Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: USS Omaha Video

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,090

    USS Omaha Video

    https://youtu.be/Q8A6znZCUxE
    Just released footage taken from the USS Omaha. Well, what do the more learned folks on here think it is?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,409
    It’s a heat source. Without more information I don’t see what else to say.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    It’s a heat source. Without more information I don’t see what else to say.
    Yes.
    "I don't know" is the only reasonable answer I can come up with. Alien visitor is still the least likely answer to me, but I don't know.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    2,328
    "60 Minutes" televised a segment on this topic yesterday. Several pilots were interviewed about their experiences tracking down and viewing these objects. The typical debunker argument is that pilots aren't reliable witnesses or at least no more reliable than a typical eye witness, but combined with visual recording and radar confirmation what can one say?
    The 60 Minute segment (~ 14minutes) is below :

    https://youtu.be/ZBtMbBPzqHY

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    15,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Spacedude View Post
    "60 Minutes" televised a segment on this topic yesterday.
    Where, exactly, in that 14 minute clip is the video from the OP discussed? It wasn't at the start and I prefer not to wade through 14 minutes of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spacedude View Post
    "Several pilots were interviewed about their experiences tracking down and viewing these objects. The typical debunker argument is that pilots aren't reliable witnesses or at least no more reliable than a typical eye witness, but combined with visual recording and radar confirmation what can one say?
    The 60 Minute segment (~ 14minutes) is below :

    https://youtu.be/ZBtMbBPzqHY
    What does that have to do with the OP video? As far as I could tell from the voices there were neither debunkers nor pilots in that clip.
    ____________
    "Dumb all over, a little ugly on the side." -- Frank Zappa
    "Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
    "This is really very simple, but unfortunately it's very complicated." -- publius

    Moderator comments in this color | Get moderator attention using the lower left icon:
    Recommended reading: Forum Rules * Forum FAQs * Conspiracy Theory Advice * Alternate Theory Advocates Advice

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,613
    The video in the OP is a video of a video; i.e. a video taken of a video playing on a monitor. That's not a good start. And I can't tell what I'm looking at. A black blob which may or may not be a heat source.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Swift View Post
    Yes.
    "I don't know" is the only reasonable answer I can come up with. Alien visitor is still the least likely answer to me, but I don't know.
    The "I don't know" part is exactly why such phenomenon are called Unidentified Flying Objects, lol.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    8,800
    Here's Mick West's initial analysis. He doesn't know what it is- but that is mostly because there are so many possibilities, we can't choose between them without more information.

    https://youtu.be/WAfiJqUHDg0

    1; the object is descending slowly and smoothly, with no sudden moves. This can only be seen if you stabilise the sea and the object together. So this object does not display any wild, physics-breaking manoeuvres- it just slowly loses altitude.

    2; The clip has a six minute gap in the middle, during which it seems to do nothing except lose altitude. Maybe this six minute hiatus was also filmed, but it probably wasn't, since this clip was made by someone filming the display using a hand-held camera, probably on a 'phone. We can safely assume that nothing interesting happened in that six minutes.

    3; The object disappears at the horizon, so was at least 10 miles away, given the height of the SAFIRE sensor above the sea surface (about 70 feet). This object was a long way away.

    4; the object disappears in exactly the way a glare from a glowing object would disappear - so it was a warm or hot object seen in infra-red, such as a distant plane or flare.


    West has this to say: it could be a balloon flare, or a parachute flare; it could be a drone - it could be a Chinese drone; it could be a very distant aircraft sinking down over the horizon, maybe an alien spaceship doing some boring flying.


    We don't have enough information to discriminate between these options. Perhaps the US Navy doesn't have enough information to discriminate between these options either, or perhaps they are not willing or able to give us that information. But the Alien/extradimensional explanation is far from being the only one on the table, given our current state of knowledge.
    Last edited by eburacum45; 2021-May-20 at 09:44 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    2,328
    "Where, exactly, in that 14 minute clip is the video from the OP discussed? It wasn't at the start and I prefer not to wade through 14 minutes of it.
    You are correct Slang, the 60 Minutes segment did not touch on the USS Omaha sighting, my bad. I conflated the USS Nimitz sighting (also in the Pacific). If you'd like to hear the Navy pilots from the Nimitz tell their story it starts at ~6:20 on the segment. Also, the beginning of the segment deals with the Navy pilot sightings off the Atlantic coast.

    Also, yes, no debunking mentioned in the OP tape.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,409
    So Mick is saying pretty much what I said, just with more detail: It’s a heat source, but without more information there isn’t much more to say about it. It always gets me how big a deal some people make out of so little. I looked at some of the comments on his discussion video and they act like he’s unreasonable for not seeing the blob as some fantastic revelation. Though in fairness, most of the comments are fair. I’d guess most of the fanatics wouldn’t be interested in his videos.
    Last edited by Van Rijn; 2021-May-20 at 10:29 PM.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    8,800
    The best fit for the USS Omaha clip is a distant plane going over the horizon - but if it is an airliner, it needs to be about 200 km away, because of the curvature of the Earth. This also seems unlikely, because of atmospheric extinction.

