Beyond Skinwalker Ranch S03E04 - Orbs

[jarlrmai]

This plane flies N-S past the property with the lake at 0101UTC.

https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?replay=2024-02-15-01:02&lat=26.064&lon=-81.322&zoom=10.0
View attachment 82006

N147BZ
View attachment 82012


It has a wobbly track too and other planes that on first inspection match the other lights seen in the video.

View attachment 82008

View attachment 82009

Sync'd In sitrec: https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?cu...om/15857/FlarkeyPlaneSwamp/20250627_080322.js
View attachment 82011

You can see the strobes in this frame

 

[Mick West]

This plane flies N-S past the property with the lake at 0101UTC.

Awesome.

It; didn't match the stars, so I adjusted the camera to match. I also adjusted the sim speed to 86x to beter match the motion.
https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/1/BSWR S04E04 Wiggly Plane Flarkey Match/20250627_113059.js

All three planes match.

Not perfect due to lens distortion, and being filmed off a TV (so three levels of distortion, two lenses, and the in-room camera position)

Lining it up does require a camera position two miles [Edit: 2,000 feet]from the lake. I'm not sure if this is due to data inaccuracies, code issues, or if they actually were two miles away. However, these are the planes we are looking for.

 

[Mick West]

It has a wobbly track too

Which is not showing up in Sitrec. I need to dig into that - it's over-smoothing the tracks

 

[Mick West]

Which is not showing up in Sitrec. I need to dig into that - it's over-smoothing the tracks

Yeah, the original data is seen here in the extended-to-ground track, but the displayed track is smooth.

I shall fix. A little fiddly.

 

[Mick West]

Lining it up does require a camera position two miles from the lake. I'm not sure if this is due to data inaccuracies, code issues, or if they actually were two miles away. However, these are the planes we are looking for.

Oops, I made a mistake, as the lake was so dim in Sitrec, I thought it was somewhere else. My matching position is just 2,000 feet from the lake. Much better. I think that's within the bounds of the accuracy of GPS data and possible geoid variations.

Apple maps has a better image

 

[Mick West]

I shall fix. A little fiddly.

Fixed! Also managed to get to location at the pond with a reasonable match.

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?cu...Wiggly Plane Flarkey Match/20250627_183543.js

It now looks remarkably good, the wiggle matches perfectly

 

[jdog]

Fixed! Also managed to get to location at the pond with a reasonable match.

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/1/BSWR S04E04 Wiggly Plane Flarkey Match/20250627_183543.js

View attachment 82024
It now looks remarkably good, the wiggle matches perfectly

Great, they've found a mysterious invisible force in the air above the Everglades that makes airplanes wiggle!

 

[flarkey]

some social media coverage of this inexplicable wiggling UAP...


Source: https://x.com/chrisbledsoeufo/status/1937722255943041367?t=edCRGPeD028JEzSZLXuI5A&s=19



Source: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DLTsD_QRxK6/?igsh=bDN3YW53Z2o1YTM4

 

[jarlrmai]

I knew if we waited it would be on the socials

 

[jarlrmai]

But Bledsoe barely gets a mention on reddit UFOs maybe this will make it on now he has posted it on X

 

[Mick West]

I shall make a video.

 

[Mick West]

Priola's south view is just as good:

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?cu...amazonaws.com/1/South view/20250627_214330.js

 

[jarlrmai]

It probably needs to be explained upfront that we are looking at relatively long exposure time lapses at faster than realtime

 

[jarlrmai]

Which makes the planes' movement look more erratic than it is.

 

[Ann K]

Already?

 

[jarlrmai]

Already?
View attachment 82027

It's still there, I think it's just not embedding if you click from the bledsoe x link it works

 

[Mick West]

Source: https://x.com/MickWest/status/1938751014200570352


I'll put it on YouTube later this evening.

 

[Edward Current]

What galls me the most is that the producers made an effort to redact the timestamps. Someone directed someone else to do this. If this is a good-faith investigation, how can this be defended?

