UFO sightings 2011: UFO flying across the sky in Melbourne, Australia 8-Jan-2011

View Comments

• Could be same thing as in STS80 NASA video.Perhaps with private sector space flights these things will be reviled.

• First I'm no debunker just a regular guy like you. I'm no expert. I see with both eyes just like you. And I hold no special place in this world. But I do know a little about lenses. And that little dot is just a form of lens aberration. Lenses for the most part are crafted for the use they are intended for. Night,Day,Stars,Mountains,etc.Starlight Night have about a zero focus factor and

• to usahostingfactory<br /><br />If he saw it with his own eyes your lenses theory is useless.

• usahostingfactory <br />No mention is made of the small point of light which is obviously a lens aberration!<br />So why do you take up half a page talking about it?<br />Lets concentrate on the actual ufo (the large orb)<br />What do you think THAT is?

• very impressive !!

• Large orb is just a satellite. There was no straying from it&#39;s course, which was a straight line. Talk to us when it starts making turns, or completely stops in it&#39;s tracks. There are a million of these things out there-- and most of them are terrestrial.<br /><br />Oh, and btw, to the guy who writes long diatribes, that is just a lens aberration. And the filmer of this video seems to

• Because he is using a laser pen to point at the two different lights that&#39;s why I brought up the second smaller light. And yes, he said he could see it with his own eyes. So what....You can still see that it&#39;s a highly distorted object. It&#39;s hard to tell what it is. Maybe it&#39;s a garbage bag in space who knows. I&#39;m not saying there is nothing there. I&#39;m just pointing out

• I think its just a bog standard sat.<br />As mentioned it needs to start doing some crazy shit to qualify for real UFO status around these parts.

• to usahostingfactory<br /><br />Maybe you are right but... the guy above made a good point. You presented a theory which implied that the distorted object was a product of a lens aberration when in fact the same distorted object could also be seen by that person with his own eyes. Anyway I incline to believe this was a satellite.

• Thanks for the good discussion. I must be missing the point that he saw it with his own eyes. &quot;where does he say that at?&quot; I only have a paragraph to reference from just above the video&quot; and in reading it I don&#39;t see that statement.In any case no big deal. I digress. I was just trying to point out an obvious deficiency in using Starlight Scopes to try to prove that what we are