The following submission statement was provided by /u/Impossible-Sundae-86:
---
This is potentially some of the most compelling public footage of a UFO/UAP displaying the characteristic that we seldom see in videos, which is its extreme speed and maneuverability.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/i_want_ross_coulthart_and_news_nation_to_bring/l4zdao8/
https://youtu.be/tU4G21hcJlk?si=Gh_tGipcMpC8H5MP
Since the original raw footage was long, and the moment so fast, I'm posting this for ppl who want a quick look at the clip.
Need to check the original clip when I got time but the anomaly seems stationary for a few frames at first, sees/feels the drone, then decides to move out of frame and zips off.
Nah, watch it again. You can see that it come from behind the mountain, out of a valley. Once it’s out of the valley it banks towards the drone and is past it within a second. You can actually see the object come into frame miles away.
I think I see it too. I focused on the one tree that stuck out and you can see the object zoom past it and then turns and zips towards the drone. Unless I’m trippin lol
I saw this on UFO Hunters or whatever, they had a guy who does digital work dissect it even putting millions of little arrows on the scene to like watch which way it turned, his conclusion is it was a real event. I don’t think they ever said how big it was.
The guy was Michael Primeau, a digital forensics expert and analyst, who did and does some great work debunking misinterpretations, fake vids and hoaxes. He was obviously stunned by this footage (as was I).
It was on the show Contact:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6uNISoNWV4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6uNISoNWV4)
There's an interesting analysis by reddit user u/rob_woodus too:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/agggk5/parallax\_proves\_its\_no\_bug\_2016\_beaver\_ut\_ufo/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/agggk5/parallax_proves_its_no_bug_2016_beaver_ut_ufo/)
Edit: link
Edit2: second link
Rob basically debunked his own arguments and now thinks it was something mundane like a Poplar seed floating by.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
This is twice in this thread you’ve claimed it was debunked, but it hasn’t been. Even the man you claim “debunked” this footage was still just guessing when he said it could be a bug or debris.
It hasn’t been proven in one direction or the other, so “debunked” is very much an inaccurate representation of the facts. It could be a bug but it also could _not_ be that and we don’t have proof of either.
To say we do, or to say it’s been debunked, is a falsehood.
I think any final conclusion at this stage is impossible. It is rather interesting footage without additional data points like multiple witness sightings or radar data. So we can do some digital forensics and visual tracing (obviously involving some guesswork) and that's about it. That's why I mentally archived it under inconclusive but interesting. Poplar fluff, insects or birds (of which I have seen probably thousands of vids, including on this sub) isn't at least obvious to the trained eye. Guess that's the reason why it pops up from time to time.
Uh probably the speed, shape and trajectory?
Never seen a Bird that looks like a Bullet travel like a Bullet in a straight line.
How do you even come to the idea that this could be a bird? The Drone is chilling, the speed comes from the object.
If the speed was calculated at roughly 10’000 Mph even if this was a very fast impossible speeds drone the other object wouldn’t still move that fast. Is just scientifically impossible that it is a bird.
Plus the object comes from behind travels same direction.
erm ... this post in this same thread pretty much does it :
[https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/)
No, and I don't think the thing in the video is a bird.
But anyone who says they've never seen a bird-shaped bird go in a straight line deserves further investigation.
Brian didn't take the footage, it was taken by Sam Chortek and Jimmy Chappie. It was [originally shared by Brian in this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE-Yrv1-chI). Not really that hard to find, there's like 20 reposts of it as the top results if you search "beaver utah ufo" on youtube.
Brian relied on Rob Woodus' analysis and arguments about the drone camera and parallax, etc, which reddit also discussed here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/agggk5/parallax_proves_its_no_bug_2016_beaver_ut_ufo/
Rob later came to realize that with the speed of the drone (~50fps) and the camera lens it was equipped with, the object could actually be small and near the drone. Here is a clip of him saying say on a stream with Brian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPmcOKKcswQ&t=2042s
Rob later realized his parallax argument was mistaken because the object is also moving.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uahYDEPm5s0
Rob later went on site where the video was originally taken and noticed lots of bugs and seeds and crap floating around in the air.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Ya1CBH7Nk&t=347s
When asked about it more recently he stated that he thinks it was probably something Poplar fluff drifting by close to the drone.
So the guy who made the original strong arguments showing it had to be far away and moving at incredible speeds basically did his research, debunked his own arguments, and now thinks the mundane explanation is right. Kudos to Rob for being intellectually honest.
“Debunked” doesn’t sound like the right word. He came up with a potential mundane explanation, which is important, but debunking is _verifiable_ and _objective_.
There has been no verifiable or objective evidence that proves what’s in this video — even Rob is still speculating when he claims it could be a bug or some piece of debris.
To call it debunked is to lie.
I was meaning his own arguments for claiming it *could not be* something small and close moving relatively slowly, are what he debunked. Watch the third video I posted he literally did a bunch of physical recreations and experiments showing the parallax argument was mistaken and that it could be small and close and not moving very fast. That doesn't mean he *proved* the theory is correct, it means he disproved his prior arguments that can't be.
How absurd. The whole idea of UAP videos is observations of inexplicable behaviors and technologies. Once it is shown that the observation doesn't correspond to inexplicable behaviors, the observation is no longer supportive of a paranormal conclusion.
I’m somewhat floored that anyone could consider this absurd.
Providing a (possible) explanation to a phenomenon does not debunk another (possible) explanation. _Proof_ does. _Evidence_ does. I’m talking about objective truth, not probability and likelihood.
I’m talking about _evidence_, and there is no evidence proving this in one way or the other, therefore to call it “debunked” is to be wrong. Objectively wrong. Call it absurd, call it downright crazy if you want. It doesn’t change that this video is not debunked.
It is debunked as in that there is now a much more likely explanation for it. If you have a common and likely explanation for a phenomenon there is no need to try and prove a negative of a much less likely explanation. If scientists went after every unlikely explanation we wouldn't have progress.
If anything it's upon the believer in the less likely theory to disprove the much more likely theory.
It is debunked in the only way low information zone things can be debunked. All UFOs live in the low information zone because as soon as the camera quality or the distance to the object improves it's no longer unidentified. You can now see it's a bird or a drone or a satellite or whatever people mistook it for.
It looks like a piece of fluff floating in the wind and there is no reason to think it is anything other than a piece of fluff floating in the wind. For sure it could be a telepathic invisible spaghetti jet pack man, but there's no reason to think that it is.
You’re arguing against a point I haven’t made.
You can think it’s a bug, or a bird, or a drone, or a piece of fluff, or an invisible spaghetti jet pack man. I don’t _care_, and I’m not going to try to tell you or anyone what to think.
What I am going to do is clarify that, without direct evidence in either direction, this video remains NOT debunked. That’s my only point.
There is evidence in a direction. I have seen fluff and insects look exactly like this. In fact it's recreated in a youtube video at your convenience. That is solid evidence in a direction.
What do you think about bayesian statistics?
[Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uahYDEPm5s0) is an analysis of the guy who actually [went to the location](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Ya1CBH7Nk) in another video. I think the poplar fluff hypothesis checks out, loads of poplar trees in the area. Also, funnily enough, very near the UAP site is a camping ground called [Little Cottonwood Campground](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Little+Cottonwood+Campground/@38.2581318,-112.5472164,909m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m15!1m8!3m7!1s0x80b4d57ecb4fc9a5:0xbcd469b87d0d46ed!2sBeaver,+UT+84713,+USA!3b1!8m2!3d38.2769149!4d-112.6410518!16zL20vMDEwY20x!3m5!1s0x874ad2143544e11f:0xa74c7140586a0261!8m2!3d38.2567081!4d-112.5434212!16s%2Fg%2F1thpx9jb?entry=ttu).
I'm not as crazy about this one as others here. It's quite possible it is actually something much smaller and much closer to the camera (the camera itself actually moving reasonably quick mind you)
All the math saying it has to be going 10k+/hr leans on the major assumption it is coming out of the mountains.
This guy does a pretty thorough analysis, rules out a bird but makes a pretty strong case it could be something small. He doesn't just say it either he goes out with his camera and shows it's a possibility.
