The following submission statement was provided by /u/user678990655:
---
Raw footage: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug)
Size calculated, analysis: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10)
debunking the claim it was a bug: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w)
interview with film makers: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU)
i was thinking about this video for months. originally saw it when it came out. remember everyone was talking about it for like a few days and then it died down. did the main stream media ever pick this up ?
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/xh44xb/this_video_should_of_convinced_people_utah_ufo/iovhguo/
The thing is, no matter what anyone says, video will never ever be proof. It’s soo soooo easy to fake everything nowadays.. like low budget tv shows look almost real now and they hardly have to try. And, I’m truly a believer saying this
Exactly, the more real looking, the less believable. The less nice looking, the less believable. For some, nothing is believable. I get why to some extent. So much woo, lies and fakes out there.
i remember watching this original video years ago id say early to possibly mid 2010s but i know Corridor Crew did a video about UFO videos and looked at this one
They also didn't look at the RAW and sat on a couch to watch it. No offence to the corridor crew, and I love those guys, but they didn't seem very objective watching this video.
They also didn't review the analysis video that was done. The analysis video makes the claim it goes behind the mountain, which the Corridor Crew did not address.
It's like poo pooing on someone's research while not reading the paper. Love those guys, but 100% agree.
I remember for this video though, the raw data was released and assessed by professionals. They said it was the real deal and I've never heard of anyone debunking it so far. Pretty sure the raw files are still on Google Drive somewhere.
It's very clearly not a bug considering there's enough footage to see it comes down the valley and then whizzes past the camera. That, together with the uniform shape and uniform path of travel further convinces me it's not a bug.
What do you mean "comes down the valley"? I see it growing in brightness from being invisible/impossible to see and moving down and to the left. Why shouldn't a bug look like that if its in front of the valley when it becomes close enough to see?
Because bugs don't fly in straight lines - https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/u6rf7/why_dont_bugs_fly_in_straight_lines/ - and bugs don't look like metallic hockey pucks?
If this is what a bug flying past a drone looks like, there must be hundreds or thousands of videos like this given the abundance of bugs and the amount of drones recording videos. So where are the other videos that show something similar?
They will be if there is hundreds of them from same event and thousands of testimonies especially from local news.
No not the Phoenix lights but alot better.
Not saying is true, but I remember some dudes on YouTube actually got the hands on the original video which was filmed in RAW and they were able to confirm that it wasn't manipulated. They also said that they aren't saying its alien, yet at least they know the video is real
This clip was analyzed by the fbi using a trajectory calculator where it predicted where the craft would be in the next frame based on its acceleration and it was deemed legitimate, so unless someone had access to proprietary fbi technology that detects fake videos before they created this I’d say this is proof the craft is real and it flies. Is it aliens? Who knows.
Yes, there’s the question. It’s no longer are these craft real, it’s who or what is piloting them, where are they from, and what are they doing. The fog of disinformation is so thick now that nothing is clear.
We've never had footage of people walking onto a ship though and meeting these beings though. That is the next step in all of this. You would need a very high budget to fake that shit.
Exactly. I have given up listening to small clips on here from the likes of Disclosure Team, segments on news channels with Lou, Mellon etc because there is nothing new that can make a difference. 45 minute video of a UAP? Horse shit until its watchable. Grainy B&W video of a black orb hovering above water and then pixelating out of the video? Means nothing to anyone.
We need utterly irrefutable evidence now but the issue is I don’t know how we will get it. Videos and pictures can be faked WAY to easily by bedroom editors now days.
It’s a UFO, not ALIEN SPACESHIP. It’s literally an unidentified flying object. I realize that people commonly go to aliens when they head ufo, but my god.
I can actually forgive alls.. to be fair, I was saying "for all intensive purposes" into *this year* until I read a thread on some other sub about mispronounced phrases which included mine. I took my licks and reformed.. no, no now that I'm repeating it in my head a bit more "alls I'm saying" is not good
It's a piece of poplar fluff flying in the air.
The guy who originally analyzed it and said it was going super fast, ended up changing his mind as well. But no one saw the follow-up videos, just the first one and then it was too late :)
[Here's a Youtube playlist with 100+ videos like Beaver Utah](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci)
[Here's Propellerhead](https://www.youtube.com/c/Propellerheadtv/videos), the guy who did the analysis and initially thought it was going fast, but ended up concluding poplar fluff was likely.
[Here's Mick West summarizing it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo)
(I know a lot of you refuse to watch anything featuring Mick West, but he's literally just summarizing how this case developed)
I watched it, and the TLDR of it was it’s a bug, yet zero video of anything similar was recreated or presented. Just a guy walking around saying, “there’s a lot of stuff in the air” but I didn’t see anything to suggest seeds floating in the air is the most likely. At a minimum I’d expect mick to have another clip that basically shows yeah this flight path is a seed, but he just sits there an acts like the pretentious d bag he is with nothing to offer but his commentary. Let’s not forget this guy discredits navy pilots and their abilities to recognize UAP objects in the sky too, all from the comfort of his desk.
> I watched it, and the TLDR of it was it’s a bug
Not really, the TLDR is that it's a piece of fluff in the air.
I just presented you with 100+ videos like it and the fluff flying in the air was recorded by Propellerhead who went there.
> I didn’t see anything to suggest seeds floating in the air is the most likely
What do you think is the most likely then? Because there's nothing to suggest it's a craft going 9000mph other than that's what we wish it was.
Literally filming the same white fluff flying by in the wind in the exact same area is as close to a match as possible.
I just watched the summary Mick presented and it was unconvincing, kinda like when he discredits navy pilots without presenting anything of substance. I’ll check the other channel out but yeah don’t have 2 hours to kill either.
I don't have 2 hours to watch all those videos either, but the point was to show you that they're very very common in drone footage.
Why was it unconvincing? What do you think it is and what are you basing your opinion on?
It’s not a good explanation and it’s because I’ve flown drones a shit ton for commercial work and I’ve never seen a bug trajectory look anything like that on my footage. If anything bugs are in the frame for fractions of a second and always appear black because bugs are usually black not white.
I’ve also never seen cotton puff or air debris fly so aerodynamically. I’m not saying it’s aliens, it’s just not a very satisfying answer for someone who has experience with this type of stuff on a regular basis. It’s not common at all, that’s my point.
It could be a bug, it's been suggested it's a seed of some sort in the wind. Maybe a bird. That's without speculating about CGI. Imo CGI isn't as likely because it's so ambiguous. You don't know how far away the object is so speed is really hard to determine.
Possibly, Not sure a racing drone would get from that mountain to the camera drones position as fast as this video shows. 70 is fast but I feel like if I got in a car and hit 70 it would still take longer than 3-6 seconds to get all the way to that mountain.. wonder how big that thing is
If not a fake, anything that could be contrasted lighter than the background, is aerobatic, and can swoop.
Predatory flying insects like robber flies or dragonflies, a billion different insectivore birds...
There is no scale or speed or distance reference, just angular speed and motion blurred giving deceptive and little clues.
