UFOs Hover Over Fresno for Four Hours

No, this is a great thread. People are curious at what they are seeing above the skies of Fresno.
Its really sad to think that there are people in this world who think its as simple as a "Parachute" or "Balloon" and then case closed, move on.
This thread has demonstrated a compassion for seeking evidence in what it MAY BE, but in these kinds of cases people tend to forget, how do you prove this UFO is alien in origin? living in a world where world governments deny such things and the mainstream societal view is nothing but crackpots and fringe science, how could one prove their position? You can easily prove its a balloon or parachute, sure. But when the cards are down and the chips at stake and you realize its not a balloon or a parachute, then what else could it be? OMG WELL I DON'T KNOW THEN BUT ITS NOT ALIEN!!11!!11
How can you prove its NOT alien?
Speculation is all we got here, but no HARD EVIDENCE on what it is exactly, I don't see a parachute.
AND the truth is, I too WANT to say its a balloon, but considering the factors involved tell me its not a balloon.
That's the whole point to this. Hear what you want to hear, see what you want to see.
I for one am glad this thread has stayed open for this long, I have heard all kinds of theories on what it can be, this is what ATS is all about. Fight the good fight.
The object above Fresno is a UFO.
Terrestial? unknown
Extra Terrestial? unknown
Deny Ignorance.

Originally posted by SecretKnowledge
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

If it fits where Venus should be, Why cant this be Venus?

wow. just wow.
so it was venus. and it disappeared after 4 hours.
now we have another mystery on our hands.
where's venus disappeared to ??????

Wow, What do you mean? Just wow, do questions always amaze you so much?


Who said it was Venus?

Where does Venus disappear to, well as our planet revolves it will disappear below the horizon wont it?

or it hides in Uranus you asked for it

image enhancement courtesy of member Krokodil:

Originally posted by yourmaker
To me it looks like a parachute caught in something like an updraft?

Hot air rises. If it were high pressure over the area with limited winds it's completely feasible this thing just sat way up there open being pushed up maintaining the parachute in a stationary position.

For 4 hours? Doubt it, sensationalized.

Originally posted by Arnie123
Its really sad to think that there are people in this world who think its as simple as a "Parachute"

Occams' razor, it looks like a parachute.

Or let's play your game, it's an alien.
What is it's operational mandate?
Why remain visibly stationary over Fresno?

Neither answer makes any sense when compared to an unmanned parachute getting caught in "wind" or lack of, due to heating and the contents of the atmosphere, if it were high pressure.

Originally posted by yourmaker

Originally posted by Arnie123
Its really sad to think that there are people in this world who think its as simple as a "Parachute"

Occams' razor, it looks like a parachute.

Or let's play your game, it's an alien.
What is it's operational mandate?
Why remain visibly stationary over Fresno?

Neither answer makes any sense when compared to an unmanned parachute getting caught in "wind" or lack of, due to heating and the contents of the atmosphere, if it were high pressure.

What would be helpful is if you'd provide an instance, perhaps with a video, of an unmanned parachute getting caught in a wind or lack thereof and maintaining inflation and position.

Originally posted by WASTYT

Originally posted by yourmaker

Originally posted by Arnie123
Its really sad to think that there are people in this world who think its as simple as a "Parachute"

Occams' razor, it looks like a parachute.

Or let's play your game, it's an alien.
What is it's operational mandate?
Why remain visibly stationary over Fresno?

Neither answer makes any sense when compared to an unmanned parachute getting caught in "wind" or lack of, due to heating and the contents of the atmosphere, if it were high pressure.

What would be helpful is if you'd provide an instance, perhaps with a video, of an unmanned parachute getting caught in a wind or lack thereof and maintaining inflation and position.

That's pretty much the greatest argument FOR UFO's i've encountered yet. I like it.
I do not have that video because it doesn't exist, which essentially negates my point.

Okay, we remove that equation, and we're left with my previous two questions?
Operational mandate of the craft? Why over Fresno?

Originally posted by yourmaker


That's pretty much the greatest argument FOR UFO's i've encountered yet. I like it.
I do not have that video because it doesn't exist, which essentially negates my point.

Okay, we remove that equation, and we're left with my previous two questions?
Operational mandate of the craft? Why over Fresno?

No. That's not it at all. The easiest way to disprove the UFO theory is to present your evidence beyond your own words. And who cares why it's over Fresno. That's irrelevant. You're just as guilty as the rest of them with your say so arguments. And hiding behind Occam's razor doesn't solve the issue.

