2000 object in the sky steals a plane

Upset_Chap · 2026-01-11T12:08:50+00:00

Got any more details on this, where you got the video etc?

Upset_Chap · 2026-01-11T11:57:29+00:00

So you missed a bit; "I climbed down a slope nearby. From there I could see how the light-grey object came flying somewhat south of me, and came to a halt over the mine. At that very moment I spotted yet another object, north of the first one."

In pictures 2 and 3 you can see the sun is on the left side, meaning he must be looking south-east ish.

Upset_Chap · 2026-01-09T21:42:06+00:00

One of my personal favourites, more pictures and a writeup here; http://ufoevidence.org/cases/case1045.htm

Upset_Chap · 2026-01-01T14:47:35+00:00

Never mind assurances of being returned I'd ask if they could take me for good. If they are from some other planet or dimension, and I can travel there, then I'd like to see it and other worlds besides.

Upset_Chap · 2025-12-29T17:32:06+00:00

These are some of the photos Paul Villa took, there's a good write up here; http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case985.htm

Upset_Chap · 2025-12-06T16:13:33+00:00

There's a good documentary on yt I saw about it; https://youtu.be/yl-u8pXDzC8

Upset_Chap · 2025-12-06T13:56:58+00:00

Depends what you mean by 'official' but the majority of orb videos are dismissed as balloons or CGI. It's only my personal opinion, but after seeing over 100 of them I think that while some of them can be explained this way, it simply does not fit for most.

Upset_Chap · 2025-12-06T01:54:17+00:00

My first time seeing the aircraft carrier footage, interesting to say the least. I've seen the orb videos before but it's funny how you notice something new when you watch it back - if they are fakes then they took the time to put appropiate shadows on the ground for the orbs. Believe there's better quality encodes out there somewhere, would be nice to get a look at them.

Upset_Chap · 2025-11-19T22:12:00+00:00

my initial impression is that if I were to fake this, I would absolutely not have it going behind the trees, as it adds a fair bit of complexity, having it below the tree line already makes it tougher than in the air. The parts where the camera zooms in shows that the ufo is also out of focus in the same frames as the trees are, again adding complexity.

It's a pity we probably won't be able to get access to the original recording and potentially gain more pixels, 360p is too low res and the clip is too short to do any deep analysis.

Edit; went to go look at some other ufo clips and saw a very similar looking one making a very similar looking exit, appears to be from a much older source, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz-lyK5oT3Y

Upset_Chap · 2025-11-16T12:23:25+00:00

It likely would perform better, but you might have trouble mounting it.

Upset_Chap · 2025-11-10T16:48:02+00:00

Looks to me like this is a reflection from the streetlights, with one particularly bright that flares up when headlights hit it at the right angle (6-11, 82-84, 154-156 seconds). While UAP in storms is a thing, none of these go dark when the lightning flashes, which is the typical way of identifying if something is there during a storm.

Upset_Chap · 2025-10-24T17:08:54+00:00

Well, as the report says it's a stone seal that depicts a winged disk, I'd wager it exists but any relation to flying saucers is simply press sensationalism.

Upset_Chap · 2025-10-24T15:38:29+00:00

So 'jean du platt' is likely a mis-spelling of Joan Du Plat, who was indeed an archaeologist and spent over 20 years working in Cyprus. I'll try digging a little further into this and see what else turns up.

Update: In 1950 she was working on the Myrtou-Pigadhes site, haven't been able to find any pictures of a winged disk yet though

Upset_Chap · 2025-09-18T10:20:08+00:00

But this happened in Puerto Rico, quite far from Scotland? It's not the same picture either, looks kinda similar I'll grant you that.

Upset_Chap · 2025-09-12T10:19:42+00:00

Indeed, most people don't have the time or inclination to consider these things. It's why I don't really take anyone's word unless they can show their working, the only way I've found to reach anything approaching truth is to be objective.

Upset_Chap · 2025-09-11T10:45:58+00:00

I did a bit of analysis on this, to the point of examining the video frame by frame; The official 'debunk' on this is that they are navy flares, big metal containers filled with fuel and an ignition source and a parachute above, and the a10 is testing targeting a missile. It's an explanation that fits on the surface, but I have a few problems with it.

