Clouds over Mount Shasta - Dissipation Trail?

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
Just for reference, I've driving past Mt. Shasta many a time, weird looking clouds over Shasta are not uncommon, even when the rest of the sky is fairly clear. Local lore is that when the clouds cover the top of the mountain, it's the Lumanarians hiding what they're up too.

1670262968921.png

1670262999182.png

1670263020764.png

1670263067352.png
https://www.mtshastamuseum.com/2021/09/17/the-lenticular-clouds-of-mount-shasta/

I managed to find this one image of a rare Kelvin-Hemholtz wave over Mt. Shasta form an odd rental property site for Siskiyou County:


1670263925718.png
http://mtshastasweethome.com/

Kelvin-Helmholtz waves are vertical waves in the atmosphere generated by wind shear. If enough moisture is present, a characteristic cloud, the Kelvin-Helmholtz wave cloud (also known as Fluctus), can be formed. The wind shear is the result of stronger upper winds being separated from weaker lower winds by a stable layer between. This thermodynamically stable layer is typically a temperature inversion.

When the upper layer of air is moving at a higher speed than the lower level air, it may scoop the top of an existing cloud layer into these wave-like rolling shapes. The clouds themselves occur within the stable layer at altitudes above 16,500 ft.

The presence of Kelvin-Helmholtz wave cloud is a useful indication of wind shear and turbulence. Vertical soundings can also be examined to show the vertical wind profile and the existence of any stable layers. Kelvin-Helmholtz waves are most commonly found but not limited to mountainous regions. Pilots should avoid flying at the altitude where these clouds are forming and should expect and prepare for turbulence if they have to fly through the boundary between two airstreams, for example during climb or descent.
Content from External Source
https://skybrary.aero/articles/kelvin-helmholtz-waves
 

Ann K

Senior Member.
@NorCal Dave, I have (many years ago) actually seen lenticular cloud photos in books that claim they're examples of UFOs. But having once lived at the foot of a mountain, I roared with laughter, and cheerfully gave up my childhood interest in woo to replace it with skepticism. I understand how flatlanders would find them mysterious because there's nothing like that over flat corn fields, but anyone familiar with mountain skies can recognize them.
 

Mkitz

Member
June 28th 2020 at 9:31 a.m. That could be an hour off, since camera was set on Denver time and my home in California is an hour earlier. So 99% probability it was 8:31 a.m. Pacific time. All the other frames show the time elapsed between frames correctly. If you need another time please let me know. Thank you.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
June 28th 2020 at 9:31 a.m
that works close. if you forgot to change the camera for daylight savings time it would jive in california.

what is the timestamp of the second photo on your Opening post of this thread?
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
For clarification, I'm trying to understand exactly what you're saying happened.

To start with, you saw what appeared to be a fast-moving object on the LCD screen of your large format camera system, but you were unable to photograph it before it cleared the screen:

I observed a fast moving object, circular in shape, but no details on the lcd screen. I was not able to photography the object because I had a two second delay on the camera to reduce vibration.

Weeks later you say you found a "vapor trail" on one of the photos you had taken that seemed to coincide with where you remembered the object to have passed across the LCD screen:

However, weeks later I discovered the vapor trail left by the object and the vapor trail coincides perfectly with the trajectory of the object on the screen.

This "vapor trail" is almost undetectable, unless the color original is converted to B&W and the contrast is boosted:

The first image is has the contrast boosted to show the vapor trail
The images were photographed in color but I converted them to black and white to enhance the details

And, the cloud layers were in fact very slight and not nearly as thick and dramatic as they seem in the photos. People on the ground would not have seen them at all:

Observing the cloud above the mountain from ground, it appeared as very shallow and almost insignificant. I was using a 600mm telephoto lens that makes the cloud seem much thicker. Again, anyone viewing the cloud above the mountain would have thought nothing of it, all detail was undetectable because of the brightness from the sun behind the mountain. Only shooting at 1/4000 of a second under high magnification revealed the changing patterns.

In addition, this "vapor trail" only lasted milliseconds:

Yes, it is mind boggling that I caught the vapor trail that lasted in milliseconds. The vapor trail coincides perfectly with the path of the object.

At some point after taking the photograph that resulted in the "vapor trail", possible 15 seconds later, you continued to take photos of unusual cloud formations for 2 hours:

I was photographing about every 15 seconds and I will have a video that shows the transformations over the two hours.

For the next two hours I photographed the clouds over the mountain as there was a constant change of interesting patterns in the clouds.

And you think the strange clouds formations are related to the object that produced the "vapor trail" traveling at supersonic speeds before possibly impacting on the mountain and creating 2 hours of strange cloud formations:

I saw an object in the lcd screen that based on the duration of a second that took to cross the screen and the distance it traversed, the speed was likely supersonic.
The second image shows an pattern that emerged from the point at which the object would have impacted the mountain. There were hikers in the vicinity of the area that an object would have struck the mountain, about 13,000 ft in elevation and a short distance from the summit of Mt. Shasta that is over 14,000
After the vapor trail the cloud patterns persisted for two hours.
Whatever object left the vapor trail through the clouds appears to have had an energetic effect on this area for two hours and hundreds of images were captured.

