that would be quite high up where anoxia can mess with your brain just a little bit... or perhaps some local food additive may have helped.
Good photos before you waste too much time on this one...
Mysterious UFOs have returned to a remote region on the Tibetan border, according to sightings by Indian troops stationed in the area. The UFOs, which have been reported for years, are said to have included a strange "robot like" figure seen by Indian scientists in 2004 walking along a mountain valley - which then "rapidly …
A 'strange "robot like" figure' that can become airborne and fly away? I think this explains it:
Yeah, I agree.
Sorry, but if you filmed it and it was vaguely convincing, you could have had it on the news the next night, governmental approval or not.
And if you filmed it but it wasn't convincing, lots of people will laugh at you (have you SEEN the resolution and zoom of a cheapy digital video camera nowadays? It's unbelievable! But you "couldn't zoom in" and we're left staring at a couple of blurry pixels of actual data which could be anything from lens-flare to a insect on the lens?)
And if you didn't film it, well we have to take you on your word and there's a lot of (even highly qualified) nutters around. A straw poll of even a table full of doctors and scientists will find 50% of them have seen something they couldn't explain (e.g. ghosts, ufo's etc.). You'll even find a small percentage who are certain it was a <insert supernatural explanation here>, despite all their training and expertise.
Film, or it didn't happen.
And high-quality, focused, blur-free, still film with proper focus on that amazing object that you couldn't believe was there. Because I fail to believe that if I was seeing a UFO or similar, I wouldn't zoom in and get as much detail from the damn thing as I can in order for ME to tell what it was myself.
It's like claiming that someone at a football match wouldn't use the pair of binoculars in their hand to see if it was a goal at the other end of not at the most exciting, critical part of the FA cup. Of course they would, if they had them to hand. They wouldn't peer through them at zero-zoom so the point of interest is some blurry half-a-dozen pixel affair, they'd be trying to check what they were seeing as clearly as possible.
"high-quality, focused, blur-free, still film..."
Oddly enough there was a news report recently ( sorry, can't just remember where ) about UFO societies being disbanded due to lack of evidence - one spokesman being quoted as saying something like "with everyone having cameras these days and yet no clear images..."
"Film, or it didn't happen.
And high-quality, focused, blur-free, still film with proper focus on that amazing object that you couldn't believe was there. Because I fail to believe that if I was seeing a UFO or similar, I wouldn't zoom in and get as much detail from the damn thing as I can in order for ME to tell what it was myself."
I could not agree more! Considering the aleged frequency of these events across the world I'm astonished in this day and age with the proliferation of camera phones, video cameras, CCTV, DSLRs etc that not one person has manage a coherent, stable, clear, focused video.
Like Lee said, if it were me filming it I'd like to think i'd be able to get focused zoomed and wide angle shots, with something in for scale, time of day etc and if I were videoing it be able to give a verbal description of what I could see and what settings, zoom length etc I was using.
I want to believe I really do, but you've got to question why this hasn't been accomplished yet!
Pics/vids or STFU.
In regard to the lack of low-blur, high-res zoomed-in images of UFOs:
Guys, I'm as skeptical about UFOs as anyone, but - have you guys ever actually tried focusing a mobile phone or pocket camera on a small flying object at a distance with enough precision to meet this requirement? Especially at a zoom level high enough to positively identify it. It's damn near impossible for anyone who isn't a professional photographer. Maybe a Hollywood-qualified cameraman with a studio-grade dolly camera could pull it off, but your average joe or jill with a mobile phone has Buckley's chance.
A few years ago, my brother and I bought a pair of those cheap RC helicopters that have been coming out of China of late. We flew them in a nearby park on a clear, sunny day with only a light breeze, and I attempted to film them using a $500 7 MP pocket camera with 5X optical zoom lens mounted on a tripod. My brother flew his helicopter, and I tried to film it.
