Can you actually see that? Or is that just an interpretation?
UAP Hearing New Video - Yemen Orb
- Thread starter Mick West
- Start date
Can you actually see that? Or is that just an interpretation?
Giddierone
Senior Member.
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
And this is visible at a time when the object is not locked (frame ~1310), so the "target" in this frame is the ocean surface, meaning 24525 is the altitude above the water. That number only make sense if the numbers in the lower right like 3.1NM / 2.4NM are slant / horizontal, as @Mick West showed.
I feel like it'd be odd for a targeting system to not display the slant angle. I wonder if the uncropped original video shows that. It is frustrating that so many videos are of this form which excludes information not even due to official redaction, but just because whatever recording-of-a-recording process used failed to get the whole window of the original video in frame.
~15 frames after impact the system loses track of the object and the slant/horizontal numbers spend 2 frames resetting before showing the new values 3 frames later. This probably is meaningless, just thought I'd note it.
Frame: slant/horizontal
603: 3.1/2.3
604: 1.4/1
605: 0/0
606: 6.1/4.6
Those are all plausibly roundings of the exact same similar triangular ratios. I played around with numbers in the orig columns to get unrounded numbers that come out to the same ratio. (note: these are not the only values that work, I just picked 1.35 arbitrarily because it was a clean value near the middle)
Just a friendly reminder that this video was anonymously given to Burlison, and has no chain of custody. There a significant chance that it is not a good faith leak, but instead something conventional that was planted specifically for you to debunk, as a way to discredit the hearing and distract from witness testimony about real anomalous UAP.
I made a preliminary video, basically summarizing some points discussed in this thread.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTedmssoj24
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTedmssoj24
I can't speak to any specific balloon system, but the comment about potential actions by the Houthis inspired me to start looking for news stories about US activity in and around Yemen in October and November of 2024. For example, I found this report by the Guardian, dated October 17, 2024, which reports the US used B-52 bombers in Yemen. The story also includes this published response by the Houthis: ""America will pay the price for its aggression on Yemen, and as we have said before, its aggression will not deter Yemen from its stance in support of Gaza," Nasruddin Amer, the deputy head of the media office for the Houthis, said on X."
I realize this article says nothing about the thing we are seeing in this video, but it does support that there was heavy military activity in Yemen by the US a few days before this video was captured, and that as of October 17, 2024, Yemen was vowing America would "pay the price for its aggression." I think this provides indirect support that (1) the thing we are seeing might be the product of the Houthis or some sympathetic group looking to retaliate against American interests, and/or (2) that the US was on extra alert and perceived this object as potentially hostile, given the US had just carried out a military operation in the area days before.
If there is any interest here I might continue looking for open source news publications in and around this dates to help shine a light on the geopolitical conditions.
Edit: Have we confirmed the date of the video? The clip I just saw of Rep. Burlison begins with him saying the video was taken 10/30/24.
Last edited:
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Which raises the question, then, why is this being presented as a UAP/UFO? At what point in the process did this go from shooting down something the Houthis were believed to have launched at them to "wow, another amazing UFO!"?
Not a question we are in a position to answer, here at Metabunk, but mentioned here in case anybody on a congressional staff is wandering by to see what we make of this. Your boss, hypothetical Congressional staffer, ought to want to know why they are being shown normal stuff and told it is something mysterious and unexplainable, and is in a position to insist on an answer to that question. Wasting Congress's time with this and presenting falsely categorized videos to a Congressional hearing seems a good example of waste, fraud and abuse...
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
Depends on the mass and air resistance and what terminal velocity it could reach. Could be longer.
I think Knapp sort of hinted at an answer here. The answer is that someone in the US Department of Defense is collecting short clips from other videos, putting them into a folder of "UFO" videos on some shared file server, and then others are then finding them and spreading rumors about them and sometimes leaking them without context that others at the time the video was recorded may have had.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Not sure which thing that flies in this video you are referring to.
If the "UAP," the observation that it is likely slow moving and only seems to clip along due to parallax would of course also support it not being a missile.
If the second thing that flies in and hits the first is what you mean, and it is not a missile, what might it be?
JMartJr
Senior Member.
ABC News reports that the glowing orb was stuck by a missile that bounced off of it, then it the orb flew on undamaged.
Source: https://www.facebook.com/reel/2396490114086784
"A lie can run halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on..."