That's my understanding, please correct me if I'm missing something.

Assuming I got this right we can start with the impact. You pretty much showed this to be highly unlikely your self:

The object made no sound as it moving toward the mountain and there have been no reports from hikers indicating an impact
There is no report of an impact from the hikers near the likely impact zone. There were no sonic booms reported.

I also live in Northen California, a couple of hours from Mr. Shasta. While COVID was the big story of 2020 and rural Siskiyou County isn't downtown LA, I feel certain one of the local TV stations (KCRA 7 out of Redding or KHSL 12, Chico) would have reported a supersonic object impacting on Mt. Shasta and creating a 2 hour show of strange cloud formations.

Likewise, there are enough commercial and General Aviation flights that have passed over the mountain in the ensuing 2 1/2 years, that an impact crater would have been noticed.

Barring some large-scale government conspiracy and coverup it appears there is just no evidence that anything impacted Mt. Shasta.

The strange cloud formation could be just that. It would be interesting to see some of the color originals. You seem to indicate that the clouds were very thin, wispy and maybe very difficult to see under normal circumstances. As you indicate that you do these photo sessions often, is it your normal procedure to convert the photos to B&W and then up the contrast? Or was this a new thing you tried after finding the vapor trail? Would any of your other photos over the years look as strange and unusual with the same treatment?

As for the vapor trail itself, I just don't understand how it can be as long as it appears and only last "milliseconds". Regardless of how fast the object was traveling, if the conditions are right for a vapor trail to be left in the sky, then it's in the sky. At least for a few seconds if not minutes. If the next photo is 15 seconds later then it didn't last even that long.

You describe it as being narrower at the front and fanning out is it goes along, so it would have had to have time to fan out. I don't see how a vapor trail winks in and out of existence.

Now if the clouds are as thin as you seem to hint at, is it possible that they thinned out enough to momentarily allow a higher contrail to become visible through the clouds. In other words, it's a contrail of a jet passing overhead being glimpsed through the clouds. Now that the time is known, member Flarky can figure this out. And this is assuming it's an actual contrail or vapor trail, and not just some artifact that has become artificially enhanced through the B&W/contrast treatment.

Lastly, as Dierdre pointed out in post #29, things that are closer to the camera can appear to be traveling very fast, when they are not. Your reply missed the point:
It could not be closer to the camera because the airflow over the mountain

The suggesting is that the object is small and close to the camera lens, as in on your window or just outside if the window was open during summer:

1670279311061.png

A small insect flying between your lens and the mountain would appear to zip across the LCD screen. The relationship between size speed and distance of objects in 2D images of our 3D world are discussed in these threads:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/utah-drone-video-of-ufo-probably-an-insect-zip-by.10370

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/tic-tac-in-greece.12147
 

flarkey

Senior Member.
Staff member

deirdre

Senior Member.
As for the vapor trail itself, I just don't understand how it can be as long as it appears and only last "milliseconds".
i don't know how he knows it lasted milliseconds if he didn't notice it til weeks later.

Please somebody check my date and Time conversions...

8.34 PDT on June 28th 2020 is 3.34pm UTC = 1534 hrs UTC
i believe 8:34 is in response to my question regarding the second photo in the OP. the one with no discernable contrail.
note: the contrail [shadow] is extremely faint, so even the slightest change in cloud movement or thickness would make it disappear.

also note: with daylight savings time that spring we dont know if he changed his camera time. he says he didnt change it when he moved back to california, so like most people in this world he likely doesnt change his camera time as needed. i like the 9:14 plane myself, assuming he is correct when he says the trail is headed to the Northeast. (even though @Norcal quotes him above as saying the sun is behind the mountain. so...)

add: original unmanipulated photo timestamped 9:31 according to camera clock.
vapor trail unmanipulated.jpg
 

Mkitz

Member
For clarification, I'm trying to understand exactly what you're saying happened.

To start with, you saw what appeared to be a fast-moving object on the LCD screen of your large format camera system, but you were unable to photograph it before it cleared the screen:



Weeks later you say you found a "vapor trail" on one of the photos you had taken that seemed to coincide with where you remembered the object to have passed across the LCD screen:



This "vapor trail" is almost undetectable, unless the color original is converted to B&W and the contrast is boosted:




And, the cloud layers were in fact very slight and not nearly as thick and dramatic as they seem in the photos. People on the ground would not have seen them at all:



In addition, this "vapor trail" only lasted milliseconds:



At some point after taking the photograph that resulted in the "vapor trail", possible 15 seconds later, you continued to take photos of unusual cloud formations for 2 hours:





And you think the strange clouds formations are related to the object that produced the "vapor trail" traveling at supersonic speeds before possibly impacting on the mountain and creating 2 hours of strange cloud formations:






That's my understanding, please correct me if I'm missing something.

