The thread you keep posting is about how camera apertures can create the illusion of a shape of a luminous object being filmed out of focus. So what is it an out of focus video of? We see it when it is in focus and it is still a bright green orb. The uap flew beside them for 45 minutes and then ascended out of sight. It also displayed an erratic zig-zag motion as so many uaps do. So what is it?
Here's the video of it again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdTJyMYI7cI
At no point is that in focus. Nor is there any indication that the zig-zag is anything but camera movement.
But you keep telling yourself whatever you want to believe.
Quote:At no point is that in focus. Nor is there any indication that the zig-zag is anything but camera movement.
The eyewitness herself said it was zig-zagging, and so it was zig-zagging. And yes the orb IS in focus. So again what is it? Still no clue?
Most people filming are watching their camera/phone, not the actual thing. And no, at no point in that video is it ever in focus.
You're just imagining things again.
Quote:Most people filming are watching their camera/phone, not the actual thing. And no, at no point in that video is it ever in focus.
No she wasn't. She said she watched it out the left side of the jet and then put her phone against the window. She also said the uap flew beside them for 45 minutes. Pretty sure her and the pilot were watching the uap directly. If they saw it zig-zagging, then it was zig-zagging.
And yes...the video clearly shows the uap in focus. So again what is it?
You're not going to convince me by repeating your same imagined claim.
"pressed it to the window?" And that just happened to be the precise vertical and horizontal angle to align with something flying?
Even a minimum of critical thinking should tell you that that's not literally what happened. And when have you ever, in your life, seen anyone film anything that way?
Granted, you don't get out much.
Quote:Even a minimum of critical thinking should tell you that that's not literally what happened. And when have you ever, in your life, seen anyone film anything that way?
It evidently worked cuz that's what she did:
"All of a sudden, I heard traffic control say, "We have a foreign object, can you please identify",' Martin said.
'I looked to the left, and pilot saw three objects, I only saw one, and I grabbed my phone, I just pressed it to the window to see if I could get a video of what the object was.'
Kinda blows your "hand shake" claim out of the water doesn't it? Can you say "zig-zag"? lol
So you believe that people ALWAYS relate facts with 100% accuracy? That there's never any ambiguity between what a person is trying to express and how they say it? Or maybe that women are especially capable of describing their awareness of spatial relationships?
Quote:So you believe that people ALWAYS relate facts with 100% accuracy? That there's never any ambiguity between what a person is trying to express and how they say it? Or maybe that women are especially capable of describing their awareness spatial relationships?
Yes of course they do. And I certainly believe their own account of the sighting over some armchair skeptic with an agenda to debunk every uap sighting as something mundane. You have every reason to make shit up about things you didn't see. They do not. And that's why their account as well as the video is counted as compelling evidence for uaps and makes national headlines. Just as all eyewitness-based and video captured news stories are.
(Jan 12, 2025 05:51 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:So you believe that people ALWAYS relate facts with 100% accuracy? That there's never any ambiguity between what a person is trying to express and how they say it? Or maybe that women are especially capable of describing their awareness spatial relationships?
Yes of course they do.
And that's why you're a gullible little mooncalf.
You really should get out of the house more.
Quote:You have every reason to make shit up about things you didn't see. They do not. And that's why their account as well as the video is counted as compelling evidence for uaps and makes national headlines.
I'm not the one getting their fifteen minutes of "fame" from this. As you say yourself, "national headlines."
That's far more personal motivation that I have, with the whopping audience of the handful of regulars on this forum.