ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 6th January 2020, 03:33 AM   #81
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
I posted a link to a tweet by a weather camera company that contains still images it says are groups of drones taken on its weather cameras.



I sympathize with the dissatisfaction in the videos and photographs; but realistically speaking a picture or a motion video taken of a light in the sky at night is never going to be more than an image of a light in the sky at night. If it's taken with a cell phone camera, which is the only kind of camera most people are likely to have available to them, it's going to be an image of an extremely blurry and dim light in the sky at night.
If it is visible to the naked eye it is going to be visible and recordable with pretty much any recentish 100 dollar plus smart phone.

People have claimed they see these lights held in a formation and then moving in formation as if conducting a search. These claims are not of a momentary or a brief glimpse.

I simply do not find it credible that there is no video of such. I do not find it credible that those making the claims either weren't carrying a smartphone or forgot they were carrying it.

So far the only reason this is being treated unlike a silly and typical UFO story is that the word " drone" has been dropped into it to give it a veneer of realism.

There is simply not enough evidence to believe these claims and the lack of evidence would suggest that even if a claim is being sincerely made the actual event was quite different to the claim.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 03:39 AM   #82
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
Here is a video by NBC News that has a couple shots showing the drones in formation.



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ories-n1108941
That's not playing on my phone at the moment, but thanks for the link I'll check it when I'm at home later.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 04:00 AM   #83
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
So far the only reason this is being treated unlike a silly and typical UFO story is that the word " drone" has been dropped into it to give it a veneer of realism.
I don't see have you can say that with a straight face. Typical UFO reports are defined by reported behavior that is physically impossible. On the odd occasion the reported behavior is not impossible, the reports are easily explained by referencing real-world, known-to-exist things that are capable of exhibiting that behavior.

Drones aren't merely a "veneer" of realism; they're real things plain-and-simple.

1. Drones are real-world, known-to-exist objects; this is an indisputable fact.

2. Drones can and do fly at night, in formations, and preprogrammed courses including patterns of any kind; this is an indisputable fact as well.

3. None of the reported behavior of the alleged "drones" is inconsistent with the known capabilities of drones generally.

4. There are commercially-available drones whose physical characteristics such as size, lighting, and flying endurance, are consistent with the reported characteristics of the alleged drones.

None of these things is true of "silly and typical UFO stories". There's not a single claim being made about the drones that is in the least extraordinary; you could as easily be calling a claim by someone to have seen a formation flight of actual airplanes or a flock of birds flying in a v-shaped formation "no different from a silly and typical UFO story, except that he has called it a flock of birds to give it a veneer of realism".
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 04:13 AM   #84
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
That's not playing on my phone at the moment, but thanks for the link I'll check it when I'm at home later.
Was probably being a tad impatient with my connection speed playing now.

That is meant to be the best one and it doesn't show 30 drones at a time, flying in formations and so on.

It is more and more looking like this is exactly like so called mass "alien" UFOs sightings.

I am sure people are seeing one or two drones, they are getting to be a common sight.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 04:30 AM   #85
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Wrong end of the stick Checkmite.

In typical UFO mass sightings we will have people making all sorts of claims, craft flying in formation, 20, 30 objects in the sky, multicolored lights and so on, these mass sightings are massive yet strangely there is never any tangible evidence for all these claims.

The difference here is that people are slapping an identification onto these claims that everyone is seeing drones and all the sightings are related. But without having a shred of evidence to support that identification apart from "it could be". Sure drones could behave in such a way.

Just like all those UFO claims we are without any real tangible evidence.

We know eye witnesses are terrible recorders of an event, we know how "well I thought I saw a light hovering in the sky last night" quickly becomes "I saw one of these drones last night and it was hovering around and moving and...". Not because people are lying or even really making it up it is simply how our recollections work.

Which is why we need evidence that is objective, given the scale of these claims we should have tons of objective evidence in terms of videos of the events, photos of the drones, even audio recordings.and what do we have, so far 2 videos one showing a single light, one following what is claimed to be a formation but no formation in the video.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 08:11 AM   #86
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 24,164
I think this part of the news video shows 4 lights (drones). I put the yellow arrows to point them out.

