Video of UFO stalking Chilean Air Force

[newyorklily]

Interesting article in the Huffington Post written by Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal.


Is this the case UFO skeptics have been dreading?
Sightings of mysterious flying craft with capabilities unknown on Earth have confounded mankind throughout recorded history. Most have been convincingly explained away as unfamiliar aircraft, natural phenomena or illusions. But then there are the others, witnessed in our time by pilots and air traffic controllers, military leaders, scientists, law enforcement officers and other trained observers, sometimes with physical evidence, including corroboration on film and video.
"We don't know what they are," says Nick Pope, a former head of the official UFO office in Britain's Ministry of Defense. "But they do exist."
As agreed by authorities around the world, these truly unexplainable unidentified flying objects appear solid, metallic and luminous, able to operate with speeds and maneuvers that defy the laws of physics. And, most chilling of all, they often behave as if under intelligent control.
One such case has just come to light in Chile, and was presented by government officials for the first time at a press conference on March 13.
It was a glorious, sunny morning on Nov. 5, 2010, when crowds gathered to celebrate the changing of the Air Force Command at El Bosque Air Base in Santiago. From different locations, spectators aimed video cameras and cell phones at groups of acrobatic and fighter jets performing an air show overhead. Nobody saw anything amiss.
But afterward, an engineer from the adjacent Pillán aircraft factory noticed something bizarre while viewing his footage in slow motion. He turned it over to the government's well known Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena, or CEFAA, for analysis.
The stunning conclusion: The Chilean jets were being stalked by a UFO.

Read more and watch the video here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-kean/the-extraordinary-ufo-sig_b_1342585.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=1721725,b=facebook

I've seen one post on Facebook (so far) saying that the video is a fake. What do you think? And, if you think it is bogus, why do you think the Chilean government would do such a thing?

[southerncross]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-kean/the-extraordinary-ufo-sig_b_1342585.html

with video

By Leslie Kean

excerpt-
"We don't know what they are," says Nick Pope, a former head of the official UFO office in Britain's Ministry of Defense. "But they do exist."

As agreed by authorities around the world, these truly unexplainable unidentified flying objects appear solid, metallic and luminous, able to operate with speeds and maneuvers that defy the laws of physics. And, most chilling of all, they often behave as if under intelligent control.

One such case has just come to light in Chile, and was presented by government officials for the first time at a press conference on March 13.

[murmur]

Very impressive....multiple cameras.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga6wdavEEUE

[Doc]

Victor weighs in:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-kean/the-extraordinary-ufo-sig_b_1342585.html?ref=science&ir=Science
/
http://ufoshock.com/ufo-caught-on-tape-over-santiago-air-base-still-baffles-chilean-government.html

AMAZING! VIDEO OF UFO OVER SANTIAGO AIR BASE!
/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS_uYCIzi5E [1:10 min]
/
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/91332/UFO__Over_Santiago_Air_Base__Leslie_Kean_/

CLEAR AS DAY! UFO CAUGHT ON TAPE OVER SANTIAGO AIR BASE! / CHILEAN JETS
WERE STALKED BY A SINGLE, LARGE UFO AT AN AIR SHOW WITNESSED BY
THOUSANDS! / UNLIKE OTHER GOVERNMENTS, CHILE's MILITARY HAS OFFICIALLY
SAID IT WAS A UFO SIGHTED AT THE EL BOSQUE AIR BASE! –
Written with Ralph Blumenthal / Posted By Leslie Kean E-Mail:
LKean@ix.netcom.com / Thursday, 03/15/2012, 8:22 p.m.

IS THIS THE CASE UFO SKEPTICS HAVE BEEN DREADING?!

Sightings of mysterious flying craft with capabilities unknown on Earth
have confounded mankind throughout recorded history. Most have been
convincingly explained away as unfamiliar aircraft, natural phenomena or
illusions.

But then there are the others, witnessed in our time by pilots and air
traffic controllers, military leaders, scientists, law enforcement
officers and other trained observers, sometimes with physical evidence,
including corroboration on film and video.

"We DON'T know what they are," says Nick Pope, a former head of the
official UFO office in Britain's Ministry of Defense. "But they DO
exist."

As agreed by authorities around the world, these truly unexplainable
unidentified flying objects appear solid, metallic and luminous, able to
operate with speeds and maneuvers that defy the laws of physics.