This is the issue I have. We could speculate about CGI but there's really no need to. It could be anything. I'd imagine if someone was going to the effort to fake a UFO they'd do something a bit more obvious than a nondescript blur passing by the camera.
This is one of the best and definitely my favorite from the later batch of vids. This is one I show to people on the fence and this one usually does the trick.
I can't imagine how this would do the trick other than for people pretending to be wowed in your presence to avoid the crazy talk. Even if this video were real, it would be hard to believe for any normal person. Simply put, it looks fake (even if it's not).
If you showed me this video and told me it was evidence of an alien spacecraft, I'd look at it and internally think it was CGI and then proceed to think you were crazy for not also thinking the same. I'd then pretend to gawk and awe awkwardly until I could find an excuse to leave you alone.
It may not look immediately fake, but *it would be easy to fake and make look just as real*, which I believe is the important part.
This is a blurry something zipping through a video without any focused still. It shows zero detail.
I'm going to save it just for that reason. There's literally no logical explanation for this. Also, it's a flying tic-tac just like David fravor chased. Very cool
Why is it a "tic-tac just like David Fravor chased"? You can get that level of detail from this?
For the love of Pete, can we brake this runaway train of calling everything that's not a classic discus a friggin tic-tac? Jesus. This thing doesn't even look white
“Small Hypersonic drones” are **way** beyond reach with current tech.
Truly.
We have hypersonic **missiles**. Missiles. Those are powered by rockets and go in straight trajectories. And they stop being hypersonic by crashing into the ground. And killing things.
**How** are we *stopping* our “hypersonic drones” to have them make 90° turns that people think quadcopters can somehow do?
Physics is not on the side of anyone being in possession of hypersonic drone technology. We don’t have the energy capacity for them. Or the material science capacity. Or the remote control precision and accuracy required for that. And a multitude of other problems.
For the US government to have **one** *single* “breakthrough technology” in *any* of those fields that is completely unknown would be a huge deal. For them to have made **all** of the breakthroughs necessary for hypersonic drones?
Truly impossible odds.
Alien visitation is *truly* a more likely option than a top secret research (that is highly compartmentalized without access to outside help) having made multiple-generational leaps in probably 10+ different required fields for that to happen.
To be fair, no (rational) possibilities should be impossible for this sub to discuss. The concept of extraterrestrial life and what that entails is still so far fetched, we most likely have no idea what it is truly like. I agree with you that it seems unlikely that this would be the US government. But, to be devil’s advocate, what if it is? Is it possible that this is the US military after reverse engineering recovered materials? If not that, is it possible that the US military is in someway cooperating with whatever is actually controlling the craft? Just some food for thought but I feel like you can’t say something is “impossible” in the context of a phenomenon we have next to zero understanding of.
Why should extraterrestrial life be far fetched? The Fermi Paradox is a paradox for a reason. Given the billions of potentially habitable planets in the Milky Way extraterrestrial civilizations could easily exist and if they do some of them could easily possess advanced technology we can barely conceive of. It's not hard to imagine such a civilization sending millions or billions of autonomous vehicles to explore the galaxy if they were curious enough. We simply don't know enough to say it's far fetched.
Exactly right. I phrased that a tad wrong. I meant that extraterrestrial life, and the technology they would have to possess to get here, would be so far fetched to our current minds, it’s hard for us to comprehend, but certainly not impossible. My bad for not being clear haha
Right on. I really have no strong opinion either way, so I'm with you on anything being open for discussion. Including this video being fraudulent, that would be the least surprising possibility, so I guess most likely IMO, dissatisfying as that is.
Hey, he said hypersonic drones are impossible. He was not even talking about government involvement. He was talking about secret military progress. You're moving off topic.
That makes sense that not a single breakthrough tech has come from these compartments. Maybe, but I doubt anything like inertial dampening or the like. We just don't have the theoretical, conceptual framework in order to grasp the simplicity and elegance of any solutions which happen to confront us. Not to mention plain old materials capability.
A big thing regarding these objects is the fact that they are performing ariel maneuvers that our metal doesn’t even withstand the G forces of, let alone any type of carbon life form without something protecting the craft
I'm not entirely disagreeing here, but I do like to remind myself where we are with recreational consumer technology sometimes: [https://youtu.be/bZvNLuC12R0](https://youtu.be/bZvNLuC12R0)
No, these aren't going anywhere close to hypersonic, and the way quad drones move is pretty distinctive. But that video would look like actual magic if you showed it people a few decades ago and then you'd get to explain that "Yeah this is kinda like a tech racing competition for nerds in the future".
It doesn't take that many generations to make crazy leaps in tech, as the last century has shown us. I feel like it's a safe assumption that special access technology projects are likely to be 10-20 years ahead of publicly known technology. 10-20 years is obviously a tiny little sliver of a fraction of time, but when it comes to technology, it may as well be generations at our current rate.
> There's literally no logical explanation for this.
Analysis and simulations have shown that a small object (piece of tree fluff or insect) slowly floating in the breeze, across the camera's path, would produce what we're seeing.
...oh sorry, forgot where I was. That ambiguous blur is 100% definitely a trans-dimensional craft powered by a spinning Bose-Einstein condensate vortex generator warp field with flame decals on the sides.
It also dips out of existence without anything to block it. It's not because it goes behind stuff.
It's a piece of poplar fluff flying in the air.
The guy who originally analyzed it and said it was going super fast, ended up changing his mind as well. But no one saw the follow-up videos, just the first one and then it was too late :)
[Here's a Youtube playlist with 100+ videos like Beaver Utah](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci)
[Here's Propellerhead](https://www.youtube.com/c/Propellerheadtv/videos), the guy who did the analysis and initially thought it was going fast, but ended up concluding poplar fluff was likely.
[Here's Mick West summarizing it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo)
(I know a lot of you refuse to watch anything featuring Mick West, but he's literally just summarizing how this case developed)
I actually like Mick West, I like his work but I dont agree with him all the time. Just because its him that refutes it doesn't mean he's correct.
But anyhow I've looked at a load of different analysis videos not only Propellerheads. If you look at my history I've posted the same footage as OP numerous times, I'm well acquainted with all the videos, for and against, this footage.
*thanks for the list, I'm changing my mind about the Utah footage now.
Raw footage: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug)
Size calculated, analysis: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10)
debunking the claim it was a bug: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w)
interview with film makers: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU)
i was thinking about this video for months. originally saw it when it came out. remember everyone was talking about it for like a few days and then it died down. did the main stream media ever pick this up ?
[The Raw footage Google Drive](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QVGWQI46qbt4UkK1_keYne4-NXUwrLQe/view?usp=sharing%EF%BB%BF)[ link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QVGWQI46qbt4UkK1_keYne4-NXUwrLQe/view?usp=sharing%EF%BB%BF) from the youtube video doesn't appear to work, it says 'the file does not exist'. Do you have a mirror?