If this is a formation then I don't know what the form is. They don't seem to be flying side-by-side, and they may not all be at the same altitude. To me, this does not look like a formation for grid surveys or grid searches - but I don't know.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg drones1.jpg (15.5 KB, 2 views)
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 08:30 AM   #87
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 24,164
This is a bigger perspective of the image that I posted above. It shows 5 lights. Again no discernible formation. The upper light has a cut-off halo because it is at the top of the camera/lens/frame aperture. One light is not visible but that's just because it's very dim in this particular instant.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg drones2.jpg (16.0 KB, 1 views)
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 08:31 AM   #88
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Yeah I saw that but that was labeled "enhanced" and without knowing what enhanced means it's hard to say if it is meaningful. And as you say that's not a formation.

One of the claimed sightings stated:

...Phillips County sheriff says there are at least 17 of the aircraft that fly between 7 and 10 p.m. nightly

....
And these are meant to have happened every night for a week and yet no video or photo?

The "enhanced" video doesn't with the most generous interpretation show anything like 17.

Another report mentioned a Denver Post *photographer* out with a sheriff and all he managed to capture was one photo of something that could be a singular drone.


Based on the evidence to date my view is that there are some folk flying drones at night in these areas. Just like there are in most places these days. There are not formations of multiple drones methodically moving in formation from "square" to square. We are seeing the same effect we always do when people start to say they've seen something they don't understand and other people start to show an interest. People start to notice "strange" things.

Is there a term for this type of behaviour, its akin to mass hysteria but without the hysteria?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 08:39 AM   #89
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 24,164
I don't really know how a person would go about doing grid surveys or grid searches with drones but I would expect this...

Drones are flown side-by-side and equidistant from each other and also flown at the same altitude. How far apart and at what altitude would be decided by the criteria of the mission and the parameters of the equipment/technology.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

Last edited by William Parcher; 6th January 2020 at 08:41 AM.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 08:50 AM   #90
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 24,164
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Yeah I saw that but that was labeled "enhanced" and without knowing what enhanced means it's hard to say if it is meaningful.
Whatever they did with the video they probably didn't add lights where there weren't any. Enhancement can be as simple as brightening a dark scene or attempts to increase sharpness. For our purposes it probably doesn't matter because it doesn't change anything that is important.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 09:46 AM   #91
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,617
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Yeah I saw that but that was labeled "enhanced" and without knowing what enhanced means it's hard to say if it is meaningful. And as you say that's not a formation.

One of the claimed sightings stated:

...Phillips County sheriff says there are at least 17 of the aircraft that fly between 7 and 10 p.m. nightly

....
And these are meant to have happened every night for a week and yet no video or photo?

The "enhanced" video doesn't with the most generous interpretation show anything like 17.

Another report mentioned a Denver Post *photographer* out with a sheriff and all he managed to capture was one photo of something that could be a singular drone.


Based on the evidence to date my view is that there are some folk flying drones at night in these areas. Just like there are in most places these days. There are not formations of multiple drones methodically moving in formation from "square" to square. We are seeing the same effect we always do when people start to say they've seen something they don't understand and other people start to show an interest. People start to notice "strange" things.

Is there a term for this type of behaviour, its akin to mass hysteria but without the hysteria?
I think it's called 'seeing drones repeatedly flying in predictable places around the same time'.

Gonna throw out a guess that they will be found to be smaller than the 6 foot being reported. Really like to know how they estimated a diameter/wingspan against a pitch black sky three hundred feet up.
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 11:33 AM   #92
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
If this is a formation then I don't know what the form is. They don't seem to be flying side-by-side, and they may not all be at the same altitude.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Yeah I saw that but that was labeled "enhanced" and without knowing what enhanced means it's hard to say if it is meaningful. And as you say that's not a formation.
Okay. The video obviously shows multiple lights in the same area of the sky at the same time; but you're going to completely throw it out because you've decided since they used the word "formation" to describe a group of drones all flying together, the picture needs to show the lights in a specific discernible shape or else it's evidence of nothing no matter how many lights it shows in the sky.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 11:55 AM   #93
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Okay. The video obviously shows multiple lights in the same area of the sky at the same time; but you're going to completely throw it out because you've decided since they used the word "formation" to describe a group of drones all flying together, the picture needs to show the lights in a specific discernible shape or else it's evidence of nothing no matter how many lights it shows in the sky.
No I am not throwing anything out. What I am saying is that the evidence so far produced does not match the claims that have been made.

Therefore we don't yet have evidence that the claims are accurate, in other words that there is this wide spread coordinated formation flying, night after night of lighted drones.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 11:56 AM   #94
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Okay. The video obviously shows multiple lights in the same area of the sky at the same time; but you're going to completely throw it out because you've decided since they used the word "formation" to describe a group of drones all flying together, the picture needs to show the lights in a specific discernible shape or else it's evidence of nothing no matter how many lights it shows in the sky.
The claim by the way is of "at least" 17 drones in a formation.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 12:02 PM   #95
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,617
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
No I am not throwing anything out. What I am saying is that the evidence so far produced does not match the claims that have been made.

Therefore we don't yet have evidence that the claims are accurate, in other words that there is this wide spread coordinated formation flying, night after night of lighted drones.
Sounds like you are saying that multiple independent and unrelated witnesses in different States reporting dipassionately can be discounted, lacking video.

I'll have to remember in the future how easy it is to discount testimony.
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 12:06 PM   #96
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Sounds like you are saying that multiple independent and unrelated witnesses in different States reporting dipassionately can be discounted, lacking video.

I'll have to remember in the future how easy it is to discount testimony.
Nope that is not what I am saying.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 12:11 PM   #97
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,617
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Nope that is not what I am saying.
Any part in particular inconsistent with your postings?

I didn't even mention the mass hysteria sans hysteria, which is loosely the equivalent of saying 'theyre all nuts'.
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 12:14 PM   #98
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Wrong end of the stick Checkmite.

In typical UFO mass sightings we will have people making all sorts of claims, craft flying in formation, 20, 30 objects in the sky, multicolored lights and so on, these mass sightings are massive yet strangely there is never any tangible evidence for all these claims.

The difference here is that people are slapping an identification onto these claims that everyone is seeing drones and all the sightings are related. But without having a shred of evidence to support that identification apart from "it could be". Sure drones could behave in such a way.

Just like all those UFO claims we are without any real tangible evidence.
This approach doesn't make any sense.

When somebody reports seeing a UFO that they think is an "alien spaceship", and they don't have a photograph but describe it having red and green lights that blinked at a steady rate, what we say to them is, "that was probably an airplane". We don't say to them "you have no proof, so you probably just imagined it". We say that because there is a thing that's known to exist in the world that matches their description, so there's no call to assume a faulty observation, just misidentification.

Now if I told you that last night I saw an airplane in the sky, and I know it was an airplane because it was flying at about the same speed and altitude that I've seen airplanes flying during the day, and it had the kind of lighting that I know for a fact airplanes display at night, but I didn't bother to take a picture of it because I didn't figure I would need to prove that an airplane exists, would you tell me my claim is "no different from a UFO sighting" on account of not having a single shred of evidence there was any airplane in the sky over my location last night? No, airplanes are utterly mundane. If I told you that two years ago I got hit by a car and received minor injuries while crossing the street, despite having not a single shred of evidence that happened you're not going to tell me I've made up, imagined, or misidentified "what really happened" because traffic accidents are utterly mundane events.

Drones are utterly mundane as well.



Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We know eye witnesses are terrible recorders of an event, we know how "well I thought I saw a light hovering in the sky last night" quickly becomes "I saw one of these drones last night and it was hovering around and moving and...". Not because people are lying or even really making it up it is simply how our recollections work.

Which is why we need evidence that is objective, given the scale of these claims we should have tons of objective evidence in terms of videos of the events, photos of the drones, even audio recordings.and what do we have, so far 2 videos one showing a single light, one following what is claimed to be a formation but no formation in the video.
No, there are a lot more videos than two. There are a number of videos.

There are three different videos shown at the beginning of this news report:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Usually the news reports will have one or two or more video clips in them.

I'm not going to do an intensive search on YouTube and social media for every clip of the alleged drones that has been posted because anybody can do this for themselves. But to remark that "all we have is two videos" because that's all that has been directly linked in this thread is disingenuous.

Most of the videos only show one fuzzy light because they are taken with smartphones (and I've already explained that they cannot take pictures of small lights in the sky well), and because they are typically zoomed in on one object, in a (futile) attempt to try to resolve some detail.

People have not been taking videos of character that you deem satisfactory (i.e. wide-angle shots of large portions of the sky showing 17 drones at once) partly because, again, smartphones are incapable of taking images like that; but primarily because since local law enforcement in multiple counties across two states so far have confirmed seeing the drones for themselves, there's no question locally that the drones exist and thus most witnesses, even ones who take video, aren't seeking to "prove" their existence so much as attempting to positively identify them.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 12:24 PM   #99
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 24,164
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Okay. The video obviously shows multiple lights in the same area of the sky at the same time; but you're going to completely throw it out because you've decided since they used the word "formation" to describe a group of drones all flying together, the picture needs to show the lights in a specific discernible shape or else it's evidence of nothing no matter how many lights it shows in the sky.
I'm not throwing it out. The video looks like a group (you can see 5 in my image) of lighted flying things which could be drones. I'm going to go with them being drones.

I thought that the fact that they are not in formation would be informative. Witnesses could be right about seeing multiple drones but wrong about them being in a discernible formation. If this is so, then maybe the drones aren't doing surveys or searches. Maybe their "purpose" is something else. Maybe they are being flown by a civilian hobbyist just because they like it and they can do it. But there are lots of possibilities.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 02:17 PM   #100
jadebox
Graduate Poster
 
jadebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,641
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
People have not been taking videos of character that you deem satisfactory (i.e. wide-angle shots of large portions of the sky showing 17 drones at once) partly because, again, smartphones are incapable of taking images like that;
That's pretty much all that most smartphones are able to record. Smartphones don't have large, telephoto lenses.
jadebox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 03:15 PM   #101
novaphile
Quester of Doglets
Moderator
 
novaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,326
A couple of thoughts here...

Firstly the group of objects looks to me like a single object and lens flare.

Secondly, the film from a couple who chased a 'drone' appeared to show the moon and Venus.

I'm pretty sure they're not going to be able to catch Venus.
__________________
We would be better, and braver, to engage in enquiry, rather than indulge in the idle fancy, that we already know -- Plato.
novaphile is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 03:28 PM   #102
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,617
Originally Posted by novaphile View Post
A couple of thoughts here...

Firstly the group of objects looks to me like a single object and lens flare.

Secondly, the film from a couple who chased a 'drone' appeared to show the moon and Venus.

I'm pretty sure they're not going to be able to catch Venus.
Perhaps they could if they were Mercury?
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 03:29 PM   #103
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Here are some more video clips in the form of tweets from the same weather-camera company whose still-images I linked earlier. Unlike the smartphone images and videos, these cameras do show a somewhat large swatch of the sky. These video clips were also posted on January 2nd.

Tweet 1

Tweet 2

Tweet 3

The second tweet gives both a location and a direction of view for the featured camera. This information is missing for the clip in the first tweet, although it's readily apparent that it is a different location. The weather camera company's website provides a map of all of the camera feeds and while I didn't attempt to hunt down the location of the unnamed camera, the map does indicate that there is only one camera in each location.

These video clips quite indisputably show large numbers of moving objects in the sky. So what are those objects?

In the first clip, which represents one minute of real time, the sheer number of visible objects over the space of a minute (I count at least 7 or 8) combined with the fact that they're moving in opposing directions rules out that they're satellites. Could they be normal aircraft? They could, although I would contend the sparsity of facilities in the region we're dealing with strongly argues against that volume of air traffic in any one location in the space of one minute. But it's not theoretically impossible.

The second clip is a whole hour time-lapsed, but it shows quite a lot of lights in that hour. They visibly change speeds and don't all follow the exact same flight paths, but the vast majority of them trend right-to-left across the image and a lot of the lights appear to vaguely concentrate around an area on the left side of the video clip. Could that be normal airplane traffic, perhaps approaching to land at an airport in that area of the image? Well, being that we have an actual location and a vague bearing for the camera, we can examine the air traffic with more exactitude.

Chart time again:



This area is just to the west of the first map I posted - compare the two if you want. I've used a green splotch in the bottom center to mark the location of the Fry Hill weather camera as given on the cam company's website. The tweet says the camera is pointed "north", but let's accept that as "vaguely northerly", maybe not exactly north.