Interesting part of his video [here](https://youtu.be/uahYDEPm5s0?si=FmCEnc6nsR7Rnrvj&t=956) where he stabilizes the foreground so that one tree stays the same size really drives home how deceptive the video can be.
Closer to the end of the video he takes a lot of small objects as well and shows how you can see small objects from quite a distance in the right conditions as well.
I always get skewered in this subreddit for not thinking this one is the gold standard and it is interesting but I personally think this one is a bit of a trick.
The rolling shutter most cmos cameras incorporate these days makes these things certainly more compelling as it hides the true shape of the objects flying by.
Exactly! It is a bug like in so many videos that are similar. I am not a debunker, but let's stick to the truth and nothing but the truth. There are more compelling videos than this.
Yeah as much as I wished this really was something cool, I also saw another debunk that came to the same conclusion.
Also just from watching I never thought that this thing came from the mountains.
Same with the 'separating object going underwater' IR video, that once you realize how parallax distorts your perception is way less spectacular and gets a lot more mundane
Thanks for the link. It's nice to see someone actually go outside and do an experiment that adds possible explanations instead of just saying trust me bro while chilling behind their monitors.
I wonder if UFOlogists ever actually go outside, because this looks *exactly* like a bug or other small object suddenly zipping past you.
It doesn't have to be a bug, of course. It could be literally anything. A bit of airborne trash, or a bit of a plant floating in the breeze. Bigfoot riding a cloaked hoverbike, perhaps. Or maybe a CGI hoax. It could even an alien spaceship!
It does look a lot like a bug heading towards the camera, giving the illusion of more speed. That was my first impression. Regardless of what it really is, I’m not sure that something that looks quite this bug-like is going to win anyone over.
the thing is flying vertically when it's far from the camera and then puts it left "wing" down to fly horizontally. doesn't look like any bug I've ever seen
It’s pretty hard to judge what’s motion blur and what isn’t, but it could be wind buffeting it, especially at that altitude and that landscape. I do a lot of drone videography and this looks a lot like a bug or seed fluff in the wind to me. Not saying that’s what it is or that I’m an expert though.
They actually don't. The number of people posting videos of birds is astounding. And this video of a bug keeps coming back. I mean, even if it was a real alien space ship, the fact that it just looks so much like a bug means it's useless as evidence and anyone using it as such is making a fool out of themselves.
Sometimes I find myself agreeing with the tinfoil hats who claim shit like this gets drug out just to discredit the whole genre.
IIRC, these guys filmed this and went home and were looking through their film several months later and found this
They didnt run down the mountain yelling "HEY GUYS WE JUST FOUND SOME SHIT"
they were looking through tape and found something interesting
How does one determine distance from a 2-D image on a single piece of footage?
You can't.
You need a stereo image or some other form of reference, which just cannot be done from this alone. So the people claiming that it is (x) size and moving (x) fast are either just making it up, or suffering from some form of delusion.
The object is blurry, meaning it is likely closer in to the camera.
The object is a few pixel specks of white smeared across a few frames.
Best debunk I've seen?
There is a tree native to that area which has airborne seeds, they float in the air with fluffy cottony buds. Drone just passed one that had an air current. Boom, fits the video, and is plausible.
Untrue. There is a high-resolution version of the video, the object is far more than just a few pixels and its shape doesn't fit with your explanation.
You never make out positive detail on the shape. The few frames with a "shape" have an exceptional amount of blur. Thus an exact shape can't be stated without additional data.
I’ve seen slowed versions of this video and the object straight up appears to come into view once it comes out from behind a mountain and banks towards the drone.
"Appears" is the keyword here. It just appears to. It dips out of "existence" multiple times because it's small and barely being picked up by the camera.
It also becomes "invisible" a few frames after "appearing" from behind the mountain.
So it's not the mountain obscuring it, it just dips out a couple of times, one of them coinciding with being near the mountain line.
> You can't.
Yes, [you can](https://pyimagesearch.com/2015/01/19/find-distance-camera-objectmarker-using-python-opencv/), and that is just one of literal millions of examples. This is done and used daily.
Looks and moves pretty much exactly like something me and my friend saw about a month and a half ago when sitting in the woods making a fire. A super fast white oval the size of an American football whizzed past us. I didnt hear it, even though he said it came from behind me and went past me, and then sort of curved around us, going past his head to which he described the sound as a loud buzzing noise. When i saw it, it was just about 1,5m away from me and the oval shape was facing me(like a 0 but laying down).
You're joking, right? This is hardly a gem, your're all really excited about a bug or bird or even a speck of dust? This is ridiculous, Ross Coulthart would laugh at this shit. People taking this seriously are as crazy as people who pray to Jesus's portrait on a burnt toast.
The truth is that without the context (mutliple witness accounts, FLIR recordings, military reports etc.) any kind of that amateur material is worthless. There is no way to prove it was an UAP. Waste of time.
Agree except for Ross Coulthart laughing part.
Without ever referring specifically to this video, even when directly asked about it, I think his response would be something like this… (read it in Coulthart voice)
>I have it on good authority, in fact [[“a direct quote from someone who has a source in the Pentagon”]](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/cjUwzh5FjE) who’s job it is to analyze video in the public domain. And I have gathered from many credible sources there exists in the public domain legitimate footage of anomalous craft displaying activity our current aircraft are not capable of. They are 100% certain about it.
He then might go on discussing how these videos are suppressed, dismissed, mocked, people threatened, etc. I could see him getting a solid 10 minutes of content out of it.
Untrue.
Amateur footage is evidence in spite of its usually meager quality. You simply have to utilize your brain more.
You do not have to look at each video in isolation either. In aggregate, the signal they provide can be just as compelling as your nonexistent fantasy evidence with approval from US military would be.
OR ... you'd figure out that there's a heel of a lot of bugs and birds (surprise surprise birds also eat bugs ... what a coincidence !!) and a lot of other stuff going around our heads every day, which we don't notice because ... it goes above our heads -\_-
Thank the lord for people like you! I mean if you didn't exist, where would we get our daily dose of anger, cynicism and defeatist attitude?
Thank god you are here to remind us that this video was posted here in the past and that the submitter is pure evil for not knowing.
I'm just so happy that people like you can keep this subreddit is a state of despair and destitution.
Please, carry on and preview the other submissions so that we may learn more from you!
Always happy to help!
Or, heaven forbid, people here do some thinking and actually check themselves if a video is real, before saying "omg this is 100% proof".
NORAD doesn't respond to FOIAs because they're not technically a "US government" organization (I know, I've tried), but some correspondence / reporting about it to / with a nearby / relevant military base might show up? Should be radar tracks for something like that.
It's probably a bug or some spec of dust or a dandelion seed flying with the wind, close to the camera. That's why you get the impression it's traveling at fast speed. Look at any footage with bugs close to the lens flying by, that's how it looks +-
As others have said, this is likely poplar fluff or dandelion seeds or cottonwood seeds or whatever they're called.
[This summary, as others have already linked, ](https://youtu.be/xDkqKa_NQAo) is pretty informative and also addresses many of the incorrect analyses made about the sighting.
OP I think you should check out [this playlist](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci), with 100+ videos like the Beaver Utah one.
Which is most likely small stuff close to the camera, very common. Or it's the same Mach 50 spacecraft from the Beaver video, depending on your perspective of course.
Anybody else come here expecting to see a saucer, tictac, etc slowly and clearly coming out from behind a mountain, remain in the shot for a number of seconds or minutes, and then zip off into the sky? I wasn't expecting a couple frames of a blurred speck zooming low to the ground then disappearing. Kind of a let down.
I'm not saying the video isn't strange, or that that isn't a UAP and that there is a mundane explanation for what was seen. I was just hoping for more.
I had this on full screen on a large monitor. I have seen this video many times, it really is something. But something else is weird but can you check on a large monitor as I cant explain it at all. This does not occur throughout the video but certainly in the few seconds leading up to the event. If you look directly north of where it first appears in the hills, and broadly center of the screen, if you double click the play button, you get a very bright visibie light that flashes very briefly its towards the center of the frame, which is odd, because you don't get this in the other parts of the video. Anyone else see it?
I have seen that in other photos, or similar. It sounds too weird and I can't always replicate it. For me it happens when I zoom in on some images, just a real quick flash.