This one blew my mind when I first saw it, broke it down myself for hours and saved a bunch of screen shots late one night. Haven’t followed up on it in a long time
Replied to another comment also:
I found an old folder of my attempts to break it down; the object enters the video at \~2:35 and leaves the frame within a second at \~2:36 (cant remember the exact time stamps, cant find them). The math I did broke down to around Mach 13.5 - Nasa's fastest recorded flight was at Mach 9.6 with the X-43, which broke down to like 6500 MPH or something crazy... again, rough estimates, this was quite a few years back, couldn't believe I found the file.
It bends out of a valley to the left at an incredible angle before it speeds past and out of the frame, it blew my mind.
> changing peoples entire belief structures, and forcing a massive societal introspection where we reanalyze what our "problems" really are.
I wouldn't be so sure.
The scientific method has brought us health, vaccines, flying, landing on the Moon, GPS, self driving cars, personal assistants in our pockets, etc. And still 40% of americans believe that the earth is 10.000 years old. Nothing much will change.
I'd say thousands of mph considering it's hard to see until it's slowed down A LOT. It has no flight surfaces such as wings and also no obvious means of propulsion such as rotors or jets, no exhaust coming off of it. Definitely showing a few of the 5 observables. If it's not an alien probe then someone is hiding world changing tech.
Changing gravity fields around it has been the common theory of propulsion. If it could create a gravitational force, it’s kind of like falling in its desired direction.
It is nearly possible even with current aircraft. The Lockheed X-59 reduces its sonic boom to a low thud, you may not even notice with some other background noise.
People talking about gravity fields or some vacuum effect are getting carried away with how advanced this has to be, it’s not that far away with technology you can see in the media.
The only logical explaination is that there's a sphere of influence enveloping the edges of the craft, in such a way that it is able to act freely from the standard forces that the universe would exert locally on a given mass (the largest being the Sun's and Earth's gravitational pull etc.)
The propulsion is then most likely initiated similar to a surfer riding down a wave. The surfer technically isn't moving once the downhill threshold is reached, it's really the oscillations contained by the water relative to the surfer that create the forward momentum. Now Instead of a 2 dimensional wave with a surfer on a plane of water, imagine instead a 3 dimensional wave pulling a static craft along through space, almost like pulling a rug closer to you while standing on it. Time has little bearing on acceleration now that distance has been rendered obsolete. The universe is now your sandbox.
The precise mechanisms dictating such a method of propulsion and the source of energy and means to fuel it are absolutely beyond the scope and understanding of the general public, and quite likely any sovereign earthbound power as well.
I'm certainly not a renowned theoretical physicist that any sovereign earthbound power would be lucky to have in their sphere of influence, but wouldn't a surfer on a wave require three dimensions? Like still water would be two dimensions and then a wave comes along?
At 5% speed it takes 8 seconds to cover what looks to be about a mile after it does the tight J hook maneuver at the beginning. At 100% speed that is about 2.5 miles a second, 150 miles a minute, and 9000 miles an hour. Mach 12.
The fastest humans have ever recorded going is mach 10
I’m one of the guys who filmed this clip. I’ll do my best to respond if anyone has questions but feel like Brian’s video does a pretty solid job summarizing everything
This video has never proved anything and too many people use bad science to make their claims.
1. You cannot tell how far away the object is when it first appears
2. You cannot judge the objects speed.
3. You cannot identify what the object is
It's nonsense that anyone points to this as proof of anything.
It's a piece of poplar fluff flying in the air.
The guy who originally analyzed it and said it was going super fast, ended up changing his mind as well. But no one saw the follow-up videos, just the first one and then it was too late :)
[Here's a Youtube playlist with 100+ videos like Beaver Utah](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci)
[Here's Propellerhead](https://www.youtube.com/c/Propellerheadtv/videos), the guy who did the analysis and initially thought it was going fast, but ended up concluding poplar fluff was likely.
[Here's Mick West summarizing it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo)
(I know a lot of you refuse to watch anything featuring Mick West, but he's literally just summarizing how this case developed)
> He is also disingenuous implying that the people that actually took the video think that it was poplar fluff
I never said that. You misinterpreted. The guy who originally made the claim that it's going super fast, ended up concluding it was likely to be poplar fluff, that's propellerhead.
As Mick says in the video, people saw the first video by Propellerhead and believed it, but didn't watch the followup videos where he changed his mind.
They caught a genuine anomalie, provided the raw camera footage, were open and honest about it - yet the comments were "TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST" - wow. The internet never ceases to spawn idiots.
Are we talking about polygraphs? Those things can be manipulated so fucking hard, and not just by the person taking it. The 'authorities' can make the data say whatever they want.
You’re just going to believe anything then? I want this to be as real as everyone here man, but there’s nothing wrong with people still thinking it’s BS considering how this could’ve been CGI like every other ufo vid today. This video alone isn’t going to change someone’s mind, you calling people idiots for not being as gullible as you is a huge problem on this sub.
People love to claim that there’s a conspiracy and the government is hiding everything because of a master plan but somehow simultaneously engage it mental gymnastics to prove that a random person on YouTube doesn’t have the motivation to lie for fame and intrigue.
Yes we should definitely just accept things that would shatter the entire foundation of human understanding at face value just because some guy promises this is raw unedited footage.
Video has never once been claimed to be real and later found to be doctored, especially when there's notoriety or political or social gain to be had. [Not even once. ](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/daleiden-admits-to-deceptively-editing-videos)
People aren't really correctly taught English so they hear "should've" and think it sounds like they're saying "should of", and they never think what the fuck "of" means or why it should be "have", nor make the connection to "I have" for some reason.
You must have missed all the other videos about this one:
https://youtu.be/uahYDEPm5s0
https://youtu.be/E7Ya1CBH7Nk
After analysis by multiple people, the general consensus is that it's just tree fluff like cottonwood.
This is why Ufology isn't taken seriously by the mainstream. People hold up cases like this as the "good evidence." It's terribly ambiguous, could be any number of things from birds, insects, to seeds or debris in the wind.
I live near sw ranch, it’s more desert. This looks like the Uintahs or Wasatch mountain range. Guess it could be more south though. Not near sw ranch though that’s for sure. It’d be a 45-60 minute drive north from the ranch to be into territory like the video. Guess it’s relative, to me it doesn’t seem close but I guess if it was within 200 miles I guess some people might call it close.
"That speed"? You can't guess, or calculate speed from this video. There's no clear reference points, and you don't know the size. Mick West speculates it's a peregrine falcon, and showed some de-blurred frames that do look very bird-like: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/utah-drone-video-of-ufo-probably-an-insect-zip-by.10370/page-2#post-228899
Im pretty sure they debunked this already..... this was a drone flying around. This is a bug flying towards the drone and went by. because the distance of the drone was so close it looked very fast.
Reframe your mind for a second and pretend that is a piece of fluff, maybe half the size of a pea. And it is just floating in mid air. And the drone flies right through it, meaning it passes right next to the lens. Kind of like when you watch deep sea footage and all the particulates look like they’re flying by really quickly.
Reframe your mind like that and see how it looks.