    Could it be a much lower military jet, or even a very advanced drone, just over the horizon? If it were a drone, it would need to be a special projects one, operating far from land - maybe the mythical Chinese drone that West alludes to.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arlington Hts, Illinois
    Posts
    1,832
    So where is the spectrograph? "I see this" and "I see that" don't work for me. Attached is a sample of Telluric bands I took with my solar spectroscope and a ZWO mini. These are water vapor, having the band head to the left within the infrared region. I use it at night as well, on street lamps, vehicle exhaust, and am improving at making profile graphs.

    They should be able to do similar to an object like that.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Tellluric Bands.png 
Views:	19 
Size:	39.8 KB 
ID:	26191  
    Last edited by blueshift; 2021-May-22 at 03:01 AM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,409
    Quote Originally Posted by blueshift View Post
    So where is the spectrograph? "I see this" and "I see that" don't work for me. Attached is a sample of Telluric bands I took with my solar spectroscope and a ZWO mini. These are water vapor, having the band head to the left
    I donít understand what youíre asking. Did you post to the wrong thread? The current discussion is about an IR image seen on a screen taken at night. How does a spectrograph enter into it?

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    8,800
    Spectrographs have been used at Hessdalen, a location in Norway where unexplained aerial phenomena have been seen on many occasions. Unfortunately the results were inconclusive.

    Most of the Navy videos have been taken using infra-red cameras of some kind, which do not allow spectrographic analysis. Some were taken using image intensifiers, which are even less discriminating in their sensitivity.

    One aspect of an infra-red system is that it can detect objects at a significant distance that would be invisible in visible light; this sometimes allows very distant (mundane) aircraft to be misidentified as much closer objects.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arlington Hts, Illinois
    Posts
    1,832
    Quote Originally Posted by eburacum45 View Post
    Spectrographs have been used at Hessdalen, a location in Norway where unexplained aerial phenomena have been seen on many occasions. Unfortunately the results were inconclusive.

    Most of the Navy videos have been taken using infra-red cameras of some kind, which do not allow spectrographic analysis. Some were taken using image intensifiers, which are even less discriminating in their sensitivity.

    One aspect of an infra-red system is that it can detect objects at a significant distance that would be invisible in visible light; this sometimes allows very distant (mundane) aircraft to be misidentified as much closer objects.
    Thanks for this input. I likely should have put this into a Q&A thread. Secondly, some of the observations were taken from jets in the interview on 60 minutes. Something that is unexplained is just that so far. There are all kinds of birds I cannot identify and space junk has crossed my video screen on numerous occasions. I can't identify any of that either.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,828
    Quote Originally Posted by blueshift View Post
    Thanks for this input. I likely should have put this into a Q&A thread. Secondly, some of the observations were taken from jets in the interview on 60 minutes. Something that is unexplained is just that so far. There are all kinds of birds I cannot identify and space junk has crossed my video screen on numerous occasions. I can't identify any of that either.
    But to analyze something by spectroscope you have to have a spectroscope handy while it's visible. That was not the case in the OP example. So I'm confused as to why you asked for a spectro analysis.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,409
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    But to analyze something by spectroscope you have to have a spectroscope handy while it's visible. That was not the case in the OP example. So I'm confused as to why you asked for a spectro analysis.
    Yes, and there is no indication there was something visible they could have used a spectrograph on in the first place, hence my earlier question if blueshift had posted to the wrong thread - it seemed unrelated to this case.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    8,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Yes, and there is no indication there was something visible they could have used a spectrograph on in the first place, hence my earlier question if blueshift had posted to the wrong thread - it seemed unrelated to this case.
    The USS Omaha clip shows a real object, probably a distant plane or other object. It is warm enough to be detected in infra-red, and warm enough to produce a slight glare, but it might not be warm enough to produce a useful spectrograph.
    Last edited by eburacum45; 2021-May-23 at 03:03 PM.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    15,002
    About the object in the USS Omaha video, I was just wondering if there is a possibility that it is a non-physical object, so something like an IR laser beam aimed at the ship for example. Well, thatís still physical, but I mean some kind of photonics device or phenomenon.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    8,800
    Since it sets over the horizon, the object emitting this laser beam would be about 10 miles away. Not impossible, but I'd expect more flickering if that were the explanation. It is more likely to be a warm object either at, or beyond, the horizon.

    I think the problem with these new sensors is that they are too sensitive, and they are picking up objects that the navy operators would not normally notice - distant aircraft tens of kilometres away, birds or balloons between the plane and the sea, objects that they cannot see clearly with their own eyeballs if at all, and which they interpret (wrongly) as aircraft similar in scale to their own.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •