Leaked Photo Surfaces of Purported Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

nivek

As Above So Below
I think lots of people aren't taking into consideration the altitude and the size of the object, it would be one big giant balloon at 35k feet...

...
 

nivek

As Above So Below
Heres the data from the original image taken...

EoYCzIaXUAELnCY.jpeg
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
There's another near identical thread for this.

That iPhone is not the camera you want in your hand right then and there. Leave it to that pilot or his back seater to have the presence of mind to be able to photograph it with anything at all in the first place. I wonder how long this incident lasted.
 
For the record - I could care less if this turned out to be a prosaic object, but it's not a Mylar toy balloon at this altitude unless the photo itself is a hoax, because Mylar balloons can't rise above about 8,000 feet. And from the curvature of the Earth and the height above the cumulus clouds below, this picture was taken somewhere around 35,000 feet in altitude.

We don't know the altitude at which the photo was taken. 35k ft is only an estimate that could be off by +/- 10k ft.
Okay but even if I'm off by 10K feet, it still can't be a Mylar party balloon like everyone is saying. It's physically impossible for a Mylar balloon of this type to rise that high.

But here is some info about the maximum altitude helium balloons can reach:

How High Can a Helium Balloon Go Before it Pops?

From the above article maximum altitude for helium balloons is 30k ft, which is inside the estimate error.
You've confused latex balloons with Mylar balloons. Latex balloons can rise to 35K feet because a latex balloon expands as it rises, lowering the density and allowing it to climb higher.

Mylar is laterally rigid - it can't expand, so the density remains constant, limiting its potential altitude to under 8000 feet.

This is the only scientific study that I could find on this subject, and the top altitude that they could get for a Mylar balloon was 7,874 feet. The top altitude for a latex balloon turned out to 34,941 feet:

"Test of toy balloons performed for Federal Department of Aviation," Tom Hjerting Nielsen & Susanne Otto, Statens Lufthavensvaesen, 1992
https://www.balloonhq.com/faq/deco_releases/blnstudy.html
 
Okay I'm seeing quotes like these in the rag/press media, but they're not providing any verifiable source information:

"As per sources, the photo was captured by a military pilot from her mobile phone’s camera when it was hovering 30,000-35,000 feet above the ocean."
Leaked Pentagon Photo Seems to Capture a UFO. Is it Real This Time?

"The photo was previously described as depicting an 'unidentified silver 'cube-shaped' object' hovering over the ocean at an altitude of roughly 30,000 to 35,000."
Leaked photo from Pentagon UFO task force shows silver cube hovering over the Atlantic | Daily Mail Online

"The three officials told The Debrief that based on the picture the mystery 'cube' appeared to be flying at 30,000 to 35,000 feet and was roughly 1,000 feet from the fighter jet." [Note: there's no altitude information in The Debrief article about this photo]
Leaked Pentagon UFO reports reveal photo of mystery 'silver cube' over Atlantic
 

nivek

As Above So Below
I guess if we do not see a photo of a UFO at 20 feet away clear and in focus, the rest will always be a balloon or a seagull...Think of how difficult it would of been for the pilot to capture that photo on his cell phone whilst travelling at about 500 mph...

...
 

nivek

As Above So Below


 
I guess if we do not see a photo of a UFO at 20 feet away clear and in focus, the rest will always be a balloon or a seagull...Think of how difficult it would of been for the pilot to capture that photo on his cell phone whilst travelling at about 500 mph...

...

That seems to be the futility in Ufology, and ive long since come to accept that its not really here to prove this, at best we can have is potential hints or prescience of thing to come. The chase for proof is not possible with what we have, lacking most of the support and funding. Because the burden of proof is set so high, the only proof will come when or if the potential visitors decide to initiate contact, or government spills what it has(unlikely). Pics or video will always be explained away whether deservedly or undeservedly, especially if they continue to be at this quality.
 
Last edited:
Okay I'm seeing quotes like these in the rag/press media, but they're not providing any verifiable source information:

"As per sources, the photo was captured by a military pilot from her mobile phone’s camera when it was hovering 30,000-35,000 feet above the ocean."
Leaked Pentagon Photo Seems to Capture a UFO. Is it Real This Time?

"The photo was previously described as depicting an 'unidentified silver 'cube-shaped' object' hovering over the ocean at an altitude of roughly 30,000 to 35,000."
Leaked photo from Pentagon UFO task force shows silver cube hovering over the Atlantic | Daily Mail Online

"The three officials told The Debrief that based on the picture the mystery 'cube' appeared to be flying at 30,000 to 35,000 feet and was roughly 1,000 feet from the fighter jet." [Note: there's no altitude information in The Debrief article about this photo]
Leaked Pentagon UFO reports reveal photo of mystery 'silver cube' over Atlantic

I dont see a cube in that picture, nor do many other people. How can someone describe that as such. Maybe you had to be there... whatever.

If military pilots think this balloon like thing looks like a cube, it paints a rather worrying picture of the east coast Roosevelt sightings of "similar" objects.
 
Last edited:

nivek

As Above So Below
That seems to be the futility in Ufology, and ive long since come to accept that its not really here to prove this, at best we can have is potential hints or prescience of thing to come. The chase for proof is not possible with what we have, lacking most of the support and funding. Because the burden of proof is set so high, the only proof will come when or if the potential visitors decide to initiate contact, or government spills what it has(unlikely). Pics or video will always be explained away whether deservedly or undeservedly, especially if they continue to be at this quality.

If we had a clear in focus photo of a UFO it would be explained away as cgi by many too...Some people won't be satisfied until a UFO lands in Times Square and aliens come out of it for all to see...If that ever happens I would be more worried than satisfied...

...
 

nivek

As Above So Below
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
The important things are that this made it to a Senate hearing that is paying attention to the topic and the Navy's new reporting procedures seem to be a plus. That pic makes me wonder if there is additional data to be found for this incident, classified or not.
 

1963

Noble
If we had a clear in focus photo of a UFO it would be explained away as cgi by many too...Some people won't be satisfied until a UFO lands in Times Square and aliens come out of it for all to see...If that ever happens I would be more worried than satisfied...

...
Hi Nivek, I hear what you are saying and what Thomas is saying about the altitude being far too high for a mylar balloon, and wouldn't argue with either of your qualms against the 'mylar balloon identification' , which as you know has also always been a personal bugbear of mine also, but in this particular incident, and it may just be an unreasonable-failing of my own... but something at the back of my mind was telling me that there was just something a little 'off' about this whole story. ... it's not just the usual tediously-oblique nature of this 'new-smuggled-revelation', but also it didn't take long to find Jason Gleaves' response to the picture, ... and not to put too fine a point on it, this picture immediately sealed the deal for me to say that I was [and am] pretty certain that what I was looking at was in fact the Mylar balloon of no other than Batman himself....
twitter-balloon-e1607032023654.jpg
129013148_2892157097738066_39970997434611280_o.jpg

... and as Thomas and yourself pointed out that mylar balloons cannot ascend to such lofty heights, I did a little checking and found this Test of Toy Balloons Performed For Federal Department of Aviation
Balloon Study (balloonhq.com)
...which seems to validate your claims that it could not be a naturally occurring 'toy balloon event' at that height! ... though this test paper comes from 28 years ago... and I suppose that manufacturing of these things could have vastly improved in that time and the limit 'could possibly have tripled?.. enough to allow the balloon identity ... I really don't know mate? ... but as I say, even if not.. the feasibility of the 'Batman Balloon' judging solely by the picture above is too great for me to deny, and I suspect that this whole saga has been intentionally created to cause a bit of a stir in the UFO community with the intention to demonstrate just how gullible folk like us are! ... Of course that's just my present opinion and could well be wrong! ... who knows? perhaps i'm just being overly obtuse and cynical! :oops:

Cheers Buddy.
 

1963

Noble
Hi Nivek, I hear what you are saying and what Thomas is saying about the altitude being far too high for a mylar balloon, and wouldn't argue with either of your qualms against the 'mylar balloon identification' , which as you know has also always been a personal bugbear of mine also, but in this particular incident, and it may just be an unreasonable-failing of my own... but something at the back of my mind was telling me that there was just something a little 'off' about this whole story. ... it's not just the usual tediously-oblique nature of this 'new-smuggled-revelation', but also it didn't take long to find Jason Gleaves' response to the picture, ... and not to put too fine a point on it, this picture immediately sealed the deal for me to say that I was [and am] pretty certain that what I was looking at was in fact the Mylar balloon of no other than Batman himself....
twitter-balloon-e1607032023654.jpg
129013148_2892157097738066_39970997434611280_o.jpg

... and as Thomas and yourself pointed out that mylar balloons cannot ascend to such lofty heights, I did a little checking and found this Test of Toy Balloons Performed For Federal Department of Aviation
Balloon Study (balloonhq.com)
...which seems to validate your claims that it could not be a naturally occurring 'toy balloon event' at that height! ... though this test paper comes from 28 years ago... and I suppose that manufacturing of these things could have vastly improved in that time and the limit 'could possibly have tripled?.. enough to allow the balloon identity ... I really don't know mate? ... but as I say, even if not.. the feasibility of the 'Batman Balloon' judging solely by the picture above is too great for me to deny, and I suspect that this whole saga has been intentionally created to cause a bit of a stir in the UFO community with the intention to demonstrate just how gullible folk like us are! ... Of course that's just my present opinion and could well be wrong! ... who knows? perhaps i'm just being overly obtuse and cynical! :oops:

Cheers Buddy.
edit here because I ran out of time :p .. just add that I forgot to mention that this picture isn't even new is it.... it was posted on twitter back on May 12th by Blake S Taylor ... Blake S. Taylor Investigations on Twitter: "#ufotwitter #paranormaltwitter https://t.co/LlIFEk3wVf" / Twitter
... so what's going on ??

Cheers Buddy.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

nivek

As Above So Below
Then there's this:

 


I wouldnt exactly call that photo "stunning". I dont know what the hell im looking at, especially without any further data and context. A balloon pops to mind as a simplest explanation, but might be wrong. Give us ur explanation why you think this depicts something rather extraordinary please, Mr Mellon.
 
Top