jeremyjr Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I consider this entry as a follow-up to a previous thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/85807-the-reality-of-atmosphericnear-space-anomalies/ As was mentioned on that thread what are presented here are observational claims about the existence of non mundane autonomous objects that can be observed consistently in our atmosphere. As I have been unable to have physical contact with any of these objects, they usually move at high altitude, what I can present here are the result of direct observations where the "anomalous" nature of these objects is more "evident". The following footage was recorded 10/17/14 at 5:20 pm EST, as I mentioned in the previous thread I use a dual optical system to do atmospheric observations. This systems have a spotter/finder section that works in the infrared portion of the spectrum, by working in the infrared portion of the spectrum the sky scattering of electromagnetic radiation is lower compared to the visible portion of the spectrum and then its "spotting" capabilities are higher, aligned with the spotter section a medium size telescope is placed that allows the optical observation of the object being tracked by the spotter section. The first section of the footage was taken with the spotter section, this section contains azimuth, elevation data, also real time timestamps are provided. In the footage you will be able to observed clearly that this objects is self-luminous, that it changed shape/morphs in many different configurations, no ordinary object will be able to do that. The second part of the footage was taken with a telephoto(refractor) scope and it is in black and white. There is also footage in full color taken with a reflector telescope that will be published later today. To me this is another compelling footage that shows clearly the existence of non mundane autonomous objects inside our atmosphere: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBl4UXf8WDQ As I mentioned many times before, these are not isolated occurrences, similar objects can be, and should be, observed independently by anyone that use the right tools to observe these objects. In any possible "discussion" about this I ask to stick with this footage, that is what is being presented here, plenty of details to "analyze" in this particular footage and if anybody have a "mundane" explanation for this I am more than willing to hear about that. Already many cases like this exist, delaying the full attention and study in great detail of these manifestations is getting beyond a point that can be easily explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I thought you might have come back with something new. Something compelling. But just more videos.... In any possible "discussion" about this I ask to stick with this footage, that is what is being presented here, plenty of details to "analyze" in this particular footage and if anybody have a "mundane" explanation for this I am more than willing to hear about that. It is impossible to tell, in the total absence of data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I consider this entry as a follow-up to a previous thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/85807-the-reality-of-atmosphericnear-space-anomalies/ ! Moderator Note You were asked NOT to "follow-up" on this unless you had some extraordinary evidence to offset your extraordinary claims. More videos isn't going to cut it. So no, there will be no "sticking" with this footage. You failed last time with this type of footage, and there is no reason to suspect you will be any more successful this time, especially since you continue to claim things like "self-luminosity" and unnatural morphing abilities. Provide some evidence to match your claims, we're not going to let this thread go into multiple pages this time without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyjr Posted October 18, 2014 Author Share Posted October 18, 2014 Since anomalies can only, for now, be observed using optical means, (soon I will have a X-band radar system working in the setup), the only data that I can provide is optical data, visual/video data, asking for something else is really unrealistic and unreasonable. By blocking open discussion of this topic the moderators in this forum are effectively acting as sensors in a topic that continue to be taboo and where the pervasive attitude seen here only perpetuate the current "social deadlock" regarding the reality of anomalies. Extra links to full tracking footage is provided in the footage and also to some segments taken with the second telescope of the dual system of this amazing morphing object, these morphing features are very natural because they are real, reality is independent of anybody expectations or preconceptions, the fact that this is very hard for some people to accept is really irrelevant, unnatural is the resistance to accept something for which there is overwhelming evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endy0816 Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Others are not seeing "morphing features" in the provided videos. All they see is a blurry object for which there are a number of alternative explanations available. It certainly isn't taboo to discuss what you may have captured on film. As soon as you state that they are "morphing features" that is when you need to provide support. Otherwise it is simply an unfounded belief. I could assert that they are the servants of His Noodliness and you would not be able to refute me as you lack evidence to the contrary. It is the presentation of evidence for or against something that allows scientific discussions to proceed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Since anomalies can only, for now, be observed using optical means, (soon I will have a X-band radar system working in the setup), the only data that I can provide is optical data, visual/video data, asking for something else is really unrealistic and unreasonable. Unrealistic and unreasonable is EXACTLY how I would describe your insistence that the objects are "self-luminous", morphing, and not possibly ordinary.