Explained: Roger Stone's "Portal" over the White House - Len Flare and Spotlights

[Mick West]

Former presidential advisor Roger Stone claimed that there's a satanic "portal" over the white house that's visible day and night. The main evidence being a short video, and then three photos, the above one, then a similar (but not the same) more zoomed-in photo.

Then one more showing a faint patch

The first two photos are taken from the earthTV webcam of the White House. Notice there's several other "portals" visible.

These, of course, are just lens flares - internal reflections in the camera - just like the one in the sky. We can see both the one in the sky, and the lower ones move with the camera here (the White House is dark in this video)


The detail of the lens flare shows a pattern of dots.

This is possibly from a sensor reflection, where you sometimes get the dot pattern from the focus pixels, like here:

This varies by camera.

The video shown is from a rainy day. The raindrops on the camera cover create familiar shapes that we've seen in a variety of supposed "supernatural" videos.

But again, this is simply a (wet) camera effect known as "water drop caustics", discussed in other threads: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/explained-colorado-man-photographs-flying-jellyfish-like-'critters'-water-on-lens-caustic-bokeh.5211/

The water on the cover bends and diffuses the light, the hexagonal shape comes from the shape of the camera aperture.

The photo taken from ground level seems to just show a cloud, possibly illuminated by the flag spotlight.

 

[FatPhil]

Yeah, clear internal reflections causing the lens flares - you can even see the bokeh - 6-blade iris, would you say?

I'd say the light source for the hovering blob was outside the crop in this image, as I think I've identified the centre of the frame from 3 pairs of lights that create the ground portals. Ph34r my l33t xpaint sk1llz, attached. I note that other lights that could possibly produce flares are missing, one is marked, perhaps they're just too faint and the 4 flare-causing lights are way brighter than the other smaller ones. That's the thing about saturation, all 0xFFs are the same even if there are orders of magnitude difference between the actual source. Mr Flaretoomuch? Perhaps you should stop down a little then?

 

[FatPhil]

I'll add that my quick analysis, whilst seemingly lacking because it does not identify the light that's the source of the flare they're interested in, has the benefit of being of being *predictive*. Is there a light where I've predicted one to be? In order to be an internal camera/lens reflection of similar kind to the three others identified, which I'm happy to claim is my interpretation of the limited evidence, it too must have been in the original image - can we get access to that?

 

[JMartJr]

I'd say the light source for the hovering blob was outside the crop in this image, as I think I've identified the centre of the frame from 3 pairs of lights that create the ground portals.

And the trees on the lower edge of the image are clearly illuminated by a bright light out of frame, in the right sort of position to create the "big flare/portal," as the trees to the right are more brightly illuminated than the ones to the left, indicating a light a bit right of center -- corresponding nicely to the flare a bit left of center.

 

[Mick West]

I'd say the light source for the hovering blob was outside the crop in this image, as I think I've identified the centre of the frame from 3 pairs of lights that create the ground portals.

I don't think all the flares are symmetrical sensor reflections. Check out this pan:

There's one lens flare at the top (the "portal") that seems to rotate around the center, and possibly comes from a light off the bottom. I think the others might be dust on the cover.

This was the web cam last night.

There's a lens flare cluster that probably comes from the light at the bottom, left of center, just off-screen, but with lots of veiling glare.

 

[deirdre]

why is there a red light on the Wasington Monument? so planes don't hit it?

 

[JMartJr]

why is there a red light on the Wasington Monument? so planes don't hit it?

Yep. There are two red lights facing each of the four directions, IRC they are 1 second flashers. To make the structure more visible to planes in and out of Reagan, and I suppose Presidential helicopters and the like.

 

[Alexandria Nick]

I feel like if there was a portal over the White House, the thousands and thousands of people that are milling around outside of the place every day would have noticed it.

 

[Mendel]

I feel like if there was a portal over the White House, the thousands and thousands of people that are milling around outside of the place every day would have noticed it.

Since hardly anyone is wearing tinfoil hats around the White House, these people are obviously susceptible to mind control.

 

[Mendel]

The first two photos are taken from the earthTV webcam of the White House. Notice there's several other "portals" visible.

Does this "portal" appear every night?

Why is the White House offering a video feed that shows a top secret portal?

 

[FatPhil]

I don't think all the flares are symmetrical sensor reflections. Check out this pan:
View attachment 51106

There's one lens flare at the top (the "portal") that seems to rotate around the center, and possibly comes from a light off the bottom. I think the others might be dust on the cover.

This was the web cam last night.
View attachment 51107
There's a lens flare cluster that probably comes from the light at the bottom, left of center, just off-screen, but with lots of veiling glare.

I agree, there are different effects in the different images. One of the nice things about moving images with extreme lens flare is that you can unambiguously identify groups of flares and use parallax to extrapolate back to the light source, as you have done.