Latest activity

Here is the link to about 22 pages of clippings I collected after my first sighting. Went through every available database with fine-toothed search terms. Took many months: No matter what you think they are a blast to read. I sure as heck...

You saw the objects on Everest from '33 too? This is the one. From 1920:

Link to the second of these, "Strange Objects In Sky", Trove website https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/30512698 under Letters to the Editor, The Advertiser (Adelaide, Australia) 17 Feb 1947, writer F.W. Flavel. Couldn't see the other...

Link to the second of these, "Strange Objects In Sky", Trove website https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/30512698 under Letters to the Editor, The Advertiser (Adelaide, Australia) 17 Feb 1947, writer F.W. Flavel. Couldn't see the other...

The article being referenced, as in the one Carling is talking about. The part in question is the image caption “US Indo-Pacific Command reported a football-shaped object near Japan”.

47 says South China Sea in the that same column. Though 45 above it says Middle East then Southern United States so I don't know how much to trust it.

I think the cropped image Corbell leaked is at frame 1341 in the DoD video. The star shape and north indicator match and there a bunch of noise/compression patterns in the pixels that are only there for a frame or two. Overlay transition:

I'm just collecting examples of diffraction spikes on gun cameras / TGP cameras. There's a lot of variation. This is interesting, as it happens before the air strike. I wonder if it might be the targeting laser reflecting off something. Maybe...

If the footage for PR-46 — INDOPACOM 2024 is inverted: And the description is examined: "(...) a football-shaped body with three radial projections: one oriented vertically, and two oriented downward at a 45-degree angle relative to the...

The description for this footage on DoW website states "East China Sea". That's probably where "near Japan" is coming from:

That's just a sharpening artifact. The object itself resembles other photos of birds or insects. But ultimately, there are not enough pixels to determine this.

@nightsky74 , you'll see the term "the LIZ" used here. It stands for the Low Information Zone, and every type of camera has it. Some things occupy a very few pixels, or do so for a very few frames of a video, so that there simply isn't enough...

I would venture that most software can only enhance what was on the original photo. That is, it can't show something that wasn't captured in the first place. As Ann noted, all recording systems have some sort of inherent limitations. A classic...

Thanks Dave. This is as far as i could go then.

I would venture that most software can only enhance what was on the original photo. That is, it can't show something that wasn't captured in the first place. As Ann noted, all recording systems have some sort of inherent limitations. A classic...