Source: https://www.facebook.com/reel/2396490114086784
"A lie can run halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on..."
Last edited:
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
I know nothing about them, but I found a video that states hellfire missiles can be controlled via software to use various approach trajectories. If that is accurate I don't think angle of approach would rule it in or out either way.
Source:External Quote:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKbt17psuzw&t=148s
(02:28)
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
The missile was allegedly fired by another drone. I think the video makes sense for level flight or an angle of attack with a shallow vertical component.
However Burlison has now stated that he got the video from an anonymous source (who stripped all metadata?), which calls into question all the contextual details surrounding it like where it took place and when. Others on X have raised the possibility that this is actually from a filming of a test exercise of hellfire missile use on a test air target, since hellfires were designed for and are usually used against ground targets.
Last edited:
owntheissue
Member
These points, combined with Knapps precognition of the video, are enough clues to suggest this is another Jeremy Corbell special IMO.
Videos of prosaic events that have been de-contextualized or edited have (sadly) become his calling card.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Then they are leaked without context, but the context is classified and so the mystery is sustained.
If, as I agree, the target is likely a balloon, its size might be in the neighborhood of 0.5 to 1.0 meters in diameter, common sizes for Mylar balloons (the debris has more of an appearance of Mylar than, say, latex.) It could be larger, of course. Unfortunately I don't know what the camera's FOV at the target distance is, but if the video image is accurately representing the shape and size of the object, and the object is ~0.5m across, and the missile's flight is more-or-less level, (a lot of "ifs") then that would make the path of the missile across the frame only about 20 to 25 meters long. A Hellfire missile flies at up to 450 meters per second, according to Wikipedia, which means in the time it took the missile to cross the frame—around 1.75 seconds, assuming the video is running in real time—the missile should have traveled close to 780 meters. Obviously, if the missile was in a steep climb to the target then that would dramatically change all these estimations. Also, the missile enters the frame and then angles about 45 degrees toward the target, hits it, and turns again to exit the frame traveling in pretty much the same direction it was traveling when it entered. Assuming I laid the problem out correctly, a missile traveling at 450 m/sec making a 45 degree turn within about 10 meters would incur upward of 2000 Gs of lateral force. All of this led me to wonder if the projectile is really a missile at all, or if maybe it's something much slower and more manueverable?
Giddierone
Senior Member.
For those non-UFO interested people who might never watch the video again this will be their false memory of what occured. Incredibly poor & irresponsible journalism.
Ravi
Senior Member.
Indeed. Just leave it to the media to screw with our heads. They (the media) are in my view the cause of all the stupid non sense we see in the world, or at least inflating it.
The world would be much better of without the media outlets. They only create brain rot.
TEEJ
Senior Member.
It is an interpretation. After the balloon deflates you can see three objects that look of similar size detach. It could be a Houthi balloon/payload design or possibly with assistance from Iran? Claimed date of the video is 30th October 2024. It would be interesting to see what the winds were like on that day? There is also the possibility that it was a Chinese spy balloon design carrying a payload? Perhaps launched from a ship in the region? US forces have reported Chinese spy balloon activity over the Middle East.
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...over-mideast-posed-no-threat-three-star-says/
3 objects detaching after the balloon is hit and deflates/breaks up. Possibly payload?
Giddierone
Senior Member.
[from 2:09:00] when Luna requests the video is replayed she asks, "does this video scare you guys?" after she's just characterized it as "splitting" the hellfire missile. It is like the Asch group conformity test occuring in real time. All avenues toward a prosaic explanation (like a target balloon exercise) have been closed off.
Source: https://www.c-span.org/program/hous...ssing-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena/665348
Short video about the Asch Conformity Experiment.
Source: https://youtu.be/TYIh4MkcfJA?si=ZyPgl--23i4dMqtG
Source: https://www.c-span.org/program/hous...ssing-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena/665348
Short video about the Asch Conformity Experiment.
Source: https://youtu.be/TYIh4MkcfJA?si=ZyPgl--23i4dMqtG
Ann K
Senior Member.
I understand your frustration, but "the media" include those with honest reporting as well as those who are merely propaganda organs, and are our only connection with what's going on beyond our own front doors. Please don't paint them with an overly broad brush.
Ravi
Senior Member.
You sense my frustration very well Ann
, I shall be more careful not to generalise, indeed.
Ann K
Senior Member.
I share it.