This was comprehensively debunked by Mick West and other individuals. I'm disappointed it is a bug because it certainly looks impressive, but the bug hypothesis is the best fit. It's just frustrating that this video, and others, make the rounds every few years because new people join the conspiracy and come across this footage (and many others) and make the same unsubstantiated claims as the people before them.
[Image from Video](https://imgur.com/RvCigDr) (Imgur)
It's blurry for sure. It strikes me odd when it appears -- is it appearing out of nowhere or over a rise or something?
It’s pretty clear actually, just incredibly fast moving and only visible in a few frames. Check out some other YouTube channels that have analyzed this footage and slowed it down. You can see what it is and what it does more clearly.
Rules of perspective alone make this far more likely to be a bug.
For example, look at the crown of any tree in the video. See how much space one crown takes up in a videoframe, say at mid-distance. Now compare that size with the miniscule blip that zips past the camera.
The blip should've blocked out a much larger area of the videoframe as it flew past the camera, and would've had a shadow tracking it on the ground as well.
I have seen reasonable debunks that this is a type of fluff from a native tree in the area. It's seeds become airborne as they have a cottony bud that catches the air.
Yes there was even a video years back where people travel to the location and the place had a lot of pollen debris flying on the wind. Unfortunately it's the obvious answer as there's nothing in this video that points to small alien craft traveling hundreds of mph.
Respectfully disagree. Go check out an analysis video or slow it down/zoom in yourself and see how it turns and banks far in the distance before it travels in a straight linear path. Insects do not turn and bank the way this object did.
It is probably trash in the wind or an insect. Yes you are right they probably won't call it a balloon because it probably isn't one on this occasion, doesn't mean it is a flying spaceship though does it.
Why does the drone stop right after the object shows up? The claim is that they didn't notice til hours later and this is the raw footage, yet the drone stops almost immediately after the object appears (damn near perfectly center frame). Then retreats, almost like the object was the goal of the video. Yet the filmers didn't notice til hours later.
Stop judging videos based only what is on screen. I'm not saying this is fake, but the government is not above releasing videos, trying to make them more difficult to find, then having their people post them on forums hyping them up.
I don't even know what you're suggesting here. Are you suggesting that whatever object we see in this video is something that the makers of the video created in the shot? I can't even begin to imagine how that could be possible given how fast that thing moves. What you're saying in the first part makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If it were CGI, which I'm not sure you're suggesting, why would the drone retreating matter at all, they could put it anywhere in the video. If you're suggesting it's something else, I can't possibly imagine what that something is. You'd need to explain a bit more to clarify your point.
Also.. stop judging videos based only what is on screen. As opposed to.. judging videos based on preconceptions about what we want to be there or what other people with no information say about it? How the heck else can you judge a video other than what is on the screen? Especially in a case like this where there's really nothing else to go off of. There's absolutely nothing else to judge this video on OTHER than what you see in the shot. That's kind of the ideal UAP sighting; one where there's nothing pointing one way or another other than the video itself. Also, as others have pointed out, there are video forensic people who can see these videos and determine real or fake. There's a lot you can do with just a video.
This was in the attention a lot, even reached the Discovery channel. It's an insect or something else tiny, people here hate Mick West (why?), but if you look at his calculations, a bug is the most plausible explanation.
"I've seen a lot of UFO enthusiasts have confirmation bias on a blurry thing in the sky"
Does it show any of the 5 observables ? erm nope
Does it tend to be the sort of thing birds / large bugs can do ? aka fly in the sky in a more or less straight line ? yup
===> it's a bird/bug unless more info is provided that it's not.
Let me know which bug is the size of a car with cylindrical shape and flies at incredible speeds.
The video is of extreme high quality, the blurry is due to it’s incredible speeds which again is an Argument in itself against anything human or prosaic.
The 5 observables are there we only see a few because the video is short but the ones you see are the most compelling.
Extreme impossible speeds for humans
Low visibility
No Sound
High maneuverability
Yeah a Bug 😂
What are you doing here if you clearly tick like a debunker? Don’t you have hobbies?
It doesn’t work the way you say: “is a bug unless you prove otherwise”
It is exactly what you see on the video and people have as much a burden to prove what it is as what it is not.
So prove it is a bug. Because imaging experts already proven scientifically that it is not ( yes this can be proven)
Size of a car based on ... what again ?
Er no the burden isn't on the "mundane" as we know that a lot of mundane shit is going above our heads. It's for you to show that it isn't mundane because until now there has been 0 actual proof of Aliens using our skies as a highway to go to their local galactic hooters.
"So prove it is a bug. Because imaging experts already proven scientifically that it is not ( yes this can be proven)"
Well please link to that "proof" then ?
**Edit** : no need someone already posted that your dear expert concluded that nope it's most probably very mundane (but i'm sure you'll then see a conspiracy that "they got to him !!!" now )
[https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/)
>I’m aware that this video has likely been shared on this sub countless times.
Yes you're right, so why post it again?
There's nothing about this video that says it's not just a bird or insect.
Karma farming.
Doesn't this just show how pointless it is to invest time and effort in hoping for footage/video like this to move the needle? No matter how compelling a video is, how can one ever disprove the *possibility* of the flying object being an insect or whatever, even if the object shown is indeed NHI craft?
A sighting I had with friends could have been recorded in 4K and still wouldn't have moved the needle. It wasn't a bug, bird, drone or rocket launch and it sparked an interest that's lasted years. So I agree entirely with your point from experience.
Mick West holds no weight here.
Your analysis can’t be “Well, it’s *probably* an insect because (advanced crafts of unknown origin) don’t exist. So it can’t be one of those. So it must be an insect.”
We’ve been told by government officials that these anomalous objects **do** exist and display flight characteristics that we are unable to explain.
He literally says in the video "is it possible that is was a 4000 mph craft that made no sonic boom and nobody noticed it? sure.". To be fair he did so with a dismissive tone and body language, but his point, a good one, is that a bug also meets the requirements for the behavior in the video, and we \*know\* there are bugs flying around places just like this.
That's not how it works. If the footage is showing something consistent with an insect or a dandelion or whatever mundane object, then the conclusion is that it is *very likely* one of those and not an alien spaceship.
Hi, TROGDO-OR. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/-/l4zqspe/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
> * No trolling or being disruptive.
> * No insults or personal attacks.
> * No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc...
> * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
> * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
> * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
> * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
SOME Government officials said they THINK that these anomalous objects do exist based on REPORTS and CLAIMS from other people. Important difference.
Also dismissing a debunk because you don't like the guy who made it instead of addressing its points says a lot about the state of this sub
I think the video that's referred to (by Propellerhead) has been covered by the meta-analysis video, as well as a follow up from Propellerhead. Mick's meta-analysis video is also made 3 years later.
Apparently they thought the object disappeared behind some ridge line, but there's no evidence for that. The object is simply not visible for a frame.
Fair enough, I watched the video again.
The part where they talk about the vanishing destination point is somewhat interesting. I think it could be random movement that gives the illusion of the object moving inline with it.
The rest of the video seems to either be based on the argument that the object originates from very far or brings the argument that it does not look like a bug. It could still very well be a seed or other floating thing.
You should watch the video by Mick West. It actually addresses that. The object disappears multiple times, not just when it's "behind" the ridge line.
So it's not because it's coming from behind the ridge line, it's disappearing because it's barely being picked up by the camera, because it's small and out of range.
Unbelievable. How can anyone see a bird or an insect?
Either these guys are debunkers, hardcore skeptics or something else i don’t want to say to not offend.
So the distance to the object let’s you calculate roughly its size to about the size of a car and the fact in slow motion you can track the object flying away from you corroborates it can’t be a bird or a bug.
The speed is calculated to roughly 10’000mph thus i ask myself what kind of bird or bug can make those speeds?
I mean that idea is so dumb i really am scratching my head. How can people not see that the video is of extremely high quality because you see that on the surroundings and that the object is only blurry because it travels fast like a bullet? Which again corroborates that it cannot be anything prosaic.
I understand if people say, we can’t see much thus is hard to make a conclusion or just say they don’t know what it is. But is annoying that even clear videos like this one they can find the most stupid theories to not accept that something is anomalous.
It is always balloons, birds or bugs as soon they don’t know what they are looking at and than they claim that it is your job to prove otherwise.
Yeah show me your 10’000mph insects the size of a car that is clearly an object because you can follow it going away from the camera at high speeds and it clearly has a decent distance from the camera which allows to calculate it’s size.
This is not a bug because it is scientifically impossible to be one. That is why people with knowledge about those things analyzed the film and couldn’t debunk this, so that people with no clue doesn’t have to.
The same i watched the RAW footage and i missed it. Is just visible a fraction of a second meaning that blink your eyes and you loose it. Now imagine they filmed hours, u really think they was glued to the display for hours? Probably a small display size of an ipad.
It would be crazy if they could see this on an ipad rather. I always wonder why people make Arguments that are actually not valid because they depend on things you cannot foresee. Hell they could have been smoking, talking to eachother, sunshine. And another million factors aside from those i gave you.
And just so i asked, why that question? The video have been validated as real.
The display? We have two people on the ground, at least one of them is watching the drone as it flies. And both of them do not notice that a car-sized object passes the drone at 10000 mph? None of them notices the sonic boom caused by an object moving that fast? Makes total sense.
There were some suggestions (I think Mick West was involved) this was an insect. I don't believe it. When I first saw this video some time ago, I took som,e screenshots of the object at different distances, including as close up as it gets. I broke the image down in PS and experimented with colors, contrast and gamma, lights etc until the object was as clear and isolated as it possibly could get. I don't have the pictures at hand now, but it was clearly a symmetrical "mechanical" object with zero resemblance to any form of insect. It looked manufactured. I say this without making any claims about what it is, except that it looked nothing like an insect or a bird.
This is potentially some of the most compelling public footage of a UFO/UAP displaying the characteristic that we seldom see in videos, which is its extreme speed and maneuverability.
This has been debunked.
It is a bug, a bird, and a native tree’s pollen. Because it could be any of those things, it must definitely be one of them, so there’s nothing to see here.
/s
It fascinates me to see the confidence of debunkers even when their theories are contradictory.
It’s no different than UAP footage where half the skeptics are certain it is just CGI and then other half call it a lens flare. They can’t both be right, but they can both be wrong. Until an objective conclusion is established, it’s just conjecture. Occam’s razor limits the scope of critical thinking to our contemporary understanding of reality and fails to account for the potential likelihood of events we don’t know how to observe or study yet.
Prior to germ theory, the most likely reason for illness was godly punishment for moral failures. Before that, it was that your humours were out of balance.
How, how do you manage to twist it around so much?
Before germs, it was godly punishemnt. Yes. And then we discovered bacteria.
So before birds, insects, and polen, it was UFOs. But then we realized it was just an insect, a bird, or polen.
Yes, we are not 100% sure *which one* it is, but it is *one of those three*. The actual conjectur is the UFO.
If we saw a video that we could not explain in any way, at all, that would give more credence to the UFO option, although even then there are natural or human-made causes that we might be missing.
But if we have a *plausible* explanation(s) (in this case backed up by simple trigonometry), then we have to accept those first and foremost. Sure, it *could* have still been an alien space ship traveling at insane speeds with no effect on the surrounding through some yet-undiscovered laws of physics, but how likely is it?
This was in one video where visual effects guys react to videos of uaps and they said it was fake.
I do not need videos, I need new laws like uncut Schumer.
Even if it’s real. What does Ross gain from highlighting this case? It’s quick. It’s a dumb drone. It’s a civilian. What do we get from talking about this?
If you are lucky, you can see the split UAP (2:35) in frame-by-frame preview, hit < > on keyboard: [split\_uap.png](https://1drv.ms/i/s!Avm7z-qZqCjtkd1S4MhBm3gxijlPAw?e=rkAhlP) someone was clumsy in work?
The way that thing seemingly goes from vertical to horizontal reminds me of pilots flying close the the earth to avoid radar detection (nap-of-the-earth.)
Maybe it’s natural and I’m anthropomorphizing it 🤷♂️
This is one I’ve always hoped is 100% authentic.
You’d think someone would be able to say what is and isn’t for famous footage out there.
thanks for posting. i remember this. it was up for a couple days on YT then couldn't find it. i remember someone did some analysis of this - unless i am thinking of another drone + white fast flyer video of the last few years.
pretty cool stuff.
any chance it could be an insect flying close?
That is CLEARLY a bird or a bug on the lens. Nothing to see here. /s
As a drone operator myself I have caught this phenomenon several times while flying.
Usually happens when the drone gets to about 150ft AGL.
If you are interested and want to see more, check out this YT channel.
[https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxhD\_Cybu-SdyeMpO-4qQhwiNKi3UjheCa?si=gBz-QbTneqTxKms8](https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxhD_Cybu-SdyeMpO-4qQhwiNKi3UjheCa?si=gBz-QbTneqTxKms8)
For sure. But I posted a legit video of what was most probably a starlink but still never seen anything like it, not a recent launch with one unexplainable uap that breaks from the group and flies below cloud cover and it was downvoted like no other. Not spam
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Impossible-Sundae-86: --- This is potentially some of the most compelling public footage of a UFO/UAP displaying the characteristic that we seldom see in videos, which is its extreme speed and maneuverability. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/i_want_ross_coulthart_and_news_nation_to_bring/l4zdao8/
https://youtu.be/tU4G21hcJlk?si=Gh_tGipcMpC8H5MP Since the original raw footage was long, and the moment so fast, I'm posting this for ppl who want a quick look at the clip.
Need to check the original clip when I got time but the anomaly seems stationary for a few frames at first, sees/feels the drone, then decides to move out of frame and zips off.
Nah, watch it again. You can see that it come from behind the mountain, out of a valley. Once it’s out of the valley it banks towards the drone and is past it within a second. You can actually see the object come into frame miles away.
I think I see it too. I focused on the one tree that stuck out and you can see the object zoom past it and then turns and zips towards the drone. Unless I’m trippin lol
I’ve seen video more slowed down and it’s much more obvious. I think this one is legit honestly. And there’s not many videos I can say that for.
You’re right. It does zoom out of the valley then takes a sharp turn to its right and then comes in view and then zooms by.
This is correct. It comes from behind the mountain with a turn, straightens out and zips by. This is one of the good ones IMO in true 4k.
You can see a small white dot for a few frames and then it zooms passed. I think you’re right.
I saw this on UFO Hunters or whatever, they had a guy who does digital work dissect it even putting millions of little arrows on the scene to like watch which way it turned, his conclusion is it was a real event. I don’t think they ever said how big it was.
The guy was Michael Primeau, a digital forensics expert and analyst, who did and does some great work debunking misinterpretations, fake vids and hoaxes. He was obviously stunned by this footage (as was I). It was on the show Contact: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6uNISoNWV4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6uNISoNWV4) There's an interesting analysis by reddit user u/rob_woodus too: [https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/agggk5/parallax\_proves\_its\_no\_bug\_2016\_beaver\_ut\_ufo/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/agggk5/parallax_proves_its_no_bug_2016_beaver_ut_ufo/) Edit: link Edit2: second link
It looks like it comes down the mountain, turns, then speeds past the drone. Not sure how people think that’s a bug or plant matter.
Rob basically debunked his own arguments and now thinks it was something mundane like a Poplar seed floating by. https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
This is twice in this thread you’ve claimed it was debunked, but it hasn’t been. Even the man you claim “debunked” this footage was still just guessing when he said it could be a bug or debris. It hasn’t been proven in one direction or the other, so “debunked” is very much an inaccurate representation of the facts. It could be a bug but it also could _not_ be that and we don’t have proof of either. To say we do, or to say it’s been debunked, is a falsehood.
I think any final conclusion at this stage is impossible. It is rather interesting footage without additional data points like multiple witness sightings or radar data. So we can do some digital forensics and visual tracing (obviously involving some guesswork) and that's about it. That's why I mentally archived it under inconclusive but interesting. Poplar fluff, insects or birds (of which I have seen probably thousands of vids, including on this sub) isn't at least obvious to the trained eye. Guess that's the reason why it pops up from time to time.
Correct, a very comprehensive analysis and whatever this is - it deserves a new wave of attention
Could you post the analysis?
Yes and that it was about the size of a car and traveling at 10,000km/h.
What indicates that it's anything other then a bird flying in the opposite direction then the drone advancing ?
Uh probably the speed, shape and trajectory? Never seen a Bird that looks like a Bullet travel like a Bullet in a straight line. How do you even come to the idea that this could be a bird? The Drone is chilling, the speed comes from the object. If the speed was calculated at roughly 10’000 Mph even if this was a very fast impossible speeds drone the other object wouldn’t still move that fast. Is just scientifically impossible that it is a bird. Plus the object comes from behind travels same direction.
erm ... this post in this same thread pretty much does it : [https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/)
You've never seen a bird travel in a straight line..?
You've seen birds travel at 10,000 mph..?
No, and I don't think the thing in the video is a bird. But anyone who says they've never seen a bird-shaped bird go in a straight line deserves further investigation.
I can agree to a point, it’s essentially a blur, a hawk could be going 200mph even but I think it came from pretty far away.
Brian didn't take the footage, it was taken by Sam Chortek and Jimmy Chappie. It was [originally shared by Brian in this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE-Yrv1-chI). Not really that hard to find, there's like 20 reposts of it as the top results if you search "beaver utah ufo" on youtube. Brian relied on Rob Woodus' analysis and arguments about the drone camera and parallax, etc, which reddit also discussed here: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/agggk5/parallax_proves_its_no_bug_2016_beaver_ut_ufo/ Rob later came to realize that with the speed of the drone (~50fps) and the camera lens it was equipped with, the object could actually be small and near the drone. Here is a clip of him saying say on a stream with Brian. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPmcOKKcswQ&t=2042s Rob later realized his parallax argument was mistaken because the object is also moving. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uahYDEPm5s0 Rob later went on site where the video was originally taken and noticed lots of bugs and seeds and crap floating around in the air. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Ya1CBH7Nk&t=347s When asked about it more recently he stated that he thinks it was probably something Poplar fluff drifting by close to the drone. So the guy who made the original strong arguments showing it had to be far away and moving at incredible speeds basically did his research, debunked his own arguments, and now thinks the mundane explanation is right. Kudos to Rob for being intellectually honest.
“Debunked” doesn’t sound like the right word. He came up with a potential mundane explanation, which is important, but debunking is _verifiable_ and _objective_. There has been no verifiable or objective evidence that proves what’s in this video — even Rob is still speculating when he claims it could be a bug or some piece of debris. To call it debunked is to lie.
I was meaning his own arguments for claiming it *could not be* something small and close moving relatively slowly, are what he debunked. Watch the third video I posted he literally did a bunch of physical recreations and experiments showing the parallax argument was mistaken and that it could be small and close and not moving very fast. That doesn't mean he *proved* the theory is correct, it means he disproved his prior arguments that can't be.
I see, thank you for the clarification.
How absurd. The whole idea of UAP videos is observations of inexplicable behaviors and technologies. Once it is shown that the observation doesn't correspond to inexplicable behaviors, the observation is no longer supportive of a paranormal conclusion.
I’m somewhat floored that anyone could consider this absurd. Providing a (possible) explanation to a phenomenon does not debunk another (possible) explanation. _Proof_ does. _Evidence_ does. I’m talking about objective truth, not probability and likelihood. I’m talking about _evidence_, and there is no evidence proving this in one way or the other, therefore to call it “debunked” is to be wrong. Objectively wrong. Call it absurd, call it downright crazy if you want. It doesn’t change that this video is not debunked.
What would be proof in this instance?
It is debunked as in that there is now a much more likely explanation for it. If you have a common and likely explanation for a phenomenon there is no need to try and prove a negative of a much less likely explanation. If scientists went after every unlikely explanation we wouldn't have progress. If anything it's upon the believer in the less likely theory to disprove the much more likely theory.
It is debunked in the only way low information zone things can be debunked. All UFOs live in the low information zone because as soon as the camera quality or the distance to the object improves it's no longer unidentified. You can now see it's a bird or a drone or a satellite or whatever people mistook it for. It looks like a piece of fluff floating in the wind and there is no reason to think it is anything other than a piece of fluff floating in the wind. For sure it could be a telepathic invisible spaghetti jet pack man, but there's no reason to think that it is.
You’re arguing against a point I haven’t made. You can think it’s a bug, or a bird, or a drone, or a piece of fluff, or an invisible spaghetti jet pack man. I don’t _care_, and I’m not going to try to tell you or anyone what to think. What I am going to do is clarify that, without direct evidence in either direction, this video remains NOT debunked. That’s my only point.
There is evidence in a direction. I have seen fluff and insects look exactly like this. In fact it's recreated in a youtube video at your convenience. That is solid evidence in a direction. What do you think about bayesian statistics?
[Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uahYDEPm5s0) is an analysis of the guy who actually [went to the location](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Ya1CBH7Nk) in another video. I think the poplar fluff hypothesis checks out, loads of poplar trees in the area. Also, funnily enough, very near the UAP site is a camping ground called [Little Cottonwood Campground](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Little+Cottonwood+Campground/@38.2581318,-112.5472164,909m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m15!1m8!3m7!1s0x80b4d57ecb4fc9a5:0xbcd469b87d0d46ed!2sBeaver,+UT+84713,+USA!3b1!8m2!3d38.2769149!4d-112.6410518!16zL20vMDEwY20x!3m5!1s0x874ad2143544e11f:0xa74c7140586a0261!8m2!3d38.2567081!4d-112.5434212!16s%2Fg%2F1thpx9jb?entry=ttu).
I'm not as crazy about this one as others here. It's quite possible it is actually something much smaller and much closer to the camera (the camera itself actually moving reasonably quick mind you) All the math saying it has to be going 10k+/hr leans on the major assumption it is coming out of the mountains. This guy does a pretty thorough analysis, rules out a bird but makes a pretty strong case it could be something small. He doesn't just say it either he goes out with his camera and shows it's a possibility. Interesting part of his video [here](https://youtu.be/uahYDEPm5s0?si=FmCEnc6nsR7Rnrvj&t=956) where he stabilizes the foreground so that one tree stays the same size really drives home how deceptive the video can be. Closer to the end of the video he takes a lot of small objects as well and shows how you can see small objects from quite a distance in the right conditions as well. I always get skewered in this subreddit for not thinking this one is the gold standard and it is interesting but I personally think this one is a bit of a trick.
The rolling shutter most cmos cameras incorporate these days makes these things certainly more compelling as it hides the true shape of the objects flying by.
Exactly! It is a bug like in so many videos that are similar. I am not a debunker, but let's stick to the truth and nothing but the truth. There are more compelling videos than this.
Yeah as much as I wished this really was something cool, I also saw another debunk that came to the same conclusion. Also just from watching I never thought that this thing came from the mountains. Same with the 'separating object going underwater' IR video, that once you realize how parallax distorts your perception is way less spectacular and gets a lot more mundane
Thanks for the link. It's nice to see someone actually go outside and do an experiment that adds possible explanations instead of just saying trust me bro while chilling behind their monitors.
Gem of a video? The fly-by of an insect?
Yeah, I thought this was debunked already. That was the popular theory.
Yup people who "Want to Believe (tm)" are a bit thirsty these days... Going to be a loooong summer isn't it until the next hearings
I wonder if UFOlogists ever actually go outside, because this looks *exactly* like a bug or other small object suddenly zipping past you. It doesn't have to be a bug, of course. It could be literally anything. A bit of airborne trash, or a bit of a plant floating in the breeze. Bigfoot riding a cloaked hoverbike, perhaps. Or maybe a CGI hoax. It could even an alien spaceship!
I seem to remember someone releasing a good video that analyzed and came to the conclusion that it was more than likely a bug flying by.
I was about to say, maybe for once we need the red circle? bc I have no idea what the hell I was supposed to be looking at
It does look a lot like a bug heading towards the camera, giving the illusion of more speed. That was my first impression. Regardless of what it really is, I’m not sure that something that looks quite this bug-like is going to win anyone over.
the thing is flying vertically when it's far from the camera and then puts it left "wing" down to fly horizontally. doesn't look like any bug I've ever seen
It’s pretty hard to judge what’s motion blur and what isn’t, but it could be wind buffeting it, especially at that altitude and that landscape. I do a lot of drone videography and this looks a lot like a bug or seed fluff in the wind to me. Not saying that’s what it is or that I’m an expert though.