Assuming I got this right we can start with the impact. You pretty much showed this to be highly unlikely your self:




I also live in Northen California, a couple of hours from Mr. Shasta. While COVID was the big story of 2020 and rural Siskiyou County isn't downtown LA, I feel certain one of the local TV stations (KCRA 7 out of Redding or KHSL 12, Chico) would have reported a supersonic object impacting on Mt. Shasta and creating a 2 hour show of strange cloud formations.

Likewise, there are enough commercial and General Aviation flights that have passed over the mountain in the ensuing 2 1/2 years, that an impact crater would have been noticed.

Barring some large-scale government conspiracy and coverup it appears there is just no evidence that anything impacted Mt. Shasta.

The strange cloud formation could be just that. It would be interesting to see some of the color originals. You seem to indicate that the clouds were very thin, wispy and maybe very difficult to see under normal circumstances. As you indicate that you do these photo sessions often, is it your normal procedure to convert the photos to B&W and then up the contrast? Or was this a new thing you tried after finding the vapor trail? Would any of your other photos over the years look as strange and unusual with the same treatment?

As for the vapor trail itself, I just don't understand how it can be as long as it appears and only last "milliseconds". Regardless of how fast the object was traveling, if the conditions are right for a vapor trail to be left in the sky, then it's in the sky. At least for a few seconds if not minutes. If the next photo is 15 seconds later then it didn't last even that long.

You describe it as being narrower at the front and fanning out is it goes along, so it would have had to have time to fan out. I don't see how a vapor trail winks in and out of existence.

Now if the clouds are as thin as you seem to hint at, is it possible that they thinned out enough to momentarily allow a higher contrail to become visible through the clouds. In other words, it's a contrail of a jet passing overhead being glimpsed through the clouds. Now that the time is known, member Flarky can figure this out. And this is assuming it's an actual contrail or vapor trail, and not just some artifact that has become artificially enhanced through the B&W/contrast treatment.

Lastly, as Dierdre pointed out in post #29, things that are closer to the camera can appear to be traveling very fast, when they are not. Your reply missed the point:


The suggesting is that the object is small and close to the camera lens, as in on your window or just outside if the window was open during summer:

1670279311061.png

A small insect flying between your lens and the mountain would appear to zip across the LCD screen. The relationship between size speed and distance of objects in 2D images of our 3D world are discussed in these threads:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/utah-drone-video-of-ufo-probably-an-insect-zip-by.10370

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/tic-tac-in-greece.12147
Ok, first, no observer from the ground would think that the small band of clouds moving over the mountain were any great significance. As I said, I was shooting at 1/4000 of a second to compensate from the brightness in the clouds that made the detection of the patterns impossible. Even the hikers on the mountain would not have noticed the patterns because of the closeness and because of the brightness. That morning my interest was only to capture hikers, to see how much detail I could resolve with the new lens and camera. It was only when I raise the shutter speed to 1/4000 of a second that the details emerged. As I said previously, the area under the cloud where the patterns emerged is only a few hundred feet in height. The mountain, as you know is 14,000 feet and my vantage point is 3.000 feet, so the clouds would appear insignificant and quite different from the typical lenticular clouds that form around the summit.

I had a two second delay set on the camera, since i had to depress the shutter button and by looking at the setup you can see it is to set the rig vibrating. When I say the object produces the vapor trail it was on the back of the LCD screen of the medium format camera and you can see the screen angled away from the camera. The beauty of digital photography is you see what you are going to photography, there is little to no guess work. That morning I saw an object move from the right hand corner or just below it toward the lower left hand corner. It could not have lasted more than a second or two, it was circular in shape on the LCD screen, but detail was present. It may have been another shape, but what I saw was a circular object. I did not think to look up, but immediately hit the shutter button. SInce there was a two second delay it was impossible for me to capture the object. I assumed I had nothing and a week later going through the images I say the faint outline of the vapor trail. As I have explained, my files are 149 mb and on a good monitor show a lot more detail than what you see in the low res images I have posted. The second image you asked me to post had five or more images between it and the vapor trail. I can post those if you would like. As for the duration of the vapor trail, the moisture or air currents moving across the mountain, as you can see in videos posted elsewhere is moving at considerable speed and any trace or track fo an object is erased immeditately. In fact, any of the patterns you see last barely a second. It is the 1/4000 that is preventing blurring.

I did not hear a sonic boom, and do not know of the object was breaking the sound barrier, but I assumed it must. Two hours of patterns can be observed in sequentially with about 15 seconds between each frame. This is not something I could ever fabricate or ever would. The lack of corroboration by TV stations means nothing if you understand that there was nothing over the mountain to attract anyones attention, unless they had a telephoto lens. It was the most unspectacular cloud formation present that day, but what was taking place between the mountain and the cloud is entirely unexpected to any one familiar with shooting cloudscapes. Scan the internet and find a similar occurrence. It does not exist. When you see video of fast moving air over the mountain that condenses into clouds, the trailing edge of the cloud is fractured into jumbled pieces with no discernible form. The irony of the situation is that I did not want to get out bed that morning, but my wife needed me to mix some hair coloring kit. It was after that chemistry, that I wondered over to the picture window and notice the lenticular clouds that is much fatter and interesting to look at from the LCD. Then the object appeared and the spectacle unfolded. Is this one in a million, one in a billion, probably so, I was at the right place at the right time and I had just received the new telephone lens and had cleared my memory card that previous day. I am used to just filling the card and deleting as I need to. Something prompted me to clear the card. I practice a style of photography, trained from my 4x5 days, where a photo trip would involve 30 4x5s and not 5000 digital images. You had to be very selective with 4x5. The medium format camera will capture subtle gradations that 35mm cannot. I was fortunate to have these tools. The longest lens that Fuji makes for the GF 50r is 180 focal length equivalent. This is why I adapted my camera to the 4x5, the is the way to get telephoto reach. There is no autofocus and it is not practical for wildlife, but it was perfect what I needed. I will be out in Mt. Shasta after Christmas and you are welcome to drive up and see the set up and view the images on a 65 inch television. It would be enjoyable for me to share the experience. Look at the multiple image screenshot I uploaded and see how quickly it changes from image to the next. I have cropped images in between some of the images, but you can get the idea. Regards, Morey
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Ok, first, no observer from the ground would think that the small band of clouds moving over the mountain were any great significance. As I said, I was shooting at 1/4000 of a second to compensate from the brightness in the clouds that made the detection of the patterns impossible. Even the hikers on the mountain would not have noticed the patterns because of the closeness and because of the brightness.
well if you are saying that the clouds could not be seen by human eye, then why do yousay the cloud patterns are impossible? maybe they happen often and people just dont photograph them because they dont have big fancy cameras.

as you can see in videos posted elsewhere is moving at considerable speed
those are timelapsed.

In fact, any of the patterns you see last barely a second.
actually i think i see the same blobs in your 1st and second op pics you say are 3 minutes apart.
1670287395109.png

i'm not picking on you, i just dont understand why you think something crashed into the mountain and noone noticed. do you mean maybe a ufo dropped a bomb or dropped a radio transmitter and the radio waves were strong enough to disrupt the clouds noone can see with the human eye. kinda like the HAARP conspiracy stuff?

and notice the lenticular clouds that is much fatter and interesting to look at from the LCD.
i thought noone would notice them unless you shot at at 1/4000th sec.?

Then the object appeared and the spectacle unfolded.
so the bug flew by when you first looked at the lcd, then you started taking photos? so ...you dont know if the spectacle was happening before you looked at the camera. btw, i remember 2020 was bad for CA as far as wildfires, was there any smog type things happening then, do you remember? i remember the news talking about how the fires messed with weather patterns. so just curious if you think there could be a connection with that as far as pretty swirling clouds.

either way they are cool photos, for future pretty clouds you snap, we do have a "Photos of clouds you took yourself thread" you can share with us.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
It was the most unspectacular cloud formation present that day, but what was taking place between the mountain and the cloud is entirely unexpected to any one familiar with shooting cloudscapes. Scan the internet and find a similar occurrence. It does not exist.
i scanned flickr and what does not exist is people with your camera power apparently. i found 1 at 1/1600 secs but the rest were all pretty slow. made of list of ones that looked like swirly clouds under a smooth lenticular type thing. there werent many (most people take shots of a full lenticular or the snow blowing off/vs clouds) and none were zoomed in like yours. or as fast as yours.

heres my list if you want to look. they are not crisp like yours so you have to look for the suggestion of the pattern swirls, which i feel are there. the 1/1600 the lenticular covers the top so we only get the edge to view

flicker1
1/1600 iso 100
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/125135958@N03/52122614379/in/faves-13286053@N07/

1/1600 iso 100
flicker1.jpg

2.
1/1000
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/fgmachine/17841038690/

1/1000

flicker2.jpg
3.
1/1250 iso 100
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/44830715@N05/50234897828/


flickr3.jpg
4.
1/1000
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/125135958@N03/52190322342/


flickr4.jpg
5.
no exif data
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/43021856@N04/4304090908/


6.
no exif data
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bodiegroup/5730221565/


7.
no exif data
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bodiegroup/5724224763/
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
As for the duration of the vapor trail, the moisture or air currents moving across the mountain, as you can see in videos posted elsewhere is moving at considerable speed and any trace or track fo an object is erased immeditately. In fact, any of the patterns you see last barely a second. It is the 1/4000 that is preventing blurring.

Yes, but when we look at your photo of the vapor trail it's pretty straight, and assuming your idea that the ridge in the photo is:
the ridge you see in the photo is quite wide, thousands of feet wide to be sure.

