PROTECT YOUR DNA WITH QUANTUM TECHNOLOGY
Orgo-Life the new way to the future Advertising by Adpathway
The match to the suggested location is undeniably correct.
House, mailbox, streetlight/power pole on the street corner casting light across the road, tree, driveway and even the strip of repaired asphalt match up.
The match to the suggested location is undeniably correct.
House, mailbox, streetlight/power pole on the street corner casting light across the road, tree, driveway and even the strip of repaired asphalt match up.
That was my thoughts, but I thought there might be enough wiggle for people, but enough stuff matches.
Regarding the appearance of the light, I would suggest that under most atmospheric conditions it would just look like a regularly flashing/pulsing red light as the beam rotates (like a lighthouse beam). It's just the fog/low cloud that makes it look unusual.
A video from the same spot on a clear night would be instructive.
I'll grant "unique," but may have to draw the line at "serious." Someone who saw this amazing sight, even if sincerely fooled by it at first, would eventually notice that it never moved, and when the fog cleared hours or days later, there the tower would be, even if they had not particularly noted it before.
I'll grant "unique," but may have to draw the line at "serious." Someone who saw this amazing sight, even if sincerely fooled by it at first, would eventually notice that it never moved, and when the fog cleared hours or days later, there the tower would be, even if they had not particularly noted it before.
This follows the classic Reddit post formula, the video is actually from someone else's social media and was cross-posted over few Reddits.
One of the cross-posts shows the original poster on Facebook, where the Reddit user screen recorded it.
Source: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1n3vhm0/what_is_this/nbgfmyd/?context=3
Can anybody make out the chatter? It is very indistinct here, but some of y'all have younger ears and probably better speakers!
Something is not adding up to me, I think the location is accurate, but the house at the end of the Street is wrong as per street-view of 2024
The house has a dark front as of 2024 Streetview
But the video seems to show maybe white illuminated garage doors?
2014 it looked like this, which still doesn't look quite right.. but closer..?
Was the same in in 2009
I guess it could have been redone again since 2024..
Found this drone video from June that has a (long distance) view of the house:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaCXsfnW5GI
Hard to really tell anything for sure, but looks like there could be a garage there now? There's a big spot of white that I think would be broken up more if those windows were there still.
I can't really see other options in Bathurst - needs to be near the interstate since we can hear traffic in the video and I don't see any other locations near the interstate where there's a house that can be seen in line with a road like that where it's also sparsely developed enough that you can't see any other houses in the vicinity.
The house has a dark front as of 2024 Streetview
Those look a lot like trailers parked in the driveway lit up by the street lights or lights on the property. Note the shadow under them. White is a very common color on cargo trailers and even most RV trailers. The house in question has a single garage door, not 2. Just my thought.
Those look a lot like trailers parked in the driveway lit up by the street lights or lights on the property. Note the shadow under them. White is a very common color on cargo trailers and even most RV trailers. The house in question has a single garage door, not 2. Just my thought.
Agreed, that also explains the strange fact that the baseline of the "house" appears to be staggered. The driveway slopes down slightly towards the road, and the front of the right hand object is closer, and therefore lower.
Can anybody make out the chatter? It is very indistinct here, but some of y'all have younger ears and probably better speakers!
Nothing very exciting. One female and one male voice, one little section I can't quite make out.
F: My video's... you should see the picture I got on here
M: If you can enlarge it right here, right?
F: Oh yeah
M: So... you don't see what it is, with the enlargement?
F: It just looks like a ball. Come see it on my phone
[almost loses the light out of frame]
Oh... where'd it go?
[background noise, like a passing vehicle or aircraft]
M: What the hell?
[inaudible]
Too bad I don't have my f------ binoculars with me
F: Yeah
M: I've got a strong pair of binoculars [continues inaudible under crosstalk]
F: It's giving off a lot of light
M: Yeah. Hmm... camera. Is it on camera or video? Camera. Camera and then...
F: I'm going to zoom in again [pause] The highway don't... [clip ends]
I wonder if the last bit by the male speaker indicates that he was also trying to take a photo on a different device?
The video in the hugely upvoted Reddit, is a cropped video of a video someone took using screen recorder of a facebook video (welcome to the modern internet), they left the mic on so that the voice is the person doing the screen recording on their phone.
This is a fine example of a sighting that would benefit from the original observer returning to the same location during daylight hours and capturing additional footage. They know where they were and what camera they were using and in what direction they were facing while filming. All of which information would help them understand and describe what they saw. It would also help those interested in the sighting to evaluate and help the original viewer understand what they saw.