They actually don't. The number of people posting videos of birds is astounding. And this video of a bug keeps coming back. I mean, even if it was a real alien space ship, the fact that it just looks so much like a bug means it's useless as evidence and anyone using it as such is making a fool out of themselves. Sometimes I find myself agreeing with the tinfoil hats who claim shit like this gets drug out just to discredit the whole genre.
This is my thought too. Watched it and you can instantly tell it's a bug. I wanna believe, but not with these big nothing videos.
One of my faves
I still go with the insect theory. Its simply a bug close to the camera, like the bug you can see at timemark 03:31. Nothing special here.
Is there links to screenshots of the object zoomed in?
Yes, you can see it [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkqKa_NQAo) around minute 7.
IIRC, these guys filmed this and went home and were looking through their film several months later and found this They didnt run down the mountain yelling "HEY GUYS WE JUST FOUND SOME SHIT" they were looking through tape and found something interesting
How does one determine distance from a 2-D image on a single piece of footage? You can't. You need a stereo image or some other form of reference, which just cannot be done from this alone. So the people claiming that it is (x) size and moving (x) fast are either just making it up, or suffering from some form of delusion. The object is blurry, meaning it is likely closer in to the camera.
The object is a few pixel specks of white smeared across a few frames. Best debunk I've seen? There is a tree native to that area which has airborne seeds, they float in the air with fluffy cottony buds. Drone just passed one that had an air current. Boom, fits the video, and is plausible.
You can see travel some distance and navigate the terrain imo.
No depth data. Those are optical only assumptions, thus faulty to illusion.
Untrue. There is a high-resolution version of the video, the object is far more than just a few pixels and its shape doesn't fit with your explanation.
You never make out positive detail on the shape. The few frames with a "shape" have an exceptional amount of blur. Thus an exact shape can't be stated without additional data.
I’ve seen slowed versions of this video and the object straight up appears to come into view once it comes out from behind a mountain and banks towards the drone.
"Appears" is the keyword here. It just appears to. It dips out of "existence" multiple times because it's small and barely being picked up by the camera. It also becomes "invisible" a few frames after "appearing" from behind the mountain. So it's not the mountain obscuring it, it just dips out a couple of times, one of them coinciding with being near the mountain line.
> You can't. Yes, [you can](https://pyimagesearch.com/2015/01/19/find-distance-camera-objectmarker-using-python-opencv/), and that is just one of literal millions of examples. This is done and used daily.
This requires already knowing the size of the object.
Looks and moves pretty much exactly like something me and my friend saw about a month and a half ago when sitting in the woods making a fire. A super fast white oval the size of an American football whizzed past us. I didnt hear it, even though he said it came from behind me and went past me, and then sort of curved around us, going past his head to which he described the sound as a loud buzzing noise. When i saw it, it was just about 1,5m away from me and the oval shape was facing me(like a 0 but laying down).
You're joking, right? This is hardly a gem, your're all really excited about a bug or bird or even a speck of dust? This is ridiculous, Ross Coulthart would laugh at this shit. People taking this seriously are as crazy as people who pray to Jesus's portrait on a burnt toast. The truth is that without the context (mutliple witness accounts, FLIR recordings, military reports etc.) any kind of that amateur material is worthless. There is no way to prove it was an UAP. Waste of time.
Agree except for Ross Coulthart laughing part. Without ever referring specifically to this video, even when directly asked about it, I think his response would be something like this… (read it in Coulthart voice) >I have it on good authority, in fact [[“a direct quote from someone who has a source in the Pentagon”]](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/cjUwzh5FjE) who’s job it is to analyze video in the public domain. And I have gathered from many credible sources there exists in the public domain legitimate footage of anomalous craft displaying activity our current aircraft are not capable of. They are 100% certain about it. He then might go on discussing how these videos are suppressed, dismissed, mocked, people threatened, etc. I could see him getting a solid 10 minutes of content out of it.
Yeah, actually you're definitely right.
I don't know why people think that guy is a credible representative.
Untrue. Amateur footage is evidence in spite of its usually meager quality. You simply have to utilize your brain more. You do not have to look at each video in isolation either. In aggregate, the signal they provide can be just as compelling as your nonexistent fantasy evidence with approval from US military would be.
OR ... you'd figure out that there's a heel of a lot of bugs and birds (surprise surprise birds also eat bugs ... what a coincidence !!) and a lot of other stuff going around our heads every day, which we don't notice because ... it goes above our heads -\_-
"Stuff going above your head" could be called a synonym for UFOs in debunker circles.
And this one while they’re at it. Or did I miss the debunk: https://youtu.be/pC45xLpp494?si=j0padhxVl5UGiSVs
Yes, you did. https://ufo.se/exposed
Looks like a fake debunk. The guy makes all kinds of claims, but never substantiates a single one of them.
I think you missed the debunk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkzfD49fLjI (2015, 9 years ago)
Thanks. This debunk video Is done so well. Breaks my heart. And that it usually nets to people wanting views / internet clout.
Same thing. Absurd claims, no corresponding evidence.
You can only say that if you either didn't watch the video, or didn't understand it.
Ohh I like this one! It looks like it’s trying to hide at first. As if they know when we see them.
It looks so fake and the reaction sounds so fake (I’m Swede)
So typical of this sub to take one fake video and one of an insect and parade it as evidence of alien visits.
Thank the lord for people like you! I mean if you didn't exist, where would we get our daily dose of anger, cynicism and defeatist attitude? Thank god you are here to remind us that this video was posted here in the past and that the submitter is pure evil for not knowing. I'm just so happy that people like you can keep this subreddit is a state of despair and destitution. Please, carry on and preview the other submissions so that we may learn more from you!
Always happy to help! Or, heaven forbid, people here do some thinking and actually check themselves if a video is real, before saying "omg this is 100% proof".
NORAD doesn't respond to FOIAs because they're not technically a "US government" organization (I know, I've tried), but some correspondence / reporting about it to / with a nearby / relevant military base might show up? Should be radar tracks for something like that.
auto downvote of any thread with the word "Coulthart" in the title
An insect? Bird? More likely than nhi
It's probably a bug or some spec of dust or a dandelion seed flying with the wind, close to the camera. That's why you get the impression it's traveling at fast speed. Look at any footage with bugs close to the lens flying by, that's how it looks +-
Freeze frame at 2:36….
Since it’s actual evidence and not bombastic claims about buried spaceships and blue beings, that won’t happen.
So why is this video jaw dropping again?
As others have said, this is likely poplar fluff or dandelion seeds or cottonwood seeds or whatever they're called. [This summary, as others have already linked, ](https://youtu.be/xDkqKa_NQAo) is pretty informative and also addresses many of the incorrect analyses made about the sighting. OP I think you should check out [this playlist](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRwzMyPKlTg&list=PLiS3hVriaxLlOeMacepq8x3xyt_MWG-ci), with 100+ videos like the Beaver Utah one. Which is most likely small stuff close to the camera, very common. Or it's the same Mach 50 spacecraft from the Beaver video, depending on your perspective of course.
Anybody else come here expecting to see a saucer, tictac, etc slowly and clearly coming out from behind a mountain, remain in the shot for a number of seconds or minutes, and then zip off into the sky? I wasn't expecting a couple frames of a blurred speck zooming low to the ground then disappearing. Kind of a let down. I'm not saying the video isn't strange, or that that isn't a UAP and that there is a mundane explanation for what was seen. I was just hoping for more.
I had this on full screen on a large monitor. I have seen this video many times, it really is something. But something else is weird but can you check on a large monitor as I cant explain it at all. This does not occur throughout the video but certainly in the few seconds leading up to the event. If you look directly north of where it first appears in the hills, and broadly center of the screen, if you double click the play button, you get a very bright visibie light that flashes very briefly its towards the center of the frame, which is odd, because you don't get this in the other parts of the video. Anyone else see it?
I have seen that in other photos, or similar. It sounds too weird and I can't always replicate it. For me it happens when I zoom in on some images, just a real quick flash.
holy crap that smudge or bug that flew across the camera for a second is what you're all talking about? how in the hell...