Scaramanga
Senior Member
I watched the entire hearing. Some remarkable anecdotal stories were told. But consistently the ' It was as big as a football field and just 200 feet above me ' ( one such story related ) stories never come with video or photographic evidence. Again and again and again there is this vast chasm between the supposedly remarkable objects the stories relate...and blurry videos, poor photography, parallax effects, and so on.
The 'real UFOs' are thus entirely anecdotal. Rather than constructing some elaborate conspiracy to hide the 'real UFOs' with distracting junk stuff, how about wondering why...in 80 years and despite numerous multiple witness cases...nobody has ever caught one of these ' It was a big as a football field' UFOs on camera. My conclusion is that the junk stuff is really all that exists, and is exaggerated, mis-identified, wrongly sized ( easy to do ) and so on. No need for any conspiracy.
Giddierone
Senior Member.
I do too. This one is particularly egregious and actually harmful. I think Mick's video doubting the anomalous nature of what we're seeing is excellent but could be more explicit in saying that it looks like things we've seen before (as Flarkey mentioned #4). Hopefully there will be greater mainstream coverage of it along with some military experts who could offer their own opinions.
Here is a decent article regarding analysis of the video published in The War Zone with some historical context on the use of Reapers in Yemen.
SOURCE: https://www.twz.com/news-features/r...ngaging-aerial-targets-comes-from-uap-hearing
SOURCE: https://www.twz.com/news-features/r...ngaging-aerial-targets-comes-from-uap-hearing
External Quote:
Attachments
Last edited:
If this is IR footage, is there a consensus if this is white hot?
Other instances of leaked military IR footage have shown the glare from a vehicle's exhaust obscuring the shape of the craft. This appears to show the object's rounded outline. And then the amorphous shape of the falling debris fairly well defined as well. Does this imply that all of this material was hot vs reflecting the heat of the sun?
Other instances of leaked military IR footage have shown the glare from a vehicle's exhaust obscuring the shape of the craft. This appears to show the object's rounded outline. And then the amorphous shape of the falling debris fairly well defined as well. Does this imply that all of this material was hot vs reflecting the heat of the sun?
The three 'orbs' that certain people are suggesting are ejecting themselves from the main UFO after the missile collision look to me like they are attached by strings to the main body of the object. Does this add credence to the alternative suggestion that the object was a parachute flare, and the missile damaged the 'chute part causing it to tumble to the ground (ocean) ? This is what I'm thinking I'm seeing ...
Todd Feinman
Active Member
Exactly. Why would these crappy videos able to be debunked by folks here, and certainly known by members of the intelligence community to be nonsense, keep being presented?
Matzor
New Member
They do look a bit X-shaped, but that could be an image artefact. Or they could just be regular, commercial four-rotor drones, which are generally X-shaped.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Related question: Why are the real clear close up videos with lots of detail, that we are assured exist, NEVER leaked?
Todd Feinman
Active Member
Absolutely.
boguesuser
Active Member
I'd assume if the debris were parts of a parachute, they'd be more flippy floppy. They seem too stable to be cloth.
I saw someone liken them to drogue chutes (small stabilization parachutes). But I don't think you'd need three of them. Plus there are at least three other small dots in there, possibly quite a lot more that are just too small for the camera to see (terrible resolution)
Which rather suggests a cloud of debris of various sizes.
The large piece moves away from the smaller pieces, which in turn seem to move away from the tiny pieces (by "away" here, I mean towards the lower left on camera)
Here it's higher contrast, so you can see the smaller pieces.
Not saying this is true in this particular case, but the reasons given are usually natsec related, e.g. hiding the max resolutions of sensors and whatnot.
boguesuser
Active Member
Are you able to get an idea of how fast the object is actually moving? It seems to me to be more substantial than a balloon.
I don't think it's moving fast at all. The debris trailing it indicates it's just drifting with the wind, and the apparent motion is from parallax.
Giddierone
Senior Member.
Is it debris? It looks like the three main parts have the same definite shape/size. (see #42)
Couldn't this be the test of an "aerostat mounted drone station" the likes of which are being tested/used in Ukraine to detect and launch counter drones at incoming drones.
Something like this: https://spectrum.ieee.org/airships-drones-ukraine
Other aerostats have drones mounted under them which can be launched.
I think those are just image artifacts from low resolution, diffraction spikes, and sharpening.
Similar threads
