The following submission statement was provided by /u/Ninjasuzume:
I tweaked the brightness, contrast and zoomed in the airplane to see if the object change the texture of the plane, but I can't see it does, which suggests it is behind it. What do you think?
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/11jin4x/i_did_some_tweaking_of_the_doncaster_uap_video_to/jb2sn39/
level 1
I tweaked the brightness, contrast and zoomed in the airplane to see if the object change the texture of the plane, but I can't see it does, which suggests it is behind it. What do you think?
level 2
I think it's remarkable that the light flashes at the exact moment the object flies past.
Not saying the two are linked, but you could argue that the light would be obscured by the object if it was in front... similarly, the light could be overpowering any trace of the object that we would otherwise see as it flew in front of the plane...
level 2
Call me fkn crazy, but I think that the uap is the flash, watch it at normal speed, that light blinks super duper fast it seems for an airplane visual light, those take longer to get to full brightness then back out again, it's a slow blink, but this one, it's really fast, like this UAP went through the airplane
Edit: also, in the slow motion shots, the light phases from right to left, the direct it's traveling
level 2
I think your right, behind it. I filmed something similar 10 years ago testing a camera. but it was of a high altitude jet. Two similar object flew past with the last one curving towards the jet, because they were white, I put them down to day time meteors.
level 1
Definitely behind. I'm a long-time debunker here on this sub, and this is one video that, if it's not CGI, then it is very convincing to me.
level 1
It's in front. It gets obscured when it is front of the airplane because the underbelly and the object are both dark.
level 2
It’s a strobe light on the bottom of the plane. But it lights up evenly, then goes dark on its right side one frame earlier than the left side, from which we can conclude that the object is partly covering it.
level 2
I still think It’s an insect. The camera man is in tall grass. We’ve seen a few clips of insects mistaken for UAP and that’s what I see here. This whole “behind the airplane or in front of it” debate reminds me of a conversation I had once with a friend going through some type of mental psychosis. He said “Have you ever seen a bird fly behind the moon? I saw it today”! When things are far away….. You know..perspective… yadda yadda
level 2
I know it's not, but It looks more like a missile than a bird to me. I see the rotation you mentioned, and now my head is making jokes about sidewinders and US airspace.
level 1
Just want to point out, the fact that you can't see it pass in front, doesn't mean that it doesn't. I personally don't think it would show up at all, in contrast with the dark underside of the plane. It's too low resolution and too dark for it to be picked up by the camera at all.
If it flew in front of the lights I don't even think it would register either. They're not nearly as bright as the sky and they're way smaller + the bug is far away from the plane and close to the camera.
I know I will get some angry downvotes but we have seen this happen before. I can't remember the exact video but small objects not being picked up by a camera when passing branches etc happens. I'd go as far as saying it's more likely than spacecraft going Mach 50.
Mick West has a video on a bug that is also kind of low resolution, closer to the camera tho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfOqjychJaI
If that object, in that video, were to pass in front of those dark trees in the background, you'd have the same effect of not seeing the bug, actually not sure if it passes in front of the trees.. because we can't see it...
level 2
Except the lights look as highly contrasted as the cloud and it shows no problem in the cloud?
level 1
Why are we even arguing whether it flies behind or in front of the plane?
It's so fucking obvious that it's behind it otherwise it would have blocked out the two lights on the sides if we follow the object's trajectory.
level 2
Ya it so weird. Why the frick did that light blink right at the perfect moment? But if it partially obscured the middle light, it should have also obscured the lights on either side. But it didn’t.
level 1
I haven't read what led up to this, but why was someone taking a video of this plane landing?
level 2
There are plane fanatics and train fanatics believe it or not. I don't get the obsession but to each their own.
level 2
I live near an airport and people camp out there outside of the fence near the runway for hours filming planes taking off and landing. It’s like bird watching for them, they want to get footage of every type of plane.
level 1
Looks like its behind but hard to tell And that would mean there is radar data.
level 1
It's interesting for sure, but any video or photo that accidentally captures something potentially anomalous without corresponding observations by the person taking the photo (ie. where they notice the object only later when reviewing the photos) is difficult to get too excited about. There's too much information missing in most cases. We don't know how far the object is nor how large, and we have no accounts of it moving in unusual ways.
There are a lot of these types of images/videos being posted. I have no problem with people posting them and analyzing/debating them. But I think we all need to acknowledge the limited value of them to the larger discussion.
level 2
Well, the argument to that is that if these things are flying at Mach 30 and silent, you would never see it with the naked eye. Even Mach 2, if small enough and no sound, would not be noticed by many. Just depends.