Sonota UFO Video (split from SUNlite thread)

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: SUNlite

Postby Buckwild » Mon May 02, 2011 10:21 pm

Hi Rich,

Thanks for your message, I will get in touch with him and follow your advice.


Cheers,
Buck
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am


Re: SUNlite

Postby RICH-ENGLAND » Mon May 02, 2011 11:06 pm

Buckwild wrote:Hi Rich,

Thanks for your message, I will get in touch with him and follow your advice.


Cheers,
Buck


Hi Buck.

good move.

i hope after consultation with chrlz you will eventually share what you have even if it turns out the material is mundane, as i personally dont think you are the type to fall for garbage so it must be something at least interesting.

thanks

rich
ATS HAS TURNED INTO A "BALLOONATIC" ASYLUM
User avatar
RICH-ENGLAND
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:06 am

Re: SUNlite

Postby Buckwild » Thu May 05, 2011 1:30 am

Hi Tim, ChrLz and all of you folks,

I got in touch (PMs) with chrLz and Tim.P regarding some of the material I got/offer. Both of them declined my offer/non-disclosure deal. I respect their choice and I can even understand them because they gave me some reasons =>(past & bad experiences)

Tim stated (in SUNlite vol ?) :

One can take this technique one step further and setup a multiple video camera surveillance system for the sky. One can look at large shopping centers and their use of video cameras to help record events on the ground and move it up to the sky. Present technology can produce cameras with adequate resolution and low light capability to help locate anything that is above magnitude +3 in the sky (most reports indicate UFOs are much brighter than this). Three such systems setup in a triangular pattern, with each leg being a few miles long, could establish the existence of unusual events in the sky for that area. UFOlogists might complain that such a system would cost too much and might not capture any UFOs. The cost is not that great Astronomers often spend 10,000 dollars or more of their own cash for their own equipment. Why wouldn't a UFOlogist interested in gathering scientific data on his field of interest be willing to spend the same? A three base setup would only cost about 10,000 dollars. A half-dozen UFOlogists could surely afford such a system that might snag a UFO or make it easier to weed out IFOs in their area. Imagine the amount of coverage that could be created if each state UFO organization established several of these networks. Such a system could solve many UFO reports right away and concentrate efforts towards the truly puzzling events. Eventually, maybe a really puzzling event would be captured. This would be hard data that could not be questioned


This is what I have in stock (triangulation was not possible since it was filmed at a close distance & low altitude).
I would say that I have more than just a "craft"/object. I have what could be considered (and confirmed with further analysis) a UFOB :

(Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB) relates to any airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, or which cannot be positively identified as a familiar object. (USAF AFR 200-2)

In every characteristic mentionned above. The unusual feature besides the aerodynamic profile/shape and performances (Vspeed deceleration in 1.3 sec from X kn to zero kn) has to do with true axis. It would blow your mind because it is better than anything expected once you start analyzing it.

Now, I want to add that I would disclose it if it can be explained properly and not "approximately". If it could be explained, then it would probably be the best video debunking of all times and I would release it but I would have to ask the amateur astronomer (who is a ufo-skeptic !) who captured it first (copyright issue involved on the original 93 Mo video)

There are no other reasons than the ones I already mentionned and this one. It is still unidentified to this day and like I said, I want to find another similar (characteristics) video-capture, so I will not disclose it until it turns into a IFO, if it ever does. I just hope that ChrLz and Tim.P will change their mind and they can get in touch with me at any time if they change their mind. Hopefully they will because I have no other agenda than my own strategy that you already know. I am even more "skeptical" than most, because I want a second video-capture (for authenticity reasons mainly)

Now Tim, I do have a couple of questions for you (#1 remains unanswered) :

1.Have you been searching for video-captures (or photographs within the astronomer's & opensky communities) ?

Because if you say "no", then your argument is fallacious, it would be like saying that you've never seen a tiger in your life but that you never visited a zoo or Africa, so Tigers might not exist.

2. What else besides "a clearly distinguishable craft" would you look for, which kind of features ?

Thx in advance.
Sincerly,
Buck
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: SUNlite

Postby astrophotographer » Thu May 05, 2011 3:07 am

Buckwild wrote:1.Have you been searching for video-captures (or photographs within the astronomer's & opensky communities) ?


Exactly what do you mean. I have examined several archives of these imagery and have my own system in place (although it is not all sky and I don't run it continuously). I have not put out an all-points bulletin on the matter (i.e. requesting on various bulletin boards..etc) if that is what you are asking. I have seen several people point towards unusual lights they have recorded but they can easily be satellite glints or something of that nature. In one of my videos, I pointed towards a "point meteor" but Ian Ridpath stated it was a satellite glint (after further research, I discovered a satellite that was not listed that could have created it). I am assuming here that if something truly exotic would be seen, the imagery would be announced in some form and not "tucked away" or "hidden from view" as your astronomer appears to have done. Again, I had added in the article that I am unaware of any such imagery/videos and I have been looking for it. I don't consider that a false argument and would gladly ammend it when people produce something of significance.