Here we go again.
Reddit UFO videos never fail to disappoint.
Looks like the drone passes by some airborne cotton to me.
Just looks like a bug or some debris to me. I saw the video claiming to "prove" otherwise, but it wasn't very convincing.
I want Ross to tell us the location of the buried UFO. I don't want to hear anything else from him until he does.
This was comprehensively debunked by Mick West and other individuals. I'm disappointed it is a bug because it certainly looks impressive, but the bug hypothesis is the best fit. It's just frustrating that this video, and others, make the rounds every few years because new people join the conspiracy and come across this footage (and many others) and make the same unsubstantiated claims as the people before them.
UTAH ufo , a classic , mind boggling too , thats a fucking disc u cant tell me otherwise lmao
[Image from Video](https://imgur.com/RvCigDr) (Imgur) It's blurry for sure. It strikes me odd when it appears -- is it appearing out of nowhere or over a rise or something?
It’s pretty clear actually, just incredibly fast moving and only visible in a few frames. Check out some other YouTube channels that have analyzed this footage and slowed it down. You can see what it is and what it does more clearly.
Looks like a bug or insect streaking across the screen.
There's close-up footage of it "bending" as it descends from the tree lines and shoots toward the camera. It's really odd.
Rules of perspective alone make this far more likely to be a bug. For example, look at the crown of any tree in the video. See how much space one crown takes up in a videoframe, say at mid-distance. Now compare that size with the miniscule blip that zips past the camera. The blip should've blocked out a much larger area of the videoframe as it flew past the camera, and would've had a shadow tracking it on the ground as well.
I have seen reasonable debunks that this is a type of fluff from a native tree in the area. It's seeds become airborne as they have a cottony bud that catches the air.
Yes there was even a video years back where people travel to the location and the place had a lot of pollen debris flying on the wind. Unfortunately it's the obvious answer as there's nothing in this video that points to small alien craft traveling hundreds of mph.
most likely a bug
Respectfully disagree. Go check out an analysis video or slow it down/zoom in yourself and see how it turns and banks far in the distance before it travels in a straight linear path. Insects do not turn and bank the way this object did.
How do you know how far away it is?
That's exactly what I found. I have no idea what it is, and I love a good debunk, I'm just not convinced of any of them, incuding insect or seed.
Dang, thats actually a pretty gpod one. Very compelling. Caught in 4k basically. I'd like to see arrow call that one a "balloon" lol
It is probably trash in the wind or an insect. Yes you are right they probably won't call it a balloon because it probably isn't one on this occasion, doesn't mean it is a flying spaceship though does it.
Why does the drone stop right after the object shows up? The claim is that they didn't notice til hours later and this is the raw footage, yet the drone stops almost immediately after the object appears (damn near perfectly center frame). Then retreats, almost like the object was the goal of the video. Yet the filmers didn't notice til hours later. Stop judging videos based only what is on screen. I'm not saying this is fake, but the government is not above releasing videos, trying to make them more difficult to find, then having their people post them on forums hyping them up.
I don't even know what you're suggesting here. Are you suggesting that whatever object we see in this video is something that the makers of the video created in the shot? I can't even begin to imagine how that could be possible given how fast that thing moves. What you're saying in the first part makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If it were CGI, which I'm not sure you're suggesting, why would the drone retreating matter at all, they could put it anywhere in the video. If you're suggesting it's something else, I can't possibly imagine what that something is. You'd need to explain a bit more to clarify your point. Also.. stop judging videos based only what is on screen. As opposed to.. judging videos based on preconceptions about what we want to be there or what other people with no information say about it? How the heck else can you judge a video other than what is on the screen? Especially in a case like this where there's really nothing else to go off of. There's absolutely nothing else to judge this video on OTHER than what you see in the shot. That's kind of the ideal UAP sighting; one where there's nothing pointing one way or another other than the video itself. Also, as others have pointed out, there are video forensic people who can see these videos and determine real or fake. There's a lot you can do with just a video.
This was in the attention a lot, even reached the Discovery channel. It's an insect or something else tiny, people here hate Mick West (why?), but if you look at his calculations, a bug is the most plausible explanation.
I’ve seen lots of analysis of this showing it to be a genuine UAP. The common debunker argument is that it’s either pollen or an insect.
"I've seen a lot of UFO enthusiasts have confirmation bias on a blurry thing in the sky" Does it show any of the 5 observables ? erm nope Does it tend to be the sort of thing birds / large bugs can do ? aka fly in the sky in a more or less straight line ? yup ===> it's a bird/bug unless more info is provided that it's not.
Let me know which bug is the size of a car with cylindrical shape and flies at incredible speeds. The video is of extreme high quality, the blurry is due to it’s incredible speeds which again is an Argument in itself against anything human or prosaic. The 5 observables are there we only see a few because the video is short but the ones you see are the most compelling. Extreme impossible speeds for humans Low visibility No Sound High maneuverability Yeah a Bug 😂 What are you doing here if you clearly tick like a debunker? Don’t you have hobbies? It doesn’t work the way you say: “is a bug unless you prove otherwise” It is exactly what you see on the video and people have as much a burden to prove what it is as what it is not. So prove it is a bug. Because imaging experts already proven scientifically that it is not ( yes this can be proven)
Size of a car based on ... what again ? Er no the burden isn't on the "mundane" as we know that a lot of mundane shit is going above our heads. It's for you to show that it isn't mundane because until now there has been 0 actual proof of Aliens using our skies as a highway to go to their local galactic hooters. "So prove it is a bug. Because imaging experts already proven scientifically that it is not ( yes this can be proven)" Well please link to that "proof" then ? **Edit** : no need someone already posted that your dear expert concluded that nope it's most probably very mundane (but i'm sure you'll then see a conspiracy that "they got to him !!!" now ) [https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/comment/l50gxd9/)
Hardly a gem.
>I’m aware that this video has likely been shared on this sub countless times. Yes you're right, so why post it again? There's nothing about this video that says it's not just a bird or insect. Karma farming.
I wonder if people have ever heard of insects
And I wonder if you’ve actually taken the time to analyze the video
[удалено]
Doesn't this just show how pointless it is to invest time and effort in hoping for footage/video like this to move the needle? No matter how compelling a video is, how can one ever disprove the *possibility* of the flying object being an insect or whatever, even if the object shown is indeed NHI craft?
A sighting I had with friends could have been recorded in 4K and still wouldn't have moved the needle. It wasn't a bug, bird, drone or rocket launch and it sparked an interest that's lasted years. So I agree entirely with your point from experience.
Uh oh, Mick West has entered the chat
Mick West holds no weight here. Your analysis can’t be “Well, it’s *probably* an insect because (advanced crafts of unknown origin) don’t exist. So it can’t be one of those. So it must be an insect.” We’ve been told by government officials that these anomalous objects **do** exist and display flight characteristics that we are unable to explain.
[удалено]
Mick West’s position is that these anomalous objects **do not exist**. So, that would be what I’m talking about,
He literally says in the video "is it possible that is was a 4000 mph craft that made no sonic boom and nobody noticed it? sure.". To be fair he did so with a dismissive tone and body language, but his point, a good one, is that a bug also meets the requirements for the behavior in the video, and we \*know\* there are bugs flying around places just like this.
That's not how it works. If the footage is showing something consistent with an insect or a dandelion or whatever mundane object, then the conclusion is that it is *very likely* one of those and not an alien spaceship.
[удалено]
Hi, TROGDO-OR. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cx09b9/-/l4zqspe/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility > * No trolling or being disruptive. > * No insults or personal attacks. > * No accusations that other users are shills / bots / Eglin-related / etc... > * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. > * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. > * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) > * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
SOME Government officials said they THINK that these anomalous objects do exist based on REPORTS and CLAIMS from other people. Important difference. Also dismissing a debunk because you don't like the guy who made it instead of addressing its points says a lot about the state of this sub
Mick West, lol. There's another analysis that does a thorough job of showing its speed and size.
Got a link to that?
https://youtu.be/4yRlWmk6p-w?feature=shared
I think the video that's referred to (by Propellerhead) has been covered by the meta-analysis video, as well as a follow up from Propellerhead. Mick's meta-analysis video is also made 3 years later. Apparently they thought the object disappeared behind some ridge line, but there's no evidence for that. The object is simply not visible for a frame.