This is a fine example of a sighting that would benefit from the original observer returning to the same location during daylight hours and capturing additional footage. They know where they were and what camera they were using and in what direction they were facing while filming. All of which information would help them understand and describe what they saw. It would also help those interested in the sighting to evaluate and help the original viewer understand what they saw.
Yes, but if @jarlrmai is correct the original photographer may have known exactly what they were filming. They may have even started it was a beacon in the fog on their Facebook post. But instead, some redditor decided to record the original Facebook video and post it as a "serious and unique" UFO. It got him a lot of upvotes, so I guess it worked.
Yes, but if @jarlrmai is correct the original photographer may have known exactly what they were filming. They may have even started it was a beacon in the fog on their Facebook post. But instead, some redditor decided to record the original Facebook video and post it as a "serious and unique" UFO. It got him a lot of upvotes, so I guess it worked.
The Facebook poster calls it a UAP as well.
The video in the hugely upvoted Reddit, is a cropped video of a video someone took using screen recorder of a facebook video (welcome to the modern internet), they left the mic on so that the voice is the person doing the screen recording on their phone.
So why is he talking about wishing he had binoculars? Is that deliberate misdirection?
I am coming to the conclusion that the very bright red strobe is not a normal thing on Cell towers, it would seem ludicrous these people would
1. Put up with it.
2. Not know what it was.
From the original post:
External Quote:
A split system with a medium intensity flashing white beacon during daytime and twilight use that switches to a medium intensity flashing red beacon at top of tower in addition of a red flashing dual obstruction light at the mid-point of tower during nighttime is compliant with CAR 621 Standards Obstruction Markings.
The red light is not a strobe, obviously. (If the white is a strobe, it would annoy viewers, I'm sure.) But if the viewers had to enlarge the red beacon to see any details on a cell phone image, it couldn't have been that intrusive, I'd think.
The beacon light and fog glow is like 2+ times the size of that house.
I am coming to the conclusion that the very bright red strobe is not a normal thing on Cell towers, it would seem ludicrous these people would
Possibly it would not seem at all bright from the ground under normal conditions -- after all, you don't care if somebody on the ground sees your tower -- you care if somebody in a plane at the right height to hit your tower see it! So you'd not aim your beams of rotating light at the ground!
If I were designing a tower light system using rotating lights to simulate a flashing light I'd aim the beam horizontally as much as possible, with enough spread to give a plane slightly higher but possibly descending a chance to see it sooner. Basically, angle the beam up slightly, with horizontal inside the cone of maximum brightness. The effect of this would be a not particularly bright light visible from below (or from very much above) but maximally bright at the "danger altitude." (Planes much lower than the tower would be dealt with by all the houses and trees and stuff before hitting my tower, which is all I care about...)
In fog, however, this system would be much more visible from the ground as the fog is illuminated, and light bouncing off the fog droplets goes in every direction.
So, designed the way I'd do it (and there may be some factors I am not taking into account, I am not a professional tower light designer!) you'd get about what we see here in the fog, but it would not be particularly bright or extensive from the ground on a clear night.
I have never seen a rotating light on a radio or cell tower, and I couldn't find any evidence that towers in New Brunswick use them. What does have rotating lights is an airway/airport beacon but they usually have lights on two sides (white and another color). There are also apparently some with three or four lights that seem to be less common.
Example of a beacon on a pole.
At the nearby New Brunswick Regional Airport (CZBF) they appear to have a beacon.
I'm not sure but it may be on this pole.
Source: Google street view link
Same pole from a different angle.
Source: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RORm54bvpu4&t=113s
Same pole visible on the right in this landing video.
Source: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHaAxXJgrE8&t=353s
Landing video at night from last year showing the rotating beacon, but it only has a single white light turned on (this screenshot shows it at the point in the sweep where it is facing the camera; bright white light on the right).
Source: www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7C3-5G6H_0&t=43s
I don't think this is the source of the light in the video because I'm not sure the pole is tall enough for the light to be seen from the location the where the video was recorded, and I have not found any discussion of a configuration with 3-4 orange/red lights. The light in the video also seems to be closer than ~4 miles away based on the central point the beams extend from.
It's just the fog/low cloud that makes it look unusual.
Replying to a necro-thread here...
I recall looking up the METAR for that night and seeing something I had never seen before, the DS abbreviation, which is "widespread dust". I can't imagine what was happening that might cause this and not an FU (smoke), but it was enough that they mentioned it in the METAR at that exact time.
.png)
.jpg)
English (US) · 
French (CA) ·