The Tape - The Most Important Case Yet? (A UAP Files Film)

[taurusclover21]

So the view out the window is consistent with the hypothesis that the bright light is Venus with the two other orbs being the stars in Capricorn. If that is correct we can then conclude that that part of the video was recorded around 5.30pm on 19 December 2000.

View attachment 78833

Did you report your findings on his YT comments?

 

[jdog]

Well, sure, the claims don't look good if you analyze them. But what if you don't?

 

[JMartJr]

Note to future UFO video shooters. IF you see a UFO and shoot video and Venus is in the same part of the sky (or any other bright but normal object such as Jupiter or Sirius... or an airplane or the moon or a drone) take a second to get a shot with both in frame -- failing that, the question of "If that is NOT Venus, why don't we see Venus, which should also be right there? (Or Jupiter or an airplane or whatever)" does not scuttle your ground breaking and important UFO video of another distant point of light that does not do anything...

 

[AndyC]

Hi, just newbie here. Iv'e been following this on YT and took a few things up with Jimmy on hist first production. I don't want to rehash or provide mega lengthy stuff right now so will just go to the main point about the static light source which is the subject of many of the mins at the end. Its obv it doesn't move and its obv it doesn't represent the same as the Venus object. So I went looking for an explanation. All I found within 20mins is the bearing of view outside the back upstairs window with the camera is bang on matched with a street lamp in Rowley close just 80m away. Its doubtful the full head of the lamp is fully visible but at least an upper portion of it as its obscured by the lower ridge tiles of the neighbour. Further to that, there is further masking provided by spindly tree branches again of the neighbour. This to me explains some of the black veins of moving patterns when the zooming is bigger. Anyway, see what you think , you guys have been into this a while and I'm just dipping in

standing in Rowley close just a street out the back , following the direction of view back to the viewing property

overhead shot of the line of sight from upstairs bedroom to the street lamp. See the line intersects the pitched roofline very well and also clips the edges of the tree, which in winter will be greenless

Thanks

 

[flarkey]

hey @AndyC & welcome. That streetlight certainly could be an option. I had noticed the leaves and branches moving in front of it too. What are your thoughts on the colour? Streetlights in the UK are normally yellow but this one appears bright white. And of course ths was nearly 25 years so things may have been different then.

 

[AndyC]

Hi. Not given thought to any colours as prob too hard a route to go down. The lamp has a diffuser as normal , and he may not be in view of the actual bulb but seeing the top part of the diffuser. Another thing that seemed strange is that on one of Jimmy's pics in daylight looking at the same view, you can see the ridge tiles of the right most roof and if you look along in the same place it should be ridge tile colour or the colour of the hill fauna behind, but there is a sliver of light colour which looks out of place. I think this is the back cover of the light which is painted a light colour, but the height of this view is lower than the nighttime shots so that is why only a sliver shows. If he was upstairs in daylight I suspect it may of shown a good view of what we suspect.

 

[AndyC]

Something doesn't seem right about the timings in this. (Let's forget about the confusion regarding dates initially). They're claiming the first sighting was at 1805hrs, and that's when Richard started recording with his video camera. But it immediately ran out of battery, so he went upstairs to plug it into the mains and then started recording. But the time on the alarm clock in the bedroom read 23.30hrs. Where did the previous 5.5 hrs goto?

Jimmy has got the whole idea of what went down completely about face plus he has sliced and diced parts of the video to wrong parts of the interview. To answer this main point , we don't see the vid clip of the upstairs shot after plugging in the camera in the first presentation even though Rich talks about filming upstairs for 5 -10 mins. Why did Jimmy take it out? And why did Jimmy link to a different night fiming with the bedroom clock is talked about ? The upstairs on the first night can only be seen on the unedited file at 2:27 to 2:37 , just 10 seconds. Dave comes upstairs and says Come back ? to Rich , prob because Dave wants to go down the pub as was planned. Rich then says in the interview, "There was no more filming that night "!
Plus at no point does Rich ever say there was 3 consecutive nights of filming. Again something Jimmy has got wrong.

 

[flarkey]

It definitly looks like the "Venus & Stars" section was recorded over the 'possible streetlight' section, there is around a 9min jump on the on screen Date & Time code, with around a 9min section inbetween. I can only assume the slight mismatch in time is due to a mismatch in the replay speed of the original VHS and the modern digital resampled video.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Re: The color temperature of streetlights in the UK.

This photo is from 2018 in Glasgow, Scotland.

https://secretscotland.wordpress.com/tag/fluorescent-street-lights/

The white lamp is fluorescent while the yellow one is sodium vapor.

The blog post notes that the fluorescent type is actually older than the sodium type but the author was seeing more and more fluorescent types lately - and speculates that old stock was being used. But not that old.

I couldn't quite climb up for a look at the label inside the luminaire, but I did manage to take a pic from below, to get the details.

Although the year is not clear in this pic, it did appear as 2013 in others, but they were less readable overall.

So a fluorescent bulb - or bulbs - in use at the time the UFO videos were produced seems to be an ordinary possibility.


More photos

Unlike sodium lights, the covers are made of 'water clear' plastic, and have no lenses to shape or direct the beam.

In this view we have along the left: sodium, fluorescent, sodium, sodium, fluorescent; and on the right: LED, LED (this IS lit although it looks as if there is no light on this pole, spot it in the first pic), fluorescent.

Although fluorescents have a sickly greenish cast on daylight balanced film, these digital photos show only a hint of a greenish cast. Of course the digital camera may compensate - I don't know. Exposure levels would have an effect also, with the greenish cast more evident when the image of the lamp is dimmer.

Lastly, for some time fluorescents have been produced with different color temperatures. That must come down to the type of phosphors used. It would make sense to use a "daylight" fluorescent - say 5000 K - in a street lamp. I don't know if they were produced at the time of the UFO video. Probably.

 

[flarkey]

View attachment 78862
standing in Rowley close just a street out the back , following the direction of view back to the viewing property

View attachment 78863

overhead shot of the line of sight from upstairs bedroom to the street lamp. See the line intersects the pitched roofline very well and also clips the edges of the tree, which in winter will be greenless

I've tried to use Google Earth to model @AndyC's hypothesis that the white light could be the streetlight in Rowley Close. It does seem to be in spot very close to the position of the 'orb'. I might see if I can improve the model to show the pitch of the bungalow's roof.

 

[Mick West]

I might see if I can improve the model to show the pitch of the bungalow's roof.

To get a functional occluding equivalent (i.e. something that will hide what is behind it the same as a sloped peaked roof), add a two point polygon for each ridgeline, like:

Use a two point polygon and not a line, as the line will tilt with the ground. A two point polygon will stay parallel to the roof.

Attached kmz does not have the height adjusted.