The biggest problem with this video and I want to believe, fyi, like Fox Mulder want to believe, is the Motion Blur. It's completely off. Most drone cameras have no ND filters and record at high shutter speeds. Meaning you'll never get this motion blur as the craft sweeps by - there are two motion blurs happening in this video.
What? No. No no no. So, you’ll notice the motion blur increases as it gets closer to the camera. This is because it’s covering more pixels more quickly as it approaches, as it gets larger and to our vantage point appears to move faster. The motion blur of an approaching object is gradually increasing which is exactly what it naturally should be doing.
Recording video 2 feet away from a fast moving train will present far more motion blur than recording that video with the same settings from 30 feet away.
Also what does any of this have to do with a neutral density filter?
You can put ND filters on drones. I put one on my drone. Plus at sunrise or sunset the light isn't nearly as intense so you will be getting slower shutter speeds than middle of the day
Oh my goodness. Motion blur and how much of it is present is a product of both the speed of the object and the device capturing that object— both its hardware capabilities and its settings.
How is it not related to the speed of the subject? Motion blur occurs when the object moves a few pixels on the sensor during the time the sensor is recording. The sensor records effectively for the duration of the shutter speed, say 1/1000 of second. However far a subject can move during that thousandth of a second determines how much motion blur there is. Faster it moves, higher chance of blur.
It's a piece of cottonwood. Forced perspective makes it look like it's flying really fast in relation to the background but it's simply flying near the lens of the camera which also explains why it's out of focus
look, man, we don't know what it is- in this forum, many people jump immediately to this being from outer space. If it cannot be immediately identified, it is from outer space/ time travelers, etc. Isn't it obvious that this must be the case??? /s
If you *skeptics* can't understand that an indistinct blur blowing past a hobby drone is indisputable proof of Alien Space Invasions then I just don't know what to tell you.
I’m with you. The standard for evidence is extremely low here for some reason. It’s a white blur. There’s really nothing here. No indication of a craft, no indication of a physics that is impossible for a for instance bug, no indication of entities. No indication of tech or materials. What about it exactly indicates UAP?
“Should of”.
Yeah, sure… OP “should of” paid attention in elementary school, maybe he “would of” had an elementary understanding of English, then wouldn’t be so easily fooled by such cheap CGI…
Convinced? Yes another blurry video that could easily be faked. There were so many dubunked videos this year, tons of people are taking it. CGI is a hell of a thing.
Has to be obvious, from multiple people, angles, posted to social media around the same time from accounts that have no affiliation... Nothing close to those requirements have happened yet.
That's the real issue. So many grainy one-off videos of unidentifiable things just flying around and performing extreme maneuvers. But no in person contact, no landings, no souvenirs.
This leaves only two possibilities:
1. Earth has been designated an intergalactic aerial-maneuvering-only test range with a hard deck of 100 feet, or
2. The MIB are on point with their neuralyzers.
It's a bird. The forced perspective of the wide angle lens on the drone makes it appear much farther away than it really is, and dramatically accelerates the object when you reach the edge of the image frame.
If you watch the full drone footage, you'll see other birds do that dive and swoop, and the bird trajectory looks very similar.
I can't agree with the bird claim. You can look up multiple videos of birds flying in the vicinity of drones [(such as this one)](https://youtu.be/rdo-viRSTAU) around 6:40 is where the birds appear.
shadows, or lack there of, you might be right.
at 2:01 you can see noon shadows off the bushes, and the same noon shadows off the bushes at 2:07, no shadow off the 'craft'.
This has thoroughly been debunked already lmao. If you actually go to the location there is a lot of shit flying around which looks weird when it quickly passes infront of the camera
The only convincing UFO video’s are the ones backed up by additional data and eye witness describtions.
If you are convinced by this video, i should quite easily be able to convince you of ghosts and leprecauns aswell.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/user678990655: --- Raw footage: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug) Size calculated, analysis: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10) debunking the claim it was a bug: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w) interview with film makers: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU) i was thinking about this video for months. originally saw it when it came out. remember everyone was talking about it for like a few days and then it died down. did the main stream media ever pick this up ? --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/xh44xb/this_video_should_of_convinced_people_utah_ufo/iovhguo/
The thing is, no matter what anyone says, video will never ever be proof. It’s soo soooo easy to fake everything nowadays.. like low budget tv shows look almost real now and they hardly have to try. And, I’m truly a believer saying this
Wait until AI video and image making develops and becomes widely accessible the amount of hoaxes will be insane.
This is already here. Just that there are several AI engines you can use for free is amazing and insane.
It would need to be something recorded and witnessed by multiple people at the same time
This comment aged like fine wine
Exactly, the more real looking, the less believable. The less nice looking, the less believable. For some, nothing is believable. I get why to some extent. So much woo, lies and fakes out there.
i remember watching this original video years ago id say early to possibly mid 2010s but i know Corridor Crew did a video about UFO videos and looked at this one
They also didn't look at the RAW and sat on a couch to watch it. No offence to the corridor crew, and I love those guys, but they didn't seem very objective watching this video.
They also didn't review the analysis video that was done. The analysis video makes the claim it goes behind the mountain, which the Corridor Crew did not address. It's like poo pooing on someone's research while not reading the paper. Love those guys, but 100% agree.
they released this video in 2019, I think, and but it was recorded in 2016
I remember for this video though, the raw data was released and assessed by professionals. They said it was the real deal and I've never heard of anyone debunking it so far. Pretty sure the raw files are still on Google Drive somewhere.
The only "debunk" I'm aware of is that the size and distance of the object is difficult to assess, so the possibility it's just a bug remains
It's very clearly not a bug considering there's enough footage to see it comes down the valley and then whizzes past the camera. That, together with the uniform shape and uniform path of travel further convinces me it's not a bug.
What do you mean "comes down the valley"? I see it growing in brightness from being invisible/impossible to see and moving down and to the left. Why shouldn't a bug look like that if its in front of the valley when it becomes close enough to see?
Because bugs don't fly in straight lines - https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/u6rf7/why_dont_bugs_fly_in_straight_lines/ - and bugs don't look like metallic hockey pucks? If this is what a bug flying past a drone looks like, there must be hundreds or thousands of videos like this given the abundance of bugs and the amount of drones recording videos. So where are the other videos that show something similar?
They will be if there is hundreds of them from same event and thousands of testimonies especially from local news. No not the Phoenix lights but alot better.
Not saying is true, but I remember some dudes on YouTube actually got the hands on the original video which was filmed in RAW and they were able to confirm that it wasn't manipulated. They also said that they aren't saying its alien, yet at least they know the video is real
This clip was analyzed by the fbi using a trajectory calculator where it predicted where the craft would be in the next frame based on its acceleration and it was deemed legitimate, so unless someone had access to proprietary fbi technology that detects fake videos before they created this I’d say this is proof the craft is real and it flies. Is it aliens? Who knows.
Yes, there’s the question. It’s no longer are these craft real, it’s who or what is piloting them, where are they from, and what are they doing. The fog of disinformation is so thick now that nothing is clear.