Than the vapor trail is straight for, what a couple of hundred feet:

1670292270498.png

I don't think it works that way. As a contrail/vapor trail is produced in an area of high winds the oldest part begins to distort and drift with the wind before the newer parts. Something like this:
1670292416599.png

There can't be a straight vapor trail for hundreds of feet that stays straight and THEN suddenly gets blown away by the high winds. If the high winds were moving the vapor trail than it should look more like my red line here:
1670292814956.png

The oldest part of the vapor trail should be moving in the direction of the wind before the newest part. If the winds were too high for that to happen than the whole vapor trail would be moving with the wind BEFORE having the time to become straight, regardless of how fast the object might be moving. Once the vapor trail is layed down, it's going to react to the prevailing winds. If the winds are very high, it will never have a chance to become straight to begin with.

Back to the clouds, you state:

Ok, first, no observer from the ground would think that the small band of clouds moving over the mountain were any great significance. As I said, I was shooting at 1/4000 of a second to compensate from the brightness in the clouds that made the detection of the patterns impossible. Even the hikers on the mountain would not have noticed the patterns because of the closeness and because of the brightness.

And:

The lack of corroboration by TV stations means nothing if you understand that there was nothing over the mountain to attract anyones attention, unless they had a telephoto lens. It was the most unspectacular cloud formation present that day, but what was taking place between the mountain and the cloud is entirely unexpected to any one familiar with shooting cloudscapes.

Now my talking about the TV stations was in response to your suggestion that the object "impacted" on Mt. Shasta. If, as you say here there was "nothing over the mountain to attract andyones (sic) attention, unless they had a telephoto lens", then again this helps us rule out an "impact" and seems to suggest that what you were photographing was result of the set up you were using. For the first time:

to see how much detail I could resolve with the new lens and camera. It was only when I raise the shutter speed to 1/4000 of a second that the details emerged.
I had just received the new telephone lens

Is it possible that your new set up showed stuff you hadn't seen before? They're great photos! Like I said, I've driving by Shasta many times, headed to Bend. In the middle 00's I helped my buddy build an off-grid vacation home northeast of McCloud at the base of the mountain. It's a magical place, even without the Lumarians and UFOs.

I will be out in Mt. Shasta after Christmas and you are welcome to drive up and see the set up and view the images on a 65 inch television. It would be enjoyable for me to share the experience.

Possible, we may head to Bend for New Years as the kids are out and about. Or Baja.
 

Attachments

  • 1670291695636.png
    1670291695636.png
    164.4 KB · Views: 14

Mkitz

Member
Wow. Forensic analysis. First, I said if the object impacted the mountain the hikers below would have reported it. I never claimed there was an impact and I don’t think there was. The vapor trail is I manipulated and as it appears. All the wild speculation about how it should have behaved is pointless, unless you are implying it is impossible for the object to have left that type of trail. I can never prove this is real and you can never prove it was not. What makes sense is given the formations that followed there would be no reason for me to invent a vapor trail. The images that follow speak for themselves and do not a vapor trail to embellish their significance. There are far more impactful. There is more than wind present producing the shapes and there appear structures within the cloud patterns hard to explain. I will post later. I speculated that the vapor trail object have initiated the transformations or produced some kind of energy field changes. For all I know the object could have been hovering in the clouds. There also is the possibility that object has nothing to do with the cloud patterns. Just coincidence. I am trained as a scientist and will look for the simplest explanation first. My camera is not unusual and most digital cameras shoot at 1/4000 or more. This is not exceptional. My choice of shutter speed was dictated by the need to adjust for the brightness. It was an advantage in capturing the fast moving clouds. I have seen as you have, many images of Mt Shasta for it i has even photographed millions of times and with camera eqioment far superior to mine. The lens and 4x5 are fifty years old. No autofocus. Viewing the mountain with the naked eye with the blown out highlights would attract no one to pull out their equipment. It was nondescript.
I had my equipment ready to go in anticipation of trying the new lens. There are movements in the shapes and transformations that are verily unique. Consider how a relatively smsll lenticular cloud compresses and then rotates, fans out at the bottom, open up an area in the underbelly of the cloud that shows constantly changing forms. How often does a moisture flow last for two hours. The cloud that looks like bifurcating lightning. Has anyone seen that before. Is there an energy shaping the transformations? I believe there is. What it all means? Maybe nothing but a scientist will look for kind of organizing force to account for the organization. It is not random, of that I am certain. If this were an ordinary occurrence, surely some one would have captured it before. So I will work backwards from the pattens and say the vapor cloud is no more unusual than the events that followed it. Amen to that. Something organic, something intelligent and something of living presence is at play. The universe is magical once you can break away from the hypnotic spell of the senses that can never accept snything greater than themselves. Harder than stone and darker than night. If the cloud patterns bring no joy and we get so caught up into forcing reality to conform to our expectations, than that is the way it has to be. Deirdre, thanks for a prova stive discussion. Embrace the magic, it is nothing to do with me. Cheers.
 

Ann K

Senior Member.
@Mkitz
If you've been reading Metabunk I'm sure you've seen that a good many explanations of things end up being somewhat prosaic. That's generally the case, that something mysterious and gee-whiz turns out to be an ordinary occurrence.
I am trained as a scientist and will look for the simplest explanation first.
So are a good many of us. But it seems that you are going for a mysterious explanation rather than a simple one:
Something organic, something intelligent and something of living presence is at play. The universe is magical once you can break away from the hypnotic spell of the senses that can never accept snything greater than themselves. Harder than stone and darker than night. If the cloud patterns bring no joy and we get so caught up into forcing reality to conform to our expectations, than that is the way it has to be.
The beauty and the "magic" come when we appreciate the images as art. But this is a debunking site, and as I said, the explanations are usually more mundane. That's what we do. I for one appreciate the "beauty and magic" of a good sensible explanation as much as I do the sheer wow-factor of a good image. (I think that's my scientist side as well as my artist side, my left brain working in conjunction with my right brain.) I'm sorry if you find that to be disappointing, but I don't think any serious investigation into phenomena has ever concluded that "something intelligent and something of living presence is at play", or that any form of mysticism must be the answer. Take pleasure in the honest satisfaction of reality; nature provides endless wonder without woo.
 

Mkitz

Member
Hi Ann, thank you for the reply. I am a. scientist. by training and do. not trade wishful thinking and magical thought for hard reality. I see that material explanations of the human mind have completely failed after one hundred years of trying. The logical conclusion when. you. can explain nothing with a mechanical model is to seek an alternative. Intelligence is not an exclusive trait of brains, that is a bit. too egocentric and there intelligences infinity greater than our own, so great that the ego. is unable to comprehend how limited it is in every way. The intelligence is present in and through all nature and to. think that we are the only thing on this planet that is conscious and can direct physical events is ridiculous. In fact, what we manage to direct usually ends up destroying itself. So there is a humility that one must acquire to learn anything and be open to everything. There is a sequence of organized patterns that. repeat themselves for two hours and some will say chance and others will look for the deeper explanation, I choose the latter. I cannot prove that what I recorded is real, altered or some photoshop creation and all the speculation about what vapor trails can do or not do will lead to.nothing. If the images peak your curiosity and. open the door to. another way of seeing nature, great, otherwise it probably makes no difference to. your existence at this time. Live in the back of Plato's cave denying there are alternative realities. it would be futile of me to try and convince anyone otherwise. if people want to wonder with me and try and understand alternative possibilities that is great. This may not be the place. Thank you again. Morey
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
The universe is magical once you can break away from the hypnotic spell of the senses that can never accept snything greater than themselves. Harder than stone and darker than night. If the cloud patterns bring no joy and we get so caught up into forcing reality to conform to our expectations, than that is the way it has to be. Deirdre, thanks for a prova stive discussion. Embrace the magic, it is nothing to do with me. Cheers.

But aren't you forcing the reality to conform your expectation of a mystical force causing the cloud formations? You seem to deeply dislike the idea that these formations be accidental which affects your judgment as a scientist.

I for one agree that the universe is 'magical'. Magical in the sense of awesomely fascinating and even bizarre the deeper you investigate and observe. I agree that the properties of the universe cannot be easily brushed aside as just an accident (anthropic principle) which is also the position of Roger Penrose, Hawking's closest associate. Having said that, many behaviours of objects and phenomena in the universe demonstrably follow random or stochastic patterns -- patterns that are statistically random. Many things being accidental is one of many properties of the universe demonstrated by observation even if it's not the overriding property of all things.

You don't have to give up your belief in a deeper and subtler order to accept that nothing mystical happened in these cloud formations.

P.S. Physical observation is a gift. Not a devilish distraction designed to fool us.
 

Mkitz

Member
Debunking begins with questioning whether you are capable of understanding anything in your present state of consciousness. How do you know what you prove is real and not just self deception. When the thinker does not question their thinking there is no real thinking And no real science. Freud was convinced only he could see straight and the rest of us had to undergo years of psychoanalysis. The behaviorist thought they had found the solution for a utopia by treating everyone as rats. Now AI will take us to the promised land. All under the guise of logic and science. If don’t question the layers of self deception that make it seem like you are on top of the world and have the only key to truth, think again. Learn to remove the clown mask that makes you better than others. That is the little ego that struts and frets and ends up signifying nothing, WS. We have destroyed every civilization and are in the process of destroying this one. Debunk yourself with a strong dose of humility before that which is greater than you, logic dictates that the infinite cannot produce such parodies of itself. It is we who choose to defy and play dumb. We have to be better and 100 years of psychology still trying to figure who we are. Truth cannot be that hard. If you don’t know who you are how can you expect to know anything else? That is where science begins and anything else is self-delusion that is never ending. Thank you Lilwabbit for getting me going.
 

Mkitz

Member
This is where the object creating the vapor trail ended up. Interesting structures, appearing to link. I don't understand it, but it is a curious pattern. Is it cloud or something. else?
vp link pattern.jpg
 

FatPhil

Senior Member.
This is where the object creating the vapor trail ended up.
Is there any evidence to support that claim? I prefer @Mendel's claim that whatever caused the vapour trail bypassed the mountain ridge. Which would be the null hypothesis anyway, as the things that cause vapour trails bypass mountains the vast majority of times, by design.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
That morning I saw an object move from the right hand corner or just below it toward the lower left hand corner. It could not have lasted more than a second or two, it was circular in shape on the LCD screen, but detail was present.
what color was the object?

the vapor trail does not go from corner to corner, were you zoomed in more at the time?

Interesting structures around the heart like shape.
a heart-like shape is often seen in pictures of "wake turbulence", do a google image search for that to see more examples

wake_turbulence_shutterstock_1297412341.jpg

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHSi_Lpbqzw&t=80
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
I never claimed there was an impact and I don’t think there was.
This is where the object creating the vapor trail ended up.
To be 100% clear: you think it landed there? After being supersonic seconds earlier?
and then, being stationary, caused cloud turbulence for 2 hours?
Interesting structures, appearing to link. I don't understand it, but it is a curious pattern. Is it cloud or something. else?
It's cloud. I see no evidence that it would be anything else.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Interesting structures, appearing to link. I don't understand it, but it is a curious pattern. Is it cloud or something. else?
i think both. they are clouds and your camera has enhanced them. btw, do you have a polarized filter?

unless you are implying it is impossible for the object to have left that type of trail
he is saying that. he is saying your explanation, that the trail is going through that cloud it APPEARS to be going through, is impossible because of how wind and contrails work. (the likely explanation is it is a weird artifact from your window or it is a contrail shadow).

As far as insulting us by comparing us to Freud and Skinner, i would say maybe you should read your own words and take them to heart. That said, i agree that Mother Nature is magical and amazing. If She wasn't then MB would be boring as heck. I believe in angels, witchcraft (not like the movies witchcraft but still...) and psychic abilities. either an angel or witchcraft abilities could produce those patterns if they wished by manipulating the wind, but they look like normal cloud swirls, affected by the mountain and your camera, with a cool contrail shadow caught in one photo. It's not our fault that is what your pictures look like. You don't have to be so insulted, you're the one who chose to come to a science based website.

Screenshot 2022-12-06 091924.png
 
Last edited:

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
I wonder if the line in the clouds we see might, in fact, not be in the clouds. To me it looks most reminiscent of a piece of fine hair (or grass, spider silk, etc) close to the camera. This would be unnoticeable in the moment of shooting, only noticed afterwards. I'm also a hobbyist photographer (although your photographs are much better than mine) and it nearly always happens to me when I'm using a longer lens. It happened more often when I had a cat.

I operate under the assumption that the simplest explanation is the most likely one. Given that it appears that you are the only person to see this event (a cursory check of Instagram under the hashtag #shasta found nothing) this is the most likely theory of events in my mind:

-something small flies in front of camera (fly, bee, etc) and due to parallax it appears to be large and fast in the distance
-you check photos later and edit them until a piece of hair in front of the lens comes into contrast
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
omething small flies in front of camera (fly, bee, etc) and due to parallax it appears to be large and fast in the distance
since he lectured us on the evils of being closed minded, i'm going to go ahead and tell you: it was a floater. and he knows it was a floater and i know he knows because if he didn't know i wouldnt know. :)
 

Mkitz

Member
since he lectured us on the evils of being closed minded, i'm going to go ahead and tell you: it was a floater. and he knows it was a floater and i know he knows because if he didn't know i wouldnt know. :)
Not evils. The obvious, saying you are objective means little when you have idea who you are and all the games your ego can play. There must a certain psychological discipline that peels away the layers of self deception. It is naive to think that facts just jump out and explain reality. Is this even debatable?

Insects account for most of the images that day, not just the vapor trail. Ants on the sensor crawling around. This is the logic of an objective evaluation of the vapor trail. BUGS. Really?
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
This is the logic of an objective evaluation of the vapor trail. BUGS. Really?
what? noone is saying the bug caused the vapor trail.

the vapor trail you noticed weeks later. so you dont even really know if you photographed it right after you saw the floater or bug or airplane whose speed you are misremembering 2.5 years later. But i'm not sure why i am explaining all this to a PHd professor, it should all be self evident.
 

tinkertailor

Senior Member.
Not evils. The obvious, saying you are objective means little when you have idea who you are and all the games your ego can play. There must a certain psychological discipline that peels away the layers of self deception. It is naive to think that facts just jump out and explain reality. Is this even debatable?
Ego and whatnot are not particularly debatable on here, no. I'm discussing the evidence in your claim. If you think I'm taking from ego or whatever, that's your prerogative. We only debate the evidence here, and your evidence is not the most convincing.
Insects account for most of the images that day, not just the vapor trail. Ants on the sensor crawling around. This is the logic of an objective evaluation of the vapor trail. BUGS. Really?
No, that's not my logic. I'm saying the vapor trail isn't a vapor trail, because it looks just like a cat/dog/human hair or other flotsam close to the lens. Here's the sequence of events in my theory:

1: Mkitz is taking some neat shots of Shasta
2: Mkitz sees a small bug through viewfinder, interprets it as looking bigger and faster and more distant, thinks "craft"
3: weeks later, Mkitz finds a photo with a cat fuzz on it. He assumes that it was taken just after the craft flew by and that it is a vapor trail. It is not, it is a cat fuzz.
 

Mkitz

Member
vp 11.jpg
Ego and whatnot are not particularly debatable on here, no. I'm discussing the evidence in your claim. If you think I'm taking from ego or whatever, that's your prerogative. We only debate the evidence here, and your evidence is not the most convincing.

No, that's not my logic. I'm saying the vapor trail isn't a vapor trail, because it looks just like a cat/dog/human hair or other flotsam close to the lens. Here's the sequence of events in my theory:

1: Mkitz is taking some neat shots of Shasta
2: Mkitz sees a small bug through viewfinder, interprets it as looking bigger and faster and more distant, thinks "craft"
3: weeks later, Mkitz finds a photo with a cat fuzz on it. He assumes that it was taken just after the craft flew by and that it is a vapor trail. It is not, it is a cat fuzz.
Mkitz did not see the object through the viewfinder, Mkitz saw the object movement on the LCD screen. Mistaking a bug on a LCD screen for an object moving acroos the LCD screen is not within the realml of possibility. Someone needs to more experience with digital photography so they do not make such outrageous claims. The object on the LCD later reveals to have left a vapor trail, the track of the object matches the track of the vapor trail. To be specific, since some have noted my description was off, just below the lower right hand corner, tracking toward downward. If an object did not leave the cause the vapor trail what did? It is amazing that we are even having this discussion since the vapor trail is quite distinct. If it was not the movement of the object what explanations are there for the image that looks like a vapor trail. Debunk yourself before debunking others. :)
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
vp 11.jpg

Mkitz did not see the object through the viewfinder, Mkitz saw the object movement on the LCD screen. Mistaking a bug on a LCD screen for an object moving acroos the LCD screen is not within the realml of possibility. Someone needs to more experience with digital photography so they do not make such outrageous claims. The object on the LCD later reveals to have left a vapor trail, the track of the object matches the track of the vapor trail. To be specific, since some have noted my description was off, just below the lower right hand corner, tracking toward downward. If an object did not leave the cause the vapor trail what did? It is amazing that we are even having this discussion since the vapor trail is quite distinct. If it was not the movement of the object what explanations are there for the image that looks like a vapor trail. Debunk yourself before debunking others. :)
I'm going to ask you to tone it down as you are approaching being impolite which is against the Posting Guidelines. You posted a claim with some evidence. Scrutiny is what happens here.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Mistaking a bug on a LCD screen for an object moving acroos the LCD screen is not within the realml of possibility.
the bug isnt ON the lcd screen. its being viewed throught he viewfinder and then all that is being displayed on the lcd screen. right?

If an object did not leave the cause the vapor trail what did? It is amazing that we are even having this discussion since the vapor trail is quite distinct.
IF it is a vapour trail and not a reflection on your window glass or a piece of cat hair, then a plane left a vapour trail which is shadowing on your cloud.

You are misunderstanding alot of people.


If it was not the movement of the object what explanations are there for the image that looks like a vapor trail.
the plane that flew by at 9:14am.
or a random reflection on your window glass.
or a cat hair.

it's been 2.5 years, maybe you can add some of your expertise in one of our memory threads. that sounds like snark, but it's not intended to be, i'm generally curious what you would teach your students about memory and misperceptions in a case like this.
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
Mistaking a bug on a LCD screen for an object moving acroos the LCD screen is not within the realml of possibility.

You seem to be misunderstanding this point.

Nobody is saying that a bug was crawling on the actual LCD screen on your camera rig.

Many claims of rapidly moving objects observed in photos or videos have in fact been explained as something small, and therefore closer to the lens of the camera than was originally thought. Being close to the lens, the field of view through which the small object travels is considerably less than if the object were larger and further away as is often believed. I believe that your large lens with a high amount of zoom would amplify this situation.

There is past cases similar to this one where a claim is made that an object far out in the sky is moving at incredible speeds, when in fact it is something small and closer to the lens and moving much slower.

Simply put, the suggestion is that the fast moving object that appeared on your LCD screen, was not up in the air and traveling at supersonic speeds. Rather it was a small object, possible an insect, flying at normal speeds a few feet in front of your lens. Due to it being close to the lens, it's traveling through a very narrow field of view and would therefore appear to be traveling very fast, IF one though it was actually much further away.

It's explained very well on this video:

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