Последние 9 секунд видео с карданного подвеса, стабилизированного по горизонту.
Last 9 seconds of the Gimbal video, stabilised to the horizon.
byu/Upset_Chap inUFOs
Похожие записи:
Боб Окслер, интервью адмирала Инмана.
ЗАХВАТ НА ДВОРЕ
Мы просто будем говорить об этом как о доказательстве?
Массовое наблюдение в Аргентине
Действительно ли работают приложения для телефона Ghost Hunt?
Церковь Ватикана изучает UAP на протяжении тысячелетий? Росс Култхарт: «Мой хороший друг, Д. В. Пасулька, по-видимому, в прошлом ходил в Ватиканскую библиотеку. Она сказала мне, что в Ватикане есть огромные архивы, в которых тысячелетиями изучались явления».
Новое интервью с людьми, которые работали и видели, что скоро появятся UAP, говорит Росс.
ДР СТИВЕН ГРИР LIVE NAT PRESS CLUB НАСТОЯЩИЕ ИНФОРМАЦИОННЫЕ СЧЕТА ИЗ ПЕРВОЙ РУКИ
Помните 3 загадочных объекта, которые были сбиты США несколько месяцев назад? Каковы шансы, что это могут быть те, которые принадлежат частным компаниям, подобным тем, которые упоминались в инциденте с НЛО в Индонезии.
Google перенаправляет Grush Story
The best part about this video is always not what is shown in the video but what is being said.
‘It’s moving against the wind, the wind is 120 knots to the west’
‘There’s a whole fleet of them’
Also I’ve always felt these were good examples of videos we should be able to fight for and get the full versions of. We already have pieces so they can’t argue sources and methods.
I wonder if we will ever see the full video. Isn’t it just a great coincidence that the video stops when it goes sideways ? We all have heard rumors what happens whey they go sideways.
It’s rotating
I did some images manipulating the Gimbal video mostly for my own curiosity earlier, and thought after I was done that I had never seen this video locked to the horizon, it really gives a new perspective on it! At the very least this should end those arguments about object vs camera rotation…
The Intelligence Committtee needs to ask for the rest of the footage.
I don’t understand the argument that the flip is caused by the camera since this shows the horizon stays relatively static compared to the thingie
Edit: I think I understand this now thanks peeps!
so the black part isn’t really the shape of the object right? did they say what the object was shaped like? i have a feeling this was a lot farther away or invisible to the naked eye
Me trying to stop in Lunar Lander
It’s awfully coincidental that the axis of rotation is pointed directly at the camera.
There’s been people who stabilized it against the horizon when it first came out, [here’s one for example](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/nfahna/since_i_believed_horizon_moved_along_with/) from 2yrs ago.
This sytem tracks speed right? If they would only us give the speed of this thing, I think almost that alone would prove a whole lot.
[serious] Are we looking at video bloom? The black part being so intense as to exceed the limitation of the sensor? Is this film, or tape, or digital footage? I feel like this looks like old tv camera bloom. Not trying to discount anything, just curious.
It’s rotating
My goddddddddd
Skeptics: «Just a weather balloon» 🤡
I honestly feel like we’ve reached a point where the roles have reversed. Believers looked like fools and skeptics were seem as more reasonable. But at this point, how the hell can you look at all the evidence, hear all the testimonies from reputable sources, and STILL be like «nah, it’s just a balloon, or swamp gas, or a bug, or etc.»
its like gyroscopic movement
It’s mechanical rotation of the pod causing the glare to rotate… it’s a great looking video, but whoever can’t seem to grasp this fact really needs to work on their critical thinking. It’s even possible to do this filming the sun with an iPhone on low ISO settings… sorry Mick West haters, but he’s right in this one. I am not disputing the appearance of the object or the corroboration of a fleet being tracked, but the rotation, in my opinion is 100% an artefact of the gimbal head and not the object itself rotating. The pilot or WSO on board also categorically misinterprets this fact as well.
And right at that point
«the camera failed»
Sure….
Nice work. This is really cool.