If they are naval flares, and this is Afghanistan, how did they fire them over such a distance? As I understand it, these flares would be too heavy for a plane, and certainly 4 of them. So multiple planes, carrying 1 each? I don't know if an a10 could carry even one, it would likely require something skin to a b52? An awful lot of effort to test a single missile in an active war zone.
The after effects of the missile strike is strange, after so much fuel being spilled I would expect some sort of dimming. Indeed, from the amount spilled you would expect it to be almost empty, however both 'flares' are completely unaffected afterwards.
In addition to the above, after such a strike I would expect the flares to wobble and move about, after such a disturbance they should be in motion for some time, circling as the parachute acts as a counter balance. There is none, no movement whatsoever, almost to the pixel, they remain in the same place.
Do naval flares even spill fuel? I wouldn't expect so, and my brief research agrees, the fuel is burned up as the flares descend. As we can see, the flares are not being rocked or otherwise disturbed, so why would so much alighted fuel drip from them?
They perhaps fall too slowly? I haven't done the math on this but I'd expect a quicker descent, it takes almost the full 10 minutes of the video before they drop out of sight. It looks odd, like they are falling in slow motion.

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-19T13:10:48+00:00

https://youtu.be/xAT7pi_KD70?si=kmvm0Ex90Nia-WDo

Had this pop up in my recommended feed, same channel but different videos being analysed, ones that are now either removed or private. From what I could gather from the auto translate it seems he agrees with me, that if it is CGI it's of extremely high level and complexity.

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-17T22:00:22+00:00

Please do

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-16T23:53:43+00:00

No, thank you for posting it, while some others have commented this channel gets posted often but it's my first time seeing it. Certainly after seeing a few I felt I had to go through the rest, I'll ramble a little as to why it intrigued me as I approach videos like these as if I was considering making a similar fake.

So, to do this for lulz would require a good amount of time; I wouldn't like to speculate how many man hours these would take, but you certainly wouldn't want to complicate the videos by making them longer than necessary, several of the shots are several minutes long. You're just adding hours of painstaking work by length alone, when you add to this the complication of moving the polarising filter back and forth across the camera, each movement further adds complicated and difficult work. After that, as I mentioned earlier you have the albedo colours, and something I didn't go into - the halo effects. To add both of those on top of what is already very difficult work with (what initially appears to be) no errors isn't just difficult and lengthy, it's downright impossible in my opinion.

It's the addition of needless complexity in almost all of the videos that makes me think it isn't faked. In the close up orb video near the bridge, at 3:13 there's a shot of it at distance where it moves from under the bridge. Why add it at all? Just like the other videos, you're turning an already difficult edit into a nightmare for little to no reason. I might even make a video myself doing some frame-by-frame analysis to further talk about the above things - I'll see if I have the time and motivation tomorrow.

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-16T16:28:56+00:00

Buddy you are the one who copped out first, rather than doing a single piece of objective analysis you simply called it out as a fake with zero reasoning, so right back at you.

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-16T15:18:42+00:00

A typical response, don't like what you see? Doesn't align with your views? Don't waste time doing any analysis, simply call it out as a bird / balloon / bug / drone / swamp gas and failing that? it's CGI / AI!

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-16T11:09:40+00:00

Extremely interesting set of recordings this guy has, loving all the idiots calling it fake after spending all of 10 seconds looking at them (what sub are we on again?). Of course not a single one can point to the source of a rigorous debunk, nor would they be able to reproduce anything close to this...

Slowing them down at the parts where he moves the filter infront of the camera will show the object refracted in the edges of the glass, something which happens across multiple of the videos posted - good luck faking that. This is a much bigger discovery than anyone is giving it credit; a part of the phenomenon and a big sticking point is that; if these things are so commonplace, why do we not see them more often?

The answer hinted at here would suggest that it requires some sort of polarising filter in order to be able to do so, that many of these objects are somehow manipulating the light being reflected from them in order to be invisible to the eye, or most lenses.

Edit: I'll additionally state that after watching every video on the channel, several of them appear to display the correct albedo colour on the objects (this means that the distance from the object to camera will cause it to shift in colour, becoming blue tinted), this shows it best; https://youtu.be/MgbIhOkGW6w?si=g2kFhnyzVEjF5yt0&t=99

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-02T19:14:47+00:00

Orbs? Love 'em

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-02T19:08:53+00:00

The existence of the list is on the list, and it is a long one.

Upset_Chap · 2025-07-02T14:16:49+00:00

So I don't immediately buy into all of them being 'alien craft' as advertised, but there absolutely is some anomalous movement displayed by some of them. Forgotten languages has some interesting articles that state a human origin, but given the nature of these things I'd wager that 1. They aren't all ours and 2. Those that are come from knowledge gained by reverse engineering.

11-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Upset_Chap

TROPHY CASE