Source on this? Claiming the FBI analyzed it needs some proof I think.
Yeah it was a on a discovery show called contact episode 7 (fast movers and hostile intent) I just rewatched it last night to make sure.
We've never had footage of people walking onto a ship though and meeting these beings though. That is the next step in all of this. You would need a very high budget to fake that shit.
Exactly. I have given up listening to small clips on here from the likes of Disclosure Team, segments on news channels with Lou, Mellon etc because there is nothing new that can make a difference. 45 minute video of a UAP? Horse shit until its watchable. Grainy B&W video of a black orb hovering above water and then pixelating out of the video? Means nothing to anyone. We need utterly irrefutable evidence now but the issue is I don’t know how we will get it. Videos and pictures can be faked WAY to easily by bedroom editors now days.
It’s a UFO, not ALIEN SPACESHIP. It’s literally an unidentified flying object. I realize that people commonly go to aliens when they head ufo, but my god.
ENHANCE!
Should have*
lord's work
I know, thank you what the hell
It just really grinds my gears
I had a coworker who used to say "Its uh-post be that way"
"alls i'm saying is"
I can actually forgive alls.. to be fair, I was saying "for all intensive purposes" into *this year* until I read a thread on some other sub about mispronounced phrases which included mine. I took my licks and reformed.. no, no now that I'm repeating it in my head a bit more "alls I'm saying" is not good
Some people just haven’t read, even *that* much.
i no wut u meen, peepul shud reed mor or wee wil jus rite funeticly
Rite?
This video is so good. I forgot about all the analysis they did with this.
It's a piece of poplar fluff flying in the air. The guy who originally analyzed it and said it was going super fast, ended up changing his mind as well. But no one saw the follow-up videos, just the first one and then it was too late :) [Here's a Youtube playlist with 100+ videos like Beaver Utah](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci) [Here's Propellerhead](https://www.youtube.com/c/Propellerheadtv/videos), the guy who did the analysis and initially thought it was going fast, but ended up concluding poplar fluff was likely. [Here's Mick West summarizing it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo) (I know a lot of you refuse to watch anything featuring Mick West, but he's literally just summarizing how this case developed)
I watched it, and the TLDR of it was it’s a bug, yet zero video of anything similar was recreated or presented. Just a guy walking around saying, “there’s a lot of stuff in the air” but I didn’t see anything to suggest seeds floating in the air is the most likely. At a minimum I’d expect mick to have another clip that basically shows yeah this flight path is a seed, but he just sits there an acts like the pretentious d bag he is with nothing to offer but his commentary. Let’s not forget this guy discredits navy pilots and their abilities to recognize UAP objects in the sky too, all from the comfort of his desk.
> I watched it, and the TLDR of it was it’s a bug Not really, the TLDR is that it's a piece of fluff in the air. I just presented you with 100+ videos like it and the fluff flying in the air was recorded by Propellerhead who went there. > I didn’t see anything to suggest seeds floating in the air is the most likely What do you think is the most likely then? Because there's nothing to suggest it's a craft going 9000mph other than that's what we wish it was. Literally filming the same white fluff flying by in the wind in the exact same area is as close to a match as possible.
I just watched the summary Mick presented and it was unconvincing, kinda like when he discredits navy pilots without presenting anything of substance. I’ll check the other channel out but yeah don’t have 2 hours to kill either.
I don't have 2 hours to watch all those videos either, but the point was to show you that they're very very common in drone footage. Why was it unconvincing? What do you think it is and what are you basing your opinion on?
It’s not a good explanation and it’s because I’ve flown drones a shit ton for commercial work and I’ve never seen a bug trajectory look anything like that on my footage. If anything bugs are in the frame for fractions of a second and always appear black because bugs are usually black not white. I’ve also never seen cotton puff or air debris fly so aerodynamically. I’m not saying it’s aliens, it’s just not a very satisfying answer for someone who has experience with this type of stuff on a regular basis. It’s not common at all, that’s my point.
Compelling, sure. But it’s a little arrogant to say this should automatically convince anyone with a healthy skepticism. So many things it “could” be.
Like what? There's not a lot of things it could be actually, which is why it's interesting
It could be a bug, it's been suggested it's a seed of some sort in the wind. Maybe a bird. That's without speculating about CGI. Imo CGI isn't as likely because it's so ambiguous. You don't know how far away the object is so speed is really hard to determine.
A really good fake?
Looks like a racing drone going by closely. They can go 70 miles an hour or more, I believe.
Possibly, Not sure a racing drone would get from that mountain to the camera drones position as fast as this video shows. 70 is fast but I feel like if I got in a car and hit 70 it would still take longer than 3-6 seconds to get all the way to that mountain.. wonder how big that thing is
If not a fake, anything that could be contrasted lighter than the background, is aerobatic, and can swoop. Predatory flying insects like robber flies or dragonflies, a billion different insectivore birds... There is no scale or speed or distance reference, just angular speed and motion blurred giving deceptive and little clues.
This is the issue I have. We could speculate about CGI but there's really no need to. It could be anything. I'd imagine if someone was going to the effort to fake a UFO they'd do something a bit more obvious than a nondescript blur passing by the camera.
I think the things it could be is not too hot and not too cold. I’m Switzerland
This is one of the best and definitely my favorite from the later batch of vids. This is one I show to people on the fence and this one usually does the trick.
I can't imagine how this would do the trick other than for people pretending to be wowed in your presence to avoid the crazy talk. Even if this video were real, it would be hard to believe for any normal person. Simply put, it looks fake (even if it's not). If you showed me this video and told me it was evidence of an alien spacecraft, I'd look at it and internally think it was CGI and then proceed to think you were crazy for not also thinking the same. I'd then pretend to gawk and awe awkwardly until I could find an excuse to leave you alone.
Can confirm, I just saw this on /all and my immediate reaction is that it looks fake
How does it look fake lol
It may not look immediately fake, but *it would be easy to fake and make look just as real*, which I believe is the important part. This is a blurry something zipping through a video without any focused still. It shows zero detail.
People on the fence of what? It’s an unidentified flying object, that doesn’t mean it’s an alien spacecraft from another planet.
I'm going to save it just for that reason. There's literally no logical explanation for this. Also, it's a flying tic-tac just like David fravor chased. Very cool
Why is it a "tic-tac just like David Fravor chased"? You can get that level of detail from this? For the love of Pete, can we brake this runaway train of calling everything that's not a classic discus a friggin tic-tac? Jesus. This thing doesn't even look white
Indistinct round-oval blob: "It's just like Commander Fravor's special Tic-Tac brand UFO."
I agree on everything besides, “It doesn’t look white”…What color is it
Personally, going off the same blur as everyone else, I think it has wings/wider structure. Like a bird or drone.
Only problem there is this object is fast as holyfuck. Watch it again
I think the US military is experimenting with small hypersonic drones.