At least someone here posted a picture of a parachute or a balloon that could explain what the object is. Problem is there is no indication of a person suspended from the parachute. SO now we have to consider an unmanned one. Except how does an unmanned parachute keep its form steady. Even if it wasn't 4 hours, it could've been suspended there for 1 hour or even 15 minutes. Either way that's a long time for a parachute or even a balloon for that matter to maintain a position.

Go back and watch the 2nd video in the OP. Theres a minute when the camera is put on the tripod aimed right at the object. There was absolutely zero movement laterally. Which may suggest upward movement. This should then do away with the parachute idea.

The cameraman also makes reference on repeated occasions of a 2nd object over head. So you're entire argument rests on not one but 2 lies by this person. One being that it was for 4 hours, and the other being that there was another object... All while he's filming the damn thing...

Good chances this has very terrestrial origins but I get frustrated by lazy debunking...

Originally posted by WASTYT
Theres a minute when the camera is put on the tripod aimed right at the object. There was absolutely zero movement laterally.

That's false. When the camera is on the tripod, you can clearly see lateral movement. He adjusts the camera because of the movement. He even says at least 3 times in the first couple minutes that it's moving.

That DOES look like a weather balloon. But it didn't move? Weird.

what if it was some type of Reflective Moisture build up that occurs as some type of anomaly like a rouge wave we may yet understand.....or it was an alien!!.

Originally posted by bigfootgurl
image enhancement courtesy of member Krokodil:

Special thanks to bigfootgurl for this.

This is the frame from the page 1 video, (news broadcast)
I just did some basic enhancements, brightness/contrast, levels & curves.

Interesting things are seen around the object, outside the light source.
And that is where i always look first, if i want to see what's there.

So what do you see?

first place I would go for answers is the Fresno airport....with this thing up in the air for 4 hours, there should have been all kinds of reports from civilian pilots flying in and around Fresno that day.

For those saying it's not a UFO, you are wrong as the very definition of UFO is "Unidentified Flying Object" and as no one has identified what the hell it is, then for all means and purposes it is actually a UFO.

Ladies and gentlemen, you're looking at a simple parachute:

Weather balloon.......I think so.

If there was a "UFO" in the skies near my home. Best believe i would have every camera related device i could find recording.

I still do believe......just not this one.

Originally posted by yourmaker

Occams' razor,

Oh I just cant stand the Occams razor arguament but suprised it took someone 7 pages to publish it.

It looks to me like those 'ridges' around the vehicle are some form of propulsion system, I have often mused about this. A bit like the miniature tornado's in a Dyson Vaccum Cleaner creating improved suction. The magnetic propulsion engine fires the power through the ridges, depending on maneuvering requirements these ridges and doors open and close and vector.

Its classic and proves my theory.

S+F OP

Originally posted by IamSirDrinksalot

Originally posted by yourmaker

Occams' razor,

Oh I just cant stand the Occams razor arguament but suprised it took someone 7 pages to publish it.

How can you dislike a line of logic based on the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions being selected

What's wrong with that opposed to blind guessing or following mass appeal that it's UFO's?

It's not guaranteed but at least on the right path in comparison to where it could be.

Because it is a line dragged out as a basis for those who dont have an opinion.

Occams razor.....i dont have an opinion.

Why are people bringing up the idea of Photoshopping or sfx.
The news program sent out their own camera man to video it themselves.
Unless someone has figured out how to photoshop the sky than this should not have been brought up as a remote possibility.

The weather man confirmed it is unlikely to be a balloon or parachute because of the wind information he displayed.
unless someone has figured out how to make a balloon or parachute repel the forces of wind and gravity than this too should not have been brought up as a remote possibility.

This is a real puzzler and proberly the most compelling ufo videos ive seen in ages.

when all explanations are exhausted than the simplelest one is the most likely, a craft of some sort, man or exo-man made in origin.

Originally posted by InhaleExhale

Originally posted by occrest
reply to post by crazyewok

 

I saw this thing. I live in Fresno, and my brother and i saw this. Sorry my broke ass does not have a high def camera, or any camera at all for that matter, to get you the pictures you desire.

To OP--- good find. Myself, i am thinking it is a test projection for project blue beam.

Cool.

About what time was this viewed? afternoon, evening?


Roughly what direction in the sky, towards the west?


Was it stationary for that long or was it moving slowly across the sky as some have pointed out?

If it fits where Venus should be, Why cant this be Venus?

It sure looks like it through a cheap telescope or extremely high zoom on a camera.

Sorry it took so long to get back to you.

We noticed the object about 1:30-2:00 pm and watched it for about an hour and a half. During that time, it seemed to drift very slowly from directly over downtown to the ESE. Since we were looking at it with our naked eyes, Venus out of the equation.

As i stated, I am thinking it is/was a holographic projection, but that is just opinion and conjecture.