Washington ufo
© UnknownStill Image Extracted From Video Showing Entering Field of View & Enlargement of Light.
Posted: June 19, 2009

Date of Sighting: June 14, 2009
Time of Sighting: Object Visible From About 10:27 to 10:31 PM PDT
Location of Sighting: Ocean Shores, Washington (See Map)

[View Video]

Description: Ali Nicolls and William Puckett set up two cameras to video the sky on June 14, 2009. The cameras were set in an easterly direction and were angled about 20 to 30 degrees above the horizon. Two infrared cameras were set up and footage was recorded on DVD for each camera. The camera (containing above footage) was an IGEN NV 20/20 night viewer scope with video output.
Washington ufo II
© UnknownSecond Position of Light. Light Has Re-Entered Field of View. Image Also Contains Enlargement.
(Note: Apparent "Halo" Around Light.)
The camera is sensitive in the visual and near infrared. The spectral sensitivity ranges from about 400 microns to 1,000 microns. Visible light is approximately between 400 and 700 microns. The camera was set to capture footage at 15 frames/second (as opposed to the normal 30 frames/second) so that more ambient light could be captured. The other camera was a FLIR thermographics B2 infrared camera with video output. This camera has a spectral sensitivity in the "far" infrared from about 6,500 to 13,000 microns. The image above did not show up on the thermographics camera indicating that it likely was not an airplane or helicopter (no thermal signature). The above image also was not visible to the naked eye at any time. (We were watching the taping live on 2 TV sets each dedicated to one camera.)

map of Ocean Shores area
© UnknownMap Showing Location of Ocean Shores.
When the light showed up we first thought that it was a bright planet because it was moving so slow. However, once we saw that it was moving I went outside and could not see it. The light was moving in a southerly direction and picked up speed when it moved to the right of the field of view. The light may have possibly been moving away from us, but this is not known. Also several insects and birds flew by the lens during the taping session. (Some of the insects are evident on the above footage.)

Ali Nicolls Observations:

1. The object made no audible sound, we had the door open.
2. The object appeared to stall over the house, and then move in a southeasterly fashion, at a faster pace.
3. The object appeared to arc over the top of the camera field of vision.
4. The object appeared to be brighter and pulsate when we first noticed it on the left side of the house.
5. The object appeared to have a large field of light emitting from it that looked circular.
6. The object appeared quite close, and bright and big.
7. The object moved at a smooth steady rate similar to an aircraft, but not like a bird or bug. The object was much bigger than those objects observed.
8. The object did not appear to emit thermal signatures, as we could not see it on thru FLIR IR camera.
9. The object looked self propelled to me. Especially after it slowed down went upwards, and then back down into our field of vision.

Note: The skies were clear and a check of the satellite positions shows that no satellites were visible in the portion of the sky where the light was observed. The direction of movement of the light was different than any visible satellites. The winds aloft were from a southerly to southwesterly direction in the lower 30,000 feet of the atmosphere. This fact reveals that the light was moving into the wind the and therefore could not be a balloon or other non-propelled device. A check of visible planets showed that only Saturn was visible and it was visible to the southwest and therefore was not in the field of view of the video cameras. No tail or flame was seen with the light . Therefore the light was not a meteor or falling space debris. Now that we have eliminated most conventional explanations what could the light have been? Perhaps it could be a high altitude military unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). However, this is speculation. A UAV would be propelled and should have shown up on the FLIR image. Given available data we have no explanation for this video.

Additional comments: There is a possibility that the FLIR field of view may not have been extended to the area of the sky where the object was detected. However, tree positions indicate that the FLIR should have been in a position to detect the light. The FLIR images of the taping session will soon be posted to this report.