This means this object is common.

If you keep expecting an exact matching video, YOU will never accept what it really is. You will just have another video to argue about.

Originally posted by jclmavg
Since altitudes have not been quantified, how do you "know" this? Did you do the calculations?

I already explained that in a previous post, I would like if you went back and reread them.

In a 3D environment (3D Studio Max - Computer Aided Drafting) you could set up a camera, a realistic star dome, and a 3D bat which is the size of an average bat, and set all of that so it is to scale. You can then raise the bat up away from the camera until the size of the bat matches the size of the object in the OP's video. You can compare the size of the object to the stars and make sure it all matches the video. Once it all matches, the distance from the camera to the bat in the 3D environment will be to scale, and will tell you the approximate distance in real life.

You can even go further and set up custom radiosity lighting which mimics the glow of infrared cameras, which would probably mean I would have to adjust the hight of the bat even higher to adjust for the size of the glowing light.

I can even question the video owner about which camera he has and figure out the specification of the lenses on the camera, and set up custom focal lengths and camera settings in the 3D environment. That will make it even more accurate.

Originally posted by jclmavg
I already noted some pages back that certain species of bats can go rather high. This does not prove that these bats are out there at that location at this time of year. Nor does it prove that this is what the video shows, at best it makes the proposition more tenable.

If you read back, Phage already pointed out that bats are out flying at the time the video was taken.

Also, the only reason I am here and talking is to make the proposition of bats more tenable. I am not here to prove anything other than the fact that bats are more tenable than aliens.


[edit on 19-4-2010 by ALLis0NE]

Originally posted by Mathius
in the OP vid the dots travel at extreme speed

And you know the speed is "extreme" how? The relative motion observed can also be created by a small object at moderate distance travelling a relatively slow speed. Without proof of size or distance covered you can't make any definitive statement about speed, such as "extreme".

It's always mentioned that "debunkers" pull things out of their hat ; "swamp gas" and the like. It's ironic that the ones making that statement do their own hat-pulling.

I've heard these objects have high acceleration and pull "impossible G's".
Without knowing actual size, mass, velocity, and distance covered, any estimates of acceleration and G forces generated are worthless.

[edit on 4/19/2010 by eaglewingz]

He replied to someone complaining about the music added with this:
"I put them up with nothing and it's freaking boring to me."

You capture what you consider a UFO and you find the footage boring without music....hmmm interesting.

As for Bats:
Bats breed early April in Canada.
"no insects in cold weather". Wrong, moth's. They vibrate their body until they reach the required temperature for flight. Their flying maintains that temperature.

"can't track fast bats/birds". You are thinking about how you see them close. The further away a fast moving object is, the easier it is to track.

"too high"
Bats have been recorded by balloon radar at heights up to 10,000 metres.
Not that this really matters in this case as there is no way to know how high the objects in the video are.

reply to post by eaglewingz


with no accurate measure of distance, we can only "guess" from what we see in the vid. I wonder if in this case, a Laser Range Finder, or some similar piece of technology, would be able to detect with any accuracy.

I'm arguing that they are UFOs / IFOs, so i'm going to guess that they are extremely far away ie. +10000 feet.

those that are agruing they are not UFOs are going to guess they are not so far away. ie. -10000 feet. one "for the bats" poster has said those objects could be as close as 60 to 80 feet away.

we do what we can to evaluate the vid, but until (if ever) we get more info about it's origin, all research / commentary will have to be based on "guessing".

I think it's safe to say that as intriguing as this video is, it isn't proof of anything; and simply gets added to the ever growing pile of mystery.