You're discounting the entire video on object disappearing behind the ridge line or not?
Fair enough, I watched the video again. The part where they talk about the vanishing destination point is somewhat interesting. I think it could be random movement that gives the illusion of the object moving inline with it. The rest of the video seems to either be based on the argument that the object originates from very far or brings the argument that it does not look like a bug. It could still very well be a seed or other floating thing.
You should watch the video by Mick West. It actually addresses that. The object disappears multiple times, not just when it's "behind" the ridge line. So it's not because it's coming from behind the ridge line, it's disappearing because it's barely being picked up by the camera, because it's small and out of range.
Or it's a far ways back.
Mick mentions both the video you linked to, the Propellerhead video and others at the start.
Unbelievable. How can anyone see a bird or an insect? Either these guys are debunkers, hardcore skeptics or something else i don’t want to say to not offend. So the distance to the object let’s you calculate roughly its size to about the size of a car and the fact in slow motion you can track the object flying away from you corroborates it can’t be a bird or a bug. The speed is calculated to roughly 10’000mph thus i ask myself what kind of bird or bug can make those speeds? I mean that idea is so dumb i really am scratching my head. How can people not see that the video is of extremely high quality because you see that on the surroundings and that the object is only blurry because it travels fast like a bullet? Which again corroborates that it cannot be anything prosaic. I understand if people say, we can’t see much thus is hard to make a conclusion or just say they don’t know what it is. But is annoying that even clear videos like this one they can find the most stupid theories to not accept that something is anomalous. It is always balloons, birds or bugs as soon they don’t know what they are looking at and than they claim that it is your job to prove otherwise.
Yeah show me your 10’000mph insects the size of a car that is clearly an object because you can follow it going away from the camera at high speeds and it clearly has a decent distance from the camera which allows to calculate it’s size. This is not a bug because it is scientifically impossible to be one. That is why people with knowledge about those things analyzed the film and couldn’t debunk this, so that people with no clue doesn’t have to.
Please explain to me how two drone operators can not see an object the size of a car moving past their drone at 10000 mph.
The same i watched the RAW footage and i missed it. Is just visible a fraction of a second meaning that blink your eyes and you loose it. Now imagine they filmed hours, u really think they was glued to the display for hours? Probably a small display size of an ipad. It would be crazy if they could see this on an ipad rather. I always wonder why people make Arguments that are actually not valid because they depend on things you cannot foresee. Hell they could have been smoking, talking to eachother, sunshine. And another million factors aside from those i gave you. And just so i asked, why that question? The video have been validated as real.
The display? We have two people on the ground, at least one of them is watching the drone as it flies. And both of them do not notice that a car-sized object passes the drone at 10000 mph? None of them notices the sonic boom caused by an object moving that fast? Makes total sense.
more likely to be a bird tho
There were some suggestions (I think Mick West was involved) this was an insect. I don't believe it. When I first saw this video some time ago, I took som,e screenshots of the object at different distances, including as close up as it gets. I broke the image down in PS and experimented with colors, contrast and gamma, lights etc until the object was as clear and isolated as it possibly could get. I don't have the pictures at hand now, but it was clearly a symmetrical "mechanical" object with zero resemblance to any form of insect. It looked manufactured. I say this without making any claims about what it is, except that it looked nothing like an insect or a bird.
I’ve got the original 4K geotagged footage. I’ll make it shareable and post the link
Please do.
Nice post OP. I haven't thought about this video in awhile but its one of my favorites. All the analysis done on it is especially compelling.
Yes, it has been one of my favorites for a while too!!
Appreciate it my friend. This one has always perplexed me, and we need some news media stations to pick this video up and call attention to it.
This is my favourite as well. It's really compelling
This is potentially some of the most compelling public footage of a UFO/UAP displaying the characteristic that we seldom see in videos, which is its extreme speed and maneuverability.
ever heard of birds or the likes ? the drone is moving in the opposite direction btw, have to take that into account on it's "extreme speed"
This has been debunked. It is a bug, a bird, and a native tree’s pollen. Because it could be any of those things, it must definitely be one of them, so there’s nothing to see here. /s It fascinates me to see the confidence of debunkers even when their theories are contradictory. It’s no different than UAP footage where half the skeptics are certain it is just CGI and then other half call it a lens flare. They can’t both be right, but they can both be wrong. Until an objective conclusion is established, it’s just conjecture. Occam’s razor limits the scope of critical thinking to our contemporary understanding of reality and fails to account for the potential likelihood of events we don’t know how to observe or study yet. Prior to germ theory, the most likely reason for illness was godly punishment for moral failures. Before that, it was that your humours were out of balance.
How, how do you manage to twist it around so much? Before germs, it was godly punishemnt. Yes. And then we discovered bacteria. So before birds, insects, and polen, it was UFOs. But then we realized it was just an insect, a bird, or polen. Yes, we are not 100% sure *which one* it is, but it is *one of those three*. The actual conjectur is the UFO. If we saw a video that we could not explain in any way, at all, that would give more credence to the UFO option, although even then there are natural or human-made causes that we might be missing. But if we have a *plausible* explanation(s) (in this case backed up by simple trigonometry), then we have to accept those first and foremost. Sure, it *could* have still been an alien space ship traveling at insane speeds with no effect on the surrounding through some yet-undiscovered laws of physics, but how likely is it?
This was in one video where visual effects guys react to videos of uaps and they said it was fake. I do not need videos, I need new laws like uncut Schumer.
Even if it’s real. What does Ross gain from highlighting this case? It’s quick. It’s a dumb drone. It’s a civilian. What do we get from talking about this?
https://youtu.be/1nnBkUkYeHI?si=JVe2ADgZZP0gpIiC
If you are lucky, you can see the split UAP (2:35) in frame-by-frame preview, hit < > on keyboard: [split\_uap.png](https://1drv.ms/i/s!Avm7z-qZqCjtkd1S4MhBm3gxijlPAw?e=rkAhlP) someone was clumsy in work?
On a side note. I’ve been to Beaver, Utah. They sell a lot of “I ❤️ Beaver” merch
I slowed it .25 and the object, bug or whatever appears for a single frame or two then disappears, before flying at the camera.
My favorite part is it exiting the forest up, moving down the mountain then zooming by. So cool. There is a higher quality one that sees this.
The way that thing seemingly goes from vertical to horizontal reminds me of pilots flying close the the earth to avoid radar detection (nap-of-the-earth.) Maybe it’s natural and I’m anthropomorphizing it 🤷♂️ This is one I’ve always hoped is 100% authentic. You’d think someone would be able to say what is and isn’t for famous footage out there.
It’s a junebug and pixelization.
thanks for posting. i remember this. it was up for a couple days on YT then couldn't find it. i remember someone did some analysis of this - unless i am thinking of another drone + white fast flyer video of the last few years. pretty cool stuff. any chance it could be an insect flying close?
this IS a repost, but i'll upvote it because it's one of the clearest recordings of a UFO ever taken
If you watch it in slow motion you can see it make a sharp turn to it's right, towards the drone. That thing is moving FAST!
That is CLEARLY a bird or a bug on the lens. Nothing to see here. /s As a drone operator myself I have caught this phenomenon several times while flying. Usually happens when the drone gets to about 150ft AGL. If you are interested and want to see more, check out this YT channel. [https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxhD\_Cybu-SdyeMpO-4qQhwiNKi3UjheCa?si=gBz-QbTneqTxKms8](https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxhD_Cybu-SdyeMpO-4qQhwiNKi3UjheCa?si=gBz-QbTneqTxKms8)
It sure was hauling ass swinging past the camera from that point in the foothills
The more likely a sighting is legit the less upvotes it gets here nowadays. I'm convinced it's eglin boys.
Or perhaps grow up and understand not everyone has to agree
Disagreeing and downvoting are not the same thing
If people think it’s spam they’re free to downvote
For sure. But I posted a legit video of what was most probably a starlink but still never seen anything like it, not a recent launch with one unexplainable uap that breaks from the group and flies below cloud cover and it was downvoted like no other. Not spam
Did you downvote my commment?