Topic: UFO over El Bosque Air Base in Santiago (2010) Hoax
UFO over El Bosque Air Base in Santiago (2010)
Quote
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.
A couple of notes:
Quote
Images show it as a dome-shaped, flat-bottomed object with no visible means of propulsion. The rounded top reflects the sun and appears metallic; the bottom is darker and flat, emitting some form of energy which is visible in photo analysis. Infrared studies show the entire object is radiating heat, just like the jets.
Ordinary digital and 35mm cameras do not capture infrared. The camera in the video captured visible light not infrared so how could "Infrared studies show the entire object is radiating heat" after the fact?
Quote
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).
Without being able to calculate the size and distance you cannot calculate the speed.
Quote
The circular trajectory in front of the Halcones suggests that the object is operating under intelligent control. It flies off to the right.
"intelligent control" ah ha, like a bug or a bird?
Quote
The UFO makes an even closer approach to the planes.
Again we cannot calculate the size and distance so cannot know how close the object is to the planes.
Supposedly there are six other videos of this incident but unless these other videos are shown along with the scientific analysis there's nothing much to go on as to how 'scientific' conclusions were reached.
Another article same view and a presentation by General Ricardo Bermudez.
UFO Video Baffles Chilean Government
Another video same location.
UFO Disclosure Chilean Style
In the article above the all three stills are said to be from three different videos but look taken from the same location, have the same quality, brightness, contrast and colouration. How likely is that?
Quote
I will be talking to the CEFAA about releasing the other tapes. Some are on cell phones and very poor quality, but they are useful to the scientists doing analysis.
Leslie Kean
Leslie Kean's Facebook
Quote
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.
Who? Name names. I keep reading about experts and scientists and authorities but who exactly? The only one quoted is this one.
Quote
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.
But not a bug?
Video from Chile stirs up UFO buzz
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2012, 06:05:56 PM »
I have been discussing this case for a couple days behind the scenes, and let me tell you, there is all sorts of funny business going on with this one.
It's actually hard to discuss this with some people because they keep pulling the "well the professionals said this, and the scientists and government said that, so it must be this and that" card. Common fallacious arguments from authority.
Also, they keep saying that because there is "multiple videos" of this case that it can't possibly be flying insects. But, unless they have synchronized all the videos together and triangulated the exact position of each UFO in each video to confirm each UFO is indeed the same in each video, then the objects can still just be different flying insects in each video.
One thing that is hardly mentioned is that this video contains 3 of the 7 videos in it according to Gen. Ricardo Bermúdez. There were 3 flybys by 3 different sets of aircraft that day, the Halcones, the F5s, and the F16s, and this video has small clips from each flyby, but if you don't pay attention it will look like one continuous flyby when it is not (count the aircraft). None of those 3 videos can be used to triangulate the position of the UFO, and could all very well be insects. So I am having doubts that the remaining 4 videos will prove they are not insects.
For right now, I'm going to say this... The objects in those 3 videos look and act like flying insects. I am 100% positive those objects are flying insects. I think any analysis that concludes they are not insects is going to contain flaws. So I will be studying these videos and finding the information that proves this.
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2012, 01:43:34 AM »
In the Huffpo video, at 0:43, the "craft" takes an arching pattern that would have taken it in direct collision with the surface of the earth.
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2012, 04:04:36 AM »
Some reason all the YouTube videos of this event are 480p, so I downloaded the highest resolution version from Huffington Post to help with the analysis. I uploaded the video to my host so you can download it here:
El Bosque UFO Source (right click and save as...)
After studying the videos very closely I discovered the objects are passing in front of the hills a couple times. I was also looking for other insects that might be flying around closer to the ground and found what I think is one that is visible for moment.
I am not sure if the CEFAA found the objects passing in front of the hills. I don't think they did because I think they would have highlighted them doing so.
Since the objects pass in front of the hills, it is now possible to use the hills to help measure the maximum possible size and speed of the objects meaning their size and speed if they were the exact distance of the hills.
To Be Continued...
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 04:41:18 AM by HOAXKiller1 »
« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2012, 05:51:43 AM »
El Bosque Air Base is located at 33º33'42'' S, 70º41'18'' W. The hills are to the West. The camera location is said to be at some Pillán aircraft factory near the base, however I can't pinpoint the exact location on Google Earth. Huffington Post provided this image for the location, but it doesn't seem to be accurate at all (like the rest of the article).
After doing some searching on Google Earth I think I found a match at 33°34'6.09"S, 70°41'23.28"W.
It seems to match the open field, and the small dirt tracks, and other buildings and trees.
Here is a rough view and distance measurement to the hill that the objects pass in front of:
If the location I have is correct, then from this we can conclude that two of the objects in the video are between 0 feet and 12500 feet away from the camera.
To Be Continued...
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2012, 09:32:35 AM »
I haven't spent much time on this one yet. You're right about "fallacious arguments from authority" firstly as far as I'm aware there are only two people who have been quoted and anyway quotes are not proof or evidence. Good work on pinpointing the location. It would be good to see if the rest of the footage from the seven videos surfaces along with and 'scientific' notes made as to how people came to the conclusions they have done. As I mentioned earlier I'm not convinced that the three videos were not just one video chopped up and as you state there's nothing to triangulate in the video posted to Huffington Post.
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2012, 11:18:24 AM »
In this post I will very roughly estimate the speed of one object that passed in front of the hill by using the hill as a measuring device. I will only base my measurement on a small segment of the object's flight path which I feel is perpendicular to the camera (and may not be), and closest to the hill (our measuring device). Since we do not know the exact distance of the object, and all we know is that it is no further than 12500 feet away (the distance to the hill), I will make a chart displaying the speeds the object traveled at various distances. To start, I will calculate the speed of the object as if it were 12500 feet away.
The first thing I did was roughly align the video with the location on Google Earth. I then used Google Earth to measure the distance between point A and point B (where the UFO traveled in front of the hill).
My results show that if the object was 12500 feet away from the camera then the object traveled 755 feet between point A and point B.
Now to measure the amount of time it took for the object to travel from point A to point B I have to refer to the video details. The video I used for analysis plays at 30 frames per second. That is 1/30th of a second, which is 33.33 milliseconds per frame.
Now study the video and you will see that the object arrives at point A and sits for 3 frames and then moves to point B. So it took the object 3 frames to move from point A to B. That is 33.33 x 3 = 99.99 milliseconds. For simplification lets just round it to 100 milliseconds. It took 100ms for the object to move from A to B.
So now we can finish our speed calculations because we have a distance and a time....
If we assume the object is 12500 feet away, then the object traveled 755 feet per 100 milliseconds which is 5147 Miles Per Hour. That is pretty fast...
However, we don't know if the object is 12500 feet away, or 10 feet away, yet. So how fast would the object be traveling if it were only 10 feet away from the camera? Here is a chart I made:
Basically you divide our initial distance traveled (755 feet) by our initial distance away (12500 feet) and you will get 0.0604 feet. That means;
If the UFO was only 1 foot away from the camera, it only traveled 0.0604 feet in 100 milliseconds which is
0.41 Miles Per Hour.
If the UFO was only 5 feet away from the camera, it only traveled 0.302 feet in 100 milliseconds which is
2 Miles Per Hour.
If the UFO was only 10 feet away from the camera, it only traveled 0.604 feet in 100 milliseconds which is
4 Miles Per Hour.
If the UFO was 6250 feet away from the camera, it traveled 377.5 feet in 100 milliseconds which is
2574 Miles Per Hour. (see the chart above)
So, now we know the approximate speed of the object at various distances. From the looks of it, the only speeds that make sense (if you are not thinking about sci-fi spaceships) are the ones that are in close proximity to the camera. It makes sense when you think about the average speed of most flying insects...
For example; The average flight speed of a common house fly is 4.5 MPH. According to the speed estimation, if the UFO was 10 feet away from the camera then it was flying 4 MPH. That means the UFO could possibly be a common house fly that is only 10 feet away from the camera.
Another example; The average flight speed of a honey bee is 12 to 15 MPH. According to the speed estimation, if the UFO was 35 feet away from the camera then it was flying 14.4 MPH which is about the right speed for a honey bee.
To Be Continued...
«
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2012, 04:15:58 PM »
Stellar work, Hoaxkiller! I had been trying to see if the "object" had dipped below the hill/horizon line, thanks for highlighting it so well. It also seems like 3 of the "raw" videos (the 3 in the compilation footage) have been posted at Kean's website, all available for download. Just scroll down a ways:
http://ufosontherecord.com/research/
I'm not sure if this counts as 3 of the 7 videos, since they all appear to be taken from the same camera (and I had assumed the 7 videos were from 7 different camera sources). Just thought you might be interested for further analysis.
« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2012, 05:05:49 PM »
BobLoblaw: Grrr just spent 45 mins with the only footage I knew was available and you and post the link the raw videos. Back to the drawing board... 
« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2012, 06:15:55 PM »
Thank you very much BobLoblaw!
I'm going to study every single pixel of every video!
-edit-
It's very odd the videos are only 10 FPS. I suspected that to be the case when most of the videos I downloaded were 30 FPS and each frame was duplicated 3 times.
« Reply #10 on: March 19, 2012, 06:34:03 PM »
@Moderate Martian
Ha! I am but a lowly messenger. 
"There are still no two views of the same object from different angles so no way of triangulating distance & speed."
Agreed! Would love for them to release the additional footage.
@HOAXKiller1
My pleasure! Thank you for your already in-depth (and neutral) analysis, and for all your tireless efforts, in general!
« Reply #11 on: Today at 01:04:27 PM »
Thanks to the original videos I was able to find the rest of the flight path of one of the objects. So here is the proof it is just an insect flying in the foreground:
@BobLoblaw, my pleasure!
« Last Edit: Today at 02:18:10 PM by HOAXKiller1 »
Comments
Post a Comment