Buckwild wrote:2. What else besides "a clearly distinguishable craft" would you look for, which kind of features ?


If you can see "features" then it should be enough. I am talking about distinct objects and not simply lights in the sky. Bright lights in the sky are just not enough since there are many things that can produce said lights.

If you have a video or an actual image showing such a "vehicle", then I am not sure why you and the owner of the image are sitting on it and do not want to be open with it. The only possibility I see is that there might be money involved or some great scientific discovery. If it is the money, I begin to question the motives. If it is the scientific discovery part, then you are wasting your time teasing people with it. Get on with it and let us know when you publish the results.

Since you seem to want to get people interested, might you be able to give us details without showing the video. Perhaps the date, time, location and position in the sky? Are we talking about a still image or a video? What is the FOV and focal length for the lens system? What was the angular size of the object?
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite

Postby astrophotographer » Thu May 05, 2011 4:17 am

I was just looking backwards and realized that somebody by the screen name of Buckwild had presented this back in 2009 on the BAUT.

http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/92575-A-good-ufo-video-capture

http://sonotaco.jp/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1723

Is this the video you find so compelling? If so, we all can all now examine and talk about it since it is in the public domain.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite

Postby Access Denied » Thu May 05, 2011 8:08 am

astrophotographer wrote:I was just looking backwards and realized that somebody by the screen name of Buckwild had presented this back in 2009 on the BAUT.

I was going say... déjà vu all over again. I remember that...

On 27-August-2009, 12:48 AM antoniseb wrote:Buckwild specifically asked to be banned for life. We took his request seriously.

Who was it that said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: SUNlite

Postby Buckwild » Thu May 05, 2011 2:53 pm

Access Denied wrote:Who was it that said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?


Thanks for the (Ad Hominem argument) compliment AD. Coming from somebody who said I lied implicitely* and that later admitted that I did not (after an english class/lesson), I take it very seriously. If people read the topic I opened in BAUT, they will understand why I wanted my account to be cancelled.

They did not even understand what a (?) meant but hey, you seem to be that smart of a guy as well, don't you ?

Now, look who is talking (doing the same thing over and over) ! You are basically saying that I am "insane" this time but implicitely again. Get your stuff together and call a cat by it's name or keep this things for yourself, otherwise, I am gonna have to give you an english course, again... :mrgreen:

See you later AH, sorry, I meant AD.

* : viewtopic.php?f=7&p=35367#p35367

++
Buck
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: SUNlite

Postby astrophotographer » Thu May 05, 2011 6:03 pm

If we want to discuss this video, I suggest we move it to its own thread.Buckwild seems to have spent a lot of his time anlayzing it and now that we have seen it, perhaps he can demonstrate what he did to analyze the imagery. Then we can look at it and agree, disagree, point out potential errors and explanations, etc. One key item to note is that the video was apparently shot through a pane of glass and, IMO, that brings into issue a potential for reflection being the cause. This was the general consensus in the BAUT forum but can not be considered the final word on the matter. The ball is in Buckwild's court to present his case (but please move it to another thread since this one has gone significantly off the topic).
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

§UT

Postby Gilles F. » Thu May 05, 2011 6:46 pm

astrophotographer wrote: If we want to discuss this video, I suggest we move it to its own thread.Buckwild seems to have spent a lot of his time anlayzing it and now that we have seen it, perhaps he can demonstrate what he did to analyze the imagery.

Greetings,
Clear imho, it is for long time now I have seen "Buckwild's" video. Buckwild have already proposed this "awesome" - sic - Sonotaco "UFO" capture video before your BAUT link (you have good memories !).
It was in september 2008, in the french "UFO-Logic forum" (the #4 in the thread I think), a little time before the link concerning Buckwild BAUT's saga - sic -...
http://ufo-logic.xooit.com/t1636-UfoCapture.htm?q=
It is now from Sept. 2008, Buckwild is defending or talking about this video, with the "theatricality" of the one claiming a "smoking gun" UFO video.
We have the video now ! So...
Cheers,
Gilles.
Gilles F.
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: SUNlite

Postby chrLz » Thu May 05, 2011 10:33 pm

If it's a consensus (and I'm voting yes) I'll be happy to have a go at splitting off the posts about 'Buck's video into a new thread (that'll be fun - posts could go anywhere.. :D), but I don't have time to do it right now.