And, most chilling of all, they often behave as if under intelligent
control. One such case has just come to light in Chile, and was
presented by government officials for the first time at a press
conference on March 13.

It was a glorious, sunny morning on Nov. 5, 2010, when crowds gathered
to celebrate the changing of the Air Force Command at El Bosque Air Base
in Santiago. From different locations, spectators aimed video cameras
and cell phones at groups of acrobatic and fighter jets performing an
air show overhead.

Nobody saw anything amiss. But afterward, an engineer from the adjacent
Pillán aircraft factory noticed something bizarre while viewing his
footage in slow motion. He turned it over to the government's well known
Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena, or CEFAA, for
analysis.

The stunning conclusion: The Chilean jets were being stalked by a UFO.
CEFAA was established in 1997, within the Department of Civil
Aeronautics, the equivalent of our FAA. Its creation was sparked when
aeronautic specialists and others reported multiple sightings of
anomalous lights near Aeropuerto Chacalluta -- an airport in Northern
Chile -- which were then reported in the press.

Gen. Ricardo Bermúdez, formerly chief commander of the air force's 3rd
Air Brigade (southern area) and an air attaché in London, was one of
CEFAA's founders, and he currently directs the agency with a full-time
staff of three.

"Our mission is to study cases of unidentified aerial phenomena for
which there is adequate data, to determine any possible risk to air
operations," says Bermúdez. "Since this is a worldwide phenomenon, it
should be subjected to rigorous scientific analysis so we can come to
viable conclusions."

CEFAA officials collected seven videos of the El Bosque UFO taken from
different vantage points. Bermúdez commissioned scientists from many
disciplines, aeronautical experts, and air force and army photogrametric
technicians to subject the videos to intense scrutiny.

They all came to the same conclusions.
Each video included three different, mainly horizontal loops flown by
the UFO within seconds of each other. The object made elliptical passes
either near or around each of three sets of performing jets. It flew
past the Halcones, F5s and F16s at speeds so fast it was not noticed by
the pilots or anyone on the ground below.

This extraordinary machine was flying at velocities too high to be
man-made. Scientists have estimated the speed, depending on the size of
the object, to be at least 4000 - 6000 mph. Humans inside this object
could not survive. And, somehow, it made no sonic boom, a noise similar
to thunder which occurs whenever something exceeds the speed of sound
(750 mph at sea level).

The shock waves generated from an object at such high velocities would
normally be enormous. But no known aircraft or drone could possibly fly
this fast at such low altitudes anyway. Our fastest air-breathing jet,
the SR-71, has a maximum speed of just over 2,000 mph, but that's at
high altitudes.

And, this strange object is clearly operating under intelligent control.
It zooms toward each set of jets at about their height, circles around
and zooms back out again. Pilots who were shown the trajectory of the
object in the three flybys were amazed that this maneuver is
characteristic of reconnaissance aircraft coming in for a quick look at
others in the sky.

Astronomer Luis Barrera from the Metropolitan University of Sciences in
Chile, who has an asteroid named after him, was one of eight highly
skeptical scientists who analyzed the footage. He was able to rule out a
meteoroid, pieces of meteors or comets, space junk, a bird or an
airplane.

"The object performed a risky flight maneuver in front of the Halcones
from W-E-W, at low altitude and high speed," Barrera concluded. "It had
intentional movements. It moved east with 25 degrees inclination, which
is the same angle of spacecraft when entering the atmosphere."

Alberto Vergara, an expert in digital imaging, reported that "when we
examine the whole scene frame by frame, we have been able to realize
that it has, apparently, moved at a speed far superior to any flying
object of known manufacture."

[Doc]

NBC has picked up the story:

Video from Chile stirs up UFO buzz

By Alan Boyle







Is this truly the video (http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/15/10704801-video-from-chile-stirs-up-ufo-buzz#) that UFO skeptics have been dreading? Actually, a compilation of 17-month-old video clips from a Chilean military air show is stirring up predictable responses from both sides of the UFO debate, but no dread.
For those who are inclined to believe that some unidentified flying objects exhibit characteristics beyond what our technology seems capable of, the El Bosque case could represent the latest, greatest evidence for flying saucers.
"This is a very, very unusual case, and I'm hoping that this case will help move forward the recognition that there really is something here that's worthy of further study. ... It has the possibility (http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/15/10704801-video-from-chile-stirs-up-ufo-buzz#) of being a breakthrough case," said investigative journalist Leslie Kean (http://ufosontherecord.com/leslie-kean/), the author of the book "UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record."

Read the rest:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/15/10704801-video-from-chile-stirs-up-ufo-buzz

[murmur]

Multiple insects?

[Doc]

From Filer's Filers #11-2012, Antonio Huneeus interviews Chilean General Bermudez:





Special Reports General Bermúdez Chilean Air Force’s Multiple Videos of UFO
http://www.listrocket.com/ktml2/user/1241_M837Hca3MN/images/uploads/1241_oamuKCK38ozAhY8MKyt3_files/image007.jpgGeneral Ricardo Bermúdez left with the celebrated ufologist and author Antonio Huneeus who interviewed the General during the International UFO Congress. Antonio states, “General Bermúdez’s IUFOC presentation was a true breakthrough in the international study and public acceptance of UFOs. There is no doubt that when it comes to official UFO disclosure, Chile is now leading the way.” He revealed this important UFO case.

Every four years there is change of guard of the Commander-in-Chief of the Chilean Air Force (FACH), which takes place at an important ceremony with an air parade at the Air Force Academy in El Bosque in Santiago. The last such ceremony, when General Jorge Rojas Avila became the current chief of the FACH, took place in El Bosque in the morning of November 4, 2010. As usual, the ceremony was attended by the President of Chile, Sebastián Piñera, all the commanders of the armed forces and top brass, the Minister of Defense and other cabinet members, the diplomatic corps and many other important officials including Gen. Bermúdez himself. The ceremony is popular with the public and widely photographed and filmed because it includes the air parade by all the different squadrons of the FACH, including the Halcones (Hawks) High Acrobatics Squad, which are very popular in Chile (similar to the USAF’s Thunderbirds).
Everything proceeded according to plan and nobody seemed to have noticed anything unusual during the ceremony. However, it now looks certain that someone else who was uninvited also decided to check the FACH ceremony, since sometime after the event CEFAA was contacted by eventually a total of seven different individuals who captured a metallic-looking objects moving extremely fast in the sky while different groups of FACH aircraft—the Halcones, F5s and F16s—flew over the Academy with all the VIPs.
http://www.listrocket.com/ktml2/user/1241_M837Hca3MN/images/uploads/1241_oamuKCK38ozAhY8MKyt3_files/image011.jpgThis case clearly stands out in a world full of often dramatic and sensational UFO videos posted in YouTube, many of which come from anonymous sources and have a dubious pedigree. Here we have a case with seven different videos all showing the same thing. Below you can see a frame of the first video showing the best image of the UFO taken right after the Halcones’ flyby.
Frame from the first video at the FACH Ceremony in El Bosque, Nov. 4, 2010, showing a clear image of the metallic looking object. (Credit: CEFAA)
http://www.listrocket.com/ktml2/user/1241_M837Hca3MN/images/uploads/1241_oamuKCK38ozAhY8MKyt3_files/image009.jpgThe second video taken during the same FACH ceremony showed exactly the same metallic-looking unidentified object flying right below a formation of F5 jets. As explained by Gen. Bermúdez in his lecture, “the object is very near the F5, and our study, the heat study” showed the similarity of “the F5 with the object, same for the shadow, a very interesting case.” The CEFAA analysis estimated that the radius of the UFO was between 5-10 meters.
Frame from the second El Bosque video with the F5s showing the heat signature of both the FACH jets and the UFO. (Credit: CEFAA)
The FACH’s El Bosque ceremony then proceeded with a flyby of eight F16s and once again the metallic-looking object appeared in yet another video. “If you think it’s not enough I have another surprise for you,” said Gen. Bermúdez, “this appeared only one fraction of a second, our non-believer astronomers calculated the speed according to Newton’s law, 18 times the F-16 speed, that is over 10,000 KM per hour.”
Frame from the third El Bosque video showing the F16s and UFO. The official analysis indicated the speed of the UFO was eighteen times faster than the F16s. (Credit: CEFAA)
http://www.listrocket.com/ktml2/user/1241_M837Hca3MN/images/uploads/1241_oamuKCK38ozAhY8MKyt3_files/image013.jpgGen. Bermúdez showed the analysis done by the astronomers from CEFAA’s External Committee of Advisors, which established that the object was not a meteoroid, a comet, reentry of space junk, a bird or an airplane. Furthermore, the scientists’ report stated the UFO undertook “a risky maneuver in front of the Halcones from west to east” and that it did “a flight maneuver at low altitude and high speed.” The report also established that “the object shows light and shadow effects of metallic like reflections and shows ellipsoidal shape” and that “the land observers do not detect the object in spite that it passes over their heads, thereby it is not accompanied by a sound wave.” Finally, the report’s final significant point indicates “the object moves east with 25 degrees inclination. This is the same angle spacecraft enter the atmosphere.”
To recap the salient details about the El Bosque multiple footage case, Gen. Bermúdez stated in his IUFOC lecture that, “we have studied this case in different ways. First we gave it to the astronomers, who used their own software; second, we gave the film to the air force specialists (FACH’s Aerial Photogrammetric Service). Third, we did our own internal study; we also asked the opinion of Dr. [Richard] Haines and Bruce Maccabee. Maccabee agreed with our astronomers and Richard [Haines] said that there is an unknown aerial phenomenon.”
Final Conclusions & Proposition
After a lecture full of official evidences, both audio and visual, Gen. Bermúdez proceeded to list the conclusions about the UFO phenomenon reached by CEFAA. These are:


The Anomalous Aerial Phenomenon characterized as UFO is real and it is present inside and outside the Controlled Air Space.
We do not know what it is and where it came from.
It is necessary to continue studying the phenomenon.
It is necessary to share all the information.
The general then added that, “I believe all possibilities of risk to air operations, no matter how incredible, must be investigated; to ignore it is irresponsible.” Bermúdez then presented what he called his “Proposition” for a continuing serious program of investigation of the phenomenon beyond Chilean borders into the international arena. The three points of his proposal were:
It is necessary to a have a serious agency to direct the investigation in the entire world.
This agency must collect and share information and proceed to make an effective scientific investigation.
I believe that this agency should be located in the United Nations as a part of the Space Affairs.

Let’s hope that other nations will also join and work together to solve this intriguing mystery, and that the famous UN General Assembly Decision 33/426 of December 1978, calling for “the establishment of an agency or a department of the United Nations for undertaking, coordinating and disseminating the results of research into unidentified flying objects and related phenomena,” will be eventually revived.. Thanks to Antonio Huneeus at Open Minds http://www.openminds.tv/ufo-disclosure-chilean-style-896/ (http://www.listrocket.com/public/link.php?url=http://www.openminds.tv/ufo-disclosure-chilean-style-896/&lid=74744&uid=2816118&sid=27815&mid=24356) .You can get the DVD of General Bermúdez’s full presentation here (http://www.listrocket.com/public/link.php?url=http://store.openminds.tv/general-ret-ricardo-bermudez-presents-chiles-official-ufo-agency/&lid=74957&uid=2816118&sid=27815&mid=24356)

[murmur]

from here......

http://www.livescience.com/19241-video-ufo-buzzing-fighter-jets-bugs-believers.html

excerpt....

Is this truly the case that "UFO skeptics have been dreading?" Two Internet video sleuths have compelling evidence that suggests otherwise. The first compared an unrelated video taken of a swarm of bees in flight to the object in the video; they are virtually identical. A second investigator going by the handle "Hoaxkiller" did his own video analysis that clearly shows the "UFO" flying up from the foreground in front of nearby hills. It seems that whatever it is — whether extraterrestrial spacecraft or very terrestrial insect — the UFO began its journey into the skies above the El Bosque Air Base from approximately knee height, and probably took off from less than 20 feet in front of the cameraman.

If the Unidentified Flying Object truly is some sort of extraterrestrial spacecraft and not flying insect, it's odd that it apparently didn't show up on radar. Then there's the fact that not a single person on the scene, including the pilots, noticed the UFO. This makes fits with the flying insect theory — the pilots would of course be unable to see the bee or fly, and the crowd was of course watching the jets overhead.

Kean and others insist that the bug explanation was ruled out by expert analysis, in part because there are said to be several different videos (http://www.theoutpostforum.com/tof/#) showing it. While that claim appears to be true, it does not rule out the likelihood of the image being an insect, because so far all of the available videos are from a nearly identical vantage point. In order to conclusively debunk the bug explanation, we would need to see the UFO appearing in video taken from different locations.

Veteran UFO researcher Robert Sheaffer, who covered the topic on his "Bad UFOs" blog (http://badufos.blogspot.com/2012/03/flying-saucer-or-fly-is-this-case-ufo.html), told Life's Little Mysteries, "What is truly surprising is how easy it is to create a 'world class' UFO video, and stump the so-called 'experts.' Just get a video of an insect flying around, and edit it carefully so it's not immediately obvious that the object is a bug. Many UFO promoters have such a powerful will-to-believe that they often do not apply any reasonable critical analysis to sensational claims."
Skeptical explanation-defying ET craft stalking Chile's military jets or annoyed insect? You be the judge.

[norenrad]

... and that “the land observers do not detect the object in spite that it passes over their heads, thereby it is not accompanied by a sound wave.”

See, when I notice that nobody else is looking at the object, then there is a problem. That's the first thing I try to examine in these videos; is anyone else looking at the object? Same with that video of those two guys riding through the snow, the guy with the camera didn't act like he trying to track the object and the driver didn't act like he was looking at the object.

I can say with certainty that if there is an out of place object flying around, people will look at it.

[Doc]

I'd like to know more about the photo analysis by the Chilean Government and get an opinion from our Image analysis people.

Antonio Huneeus' interview of General Bermudez, cited above, has a still picture of an object that is not as blurry as the others, doesn't look very bug-like and is different than the picture in Filer's Files #11-2012:

http://www.openminds.tv/ufo-disclosure-chilean-style-896/

"This case clearly stands out in a world full of often dramatic and sensational UFO videos posted in YouTube, many of which come from anonymous sources and have a dubious pedigree. Here we have a case with seven different videos all showing the same thing. Below you can see a frame of the first video showing the best image of the UFO taken right after the Halcones’ flyby.

http://www.openminds.tv/wp-content/uploads/5_El_Bosque_frame_1_web.jpgFrame from the first video at the FACH Ceremony in El Bosque, Nov. 4, 2010, showing a clear image of the metallic looking object. (Credit: CEFAA)

The second video taken during the same FACH ceremony showed exactly the same metallic-looking unidentified object flying right below a formation of F5 jets. As explained by Gen. Bermúdez in his lecture, “the object is very near the F5, and our study, the heat study” showed the similarity of “the F5 with the object, same for the shadow, a very interesting case.” The CEFAA analysis estimated that the radius of the UFO was between 5-10 meters."

[Chris]

The video "analysis" that concludes it is nothing more that a flying insect actually shows nothing at all. The first few "dots" he circles in red to try and show the "insect" flying up from knee level are actually items in the background that are there in every frame. So, he is circling rocks, etc to try and show an insect?

Bob Schaeffer is a modern day Phillip Klass.

[murmur]

So it is in no way possible that the "ufo" are insects in your opinion?

I think it is certainly possible

check this

http://blog.ufo-blog.com/2012/03/leslie-kean-chile-ufo-videos-update.html?spref=fb


(http://blog.ufo-blog.com/2012/03/leslie-kean-chile-ufo-videos-update.html?spref=fb)

[murmur]

Kean has been caught covering up facts again

[Dragonfire]

Kean has been caught covering up facts again

Or maybe creating some ;)

[Chris]

So it is in no way possible that the "ufo" are insects in your opinion?

I think it is certainly possible

check this

http://blog.ufo-blog.com/2012/03/leslie-kean-chile-ufo-videos-update.html?spref=fb


(http://blog.ufo-blog.com/2012/03/leslie-kean-chile-ufo-videos-update.html?spref=fb)

What I stated is that the video purporting to prove that it was an insect does not prove anything at all. In fact, the person who did so has deliberately misled people in to thinking that every object circled in his video is his "insect", when that is obviously not the case.

I will check out the link you have posted though.

[Chris]

OK, I've read Naisbitt's blog regarding who said what during this process. It appears as though the experts have ruled out everything except for insects (which is as Naisbitt states is one of his favorite explanations for anomalous aerial objects) with the only reason that insects have not been ruled out is that Berea did not respond to his specific question about it. Berea did originally indicate though that he was looking for insects as a probable cause and then goes on to state that the typical signature attributed to birds and insects could be ruled out (I am paraphrasing here).

As to Kean's assertions on slide #18 - her quote attributed to Berea does appear to be inaccurate given Berea's later clarification of what he meant in an email exchange with Naisbitt. However, there do not appear to be any other inaccuracies in her blog post.

That being said, it seems that every expert brought in to examine the various videos has clearly stated that it can not be identified, which kinda flies in the face of the point of Naisbitt's blog post (pun intended!0

[murmur]

I don't think it is possible to prove one way or the other.