What is the busiest airport "northerly" of the camera location? That would be Cheyenne Regional, in the extreme top left. It is 65 miles away from the camera location, which in my tentative guestimate should put it below the horizon - but the continental terrain trends generally upwards in that direction and I don't feel like doing the math necessary to solve this question definitively so let's assume for the sake of argument that Cheyenne airport would be and is visible in the image somewhere in that general direction.

Because the airport symbol on the chart for Cheyenne is blue, we know it has a control tower - unlike the rest of the airports on the map which are magenta. So we know it will have more air traffic than any of them (because traffic volume is how the FAA decides which airports get control towers). But the chart also indicates that the control tower only operates part time; so it's "busy enough" to justify a control tower for only part of the day.

If we want to be more exact, we can have a look at FlightAware and see what a typical day's traffic at this airport is like. It's...pretty anemic. Today's schedule for instance shows only a single plane arriving anytime after around 6pm, and nothing at all departing after that time. Nearly all of the airport's scheduled traffic happens during daylight hours.

But that's scheduled traffic - traffic that is known about ahead of time because flight plans have been filed with the FAA in advance. What about unscheduled traffic, or flight plans that are only filed around an hour or so before they happen? Airnav.com gives us general traffic information about the airport. In the section titled "Airport Operational Statistics" says there is an average of 124 aircraft operations a day at Cheyenne Regional, averaged over a year's time. Assuming a 50/50 split of takeoffs and landings, and generously assuming that traffic is the same every day throughout the year despite the season and each day's traffic is spread perfectly equally over 24 hours' time (even though the control tower's being part-time directly argues against this), that gives us two and a half landings an hour, on average. And that is for the busiest airport in the region.

I will allow that the few lights shown entering the video clip from the top of the frame and trending more-or-less vertically downwards before disappearing, presumably into the distance, are most likely high-flying jet aircraft transiting the area. Ignoring those, the one-hour time-lapse shows vastly greater than 3 lights flying at low altitude over the area.

I would still contend that Cheyenne is over the horizon and the visible area in that time-lapse is much closer to the camera, in which there are no airports at all, towered or non. But again, let's pretend it is. Pick any three lights in the second video clip to be air traffic landing at Cheyenne; the rest of those low-level lights are flying objects, but they positively not airplane or helicopter traffic.

The third clip, in my opinion, is the best of the three clips. The video clip is best viewed full-screen so that you can see all of the lights (there's many more lights in the clip than are visible at the small tweet-embedded size). This camera is located east of the town of Hillrose by I-76, and this location can be found in the chart above by looking to the WSW of the green splotch. It is also an hour-long time-lapse, but unlike the second clip the lights are much closer to the camera, and fly all over the sky every which-way, not generally trending in any one direction or appearing to concentrate around any one area of the image. The lights' individual courses are too inconsistent to be high-altitude jet traffic, and we know from the chart there are no airports nearby supporting this volume of low-level local air traffic. It's not airplanes.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 03:46 PM   #104
jadebox
Graduate Poster
 
jadebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,641
I can't make much of those videos. In addition to regular aircraft, the lights could range from video noise and reflections in the lenses to bugs that are close to the cameras reflecting lights or satellites that are far away reflecting the sun.

Last edited by jadebox; 6th January 2020 at 03:47 PM.
jadebox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 04:03 PM   #105
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,617
Checkmite, you seem to be putting a lot of effort into a story about some knuckleheads buying drones on amazon, lighting them up and flying them around for a bit. Maybe a business hustling publicity, or testing out a new service, or just kids trying to get the UFO freaks in a frenzy before mom says it's bedtime and to put their toys away (discounting the six foot wingspan thing till it can be explained how that was possibly estimated). You have a theory or something that you want to share?
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 04:29 PM   #106
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by jadebox View Post
I can't make much of those videos. In addition to regular aircraft, the lights could range from video noise
Not in any of those three clips; video noise, or "visual snow", does not look like lights that follow a consistent course over time. There is in fact plenty of actual video noise in those images so the differences are self-apparent. So no, the lights cannot be visual noise.

Originally Posted by jadebox View Post
and reflections in the lenses
No; if they were reflections, the light source being reflected would also be visible in the image and would be duplicating or mirroring the movements of the "drone" lights, exposing the artifact. That does not happen with any of the lights that appear in the video clips; so no, they cannot be reflections in the lenses.

Originally Posted by jadebox View Post
to bugs that are close to the cameras reflecting lights
What lights? There are no lights in visual proximity below the camera. The company says their cameras are mounted on cell towers; there is only one kind of light source on cell towers; it's the red anticollision beacon on the very top of the mast. It would necessarily be far above the camera, not below, and could not light up the undersides of bugs close to the camera. It could in theory illuminate the tops of bugs below the camera if the camera were very close to the top of the tower; but in that case, all of the "drone lights" would appear to be crossing the ground below, whereas in the images they are all above the horizon. So no, it cannot be bugs close to the cameras reflecting lights.

Originally Posted by jadebox View Post
or satellites that are far away reflecting the sun.
Already addressed in the previous post; satellites can't change direction or velocity in mid-pass. So no, it cannot be satellites. None of your alternative suggestions is plausible.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 6th January 2020 at 04:32 PM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 04:37 PM   #107
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Checkmite, you seem to be putting a lot of effort into a story about some knuckleheads buying drones on amazon, lighting them up and flying them around for a bit. Maybe a business hustling publicity, or testing out a new service, or just kids trying to get the UFO freaks in a frenzy before mom says it's bedtime and to put their toys away (discounting the six foot wingspan thing till it can be explained how that was possibly estimated). You have a theory or something that you want to share?
Yes, I theorize that people are actually seeing drones, and generally are not simply making them up, imagining them, or misidentifying other things as drones. (I'll freely allow that in isolated cases some individuals may be seeing actual airplanes and misidentifying them as drones due to the news coverage).
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 11:17 PM   #108
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,617
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Yes, I theorize that people are actually seeing drones, and generally are not simply making them up, imagining them, or misidentifying other things as drones. (I'll freely allow that in isolated cases some individuals may be seeing actual airplanes and misidentifying them as drones due to the news coverage).
Agreed. But what's with the 8 by 10 color glossys with the circles and the arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one is? Seems like a lot of radar map homework for a very small phenomena. Do you know people in the area or something?
__________________

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie -Miyamoto Musashi
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2020, 11:45 PM   #109
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Agreed. But what's with the 8 by 10 color glossys with the circles and the arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one is? Seems like a lot of radar map homework for a very small phenomena. Do you know people in the area or something?
No; but I have a more-than-casual familiarity to a degree with how airspace and air traffic works; so when one of the alternative explanations for what people are seeing (if anything) is "what if they think they're seeing drones but they're actually seeing something else", and the only quantity of "something else" within reason would be full-sized airplanes and standard air traffic, I just so happen to be in a position to examine that hypothesis with a little more depth than "it could be possible".

I find this particular situation very interesting. Many companies and industries have made no secret of their aspirations to employ drones on large scales. Amazon openly dreams of massive fleets of them zipping over every major city delivering small packages. Google has made public their own similar wish. Smaller but still numerous flights of drones are already finding use in remote sensing and infrastructure maintenance applications, displacing the helicopter as the ubiquitous short-range aerial utility vehicle. Let's be pragmatic here; if not this past month, in northeastern Colorado, then some other specific place at some point in time in the very near future, a sky that had always been relatively peaceful would suddenly find itself full of tiny aircraft flitting hither and thither for reasons absolutely unknown to the people living beneath it and watching it happen. And we get to see how they're reacting - very little fear generally speaking, but a lot of curiosity, concern, and in some cases mistrust. And how the industries that use these things, and the government that regulates them, will react to those concerns will also be interesting to watch.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 03:34 AM   #110
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Any part in particular inconsistent with your postings?



I didn't even mention the mass hysteria sans hysteria, which is loosely the equivalent of saying 'theyre all nuts'.
Just the bits you made up.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 03:49 AM   #111
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 89,789
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Yes, I theorize that people are actually seeing drones, and generally are not simply making them up, imagining them, or misidentifying other things as drones. (I'll freely allow that in isolated cases some individuals may be seeing actual airplanes and misidentifying them as drones due to the news coverage).
No one has said no one has seen drones.

No one has said there are no drones flying around the areas in the claims.

What has been doubted is the accuracy of the claims being reported.

The evidence that I had seen to date in this thread did not support the claims that have been made.