However we don't yet know that this is the video, so perhaps Buck might be kind enough to say yay or nay. If it is, then as far as I am concerned, one of the major reasons (that of it not being in the public domain) that caused me to decide not to be involved in an analysis is now gone - so I would be interested to get access to the full-res video.

However (and I will explain why in the fullness of time!), I don't think the full-res video is going to shed much new light on what we are seeing. (And yes, I know that sounds like confirmation bias (or non-confirmation bias!), but it is based on the details we already have, and the fact that the source of the video seems to be non-cooperative or at least disinterested). At the moment it is certainly Unknown, but it is by no means certain that it is either 'Flying', or even an 'Object'..

But seeing the full-res version would allow some comments to be made about some of the previously done 'analysis' at BAUT and ATS. I have to say that a fair bit of that analysis seemed quite flawed...
"To wear the mantle of Galileo, it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment. You must also be right." - Robert L. Park (..almost)
User avatar
chrLz
Moderator
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:47 am

Re: SUNlite

Postby astrophotographer » Fri May 06, 2011 12:25 am

He told me it was the video and it is the same video he has been championing for over two years.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite

Postby Buckwild » Fri May 06, 2011 1:27 am

Thx you guys and thx astrophotographer ! If ufo-hoaxers duplicate it, then it might be your fault. Thx for disrespecting me/my strategy/conditions. The original video is copyrighted as mentionned by it's "owner" and by myself earlier and it is not downloadable/available on the internet so it is not in the public domain. End of the line for me in this forum since I am insane.

I'll be watching your analysis...
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: SUNlite

Postby astrophotographer » Fri May 06, 2011 1:44 am

As I told you in my PM, YOU were the one who is responsible for this video appearing in various forums and it is YOUR responsibility for its appearance here. Trying to blame me for posting links that YOU publicly posted is trying to shift responsibility just like you appear to be shifting the burden of proof. You were the one who made the claim and now you don't want to defend your research/conclusions. This is the same attitude you presented at BAUT. Instead of standing by your conclusions, you seem to want to run away. It says a lot about this video and any claims there is a craft visible here.

After examining this video, I still see no craft as you claim and I stand by my remarks in the latest issue of SUNlite.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: SUNlite

Postby Buckwild » Fri May 06, 2011 2:29 am

I said that I would not repeat the same errors ! You found the video and you brought it here, I could have said that this was not it but this is it (one of them). I run away from nothing, but from ignorance & comments like this one :

After examining this video, I still see no craft as you claim and I stand by my remarks in the latest issue of SUNlite.


You do not even have the original video where an object/dark shape is visible (with & without stacking) between the lights, I even send you a capture of it. Would you deny that and that you can see it for yourself ? Try also to explain why the right inside part of the left light is vertical (I gave you a hint)... Just a reminder, some of the data that was given by Mr Sonotaco is tronquated for privacy, so you do not even know the all story with this video.

Now, you were the one talking & insisting about a craft (as clearly interpretable spacecraft ? Like if you knew what alien spaceships would look like to start with because you are the one thinking about that I guess, just like some folks in BAUT when I am thinking about a probable UFOB) and read my messages again :

And I am not talking about lights only seen at a distance

I would say that I have more than just a "craft"/object. I have what could be considered (and confirmed with further analysis) a UFOB :


Do you know what (") means ?
Do you know what the use of "could be considered" and not "what I consider to be for sure" means ?
Do you know what and "confirmed with further analysis" means ?

I guess you do not understand, so since I won' t waste my time teaching you basic english, I leave you with the claims I supposedly said...

This time it is my last post in this forum. You can believe that I run away if you like.
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: SUNlite

Postby astrophotographer » Fri May 06, 2011 3:08 am

Buckwild wrote:I said that I would not repeat the same errors ! You found the video and you brought it here, I could have said that this was not it but this is it (one of them). I run away from nothing, but from ignorance & comments like this one :

After examining this video, I still see no craft as you claim and I stand by my remarks in the latest issue of SUNlite.


You do not even have the original video where an object/dark shape is visible (with & without stacking) between the lights, I even send you a capture of it. Would you deny that and that you can see it for yourself ? Try also to explain why the right inside part of the left light is vertical (I gave you a hint)... Just a reminder, some of the data that was given by Mr Sonotaco is tronquated for privacy, so you do not even know the all story with this video.


1. I would never have looked this up if you did not mention it. So, once again, it your fault if "ufo hoaxers" create duplicate videos.

2. Well, sending me a still can be just about anything. I can only judge what I see in the video. I don't see any dark shape even after stacking.

Since you choose not to present your evidence or explain yourself, then the case stands as just another anamolous video with plenty of potential solutions. Again, my claim in SUNlite still stands. There is nothing in this video that indicates something that is a craft of any kind.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

PreviousNext

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

cron