But I do think it is possible the "ufo" is/are insects.....and probable.

It fits.

[Chris]

I don't think it is possible to prove one way or the other.

But I do think it is possible the "ufo" is/are insects.....and probable.

It fits.
How do insects fit when there are seven separate videos showing the same object and the experts studying them do not see any of the blurring that should occur at the edges of the object if it indeed was an insect or a bird?

The fact is that insects do not fit at all.

[murmur]

Aren't the other video's from the same basic location?

They were all standing together

And it's flight characteristics looks like a bug....does it not?

http://i786.photobucket.com/albums/yy143/DrDil_frms/follow_cam_bug_edit.gif

[Chris]

Aren't the other video's from the same basic location?

They were all standing together

And it's flight characteristics looks like a bug....does it not?

http://i786.photobucket.com/albums/yy143/DrDil_frms/follow_cam_bug_edit.gif
No, they were not. In fact, one of the videos was taken from an adjoining facility to the airfield. Not to mention that the videos follow the jets from one horizon to the other and yet the object remains in frame for the whole 180 degree shot.

[Elevenaugust]

Hello everyone! :)

Here's my take about this story:

There are factual evidences to reach the conclusion that it is very likely a bug:

1 - The "official" who studied the videos said that the object emerges from behind the hills in the background, however, it is not the case as shown in this video:


http://www.youtube.com/v/Jecnye3ff5U

2 - Is the apparent "UFO" speed consistent with the speed of a bug?

Lets assume the first object that shows up on the camera is an average honey bee. Honey bee workers have an average size of 0.4 to 0.6 inches, so lets just use 0.5 as an example.

Here is a starting frame:
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/66/framestart.png

Here is an ending frame:
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/6324/frameend.png

The video I downloaded was playing at 30 frames per second. The start and end frame were 3 frames apart. That means 100 milliseconds passed between the start and end frame.

Using the length of the object in the view, I measured how many times it traveled its own length.
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/5392/startendm.gif

From the above measurement we can see that the object traveled its own length 'L' about 44 times in 100 milliseconds. Using those measurements we can calculate the approximate speed of the object at various lengths by changing 'L'.

In this case, 'L' is the average size of a honey bee worker, 0.5 inches.

0.5 x 44 = 22 Inches Per 100 milliseconds (http://www.google.com/search?q=22%20inches%20per%20100%20milliseconds%20 to%20mph) = 12.5 Miles Per Hour

So if the object was 0.5 inches in length then it was only traveling +/- 12.5 MPH.

The average speed of a honey bee worker (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Average_speed_of_a_honey_bee) is 15 MPH

...to be continued!

[Elevenaugust]

3 - The appearance of the object by itself does not argue in favor of its extraterrestrial origin, but rather that of a conventional "Blurfo"

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6866/blurfo.png

My personal files are full of these Blurfo...

Bug:
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/2378/bugfs.png

Bird:
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/4762/7653ceb46ee0.jpg

Blurfo collection:
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/2074/2093291318c133837f31b.jpg

[Elevenaugust]

The "UFO" shape can have a weird aspect as well:
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6797/test1oe.png

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/9851/birds2k.jpg

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/6365/birds1yu.jpg

[Elevenaugust]

4 - A pseudo "infrared analysis" was done which showed that the object emits heat

The OP photo:

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/1403/6elbosqueframe2web.jpg

For being able to properly study the heat signature, the camera used would have to be an IR one....

http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/5162/j102211.jpg
Boeing 737 jet departing from Salt Lake City, UT airport

There's no way simply by looking at a JPEG (and moreover at frames from a video) and playing around with curves and colors to make any "heat study". What we get here are only artificial artifacts. Plus, if these are alleged real IR colors, then the jets are in the "cold zone"...:lol:

Thinking this way, everybody can do a "heat study":

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5191/dfst8805153.jpg

Here, the planes have the same "heat signature" as the one of the mountains.....:rolleyes:

[Elevenaugust]

As stated early on this thread, Haines did, on January 6, 2011 a study called "Photo Analysis of Color Digital Images of Anomalous Aerial Object Taken on September 17, 2010 above Santiago, Chile" and that can be found here (http://www.narcap.org/files/narcap_CEFAA_BanderaFINALFINAL_summary.pdf).

In this study, "twelve high resolution, color, digital photographs (were) taken on Friday, September 17, 2010 in downtown Santiago, Chile (and) were analyzed because of the presence of a small, dark, unidentified aerial phenomenon that appeared in the sky behind a formation of single engine, acrobatic propeller-driven airplanes."

One of the main goal of this study was to show that there was at the time some heat radiating from the UFO and that "this UFO might have been a contained plasma whose energy level was sufficient to ionize gases in the atmosphere and produce various desaturated hues along with white.

To conduct its analysis, Haines stated that "Luminance stretching disclosed a light colored halo around and generally above most of the UFO images which may represent heat radiating (and rising) from the core of the UFO" (p1) and "Luminance stretched images in the green and blue hues for these same figures show a less pronounced halo, suggesting that the halo exists in the longer (red) (heat?) wavelengths.". (Note that in this last sentence, he seemed not sure about the red wavelengths to be able to exhibits heat).
On this same page (p25), he also said ""I assert that this lighter region represents heat that is rising from the surface of the UFO.", and also later (p27): "it is asserted that the pink regions represent heat that is being given off from the body of the UFO and is rising and dissipating with distance"

The camera used was a Nikon D300 and Haines, in appendix 6 (p38), reproduce its spectral sensitivity. (See below)
However, and as Haines stated himself p21, "a stock (off-the-shelf) model Nikon D300 is not sensitive beyond 700 nm in the infrared the camera used for the data of Appendix 6 was modified to extend its sensitivity farther into the infrared as is shown."

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/5891/nikond300front.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/913/nikond300spectralrespon.jpg

Now, the problem is that nowhere in its study, Haines stated that the Nikon D300 that the Chilean Air Force photographer used was also modified this way to be IR sensitive (And further more I don't see any reasons why it should be).
So we can reasonably say that it wasn't the case and therefore that the camera wasn't IR sensitive and wasn't even sensitive to the red channel from 700nm to 750nm...

http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/2670/1000pxlinearvisiblespec.png

The question now is: "Besides the fact that there are serious doubts as to how any "heat signature" can be extracted from a JPEG file, one can wonder how is it possible to conduct a "heat study" on a camera that wasn't even neither IR sensitive nor higher red wavelengths sensitive ?"

Sources:
- Nikon D300 previewed (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2007/8/23/nikond300)
- Nikon D300 study (http://www.maxmax.com/Nikon_d300_study.htm)
- Richard F. Haines report (http://www.narcap.org/files/narcap_CEFAA_BanderaFINALFINAL_summary.pdf)
- Electromagnetic spectrum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum)
- Visible spectrum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum)
- Red (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red)

[Elevenaugust]

5 - Same kind of "UFO" can be seen on other similar air-shows:

F-22 Raptor FIDAE 2010 Santiago Chile (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dACYhCYimw#)

http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/5738/dbhrh.png

To compare with an extract of the video of our subject here:

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/4469/fgctw.png

[Elevenaugust]

http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/7595/f22horizontalcropsl.gif

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3694/f22vertical.gif

http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/3073/f22verticalslow500px.gif

[Elevenaugust]

6 - Close-up, frame by frame analysis and animations that show the "UFO" in the foreground:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erak-im6bvk

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/3442/followcambug.gif

Smaller:
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/606/followbugcamsmall.gif

Slower:
http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/2222/followbugcamedit.gif

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/3649/cantdeny.gif

Thanks to "UFOGlobe" from ATS for some pictures, videos and animations shown here.

[murmur]

You are quite the expert now!

Kudos

[norenrad]

Very impressive indeed, now we know why no one on the ground paid any attention to it.

[Lee]

Thank you, 11A! Fantastic, careful and objective analysis, as always! :cool:

[epo333]

Awesome analysis 11A, Thank You very much....

Some are insects, birds, baloons, hoaxes, and even swamp gas!

BUT . . . Some are not!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h58GXiS7944&feature=player_embedded

:das

[murmur]

here is a relevant post from ufo casebook....emphasis mine
============================================
Hello, my comrades in healthy skepticism. I hope you are all doing well! Congratulations on work well done to those of you who waded into the Santiago case.

For those not aware, stiver located a video of the air show in question. She found the vid on a Chilean aviation website, posted in November of 2010 accompanying an article about the air show (not about any alleged UFO).

The video contained footage of Chilean aircraft participating in the show as well as many, many images of small objects flying about. Such objects were of course reasonably assumed to be insects or birds.

The Chilean article and video may be viewed at:

http://www.aviaciontotal.cl/2010/11/cambio-de-mando-en-la-fach/

Stiver posted a video in which she pointed out some of the abundance of wildlife present in the Chilean video she located but not introduced by team Kean. More info at my blog, in a post titled The OTHER Chile Video:

http://www.ufotrail.blogspot.com/

...but to the chase, here is stiver's posted video containing footage from the above referenced 2010 Chilean video of the El Bosque Air Base air show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-28rQq47I4&feature=player_embedded

Successful truth seeking (it's a jungle - full of insects and birds - out there),
Jack
==============================================
http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=general&num=1331501547&action=display&start=30

[Doc]

11A: Well done! It's always good to see the researcher "show his work". :cool:

[Chris]

Great analysis, 11A! Thank you for all of the time and effort you put in to this!

[DrDil]

OK, I've read Naisbitt's blog regarding who said what during this process. It appears as though the experts have ruled out everything except for insects (which is as Naisbitt states is one of his favorite explanations for anomalous aerial objects)

If I can stop you right there…

How on earth (pun intended) does a specific reply to the recipient of a personal email (which when taken into context is obviously talking about the objects in the footage currently being discussed) an email which actually said:


I always favoured the insect theory. Admittedly this is mainly as I've seen quite a bit of footage that bore more than a passing resemblance to screen-captures of the released video. Namely that the -out of focus- rapid motion of the translucent wings coupled with severe motion-blur often resembles a 'classic domed saucer' shape (with the wings creating the domed illusion).

Well, how do these words specifically referencing the recent videos and the objects contained therein pass through your personal processing centre and translate to:


”(which is as Naisbitt states is one of his favorite explanations for anomalous aerial objects]”
The phrase, “I always favoured the insect theory” when presented in context was obviously a direct reply to a specific quote (two paragraphs above) which is being answered:


Fortunately in some videos it is possible to observe birds, which showed the expected pattern of changing asymmetries due to the flap of the wings. But this is not the case of the target!!


=======================
=======================


That being said, it seems that every expert brought in to examine the various videos has clearly stated that it can not be identified, which kinda flies in the face of the point of Naisbitt's blog post (pun intended!0
How did you derive any conclusion at all from that particular blog post?

It was presented neutrally with only a personal opinion from a private email that regarding the video being discussed and offered with a choice between birds & insects, the insect theory was favoured due to prior experience.

Did you also ignore the following?


Hopefully the above explanation will allay the fears of those following the case (myself included) who were concerned that the data being supplied was irreconcilable with our current understanding of what constitutes digital imagery analysis. It was also reassuring to read that Maccabee & Haines had been involved with the analytical process.
So please enlighten me as to how the post was perceived by you personally as being critical of the authenticity and implied validity of the released footage?

Cognitive bias much?


Great analysis, 11A! Thank you for all of the time and effort you put in to this!
Go figure…..

At least three of the animations in ElevenAugust’s post were tracked down and made by the blogger you’re criticising and the following is from a French speaking website (http://www.forum-ovni-ufologie.com/t14648-video-un-ovni-filme-au-chili-laisse-les-experts-perplexes):



=======================
http://i786.photobucket.com/albums/yy143/DrDil_frms/chilean_afb_ufos/eleven_ats_naisbitt.jpg
=======================


The first poster is lambasted for tracking down the experts & related footage then presenting the evidence (whilst remaining relatively neutral), and yet the second poster is praised for doing exactly what you were criticising the first one for.

A criticism apparently borne of the fact that it was because you thought that’s what they were doing?

If you want to see what you thought was being done last time actually being done this time then check out the most recent post from a couple of days ago (http://blog.ufo-blog.com/2012/03/chile-multiple-ufo-update-new-analysis.html).

But please try and differentiate between what it actually says and what you are expecting it to say…..


Cheers.






Confirmation bias – the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.


(I’m not a proper doctor…..)

[Elevenaugust]

Go figure…..

At least three of the animations in ElevenAugust’s post were tracked down and made by the blogger you’re criticising and the following is from a French speaking website (http://www.forum-ovni-ufologie.com/t14648-video-un-ovni-filme-au-chili-laisse-les-experts-perplexes):

My bad, it's my fault, I should credit you for some animations I showed in my previous post as I did it for "UFOglobe" here.
(In fact, it's a collective work from some ATS members, and especially "UFOGlobe", DrDil and myself. )
So, I apologize if I didn't include you all the time when credit is due, be sure that I'll pay much attention next time.