Despite knowing exactly where the helicopter was and what direction it was moving in I could not capture anything other than a shaky pixelated blur even at full zoom - when I was actually able to track or frame the helicopter at all. Even the slight wind added enough random motion to the thing that it was impossible to track it with any real degree of accuracy. And I was using a tripod, remember. Filming an erratically moving distant object at high zoom is an extremely difficult endeavour at best. How much harder is it for someone with a hand held mobile phone trying to film a flying object whose size, trajectory and location isn't even known or predictable, at the same time as they might be freaking out going "WTF is that thing?"
Try it yourselves - have a go at filming passing birds or low-flying planes and see how good your footage is, and how well you can track them. It's not easy, as you'll find out if you give it a go.
If I ever saw clean, sharp, perfectly-tracked zoomed-in footage of a UFO I would call fake for precisely this reason. I'm more likely to give credence to a blurry, shaky video just because that's what anyone trying to film a 'real' UFO zipping about the sky would get.
This post has been deleted by its author
"not manned or unmanned aircraft"… What does that mean? It flies but it is not an aircraft? An aircraft is then defined as being "something that can be picked up on a radar"? Which means a balloon is not an aircraft, then? What about stealth jets?
Also, they dispatched a scientific expedition which sighted the UFOs. What about pictures?
Given the brutal repression from which Tibet is suffering, if there were Lamas there with incredible supernatural powers, who also were in regular communication with our Space Brothers, that there would have been an army of flying saucers arriving to put paid to the Chinese occupation long ago.
According to YouTube, these UFOs are from the planet Gootan. But an Indian minister is confident that India can "contain this threat from an alien culture", which is good news; next thing you know, India will also be able to repulse Coca-Cola, McDonalds, and Hollywood on the one hand, and anime and manga on the other.
What is the Gootan equivalent of Gangnam Style anyhow?
If these objects are real, could they be linked to the US? Don't forget the US Army are bringing robots into operation that can transport heavy loads long distances (BigDog)- basically robotic mules. They already have drones. It's not beyond the imagination they might have some kind of reconnaissance android that can fly.
spy planes, UAV's ect.
If the indian squady does not know what the flying vehicle is (because china has kept it's mil/spy tech secret), by definition it is an Unidentified Flying Object.
As for taking photos and film footage, I'm sure their are a lot of people who will pay well to make it disappear.
No doubt now that Disney owns Marvel they are dumbing Ironman down as a series for the kiddies--so they are secretly testing the "Ironboy" suit for the young Tony Stark to use in his youthful adventures. The pilot shows how young Tony saves a Himalayan village from the Abominable Snowman and just manages to get home in time to get his book report done.
You have to admit it's at least as plausible as the other possibliites put forward here.
Paris--because she's making a comeback as young Tony's publicly spirited school teacher, who unwittingly inspires him to a life of tween heroics......
Probably balloon transported ground reconnaissance drones?
Drop one into a territory you wish to spy out, then send it back with a quick inflating balloon? Radar proof of cause.
Kind of like a light weight version of Petman, but with a quick escape?
Can already buy toy versions of the above. :P
It seems to be an inflatable plastic balloon, with a highly reflective surface, which can be deflated by the use of a pin or an opening valve remotely. It could also be programmed to set it self on fire at low altitudes as it drops in height through an act of self deflation or an implosion. I guess a laser beam can be used to set it on fire or destroy it remotely. It may also be a remote position marker for the chinese satellites based imaging which are stationed above or are passing through the Hymalyan region to support their onging intelligence activity on India China border. See the official five letter acronym officially accepted by the Chinese defence for any of their 21st century combat zones. It explains it all. We as Indians believe in divine and celestial interactions more than combat readiness in the war zones. Please send the DRDO experts to these regions to fly away, as these so called experts, with pensionable and other benefits apart from their high salaries do nothing productive in their labs. They have not yet delivered a basic tank for the Indian army on which they have been working for last 40 years. To catch up with this air borne UFO they might take 140 years and after which we shall not need them as China would have occupied it all. It s a typical case of a complete failure of Civilian Leadership in India. Jai Bharat Mata Jai Sonia Mata, Jai Rahul Hanuman, Jai Bam Bam Bole Man Mohan Bhagwan, Jai Moorakh Sarkar !
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020