|
Author
|
|
Topic: Orb and Trail | Topic page views:
|
|
Lulu
ice behaving badly
right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000
|
posted 03-02-2002 06:46 PM
   
This just sent to me, would love to share with all of you. Taken 2/25/02 above Ridgefield OR. First appeared invisible...then voila...visible...but like no plane I've ever seen!Enlarged 400%...dark object as yet unknown. Comments please... 
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Lulu on 03-02-2002]
|
eyesopen
This Space For Rent
Ventura CA
627 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-02-2002 07:29 PM
That's just NORMAL orb traffic! 
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-02-2002 07:35 PM
looks like a distorted video grab of a airplane contrailing...and not to play dueling orb pics with you...Lulu...but check this one out... whoopse pic won't post..
http://www.tracers.8m.com/sightlink2.htm ------------------
T/S
[Edited 1 times, lastly by theseeker on 03-02-2002]
|
Deb
Senior Member
Plainfield, Indiana USA
163 posts, Oct 2001
|
posted 03-02-2002 09:02 PM
Is that Ridgefield near Portland?Since the weather at flying altitudes along the coast north past Vancouver was right for contrails that day, I would say it's a jet flying at a fairly high altitude contrailing. (just eliminating the most obvious clue) Also, depending on the camera's ability to capture a jet at 38,000+ feet, the photo may very well come out looking like something other than a plane.
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-02-2002 10:29 PM
quote:
Also, depending on the camera's ability to capture a jet at 38,000+ feet, the photo may very well come out looking like something other than a plane.
Huh? Funny, the trails came out looking like trails at the same altitiude. They didn't mysteriously turn into CD-roms of Flight Explorer to satisfy the debunkers emotional incapacity to deal with reality. If you folks can manage not to get sidetracked by these type of diversionary arguements, you might find out that the military has been experimenting with various orbs. Some to test new advanced radar sytems, others are remote controlled and outfitted with cameras... The other problem, of course, is that I and many others have seen these babies close-up and they sure as hell don't look like any damn airplane...
http://chem11.proboards2.com/index.cgi?board=Discussion&action=display&num=1012595782
[Edited 3 times, lastly by Chem11 on 03-02-2002]
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-02-2002 11:12 PM
I looked at the pic chemster, and it looks like an out of focus plane leaving a trail....jeff rense is right people will believe anything these days...he just got done saying that most if not all orb photos are atomized water.interesting discussion you and sux are having about debunkers..."military does not want to loose the debunkers" lol btw...could you add a few more pop-ups over at your place...geeze... ------------------
T/S
[Edited 1 times, lastly by theseeker on 03-02-2002]
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-02-2002 11:37 PM
First of all, I already TOLD YOU that I've seen these things up close and that thet they do not look even slightly like an airplane.Secondly, your confusing those transparent 'orbs' with the silver spheres, which are a seperate phenomena. Atomized water (and more likely dusy motes) do not leave trails (con or chem). You're other comments are unworthy of reply and are based on ignorance. IF you weren't such a continual pain-in-the-ass, maybe people would actually TALK to you and you'd learn a few things. MAYBE. As it stands, you don't know what you don't know. Lulu, that is an important photograph. I hope people take time to investigate the sphere connection further. Why is it you have no problem posting your own UFO sighting, but you are entirely dismissive of photographic evidence that others present T/S? This isn't some cheesy Photoshopped prank and there are hundreds of photographs of these silver spheres. Deal with it.
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 12:01 AM
listen, sux was your knight in shiney armour and God forbid I get in the way... http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/sprayboysflamecentral IF you weren't such a continual pain-in-the-ass, maybe people would actually TALK to you and you'd learn a few things. wow that really hurts chem...but seriously I don't click on boards to talk anymore it's pointless to go over the same old shit every couple of months or so...I like to read unusual stuff and plenty of that here, IT's not who's talking btw, IT's who gets heard ace...(make a note of that) lulu asked for comments, I gave mine...if you don't like it, that's your problem...some may see Jesus in that photo...dig ? I know what I seen was real...I sat and watched real air traffic literally haul ass away from the said area... UFO sightings have gone up 42% in Canada...why do we not hear more of that from you chem, rather than wondering about my internet social life ? ------------------
T/S
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 12:34 AM
And WTF is it that you think is in that photograph? Santa Claus?If you are going to start a discussion on the identities of the posters on my forum (of which you have no room to make an informed opinion, from either a technical or..in your case..subjective perspective), why don't you start a thread on it here? Instead of turning yet another thread into one of your trademark personal bitchfests? The topic here is not your self-sustaining delusions, misconceptions and conjectures regarding everything under the sun (but containing only a cursory nod and quick dismissal of the topic being discussed). It's orbs leaving CT's. Here's another:
http://www.home.mastersites.com/mega/OrbSprayerZoom.jpg
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Chem11 on 03-03-2002]
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 12:54 AM
chem I'm sensing a lot of hostility from you...personally I have traded enough derogatory comments with you too... sooooo, until you get a handle on your hectoring, you can discuss your problems with someone else... ------------------
T/S
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 01:01 AM
Finally got the hint, huh?Get another. 
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 01:26 AM
300% zoom, solarized to bring out defintion and contrast...  My compliments to the photographer, Lulu. This is one of the clearest shots of a spheresprayer I've seen yet.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 03-03-2002]
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 01:29 AM
only thing I get from you is a headache...ahh, so those are chemclouds eh...other photo, I'll give other than a "film development" error...what is it... ------------------
T/S
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 01:48 AM
Another example of some rather advanced technolgy that is connected with the chemtrail phenomena, it would seem.
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 01:57 AM
conjecture...------------------
T/S
|
Deb
Senior Member
Plainfield, Indiana USA
163 posts, Oct 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 07:16 AM
spheresprayer, huh? Well, if you can see and photograph such a thing from the ground, why aren't the millions of airline passengers or small aircraft owners questioning it? (I won't quite the numbers of aviation professionals.) What about children who have their nose up against the window while they are on a flight? Hard to keep them silenced about anything. Oh yeah, everyone's "asleep" or in on the best kept secret, and they are drugging the kids. Ever get on a flight and hear the Captian say, "Now don't pay any attention to all the weird stuff you're going to see out the window?"BTW, FE is not a CD. It's in real time via the net. Back in October, I did an FE study over Yakadoo's (Dave Wallace) area and guess what? The orbs in his photo above are not "spraying." The photos in the 'Silver Orbs' section are not spraying. Even Carnicom took some of his photos with a tele-photo lens for the high-flyers. Quality counts. I would like to see a video, shot the same way, of these orbs or do they just appear on stills? DO they move around, ascend, descend or remain stationary? BTW, I checked my own weather at flying altitudes captures for the 25th and just now checked the "chemtrail" reports thread here for the 25th.
|
Lulu
ice behaving badly
right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 08:55 AM
Thanks to all for the great comments concerning this picture. An excellent discussion going on here! Good one eyesopenFirst of all, seeker, this is not a video grab...the image is a still from an Olympus digital camera and although digital recording limitations could acount for such anomalies, this camera usually does so well at showing whatever...why this is any different is a mystery to me. (Quote from wishing-to-remain-anonymous individual (but known to myself) who took the above picture, in response to my inquiring if this was a video grab.) UFO sightings have gone up 42% in Canada Very interesting eh seeker...a lot of activity in Northern BC it seems...as well as Kelowna. It's a busy place up there! Yes, Deb, near Portland OR. Also, depending on the camera's ability to capture a jet at 38,000+ feet, the photo may very well come out looking like something other than a plane. I don't know much about digital cameras Deb, does anyone know the capabilities of an Olympus digital?
I have to agree 100% with you Chem11...this is the clearest shot of an "orb" leaving a trail I have ever seen. The author is an exceptional cameraman! I've told him this several times. Huh? Funny, the trails came out looking like trails at the same altitiude. An excellent point Chem, and the cameraman asked this very question (himself). BTW, a very cool blow-up orb pic you posted, thanks!
I don't know for sure if this is an "orb" or just a regular plane, but it's a real strange looking picture none-the-less. Please keep the great comments coming...
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Lulu on 03-03-2002]
|
FLKook
Chemspiracy Realist
East Central Florida
706 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 09:42 AM
Lulu, I have often wondered about the silent trails that "appear". I have mentioned this before. Hear a jet, go outside normal comet like contrail. Hear no jets go outside 15 fat chemtrails in the sky.Just a comment but ya know it has bugged me for a while. I've even seen a plane leave a "persistent trail" while one left a comet trail at the same time. Could hear the comet trail plane (much higher) but barely heard the "persistent trail" plane which I only happend to see because I heard the higher jet.
|
David
Chemtrail Information Agent
1290 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 09:44 AM
Hello Lulu, Great shot. Just want to say this; I have had two encounters with orbs, one recently. I can say without any doubt, neither of them looked remotely like an airplane, they looked exactly like what they were, orbs.
Chem, that NM photo is very impressive, nice work.
|
Lulu
ice behaving badly
right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 09:46 AM
FLKook, you're not the only one hearing planes, but not seeing them...most odd!For some reason or another I can't get Chem11's 300% zoom, solarized to bring out definition and contrast, from either here or Megasprayer, to display. I would like to see this! Anyone else having problems with this pic?
|
Thermit
Tech
Houston, TX
2733 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 10:58 AM
The silver orbs, in general are real, but also I think rare. I've seen one myself several years ago that was silver, round, metallic, reflective, and hovering near and in a cloud. They've been seen by several people, but I don't think they are very common. I've done a hell of a lot of sky watching, and have only seen the one about 5 years back. I do also think that these orbs have been photographed. Some of these photos are on the orbs page. Also I think that some of the photos presented of the orbs, are just photographic artifacts. The trick is descerning what is what. For example, this is one of my photos below. Some might say it contains several orbs, but it doesn't contain any. I know these to be due to dust in my camera. My old camera would have orbs and dust fibers showing in every photo, which is how I know. Not orbs... 
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Thermit on 03-03-2002]
|
Lulu
ice behaving badly
right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 11:24 AM
Thanks David for your reply. Interesting orb thread happening over at Megasprayer as well! I have only witnessed one silver orb, travelling parallel to a strange-looking trail, underneath it, travelling quite slow in relation to a plane.Wow! I can now see Chem's 300% zoom pic, just awesome Chem11!!! Thermit, looks like dust to me too
|
Chem11
megasprayer news
The Homeland
1366 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 03-03-2002 12:17 PM
Well, that's more like it. Thanks for the comments and personal testimony everyone. The last time I saw one of these puppies it was keeping pace with two chemjets that were flying neck and neck over Tampa. The sphere was slightly behind and slightly underneath the two jets. It either accelerated out of the area at tremendous speed or simply 'vanished'. So, yeah... these aren't 'weather ballons' or something equally prosaic. quote:
I would like to see a video, shot the same way, of these orbs or do they just appear on stills?
I've already posted several vids on Mega. Do try and keep up, Deb. http://www.home.mastersites.com/mega/archive3.htm#9384113
http://www.home.mastersites.com/mega/archive3.htm#8997741 And the infamous Concorde Incident:
http://www.home.mastersites.com/mega/archive3.htm#9320294 
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 03-03-2002]
|
Lulu
ice behaving badly
right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 12:35 PM
The Concorde and orb video is really something Chem! Just now realized it's the headline, not the date to click on. Thanks. Got a lot of Mega reading to catch up on...
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 03-03-2002 04:13 PM
"I don't know much about digital cameras Deb, does anyone know the capabilities of an Olympus digital?There are three variables that can guide you in your determination of the camera.
- Most important is the number of pixels in the charge-coupled device (CCD). This is what gives the camera its resolution, and is analogous to the "speed" (DIN/ASA) of the film in a film camera. The higher the number of pixels in the camera's CCD, the more detail you will see (all things equal).
- Second is the focal length of the lens. the longer (or more 'telephoto') the lens is, the closer the object will appear, so you won't have to enlarge the image itself -- which will lead to 'pixelation' which is like excessive grain in a big enlargement of a film negative. Of course, a telephoto lens magnifies everything, including the way your hands may be trembling as you take the shot, which leads to a blurry picture, too, which leads to ...
- ...the third characteristic of a good shot is shutter speed. (Aperture, of course, is irrelevant when shooting at airplanes. Since depth of field is not a consideration, you'll want the lens as open as possible in order to get a high shutter speed.) Not only will the higher shutter speed 'stop' the aircraft in its flight -- which, at a distance of 5 miles, doesn't matter -- but it will also cut down drastically on apparent movement caused by the photographer's hand shaking.
Now as to the photographer's camera’s capabilities --
- Different models of the Olympus have different resolutions. A good one will have about 3.3 megapixels, which approaches the capabilities of a 35 mm camera with a medium-speed film. If he has a three or four hundred dollar camera, it will probably have lower resolution (maybe around 2 megapixels). I'd need to know the particular model of the Olympus (like, "Camedia 3030") to get an idea of its resolution.
- Most cameras have both an optical and a digital zoom. Without getting overly technical, if the photographer used a digital zoom rather than the optical-only component, the resolution decreases significantly.
But even more important is what aperture the photographer used (hopefully wide open) and what shutter speed (hopefully very fast) This is the best way to get a clear picture that’s not impacted by camera shake.Bear in mind that, at an altitude of 5 or 6 miles, the aircraft image will subtend less than a minute of an arc. Often what you see is a solar reflection from a curved area of the fuselage or wing. This would only be a point source, and atmospheric interference could make it into a fuzzy ball-shaped thingy. The contrail, on the other hand, could subtend four or five minutes of an arc, and, due to its size, is not impacted as drastically by atmospheric interference. That is why you can have a fuzzy ball for the aircraft (or the glint of reflected sunlight) and a reasonably well-defined contrail.
------------------
Duncan Kunz / duncankunz@cox.net
Mesa AZ / 480-891-2525
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Duncan Kunz on 03-03-2002]
|
Chemtrail Central Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
This topic is 3 pages long: 1 2 3 