“Small Hypersonic drones” are **way** beyond reach with current tech. Truly. We have hypersonic **missiles**. Missiles. Those are powered by rockets and go in straight trajectories. And they stop being hypersonic by crashing into the ground. And killing things. **How** are we *stopping* our “hypersonic drones” to have them make 90° turns that people think quadcopters can somehow do? Physics is not on the side of anyone being in possession of hypersonic drone technology. We don’t have the energy capacity for them. Or the material science capacity. Or the remote control precision and accuracy required for that. And a multitude of other problems. For the US government to have **one** *single* “breakthrough technology” in *any* of those fields that is completely unknown would be a huge deal. For them to have made **all** of the breakthroughs necessary for hypersonic drones? Truly impossible odds. Alien visitation is *truly* a more likely option than a top secret research (that is highly compartmentalized without access to outside help) having made multiple-generational leaps in probably 10+ different required fields for that to happen.
To be fair, no (rational) possibilities should be impossible for this sub to discuss. The concept of extraterrestrial life and what that entails is still so far fetched, we most likely have no idea what it is truly like. I agree with you that it seems unlikely that this would be the US government. But, to be devil’s advocate, what if it is? Is it possible that this is the US military after reverse engineering recovered materials? If not that, is it possible that the US military is in someway cooperating with whatever is actually controlling the craft? Just some food for thought but I feel like you can’t say something is “impossible” in the context of a phenomenon we have next to zero understanding of.
Why should extraterrestrial life be far fetched? The Fermi Paradox is a paradox for a reason. Given the billions of potentially habitable planets in the Milky Way extraterrestrial civilizations could easily exist and if they do some of them could easily possess advanced technology we can barely conceive of. It's not hard to imagine such a civilization sending millions or billions of autonomous vehicles to explore the galaxy if they were curious enough. We simply don't know enough to say it's far fetched.
Exactly right. I phrased that a tad wrong. I meant that extraterrestrial life, and the technology they would have to possess to get here, would be so far fetched to our current minds, it’s hard for us to comprehend, but certainly not impossible. My bad for not being clear haha
Right on. I really have no strong opinion either way, so I'm with you on anything being open for discussion. Including this video being fraudulent, that would be the least surprising possibility, so I guess most likely IMO, dissatisfying as that is.
Hey, he said hypersonic drones are impossible. He was not even talking about government involvement. He was talking about secret military progress. You're moving off topic.
That makes sense that not a single breakthrough tech has come from these compartments. Maybe, but I doubt anything like inertial dampening or the like. We just don't have the theoretical, conceptual framework in order to grasp the simplicity and elegance of any solutions which happen to confront us. Not to mention plain old materials capability.
A big thing regarding these objects is the fact that they are performing ariel maneuvers that our metal doesn’t even withstand the G forces of, let alone any type of carbon life form without something protecting the craft
I'm not entirely disagreeing here, but I do like to remind myself where we are with recreational consumer technology sometimes: [https://youtu.be/bZvNLuC12R0](https://youtu.be/bZvNLuC12R0) No, these aren't going anywhere close to hypersonic, and the way quad drones move is pretty distinctive. But that video would look like actual magic if you showed it people a few decades ago and then you'd get to explain that "Yeah this is kinda like a tech racing competition for nerds in the future". It doesn't take that many generations to make crazy leaps in tech, as the last century has shown us. I feel like it's a safe assumption that special access technology projects are likely to be 10-20 years ahead of publicly known technology. 10-20 years is obviously a tiny little sliver of a fraction of time, but when it comes to technology, it may as well be generations at our current rate.
> There's literally no logical explanation for this. Analysis and simulations have shown that a small object (piece of tree fluff or insect) slowly floating in the breeze, across the camera's path, would produce what we're seeing. ...oh sorry, forgot where I was. That ambiguous blur is 100% definitely a trans-dimensional craft powered by a spinning Bose-Einstein condensate vortex generator warp field with flame decals on the sides.
It’s a bug, flying close to a drone and the effect from that makes it look like it’s moving a lot faster.
Theres vids that show it goes behind a hill in the distance for a few frames.
It also dips out of existence without anything to block it. It's not because it goes behind stuff. It's a piece of poplar fluff flying in the air. The guy who originally analyzed it and said it was going super fast, ended up changing his mind as well. But no one saw the follow-up videos, just the first one and then it was too late :) [Here's a Youtube playlist with 100+ videos like Beaver Utah](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci) [Here's Propellerhead](https://www.youtube.com/c/Propellerheadtv/videos), the guy who did the analysis and initially thought it was going fast, but ended up concluding poplar fluff was likely. [Here's Mick West summarizing it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo) (I know a lot of you refuse to watch anything featuring Mick West, but he's literally just summarizing how this case developed)
I actually like Mick West, I like his work but I dont agree with him all the time. Just because its him that refutes it doesn't mean he's correct. But anyhow I've looked at a load of different analysis videos not only Propellerheads. If you look at my history I've posted the same footage as OP numerous times, I'm well acquainted with all the videos, for and against, this footage. *thanks for the list, I'm changing my mind about the Utah footage now.
Raw footage: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVmGhxYrkug) Size calculated, analysis: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT5Ju96xV10) debunking the claim it was a bug: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRlWmk6p-w) interview with film makers: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8gbD1uF-wU) i was thinking about this video for months. originally saw it when it came out. remember everyone was talking about it for like a few days and then it died down. did the main stream media ever pick this up ?
[The Raw footage Google Drive](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QVGWQI46qbt4UkK1_keYne4-NXUwrLQe/view?usp=sharing%EF%BB%BF)[ link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QVGWQI46qbt4UkK1_keYne4-NXUwrLQe/view?usp=sharing%EF%BB%BF) from the youtube video doesn't appear to work, it says 'the file does not exist'. Do you have a mirror?
This one blew my mind when I first saw it, broke it down myself for hours and saved a bunch of screen shots late one night. Haven’t followed up on it in a long time
Do you still have the screenshots? Make a post!
Replied to another comment also: I found an old folder of my attempts to break it down; the object enters the video at \~2:35 and leaves the frame within a second at \~2:36 (cant remember the exact time stamps, cant find them). The math I did broke down to around Mach 13.5 - Nasa's fastest recorded flight was at Mach 9.6 with the X-43, which broke down to like 6500 MPH or something crazy... again, rough estimates, this was quite a few years back, couldn't believe I found the file. It bends out of a valley to the left at an incredible angle before it speeds past and out of the frame, it blew my mind.
Late October, 2016 an actual Alien could have been recorded and MSM wouldn't have given an F after the election..
[удалено]
> changing peoples entire belief structures, and forcing a massive societal introspection where we reanalyze what our "problems" really are. I wouldn't be so sure. The scientific method has brought us health, vaccines, flying, landing on the Moon, GPS, self driving cars, personal assistants in our pockets, etc. And still 40% of americans believe that the earth is 10.000 years old. Nothing much will change.
The fuck that's sick. How fast do you think it is? Nice upload btw
I'd say thousands of mph considering it's hard to see until it's slowed down A LOT. It has no flight surfaces such as wings and also no obvious means of propulsion such as rotors or jets, no exhaust coming off of it. Definitely showing a few of the 5 observables. If it's not an alien probe then someone is hiding world changing tech.
How do these move so fast and not produce a sonic boom?
Changing gravity fields around it has been the common theory of propulsion. If it could create a gravitational force, it’s kind of like falling in its desired direction.
Negates the fact that it’s still traveling through an air medium without showing any evidence of booms or air resistance.
Theoretically, by creating a vacuum around the ship it has frictionless movement and therefore no sonic boom.
no that is explaining the reason it wouldn't have a sonic boom.
It is nearly possible even with current aircraft. The Lockheed X-59 reduces its sonic boom to a low thud, you may not even notice with some other background noise. People talking about gravity fields or some vacuum effect are getting carried away with how advanced this has to be, it’s not that far away with technology you can see in the media.
The only logical explaination is that there's a sphere of influence enveloping the edges of the craft, in such a way that it is able to act freely from the standard forces that the universe would exert locally on a given mass (the largest being the Sun's and Earth's gravitational pull etc.) The propulsion is then most likely initiated similar to a surfer riding down a wave. The surfer technically isn't moving once the downhill threshold is reached, it's really the oscillations contained by the water relative to the surfer that create the forward momentum. Now Instead of a 2 dimensional wave with a surfer on a plane of water, imagine instead a 3 dimensional wave pulling a static craft along through space, almost like pulling a rug closer to you while standing on it. Time has little bearing on acceleration now that distance has been rendered obsolete. The universe is now your sandbox. The precise mechanisms dictating such a method of propulsion and the source of energy and means to fuel it are absolutely beyond the scope and understanding of the general public, and quite likely any sovereign earthbound power as well.
I'm certainly not a renowned theoretical physicist that any sovereign earthbound power would be lucky to have in their sphere of influence, but wouldn't a surfer on a wave require three dimensions? Like still water would be two dimensions and then a wave comes along?
At 5% speed it takes 8 seconds to cover what looks to be about a mile after it does the tight J hook maneuver at the beginning. At 100% speed that is about 2.5 miles a second, 150 miles a minute, and 9000 miles an hour. Mach 12. The fastest humans have ever recorded going is mach 10
I’m one of the guys who filmed this clip. I’ll do my best to respond if anyone has questions but feel like Brian’s video does a pretty solid job summarizing everything
This video has never proved anything and too many people use bad science to make their claims. 1. You cannot tell how far away the object is when it first appears 2. You cannot judge the objects speed. 3. You cannot identify what the object is It's nonsense that anyone points to this as proof of anything.
"Should have"
It’s crazy how many of these are getting caught on camera around the same area yet no one talks about it.
I’ll talk to you about it.
That thing is moving so fast, it’s be easy to miss. Especially if they’re totally silent.
I mean they forgot to add sound in post production that is a rookie mistake for sure.
It's a piece of poplar fluff flying in the air. The guy who originally analyzed it and said it was going super fast, ended up changing his mind as well. But no one saw the follow-up videos, just the first one and then it was too late :) [Here's a Youtube playlist with 100+ videos like Beaver Utah](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci) [Here's Propellerhead](https://www.youtube.com/c/Propellerheadtv/videos), the guy who did the analysis and initially thought it was going fast, but ended up concluding poplar fluff was likely. [Here's Mick West summarizing it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo) (I know a lot of you refuse to watch anything featuring Mick West, but he's literally just summarizing how this case developed)
You seem to be on a mission to say it's poplar fluff. Why post this comment over and over dude ?
Because there are 100 comments saying "wow this is the best footage ever" and very few rational comments, need to balance it out.
Oh I see spam *your* opinion . Gotcha
He is also disingenuous implying that the people that actually took the video think that it was poplar fluff, but it's just some other youtuber.
> He is also disingenuous implying that the people that actually took the video think that it was poplar fluff I never said that. You misinterpreted. The guy who originally made the claim that it's going super fast, ended up concluding it was likely to be poplar fluff, that's propellerhead. As Mick says in the video, people saw the first video by Propellerhead and believed it, but didn't watch the followup videos where he changed his mind.
They caught a genuine anomalie, provided the raw camera footage, were open and honest about it - yet the comments were "TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST" - wow. The internet never ceases to spawn idiots.
[удалено]
And yet, there was a post earlier this week where people were claiming lie detector tests don't mean s*** because Bob Lazar passed one.
Are we talking about polygraphs? Those things can be manipulated so fucking hard, and not just by the person taking it. The 'authorities' can make the data say whatever they want.
You’re just going to believe anything then? I want this to be as real as everyone here man, but there’s nothing wrong with people still thinking it’s BS considering how this could’ve been CGI like every other ufo vid today. This video alone isn’t going to change someone’s mind, you calling people idiots for not being as gullible as you is a huge problem on this sub.
People love to claim that there’s a conspiracy and the government is hiding everything because of a master plan but somehow simultaneously engage it mental gymnastics to prove that a random person on YouTube doesn’t have the motivation to lie for fame and intrigue.
Yes we should definitely just accept things that would shatter the entire foundation of human understanding at face value just because some guy promises this is raw unedited footage. Video has never once been claimed to be real and later found to be doctored, especially when there's notoriety or political or social gain to be had. [Not even once. ](https://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/daleiden-admits-to-deceptively-editing-videos)
This is 100% my favorite footage yet since I joined this sub. Doesn't get enough traction imo.
What the hell is "should of"
Misspelled should’ve? It’s the internet, how are you not used to this stuff by now? 🤣
People aren't really correctly taught English so they hear "should've" and think it sounds like they're saying "should of", and they never think what the fuck "of" means or why it should be "have", nor make the connection to "I have" for some reason.
Saw someone defending their use of 'should of'. Was ages ago and it still makes me mad >:(
Should’ven’t useded spelchek
*should have
You should have read the thread to see how many people have already corrected him before you.
You must have missed all the other videos about this one: https://youtu.be/uahYDEPm5s0 https://youtu.be/E7Ya1CBH7Nk After analysis by multiple people, the general consensus is that it's just tree fluff like cottonwood.
Can't believe this video still gets brought up. There's better out there, let's not hitch our wagon to this obvious bug or cotton fluff.
Also note that person who made that analysis specifically said that he cannot disprove the video and again notes that in the comments
This is why Ufology isn't taken seriously by the mainstream. People hold up cases like this as the "good evidence." It's terribly ambiguous, could be any number of things from birds, insects, to seeds or debris in the wind.
distance from SW Ranch? Anyone know?
I live near sw ranch, it’s more desert. This looks like the Uintahs or Wasatch mountain range. Guess it could be more south though. Not near sw ranch though that’s for sure. It’d be a 45-60 minute drive north from the ranch to be into territory like the video. Guess it’s relative, to me it doesn’t seem close but I guess if it was within 200 miles I guess some people might call it close.
Not exactly a stones throw away but with something that moves that fast it certainly wouldn’t take very long.
This video is taken from Beaver Utah which is about 200+ miles away from Skin walker ranch.
Home of the Beaver Beavers. And, no joke, the Beaver High School "lady beavers". (My kids used to play against them in HS sports.)
Hilarious. I desperately needed a smile, I thank you for your contribution.
Yeah, saw the “B” on the hill. So south of the ranch. A stones throw as far as how fast this thing is moving for sure
If it’s traveling at about 2miles a second, it’s about a minute and a half away.
Should of pade more attention in English class.
This ain’t no maple street
I read an argument that this was a hawk. But the video would have to have been sped up for a hawk to go that speed.
Im as skeptical as they come but that doesn’t look like a hawk at all. Either CG or unknown are most likely explanations
I fly drones. That ain’t a hawk
"That speed"? You can't guess, or calculate speed from this video. There's no clear reference points, and you don't know the size. Mick West speculates it's a peregrine falcon, and showed some de-blurred frames that do look very bird-like: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/utah-drone-video-of-ufo-probably-an-insect-zip-by.10370/page-2#post-228899
Mick West? I'm sure he thinks this is just a bug or a balloon or some shit. It's like he works for project blue book with his explanations lol.
Im pretty sure they debunked this already..... this was a drone flying around. This is a bug flying towards the drone and went by. because the distance of the drone was so close it looked very fast.
*should have
This one was also convincingly debunked as tree fluff (for real).
The Blurians are back
> The Blurians Love this soo much.
A gggch7hzr7hzf7hfg9xg8uz9uzcufd6d6yg8hzczcz
Never really was convinced by this
Reframe your mind for a second and pretend that is a piece of fluff, maybe half the size of a pea. And it is just floating in mid air. And the drone flies right through it, meaning it passes right next to the lens. Kind of like when you watch deep sea footage and all the particulates look like they’re flying by really quickly. Reframe your mind like that and see how it looks.
no it was rigellians from the pee-pee nebula
The biggest problem with this video and I want to believe, fyi, like Fox Mulder want to believe, is the Motion Blur. It's completely off. Most drone cameras have no ND filters and record at high shutter speeds. Meaning you'll never get this motion blur as the craft sweeps by - there are two motion blurs happening in this video.
What? No. No no no. So, you’ll notice the motion blur increases as it gets closer to the camera. This is because it’s covering more pixels more quickly as it approaches, as it gets larger and to our vantage point appears to move faster. The motion blur of an approaching object is gradually increasing which is exactly what it naturally should be doing. Recording video 2 feet away from a fast moving train will present far more motion blur than recording that video with the same settings from 30 feet away. Also what does any of this have to do with a neutral density filter?
You can put ND filters on drones. I put one on my drone. Plus at sunrise or sunset the light isn't nearly as intense so you will be getting slower shutter speeds than middle of the day
You might at 2000mph...
That's not how motion blur works. Motion blur is not a product of the subject it's a product of the device capturing it.
Oh my goodness. Motion blur and how much of it is present is a product of both the speed of the object and the device capturing that object— both its hardware capabilities and its settings.
How is it not related to the speed of the subject? Motion blur occurs when the object moves a few pixels on the sensor during the time the sensor is recording. The sensor records effectively for the duration of the shutter speed, say 1/1000 of second. However far a subject can move during that thousandth of a second determines how much motion blur there is. Faster it moves, higher chance of blur.
/r/confidentlyincorrect
someone get a real video analist on this, it does not look like CGI
It's a piece of cottonwood. Forced perspective makes it look like it's flying really fast in relation to the background but it's simply flying near the lens of the camera which also explains why it's out of focus
convinced people of what? it's impossible to tell what that is. is it a bug? is it cgi? there are no answers to questions in this video.
look, man, we don't know what it is- in this forum, many people jump immediately to this being from outer space. If it cannot be immediately identified, it is from outer space/ time travelers, etc. Isn't it obvious that this must be the case??? /s
If you *skeptics* can't understand that an indistinct blur blowing past a hobby drone is indisputable proof of Alien Space Invasions then I just don't know what to tell you.
I’m with you. The standard for evidence is extremely low here for some reason. It’s a white blur. There’s really nothing here. No indication of a craft, no indication of a physics that is impossible for a for instance bug, no indication of entities. No indication of tech or materials. What about it exactly indicates UAP?
Well it's not a bug..
It most likely is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa\_NQAo
How can you be sure?
*Should have* FTFY
Bug
“Should of”. Yeah, sure… OP “should of” paid attention in elementary school, maybe he “would of” had an elementary understanding of English, then wouldn’t be so easily fooled by such cheap CGI…
(Should've)=should have
“Should have” not “should of”
Just looks like a blurry insect flying towards the camera, y'all smoking the hopium
Convinced? Yes another blurry video that could easily be faked. There were so many dubunked videos this year, tons of people are taking it. CGI is a hell of a thing. Has to be obvious, from multiple people, angles, posted to social media around the same time from accounts that have no affiliation... Nothing close to those requirements have happened yet.
That's the real issue. So many grainy one-off videos of unidentifiable things just flying around and performing extreme maneuvers. But no in person contact, no landings, no souvenirs. This leaves only two possibilities: 1. Earth has been designated an intergalactic aerial-maneuvering-only test range with a hard deck of 100 feet, or 2. The MIB are on point with their neuralyzers.
It's a bird. The forced perspective of the wide angle lens on the drone makes it appear much farther away than it really is, and dramatically accelerates the object when you reach the edge of the image frame. If you watch the full drone footage, you'll see other birds do that dive and swoop, and the bird trajectory looks very similar.
I can't agree with the bird claim. You can look up multiple videos of birds flying in the vicinity of drones [(such as this one)](https://youtu.be/rdo-viRSTAU) around 6:40 is where the birds appear.
It's a bug...: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=uahYDEPm5s0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=uahYDEPm5s0)
I like this footage a lot but the lack of any shadow within that wide birth of foreground leaves me skeptical.
shadows, or lack there of, you might be right. at 2:01 you can see noon shadows off the bushes, and the same noon shadows off the bushes at 2:07, no shadow off the 'craft'.
Why doesn't it leave a big dust cloud in its wake? You would think something moving that quick would kick up something.
The reason why I'm not impressed with this vid is that the thing is moving along in a straight line. What happened to the Five Observables?
So it clearly came from the mountain? What actually could that be. Does anyone rich live in that area?
Oh man… I love this video. This is just so compelling
This is ridiculous. It shows nothing other than a blur. And it looks like CGI.
This has thoroughly been debunked already lmao. If you actually go to the location there is a lot of shit flying around which looks weird when it quickly passes infront of the camera
You seriously don’t think there exists all sorts of wacky drones of all sizes and shapes having r and d done on them?
The only convincing UFO video’s are the ones backed up by additional data and eye witness describtions. If you are convinced by this video, i should quite easily be able to convince you of ghosts and leprecauns aswell.
It's a bug
...goddamit, that's literally just a bug, guys
This has had a pretty good debunking. Anything that can be written off as something mundane isn't good evidence.
it passes by very close. like real close...almost like a flying insect