Now I will spend time tonight looking at the additional evidence you have kindly provided and it may of course support the claims.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 06:03 AM   #112
jadebox
Graduate Poster
 
jadebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,641
Checkmite,

The noise may add to the illusion of more lights. Outdoor cameras may have infrared lights on them that might illuminate bugs or dust or whatever nearby. The video might have been taken at a time when the moon might have illuminated stuff close to the camera. Some of the lights do appear to move straight like a satellite. And you didn't address all the things between those two extremes that might have contributed. Wasn't there a meteor shower recently? And a holiday which is often celebrated with fireworks or illuminated "sky lanterns?"

Find a video from one of those cell towers taken at the same time of night from before the "drones" were reported. Speed it up to match the one posted. See if they look different.

Last edited by jadebox; 7th January 2020 at 06:12 AM.
jadebox is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 11:57 AM   #113
llwyd
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 551
I guess this report hasn't been posted yet: https://www.denverpost.com/2020/01/0...investigation/
llwyd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 12:04 PM   #114
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 25,031
Originally Posted by llwyd View Post
I guess this report hasn't been posted yet: https://www.denverpost.com/2020/01/0...investigation/
Paywalled, won't even open in incognito.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 12:15 PM   #115
llwyd
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 551
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Paywalled, won't even open in incognito.
Not for me - it just required to disable adblock. Maybe then no access if contact is from a local ip?

edit: this is the ingress, I guess within rules to post that:

"A newly formed task force is on the hunt for a “command vehicle” that might be controlling the mysterious clusters of drones that witnesses say have been flying grid patterns in northeast Colorado and western Nebraska most nights for several weeks.

The command vehicle could be a “closed box trailer with antennas or a large van,” the Phillips County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement Monday, hours after about 75 people from a variety of state, local and federal agencies met in Brush to discuss the ongoing situation.

Anyone who spots such a potential command vehicle is asked to call local law enforcement."

Last edited by llwyd; 7th January 2020 at 12:17 PM.
llwyd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 12:19 PM   #116
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,810
Originally Posted by llwyd View Post
I guess this report hasn't been posted yet: https://www.denverpost.com/2020/01/0...investigation/
Quote:
Lt. Jon Carkhuff, a spokesman for F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Cheyenne, said Monday that the drones aren’t flying from the base.

“They’re not from F.E. Warren and they are not part of our counter-drone system,” he said. “We do not know where they are coming from, but we are cooperating with the FAA and the FBI and numerous police departments to find out what those sightings are.”
That's going to disappoint some; the GSC's "anti-drone" program was a popular theory on social media, with some people and outlets going as far as to declare the mystery "solved" with this unconfirmed theory. I personally didn't buy it, but now I suppose that's substantial confirmation it isn't that.

Quote:
“The reports we’ve taken in Lincoln County, these are law enforcement officer confirmed sightings,” he said. “These drones are in the area of Lincoln County. They’re not mistakes. We can’t speak to why someone wouldn’t come forward and say, ‘This is what we’re doing.’ ”
Statement likely to be ignored or dismissed out-of-hand by some...
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 01:09 PM   #117
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 16,311
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Paywalled, won't even open in incognito.
Not for me for some reason... Location dependent?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 02:23 PM   #118
novaphile
Quester of Doglets
Moderator
 
novaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,326
So far all I've seen is single dots in the sky.

(Including one video that really looked like venus).

Where's the footage of the 17 drones flying in formation, following grid patterns in the sky?
__________________
We would be better, and braver, to engage in enquiry, rather than indulge in the idle fancy, that we already know -- Plato.
novaphile is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 03:09 PM   #119
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 25,031
Originally Posted by llwyd View Post
Not for me - it just required to disable adblock. Maybe then no access if contact is from a local ip?
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Not for me for some reason... Location dependent?
They said I had exceeded my allotment of free articles. I'll try clearing cookies. Or maybe a different browser.

ETA: Now it doesn't like my ad blocker. I'll have to try it in FireFox on the other computer.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

Last edited by Trebuchet; 7th January 2020 at 03:11 PM.
Trebuchet is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2020, 03:31 PM   #120
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 46,977
I think the FAA is waiting to see if there is any "there" there with this story before launching an invesitigation.They have enough on their plate not to go chasing around every "mysterious" sighting in the sky.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:45 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.