Huge UFO triangle , Quarry Andover, NJ 5/31/10

Huge UFO triangle , Quarry Andover, NJ 5/31/10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSooH4U8WhQ

If it is a TR 3B , that does not do any noise? Being so low , you can't hear a buzz...

I'm getting so tired of these nonsense internet videos.

The first part has zero reference points. Pan out at least once and show me some landscape. Without doing that, the video is worthless.

And the second part is laughable. I saw trees and bushes being blown by the wind a few times, and it's obvious that the video is sped up. Wow, fireflies.

EASY ADVISE FOR YOU.

Don't loose your time here

If that's the case, then it's a very sad state of affairs. I thought this was UFO Magazine, not Firefly Magazine.

Not that I wouldn't be interested in more uncommon bioluminescence.

But what do you expect? Some one to give you a ticket to embark the next available UFO RIDE?

Oh i wish for that too )

Hey, we are all here to analyse and try to consider the best credible UFO film. Why you do not want to do that first instead to just drop those words of yours?
Try to be more patient

mags wrote:

But what do you expect? Some one to give you a ticket to embark the next available UFO RIDE?

Oh i wish for that too )

Judging from the 2 or 3 UFOs that I have personally witnessed, I'm not entirely sure that I'd want a ride.

But I can tell you exactly what I expect - Videos with reference points, and a strong emphasis on the "U' in UFO, not Identified Flying Objects (like fireflies and airplanes).

mags wrote:

Hey, we are all here to analyse and try to consider the best credible UFO film. Why you do not want to do that first instead to just drop those words of yours?
Try to be more patient

I analyzed that video, and while the first segment might be something interesting, I seriously doubt it because not only is there no reference points (which, even if it were something interesting, renders it useless) but the second segment in is almost certainly fireflies and the video is sped up to make it appear like something interesting. As I noted, at some points you can see the trees blowing in the wind and the video is sped up. Why speed it up if it were something worthy of consideration?

I've seen hundreds of very interesting (and sometimes, inexplicable) UFO videos, many on TV shows such as UFO Hunters. The vids have reference points, and they bring out the Special Effects guys, and Bruce Maccabee pops up, and the videos remain inexplicable and interesting.

The vast majority (I'd guess around 99% or more) of the YouTube videos are complete rubbish and do a huge disservice to the field of UFO study.

Remember, the U in UFO is the main requirement.

Quote :

The vast majority (I'd guess around 99% or more) of the YouTube videos are complete rubbish and do a huge disservice to the field of UFO study.

99% or more seems a little extreme to me . If you have witnessed , as you say you have , 2 or 3 UFO 's , why would you make a statement like that ?
If these things are real , surely within the vast library of UFO footage on YouTube a little more than 1% may be genuine , or at least genuinely unidentified .
The only thing that does a disservice to the field of UFO study is people trying to make up
other peoples minds for them .
Cheers FW .

Hey, if you want to look at videos of fireflies and play make-believe, go right ahead.

The "making up people's mind for them" part was really funny, though.

Glad i made you laugh .

Just out of interest . How do you know that 99% or more of the UFO videos on YouTube are fake ?
Really interested in your response to this one .

Cheers FW .

free wheel wrote:

Just out of interest . How do you know that 99% or more of the UFO videos on YouTube are fake ?

Two reading comprehension problems there. One small (probably my fault) and one giant (definitely yours).

The small problem is that "videos on YouTube" is not at all the same thing as "YouTube videos." I can go find the 1991 "Mexico eclipse" footage on YouTube, but that doesn't make it a "YouTube video." I was referring to videos that debut on YouTube or, more appropriately, videos intended for YouTube (i.e., the fact that some users have many of their own homemade videos posted from one account. If only we were all so lucky!)

The giant problem is that I said "The vast majority (I'd guess around 99% or more) of the YouTube videos are complete rubbish', but you asked me "How do you know that 99% or more of the UFO videos on YouTube are fake ?"

How did guess turn into know in your mind? Also, rubbish doesn't mean fake. Rubbish meaning useless for further study. If I'm seeing nothing of the surrounding area, how do I even know that the footage was shot where they claim?

If someone robbed a bank, and the cctv footage only shows the back of the bank robbers head and nothing else, that video is pretty useless - even though it shows the actual culprit. It's not a fake video.

But anyway, I'll tell you how i made my guess: When i clicked on the video posted in this thread, I took a look at some of the "related videos" on the right side of the YouTube page. Two out of the 25 or so I looked at were interesting. Out of the remaining videos, there were a bunch of obvious airplanes (some not even at weird angles or anything; they were just airplanes!), one lunatic posting videos of what he thinks were UFOs in disguise as holographic airplanes (in other words, just airplanes), a handful of total fakes (most likely not even really intended to fool anyone), and a few videos of lights that could have been anything (which, even if real. are totally worthless by themselves).

I've obviously seen plenty of YouTube UFO vids before, and more times than not, they are crude fakes - many of which aren't intended to be anything other than crude fakes, not actual hoaxes. If the starting point is >50% fakes, before you even get into the actual hoaxes, misidentifications, vids from mentally disturbed people, etc., my guess that 1% are interesting is being pretty generous.

The real question is, why do some people get so offended when a video of fireflies is pointed out as a video of fireflies?

Quote :

The real question is, why do some people get so offended when a video of fireflies is pointed out as a video of fireflies?

Certainely haven't offended me Wilhelm .
Sorry that i did not understand the "difference " between videos i could view on YouTube ,and
the "videos " i could view on YouTube !
Probably a bit long in the tooth .
I used to view a lot of UFO footage . I believed i was searching for something and that maybe
the next video would make everything make sense .
If you truly have "seen" them , or perhaps , they have "shown " themselves to you . Why get so
irritated about the fact that you feel annoyed that your "view " of things may have offended another ?
Chill matey , this is a cool forum .

free wheel wrote:

Why get so
irritated about the fact that you feel annoyed that your "view " of things may have offended another ?

Who's irritated? I think it's funny.

And that video will still be fireflies (and many others, airplanes) irrespective of my "view" of anything.

I will say this, though. It's one thing when people post crappy vids on YouTube. Not everyone is a videographer (I'm not, that's for sure) and who knows what sort of camera was used. Hell, many of them are mobile phone cams! But there is a huge difference between pointing out a crude fake and saying that something might be mundane, or a misidentification.

The responses in this thread make it appear that facts are taboo, and that's a shame.

And you know all the facts do you ?

FW .

Reading comprehension.

You know what? Simple: STOP IT LETS GO ON, SEE WHAT ELSE IT IS HAPPENING IN THIS WORLD

All for it Mags .

FW .