Can you clarify something for me: since this is now locked to the horizon. when we observe the object rotating, we are now certain that we are actually seeing the object itself rotate, right? At about 5s into the clip, the entire frame rotates CW a bit. Would this rotation of the image frame correspond to the rotation of the camera mechanism?
In effect, does horizon locking the video provide a reference that allows us to segregate the rotations of the object and camera?
I never understood Mick West’s assertion that camera rotation was the culprit. He seemed to be saying the object would rotate when the camera rotates, but that the background would not rotate with the camera. Which doesn’t make any sense to me.
I do not believe for one minute the military doesn’t know EXACTLY what these things are. We are being played.
That’s a fly in the camera housing
Exactly what Bob Lazar described 30 or 40 years ago!
Exactly like bob lazar said they fly.
It’s ROTATING
I saw a mick west video in which he debunks the root cause of the “object” in the video as being an image artifact/glare that was caused and is explained by his full modeling of the literal the gimbal system the the radar/camera of this aircraft is mounted to. Anyone else seen that? Pretty clear and objective explanation and it sort of makes sense considering the given name “gimbal”.
Wondering what others think of that?
https://youtu.be/qsEjV8DdSbs
Mandatory youtube video that should be accompanied by this video. Sadly, this comment will most likely get downvoted by the masses, but I’ll stick my neck out anyway.
Mick West made this video to show proof that the SHAPE of the object you see in the video is clearly a glare created by radiating heat and the rotation of the object caused by the gimbal effect of the camera. The object itself seen in the video is not rotating. It is just the apparent illusion.
It is important to say that Mick West’s only point in the video is to prove that the apparent shape of the object is due to the glare being emitted. He does not deny the object’s existence or the fact that there are many objects also out there in the sky per the WSO’s / pilot’s comment. It is also important to point out that the WSO’s / pilot’s comment of «seeing the object rotating» is because they were looking at the same footage that you are seeing which gives the same illusion to their eyes. The rotating of the gimbal itself is not controlled by them when telling it to automatically track an object.
Shotouts to OP for doing the rotation stabilization by hand. It just shows how passionate people are on the phenomena.
I might be mistaken but I remember someone pointing out that this isn’t a true image but more of a composite made by the different sensor systems in order to give the pilot more information about what they were tracking. The theory is that the gimbal pod rotating affects the output and the object doesn’t really rotate. It’s more of an artifact of the process on the composite image. I don’t know anything about this system at all but it appeared to satisfy Chris lehto who used to be an f16 pilot so maybe there is something to that. It’s ridiculous that we can’t get a straight answer though.
For the skeptics, when you see this what are the explanations that pop up for you?
This is so cool to live in an age when aliens are truth.
If it isn’t aliens, this is compelling proof of antigravitational flight.
There is a corona of energy being emitted from the vessel in an omnidirectional fashion. I think that makes a lot of sense scientifically.
Looks like the same usual very good gimballed video
Why are we all looking at this again?
That stabilised video made my UFO-loving heart fly high! No more debates, just awe and wonder. Thanks for sharing!
I never see this brought up, but what is the consensus with the somewhat “janky” rotational movements of the UAP? Does this look like the movements of a “pilot” or of a computer intelligence? I would assume a computer as we know it would try and rotate to 90 degrees somewhat quickly, given the theory that after rotation this object speeds off.
I am curious if others have discussed this, I think it’s interesting that the UAP is not affected by wind speed or anything during lateral/vertical movement, but the rotation looks less…confident?
No matter, the debu… nooo, the DENIERS are gonna negate with another mental acrobatics.
It moves like Bob Lazar described.
Wow this is crazy.
It’s rotating!!!!
“Clearly a jet liner”
This just in: Mick West has conniption.
What alien technology makes every video we make of them blurry and very very far away?
If you guys wanna see something also pretty mind blowing about that, type these codes into google and read the patent. US10144532B2 US10322827B2
Perfectly balanced, as all things should be
Wow, I never knew UFOs could have such steady camerawork! Now they just need a cinematography award!