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyjr Posted October 19, 2014 Author Share Posted October 19, 2014 (edited) We are very happy to accept "optical" data as evidence for many things that we never had physical contact with: very far galaxies, stars, etc. Astronomy is based on that kind of observational data. That is the kind of data that we have for anomalies, and the amount already available is really amazing, you just have to look for them. As I had repeated multiple times these are not really isolated "anomalous" occurrences, anomalies are being observed almost in a daily basis all over our planet, as they usually are "small" and bright they are masked by the sky scattering of visible light like the stars are in daylight. Nobody can deny that the sky scattering of visible light have a "masking" effect and by using tools that minimize this effect new things will be visible that were not visible before, assuming what you will see is really unscientific, it will be similar to assume what you will see through a telescope or through a microscope and that is what many people here are doing. By bypassing the sky scattering of visible light anomalies will be more easily spotted in daylight: by scanning the sky using short radio waves(radar) or in infrared many more objects are spotted in a clear sky in daylight in the atmosphere, many of these objects are anomalies, their number is astronomical just in the atmosphere. This is an observational claim for which there is already plenty of "optical" data, and anybody independently can verify that, asking for "extraordinary" evidence beyond that optical data is really unrealistic and "unfair" considering all other facts that we accept as real for which there are only optical data. The very basic claim here is that anomalies are not "mundane" objects, we are not making any claim on what they are, for that further study is needed and that study is lacking, with these postings we are trying to increase the general awareness about an extraordinary phenomenon that can be observed by anyone and which have been and continue to be ignored and dismissed by "scientific circles" in a very unscientific way. The only scientific approach here is to make independent observations and to give this the attention that it requires. Addition: Let me point here that anomalies could easily be "mundane" objects in the sense that they appear to be part of our ecosystem, maybe they are a new species that have been generally unknown until now, very likely these objects always have been here, like many species of animals on Earth that continue to be unknown to us, in that sense they are very much "mundane". Addition #2: By using the word "unnatural" to label the claim that an object is morphing/shape-shifting/with dynamic geometry, even without realizing it, right there on the use of that word "unnatural", in this context, there are a lot of embedded preconceptions: It is assumed that we know everything that is "natural/real" and then by that "unnatural knowledge" we are able to discern what is not "natural/real", then morphing/shape-shifting anomalies are not natural/real because we know everything that is natural/real. Edited October 19, 2014 by jeremyjr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endy0816 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 (edited) I'm not disputing the videos existence(giving benefit of the doubt). What I am disputing is that there is enough evidence in the videos to make any kind of claim as to the cause. Building a case might consist of some math to show how such a life form might maintain itself, comparison to images for which the cause is known and a discussion of local geography/weather. These are all reasonable and scientific avenues available which cost little to nothing. Note: There is more than just optical data available for astronomical phenomenon and most phenomenon for that matter. Edited October 20, 2014 by Endy0816 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arc Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 jeremyjr, I was watching one of your youtube videos and saw the one from 8/22/14, I took some screenshots from it to show here. You can see the balloons pretty clearly. As the balloons rotate the mylar begins to reflect the Sun. You can even make out the wrinkle and the seam in this one. Does this look familiar? That yellow one down at the bottom looks like one of these. Probably this one. http://missionlocal.org/2010/11/balloons-fly-by-law-right-into-electrical-wires/ "balloon sales in California generate nearly $1 billion a year, including sales of peripheral items like gift baskets, flower bouquets and stuffed animals that often are attached to balloons." You are not going to run out of things to watch thats for sure. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainPanic Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Since anomalies can only, for now, be observed using optical means, (soon I will have a X-band radar system working in the setup), the only data that I can provide is optical data, visual/video data, asking for something else is really unrealistic and unreasonable. By blocking open discussion of this topic the moderators in this forum are effectively acting as sensors in a topic that continue to be taboo and where the pervasive attitude seen here only perpetuate the current "social deadlock" regarding the reality of anomalies. ! Moderator Note No. If we would sensor it, the threads would be deleted, not just shut down. Please observe that your posts are still here for anyone to read. What we are saying is that if you don't provide anything new, we don't have to give you space on our forum. If you keep posting the same, without providing evidence, that is called "soapboxing or preaching", and we have a rule against that. Also, on the speculations forum, there are some additional rules that you must follow. You simply fail to do that. We didn't set up these rules to sensor things. We set them up to force people to follow the scientific method. Once you do have something really new, you are welcome to post again. However, you are not allowed to post anything related to these anomalies if your supportive evidence is no better than the videos you post. We've seen your videos now (and we're not even removing them - again, no sensorship), and we've concluded that this is insufficient to reach any conclusions. Since the Speculations forum clearly states that if your speculation is untestable, it will be moved to the Trash Can, this is exactly what we will do with the next thread if your evidence is just a video. For now, this thread, like the previous one, is closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 ! Moderator Note Also, see #5 in our FAQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts