Yeah, that's what I thought. Unless it's effective focal length, or some folded path.
Jellyfish UFO from TMZ's 'UFO Revolution'
- Thread starter Mick West
- Start date
I follow the thread and only one of the flags were mentioned AFAIK.
There is an obvious flag at the start, around 0:03. Everyone noticed it, but it hardly moves so we could make no conclusions. What I did not see mentioned is the flag around 1:13. People did not notice because after 2 seconds the flag is out of the frame. It is barely visible to begin with.
Obviosly this was done in paint. No red line on the picture is based on serious data. I will try to fix the video to the flag to try to understand it's position but as far as the naked eye can see I think there is at least a 20 degree difference between the UAP trajectory and the direction the flag is facing.
This might be the make-or-break detail when it comes to the balloon explanation.
Well spotted. A couple of thoughts on the extent to which it could be considered make-or-break:
(1) How much variation could there be in wind direction if we consider (a) the variation in altitude between the anomaly and the flag, (b) the horizontal separation between the anomaly and the flag, and (c) any turbulence caused by the buildings? I wonder this because I've seen flags or windsocks fluttering in a different direction to clouds passing above them, and I've also seen clouds at different altitudes moving on different headings, so I know that at the very least a variation in altitude can result in a variation in heading.
(2) Is there enough visual information to actually know the angle to the horizontal at which the flag is hanging? If not, then how sure could we be about the direction in which it points? If we assume it's being blown to somewhere near horizontal (by a stronger breeze) then the red line estimate of the orientation would seem to be about right. But if the breeze is less stiff, such that the flag is not being blown at an angle which is approximately parallel to the ground, then it can be read as oriented toward approximately the same heading as the direction of the anomaly's travel.
EDIT: And of course it's taken me so long to get this down that others have beaten me to the punch!
randomuser
New Member
Why should the operator switch sensors in this situation. He had visual confirmation on the thermal sensor and switching could lead to loose track of the object. If it was night then the thermal sensor would be the best sensor for spotting and tracking objects. Even blending different sensors makes no sense in this situation. He was trying to identify the object by using the best available sensor which is very rational in this situation
CrunchBunk
New Member
There's a moment it passes right next to a flag and both are blowing in the same direction. It even appears to hit a lamp post and get jostled a bit.
I'm starting to think it's a bundle of balloons, some inflated and some deflated so that it has a neutral buoyancy. The deflated balloons bulk up the bottom area where there would normally just be thin balloon string or tinsel.
This happens around 0:13 seconds of the 2:04 minute length video that has been released.
I'm starting to think it's a bundle of balloons, some inflated and some deflated so that it has a neutral buoyancy. The deflated balloons bulk up the bottom area where there would normally just be thin balloon string or tinsel.
This happens around 0:13 seconds of the 2:04 minute length video that has been released.
Also at 00:35 there's a real tall flag in the top right corner, looks like it's blowing from the eastThere's a moment it passes right next to a flag and both are blowing in the same direction. It even appears to hit a lamp post and get jostled a bit.
I'm starting to think it's a bundle of balloons, some inflated and some deflated so that it has a neutral buoyancy. The deflated balloons bulk up the bottom area where there would normally just be thin balloon string or tinsel.
This happens around 0:13 seconds of the 2:04 minute length video that has been released.
Attachments
Last edited:
Dave51c
Member
Weatherspark has a number of archived weather datasets. The link points to October 2017 as an example, but it is interactive and the month/year can be selected. I've chosen October 2017 given "probably fall 2017" was cited as a possible date in a previous post.
https://weatherspark.com/h/m/103217...er-2017-in-Baghdad-Iraq#Figures-WindDirection
The graph has shaded areas depicting night as our area of interest. The East wind is coded in Green. (North -> Blue, South -> Red, West -> Brown). On the live chart the days are visible on mouse over - they are not showing on this exported PNG.
tobigtofool
Active Member
I do, but it could be from a static balloon like this one seen in Google Earth Imagery over Iraq from 2018.
33.323527 43.611657
The thread has been busy, and I don't think I'v seen this video posted, someone started tracking the balloon a little bit.
Do we know if the camera was in a fixed position? or was it on a drone/aircraft?
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaO6sUq0HsQ
Would a fixed position create paralax? or can we assume if its a fixed position, the wind is pushing the uapalloon?
If it's a fixed position, can we determine speed? (with no evidence that I can find someone said the camera was 3.5 km away - not sure where they got that infos)
Great find noticing the flag, was melting my eyes looking for one but didnt see it!
Stealth777
New Member
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7F9DyGaCrY
My not be a fancy Military Cam. Kinda has the same effect. I totally wanna go out now and run some bugs over!
Dave Falch (mentioned upstream by Mick) posted a video looking at the infrared signature of household balloons a couple of years back, mostly intended to rebut "It's a balloon!" debunks. But the interesting thing is, the latex balloons were mostly transparent in IR (not unlike the jellyfish image) and you can plainly see his feet through one. (The mylar balloon tested was warm and near background temperature where it reflected the ground and colder where it reflected the sky. Mick did a similar demonstration with mylar in
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snwqUpQ6oSE
.)
Note that in this video black is hot, white is cold. In the jellyfish imagery the scale is apparently inverted, with white as hot and black as cold (as you can see, the sheltered areas are black).
Falch contends "Latex balloons are not easily visible with Infrared systems, both midwave and longwave. Colder latex balloons may be more detectable, but would still be hard to detect at greater distances. These balloons can be dismissed in most UAP FLIR/Infrared videos that show a significant heat signature."
Implications for the balloon theory being that a group of regular latex balloons would only show up in IR not as spherical objects, but as patches and clusters (of lower temperatures where the overlapping density of the latex is sufficiently thick to obscure the background). And mylar balloons would, of course, reflect the colder sky from their upper surfaces and warmer ground from their lower surfaces.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snwqUpQ6oSE
.)
Note that in this video black is hot, white is cold. In the jellyfish imagery the scale is apparently inverted, with white as hot and black as cold (as you can see, the sheltered areas are black).
Falch contends "Latex balloons are not easily visible with Infrared systems, both midwave and longwave. Colder latex balloons may be more detectable, but would still be hard to detect at greater distances. These balloons can be dismissed in most UAP FLIR/Infrared videos that show a significant heat signature."
Implications for the balloon theory being that a group of regular latex balloons would only show up in IR not as spherical objects, but as patches and clusters (of lower temperatures where the overlapping density of the latex is sufficiently thick to obscure the background). And mylar balloons would, of course, reflect the colder sky from their upper surfaces and warmer ground from their lower surfaces.
Eburacum
Senior Member.
It was on an aerostat, according to witness testimony. This is a kind of balloon on a tether, which can move about a bit, but would tend to be in a fixed range of positions depending on the wind direction and speed. I'd treat it as a fixed location unless other evidence disproved that.
That video is a bit misleading as it is 'tracking' the cross hairs position line-of-sight (boresight) where it intersects with the ground. This gives an unrealistic and erroneous path for the object, just as in the Aguadilla video. Mick's Sitrec shows the object at a position somewhere along that line, so the object moved on a course much closer to the camera and is, in reality, not near to the buildings.
Last edited:
FatPhil
Senior Member.
I guess with the change in focal length I was hoping that we could measure a much smaller version of what is happening with this man's hand relative to his face in the following picture:
https://www.shutterbug.com/images/17/1lp121817.png
But I suppose the distances involved are too great and the video quality too poor to effectively measure any difference.
I agree with the others that the man and his hand are a bad example, as they've varied more than one parameter.
I didn't play with focal length here, only focal distance and f-number, but it gives you some indication of how depth of field varies both with focal distance and f-number:
"Circular objects on Google Earth (2002)" post #14: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/circular-objects-on-google-earth-2002.12272/post-265717
(all images are still on my webserver, as are the ones from post #11, that area gets cleaned up about once a decade!)
Scrolling down the thread to #21, @JMartJr does have some "splats on the glass" examples too: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/circular-objects-on-google-earth-2002.12272/post-265754
Dave Beaty
New Member
Comparison of lens and sensor size impacts to FOV. Using Cinema 4D physical camera at Aerostat location
The following image uses a 1000mm lens with a 35mm sensor (full frame type)
This frame uses a 2000mm lens 35 mm sensor (full Frame Type)
This one uses a 2000mm lens with Super 35mm style sensor
Many advanced camera systems have a "2X Extender" Barlow-type flip-in lens element. Effectively doubling the FOV. I find it hard to believe it's less than a 1000mm lens based on distance and FOV in the original. But of course, cropping may be taking place in the output.
The following image uses a 1000mm lens with a 35mm sensor (full frame type)
This frame uses a 2000mm lens 35 mm sensor (full Frame Type)
This one uses a 2000mm lens with Super 35mm style sensor
Many advanced camera systems have a "2X Extender" Barlow-type flip-in lens element. Effectively doubling the FOV. I find it hard to believe it's less than a 1000mm lens based on distance and FOV in the original. But of course, cropping may be taking place in the output.
Last edited:
sgreenstreet
Member
Military witness I spoke to yesterday has now changed/altered/updated his story after a conversation he had with Jeremy Corbell. After speaking to Corbell, he thinks the object is probably alien. More details here:
Source: https://x.com/MiddleOfMayhem/status/1745576680264208469?s=20
Source: https://x.com/MiddleOfMayhem/status/1745576680264208469?s=20
Paparazzi get paid for the footage they capture by media outlets like TMZ.
Not that monetizing UFO footage is anything new, but with the likes of TMZ increasingly involved, are leakers going to expect a revenue share agreement?
What does Corbell have in order to convince this soldier to publicly change his stance in a single day?
Not that monetizing UFO footage is anything new, but with the likes of TMZ increasingly involved, are leakers going to expect a revenue share agreement?
What does Corbell have in order to convince this soldier to publicly change his stance in a single day?
Last edited:
JMartJr
Senior Member.
In terms of direction, particularly for the very brief time we see the flag, the potential variation is 180 degrees in either direction if the flag is, as it appears, in winds affected by the ground.
Friction between the moving air mass and surface features of the earth (hills, mountains, valleys, trees, buildings, etc.) is responsible for the swirling vortices of air commonly called eddies. They vary considerably in size and intensity depending on the size and roughness of the surface obstruction, the speed of the wind and the degree of stability of the air. They can spin in either a horizontal or vertical plane. Unstable air and strong winds produce more vigorous eddies. In stable air, eddies tend to quickly dissipate.
Text and image from: https://www.weather.gov/source/zhu/ZHU_Training_Page/winds/Wx_Terms/Flight_Environment.htm
You get rotating eddies or vorices (whirlwinds) going, you have bits of wind moving around in all directions -- you've seen a flag wrapped around a flag pole? That's one of the things that will cause that.
(Wind taking bag around in a circle, whatever the prevailing winds, at one point this bag is going the opposite direction...)
None-rotating turbulence you can get puffs or gusts in almost any direction, as in the first picture in this post. (I've personally seen a row of flags along a the top of a small stadium where the flags on the left were briefly pointing at the flags on the right, which pointed back at them -- 180 degrees diffference in ground wind across a few hundred fee sustained for maybe 5-10 seconds.)
Shortened version -- a flag in ground clutter wind tells you nothing about direction and little about speed of breeze that might be moving a balloon that is a bit higher and in clean air. Flag moving at all indicates wind is not zero, flag moving just a little says the wind is not howling, that's about it.
jackfrostvc
Senior Member
I'm no balloon expert, but thing to note is this.
I once went on a hot air balloon ride. I wondered how they steer, basically, they go up and down looking for different streams of air direction and speed.
So IMO, I dont think you can relate a minor difference in direction of a flag on the ground to the direction of wind the object is experiencing at altitude.
Last edited:
Hi folks - Mick's observation that the wind is coming roughly from the east, while prevailing winds are generally from the west, got me thinking.
So I went to cds.climate.copernicus.eu and got the hourly ERA5 wind data at 1000hPa for the area between August and November 2017. Then I put this into QGIS and made an animation of wind direction over the period.
This by itself wont prove anything, but maybe it will help down the line with getting a more accurate date for the video.
I can run other date ranges if it would be helpful. Also I'm not a meteorologist or a GIS expert, so it's entirely possible I've made a goof somewhere along the line.
Link to the animation is here - runs for two minutes: https://severny.s3.eu-north-1.amazonaws.com/Jelly2.mp4
Cheers,
Dave
I've started a new thread on to second part of the video, where an object is far away and moving in the other direction relative to a different camera. Perhaps some clues
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/jellyfish-ufo-the-second-part.13308/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/jellyfish-ufo-the-second-part.13308/
So he didn't say exactly what information was conveyed for him to change his position?
If this guy was on the base shortly after this event, why would Corbell know something more pertinent to the topic, and why hasn't that bit of info been announced? This soldier hasn't demonstrated much compunction in talking about it.
Having zero evidence, I cant help but think there is a bit of financial influence happening here.
Not sure if it has been noted here yet, but on NewsNation’s “Elizabeth Vargas Reports” at 2:50, Cincosk says "Towards the end, it seemingly just continued off into the distance, and it got smaller and smaller, whether that's because the sensor was zooming out or it was moving off into the distance, but it got seemingly far enough away to where they couldn't see it anymore, whether it dropped into the water or it just continued over the lake…. because there was a lake next to the base where we were at. But at no point toward the end of the video did it... where you could see it drop into the water, or shoot off into the sky like there have been some claims."
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0V9mhk9Hm0
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0V9mhk9Hm0
Last edited:
tobigtofool
Active Member
OK this will be my only contribution to the tinfoil hat side but with all the deep sea UAP hubub these days, it does kinda look like a starwars probe made of coral 
mmtmn
New Member
1. Does anyone have a video of night vision goggles and a cluster of balloons at night? I was looking for that but couldn't really find it..
2. Also, does anyone know if adjusting a thermal camera could cause the color changes we see in the video?
Edit: Solution to question 2 seems to be: "It’s not pulsing cold and hot the operator is changing the thermals from white to black hot to get different contrasting views, I used these systems on the LAV platform"
2. Also, does anyone know if adjusting a thermal camera could cause the color changes we see in the video?
Edit: Solution to question 2 seems to be: "It’s not pulsing cold and hot the operator is changing the thermals from white to black hot to get different contrasting views, I used these systems on the LAV platform"
Last edited:
captancourgette
Active Member
Not sure if this was suggested (I had quick look through thread but didnt see anything)
But if you threw a plastic bag over a drone like the following, would it fly or would it disrupt the airflow too much?
Relatedly
Too my eyes, it looks like theres 2 turrets with rotors spinning at the top on the sides (well its a very noisy image so hard to 'see' anything)
Though like a bubblebee / dragon one has to wonder how it can achieve lift with such small rotors, then again I'm guessing most of the stuff is just a thin material thats hanging down so very lightweight
But if you threw a plastic bag over a drone like the following, would it fly or would it disrupt the airflow too much?
Relatedly
Too my eyes, it looks like theres 2 turrets with rotors spinning at the top on the sides (well its a very noisy image so hard to 'see' anything)
Though like a bubblebee / dragon one has to wonder how it can achieve lift with such small rotors, then again I'm guessing most of the stuff is just a thin material thats hanging down so very lightweight
It would not fly with a bag closed at the top or bottom no matter how light. Open it into a cylinder and you might stand a chance depending on a number of factors. Lightweight material hanging beneath would likely show disruption from the drone's propulsion.Not sure if this was suggested (I had quick look through thread but didnt see anything)
But if you threw a plastic bag over a drone like the following, would it fly or would it disrupt the airflow too much?
Relatedly
Too my eyes, it looks like theres 2 turrets with rotors spinning at the top on the sides (well its a very noisy image so hard to 'see' anything)
Though like a bubblebee / dragon one has to wonder how it can achieve lift with such small rotors, then again I'm guessing most of the stuff is just a thin material thats hanging down so very lightweight
jackfrostvc
Senior Member
Not sure if this was suggested (I had quick look through thread but didnt see anything)
But if you threw a plastic bag over a drone like the following, would it fly or would it disrupt the airflow too much?
Relatedly
Too my eyes, it looks like theres 2 turrets with rotors spinning at the top on the sides (well its a very noisy image so hard to 'see' anything)
Though like a bubblebee / dragon one has to wonder how it can achieve lift with such small rotors, then again I'm guessing most of the stuff is just a thin material thats hanging down so very lightweight
The thing is, drones are noisy as anything, everyone would have noticed it
Kafka Esq.
New Member
Also not a balloon expert
But I've lived many years in the desert, and its crazy how different the wind speeds can be at minor altitude differences.
You can have the treetops kicking around while it's fairly calm at body height, before suddenly a big gust swoops in at you.
Again, just anecdotal. But, still
Last edited by a moderator:
MyMatesBrainwashed
Senior Member
I admit I hadn't considered it could be dark. In which case the low light spotter might have been of use, perhaps.
I'm just theorising that if I didn't know what it was I'd probably use everything I've got to try and work out what it was (it's hardly moving erratically to lose it). If I knew what it was I might film it in the freakiest looking feed to wind my friends up with later.
CrunchBunk
New Member
The blimp, called a PTDS aerostat, as a matter of fact cannot operate at 100% uptime. It has to come down for maintenance, and cursory googling shows that it comes down for maintenance after 20 days airborne. It's not some secret that you can't easily find evidence for. One of the camera systems that it carries has publicly available brochures detailing the capabilities. It's not exactly a top secret military weapon. It was floating in plain view next to Al-Taqaddum Air Base.
I think Greenstreet's source mentioned maintenance and lowering of the blimp not as some emergency after witnessing the "object/jellyfish" but rather that the blimp came down for maintenance after the video was taken and it's just a routine event.
L3 uses a catadioptric system in their turrets, i.e. folded path as you mentioned, thus the 3000mm are indeed optical zoom. For instance, they got a patent describing 600mm, 1900mm and 3200mm focal lengths obtained using the same telescope by moving the zoom lens assembly along the optical path.
L3 Technologies Inc Patent for Catadioptric Zoom Lens Assembly
( https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a2/80/70/87087e405155ef/US5940222.pdf )
Discussion of the integrity of Corbell, Greenstreet, 528vibes, etc moved to:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/journalistic-integrity-around-the-jellyfish-ufo.13310/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/journalistic-integrity-around-the-jellyfish-ufo.13310/
Just found this on Flickr
https://www.google.com/search?clien...biw=384&bih=718&dpr=2.81#imgrc=A3eqdMNGutrRnM
https://www.google.com/search?clien...biw=384&bih=718&dpr=2.81#imgrc=A3eqdMNGutrRnM
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Uploaded on December 10, 2008Just found this on Flickr
https://www.google.com/search?clien...biw=384&bih=718&dpr=2.81#imgrc=A3eqdMNGutrRnM
Taken on July 4, 2006
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/adamjlynch/3099198918
Interesting. (Notably from 2006, 11 or 12 years prior to the incident.)
One mundane hypothesis that would explain both clips is that some bad actor wanting more details about some current disposition of the facility (who knew the base was detecting or responding to drones) attached a downward-facing payload like a GoPro in nightvision mode to a batch of balloons, released them upwind, let it drift downwind across the base, then once it drifted far enough away used a radio release to drop the payload for recovery. Release from the payload, the balloons would shoot up.
For extra control about when it comes down for recovery you add an RC mechanism for popping some of the balloons.
But this case is really in the low information zone, lacking key details about both provenance and surrounding events.
To those discussing wind direction, earth.nullschool is a good resource for looking at past wind directions across the globe. 
Here, for example is a screenshot of predominant surface level northwesterlies roughly over the location of the base on Sep 21 2017
You can toggle the time and height of the wind direction you're looking for, which may help answer questions of differences between the flag and the jellyfish
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2017/...thographic=42.53,33.86,2921/loc=43.612,33.312
Here, for example is a screenshot of predominant surface level northwesterlies roughly over the location of the base on Sep 21 2017
You can toggle the time and height of the wind direction you're looking for, which may help answer questions of differences between the flag and the jellyfish
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2017/...thographic=42.53,33.86,2921/loc=43.612,33.312
Last edited:
It is, unfortunately, a bit limited. 1000mb is 364 feet, 850 (the next step up) is 4779 feet (it varies a bit, but will be within 10% of this).
The wind can do a 180 from 0 to 5000 feet. The object seems to be between 1000 and 2000 feet, so will be closer to the 1000mb (364 feet) level, but it's not going to be exact.
Also Earth.nullschool only has limited times several hours apart and is based on forecast models. Local wind can vary a lot over an hour.
The flag is probably the best reference we have.
Cincoski now claims to have spoken a friend, and now believes there are more videos.
This morning I spoke with a former team member who was with me in Iraq back in 2018. They wish to stay anonymous, but they confirmed that we actually had multiple recordings of the "Jellyfish UAP" with different durations.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Claim - UFO Crashes near Las Vegas, crash captured on Cop's Body-cam- Latest: NorCal Dave
-
-