 

[Smythe Bacchus]

@Edward Current The timestamp redaction may be to hide obvious continuity errors, as they have apparently mixed closeups at one place and time with wide shots from another place and time.

These "reality" shows are relatively inexpensive to produce as they are loosely scripted and don't require professional writers or actors or large overheads for sets, costumes, and special effects.

There is a long precedent of pseudo-documentaries in the "reality TV" category which are anything but real. They appeal to unscrupulous participants as a cash earner and self-promotion vehicle.

I find these programs boring, cringeworthy, contemptuous of the audience and the exact opposite of "entertaining" - the most damning criticism of all !! Kudos to @Mick West for watching it

Kudos to @flarkey, @MonkeeSage, and @NorCal Dave, and everyone who diligently helps Mick to illuminate nonsense with a harsh light of "real reality".

 

[Smythe Bacchus]

Is this image an example of accidental shutter drag?

Article:

Source: https://youtu.be/uBQZMiV2ZcA?t=505

Article:

When shooting in low light conditions, a slower shutter speed allows more light to reach the sensor to create an exposure. It also captures the movement of anything in the frame, which we call motion blur. If we don't use a tripod while taking long exposure shots, they can also be blurry from camera shake. With the shutter drag, we intentionally introduce a camera shake or motion blur into the shot for a creative effect.

Shutter dragging is a two-step process for each exposure. First, the flash freezes the subject in the frame so that they are sharp. Now move the camera while the shutter is open to create a light path with the background light. It's a great combination of sharp and soft.

Source: https://community.alphauniverse.com/forums/topic/2807-shutter-drag-effect-in-photography-how-to-achieve/

 

[Mick West]

Is this image an example of accidental shutter drag?

Article:

View attachment 82033

Source: https://youtu.be/uBQZMiV2ZcA?t=505

Article:

When shooting in low light conditions, a slower shutter speed allows more light to reach the sensor to create an exposure. It also captures the movement of anything in the frame, which we call motion blur. If we don't use a tripod while taking long exposure shots, they can also be blurry from camera shake. With the shutter drag, we intentionally introduce a camera shake or motion blur into the shot for a creative effect.

Shutter dragging is a two-step process for each exposure. First, the flash freezes the subject in the frame so that they are sharp. Now move the camera while the shutter is open to create a light path with the background light. It's a great combination of sharp and soft.

Source: https://community.alphauniverse.com/forums/topic/2807-shutter-drag-effect-in-photography-how-to-achieve/

I think it's more likely people walking through the shot with head-mounted flashlights.

 

[Mick West]

Youtube version, 4K, with a bit of audio I missed.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lq52Nc7Ebrc

 

[FatPhil]

@Edward Current The timestamp redaction may be to hide obvious continuity errors, as they have apparently mixed closeups at one place and time with wide shots from another place and time.

That which is real does not have continuity errors. I know Mick prefers his softly softly approach, but I swear I wouldn't have concluded with the word "unfortunate". It's "iffy" at best, and "well dodgy" if I can speak more freely.

 

[NorCal Dave]

The timestamp redaction may be to hide obvious continuity errors, as they have apparently mixed closeups at one place and time with wide shots from another place and time.

But if this is a "real investigation" about "real UAP" they can get their shit together. They don't, because it's not.

I find these programs boring, cringeworthy, contemptuous of the audience and the exact opposite of "entertaining" - the most damning criticism of all !!

100% agree! I just don't get them. They are slow and boring despite all the fake hyperbole. I gave up any form of TV years ago, $10 YouTube Prime is my one service. I can't fathom paying $80+ a month to watch stuff like this. Ah well, my brother likes them.

However, these show create threads like this. It was so fun to watch it play out in real time. No subterfuge, no hiding data, people making mistakes here and there. I find it FAR more entertaining than any of the crap on TV.

 

[yoshy]

Does the show explicitly present the wobbly light as being summoned by Bledsoe? (I know I could get the answer by watching the episode but please don't make me do that to myself!)

 

[Mick West]

Does the show explicitly present the wobbly light as being summoned by Bledsoe? (I know I could get the answer by watching the episode but please don't make me do that to myself!)

I don't recall if they did. I think that's more how Bledsoe presents it.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Does the show explicitly present the wobbly light as being summoned by Bledsoe? (I know I could get the answer by watching the episode but please don't make me do that to myself!)

Doesn't seem to. Most of the location footage just shows 1 or 2 lights that looked like planes. Then they would say"it just disappeared even though ti clearly went behind a cloud. They spend a lot of times playing around with radio signals insinuating that Bledsoe and his daughter can pick up or communicate via 1.6 GHZ. Then it's all back to the ranch in Utah for the debrief. And yes, it's about as painful to watch as you would imagine. I seem to have contracted a low grade flu of some kind, so I was able to watch most of when I would normally be doing more productive things with my time.

 

[tfelix]

Flighttracking is a freezed image. At any time in the Video its showing the extact same image, not even 1 thing on it is moving at all. I croped all and changed perspective of it, so all look same perspective. 1.jpg is the first apperance 4 is the last in the video xD this series is active faking its cases

 

[Mick West]

Flighttracking is a freezed image. At any time in the Video its showing the extact same image, not even 1 thing on it is moving at all. I croped all and changed perspective of it, so all look same perspective. 1.jpg is the first apperance 4 is the last in the video xD this series is active faking its cases

Maybe not deliberate, as they are in the middle of nowhere.

 

[FatPhil]

View attachment 82059

Maybe not deliberate, as they are in the middle of nowhere.

So "we have a way of ruling out aircraft with our FAA tracker"
View attachment 82048
was a lie?

 

[Mick West]

So "we have a way of ruling out aircraft with our FAA tracker"
View attachment 82048
was a lie?

It certainly seems inaccurate at that moment. But FR24 is a way of partially ruling out aircraft, if they got internet. It's also a way of partially ruling it out later, if not available in real time. So, misleading.

 

[flarkey]

So "we have a way of ruling out aircraft with our FAA tracker"
View attachment 82048
was a lie?

it was a lie in many ways. Fight Radar 24 has no association with the FAA. They are a Swedish company, and although there is law that US planes have to broadcast ADSB the data is collected by civilians all around the world.

 

[Mick West]

it was a lie in many ways. Fight Radar 24 has no association with the FAA. They are a Swedish company, and although there is law that US planes have to broadcast ADSB the data is collected by civilians all around the world.

A lie implies a deliberate untruth. They might simply not know what they are talking about.

 

[JMartJr]

They can say whatever they want. "FAA tracker" sounds cool, and is close enough for an entertainment show. They could say their magic plane dowser proved it was not a plane. Its all good as long as it is entertaining to the target audience...

 

[Mick West]

Priola updated his video description:

Updated Analysis: A Case of Mistaken Identity
This time-lapse video, recorded in the Everglades during an overnight investigation with Chris and Emily Bledsoe, originally appeared to show a craft exhibiting erratic, nonstandard flight behavior—unlike anything we could identify in the moment or through initial research.

At the time, I cross-checked the timestamp against publicly available flight tracking data (using FlightRadar24) and found no matching aircraft in the area. Based on this, and the apparent undulating motion of the object in the time-lapse, I initially ruled out conventional aircraft.

However, a follow-up analysis by investigator Mark West successfully identified the object as a small, twin-engine aircraft (PA-34 tail number N147BZ). His reconstruction used open-source data, visual scene-matching, and flight path overlays that align precisely with the light trail captured in my footage. The apparent erratic motion turns out to be a result of the plane flying almost directly toward the camera—combined with perspective compression and slight course corrections, which are common in small craft but exaggerated in time-lapse.

I also want to acknowledge that I missed a key piece of evidence during my own review—something that could have solved this sooner. I didn't catch it, and that's on me.

This serves as an important reminder: many aerial light anomalies can be convincingly explained with the right tools and hindsight. It's also why I personally give more attention to lights or craft that display highly irregular, dynamic movement—something I've found difficult to explain through conventional means. Smooth, linear flight is often the hallmark of man-made craft; erratic motion tends to stand out.

I appreciate the detailed work from the debunking community—this is how real investigation should function. As I continue documenting aerial phenomena, I remain committed to clarity over confirmation bias.

Source: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLTsD_QRxK6/

 

[JMartJr]

Nice work, Mark.

 

[jarlrmai]

Priola updated his video description:

Updated Analysis: A Case of Mistaken Identity
This time-lapse video, recorded in the Everglades during an overnight investigation with Chris and Emily Bledsoe, originally appeared to show a craft exhibiting erratic, nonstandard flight behavior—unlike anything we could identify in the moment or through initial research.

At the time, I cross-checked the timestamp against publicly available flight tracking data (using FlightRadar24) and found no matching aircraft in the area. Based on this, and the apparent undulating motion of the object in the time-lapse, I initially ruled out conventional aircraft.

However, a follow-up analysis by investigator Mark West successfully identified the object as a small, twin-engine aircraft (PA-34 tail number N147BZ). His reconstruction used open-source data, visual scene-matching, and flight path overlays that align precisely with the light trail captured in my footage. The apparent erratic motion turns out to be a result of the plane flying almost directly toward the camera—combined with perspective compression and slight course corrections, which are common in small craft but exaggerated in time-lapse.

I also want to acknowledge that I missed a key piece of evidence during my own review—something that could have solved this sooner. I didn't catch it, and that's on me.

This serves as an important reminder: many aerial light anomalies can be convincingly explained with the right tools and hindsight. It's also why I personally give more attention to lights or craft that display highly irregular, dynamic movement—something I've found difficult to explain through conventional means. Smooth, linear flight is often the hallmark of man-made craft; erratic motion tends to stand out.

I appreciate the detailed work from the debunking community—this is how real investigation should function. As I continue documenting aerial phenomena, I remain committed to clarity over confirmation bias.

Source: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLTsD_QRxK6/

Hey Steve maybe give the date and time next time and we won't have to painstakingly frame by frame analyse a 40 minute TV episode, looking for dates the editing team missed.

Hey maybe even do it before you release a TV episode and avoid this potential embarrassment. Oh and getting people's names wrong is also embarrassing.

The lesson learned here should be obvious, however it's probably more likely to be improved opsec.

 

[Mick West]

Hey Steve maybe give the date and time next time

He also replied ot my comment:

@mickwest hi Mick. Thank you for taking the time to research this on your end. A couple things for the record: I did indeed use flight radar 24 to track aircraft in the area that night and for some reason I did not see a craft that fit that time in that airspace at the time. I find that very strange. But what you have found here is really unmistakable. Thank you for your solid investigative effort. What to do here with this video? I think I will update the description to include your findings. Ah, second thing, I would have given you all the metadata if asked! :)

 

[jarlrmai]

Did you not ask on Twitter? Did we know that Steve was the one that made the recording? Could he not have put the metadata in his Instapost?

I guess they were "so sure they did it right" they didn't even think to post it..

 

[FatPhil]

Hey Steve maybe give the date and time next time and we won't have to painstakingly frame by frame analyse a 40 minute TV episode, looking for dates the editing team missed.

Hey maybe even do it before you release a TV episode and avoid this potential embarrassment. Oh and getting people's names wrong is also embarrassing.

Can he also expand on precisely what was the "tell-tale sign it's not an aircraft"? (Mick's YT vid id lq52Nc7Ebrc above, ts 0:20).

Anyway, we can chalk up yet another true positive for "it's not an aircraft" being said with certainty implying it's an aircraft. Our *jokes* are more reliably accurate than their "science".