• ultranaut@lemmy.world
    0·
    1 month ago

    What kind of camera and lens? If it’s a phone camera, image processing could be a factor and it may look very different than the picture depicts. I would guess something shiny catching light is being distorted into what is seen in the image. I think it’s likely to be a high altitude balloon.

  • felsiq@piefed.zipEnglish
    0·
    1 month ago

    One thing I see a lot in phones with multiple cameras is blotches of light that look a lot like that showing up when the lenses are pointed towards something bright (like the sun or a sunset). I usually assume any light flares in a picture are just a result of that, if it was taken by a phone lol.

            • Friendlybirdseggs@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
              0·
              1 month ago

              Note though, none of these celestial beings are called ‘angels’ (malakim). Malakim means ‘messengers.’ It is something of a job title. ‘Angels,’ properly so called, typically appear human: there are the ‘men’ who visit Abraham in Genesis 18, but two of them are called ‘angels’/malakim in the next chapter. There are also the ‘men’ who destroy Jerusalem with fire from the altar in Ezekiel’s visions, the human-like messenger who interprets Daniel’s vision, and the messenger(s) of Yahweh who appears to Gideon and to Samson’s parents in Judges.

              The trend began with the translation of the Septuagint and gained popularity with pseudo-Dionysios’ The Celestial Hierarchy. The Greek word used to translate malakim is άγγελος/aggelos. This title also means ‘messenger.’ P-Dionysios argued that it is proper to call all obedient celestial beings who serve God ‘messenger’ because they pass on messages and grace from God to the lower hierarchies. Thus, even those celestial beings closest to the throne—e.g., cherubim, seraphim—are messengers to the hierarchy below them, while the next hierarchy passes the message on down the line, and so on until you reach the lowest level: angels, properly so called.

              If you’re looking for a ‘biblically accurate’ malak/aggelos, take a look at the nearest human. In the Bible, ‘angels’ are often mistaken for humans at first.

    • Friendlybirdseggs@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      I already know its not ai due to the fact the person who took the photo zoomed their camera in on the left photo. So im stumped

  • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    0·
    1 month ago

    It’s an ambiguous photo. Probably faked.

    If the object isn’t an optical aberration or a faked photo and is in fact an actual object in the sky it could be a deflated weather balloon falling.They can get pretty funky looking. To me though it looks more like a wind turbine.

    My money is on it being a faked photo.

    • Friendlybirdseggs@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      I dont think there were any weather balloons nearby and the photographer is just some lady from Greeneville, TN so I have no clue

      • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        0·
        1 month ago

        There is another high probability possibility. It could be a tea light powered hot air balloon. You suspend a tea light under a lightweight plastic bag. The candle heats the air in the bag and it floats off across the sky. They look pretty freaky if you haven’t run across them before Especially at night. If the bag got hit by a sudden gust, it might twist into that shape and start to fall. Don’t see them very often due to the fire hazard.

        Another possibility might be a custom hobby r/c craft of some sort. That’s all the reasonable ideas I’ve got.

        • Friendlybirdseggs@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
          0·
          1 month ago

          Probably isn’t, we dont have very many hot air balloons around here plus its pretty dry right now so I dont think we would take that risk.

          • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            0·
            1 month ago

            I think you may be thinking a little too large a hot air balloon. Think grocery bag sized. As for not taking the risk, have you ever met a kid, or more likely in this case, teen, that thinks through the consequences of their actions.

            And it is a very cool science trick. I could see a kid doing something like that, pretty easily.

            This was the first result in YouTube when I looked it up. https://youtu.be/mfOm6IOA9Og

            • Friendlybirdseggs@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
              0·
              1 month ago

              That would make sense, but AGAIN somehow it cant be. You see the kids in South Greene aren’t exactly that interested in science I know I saw their scores in science they genuinely aren’t trying. I mean its not even that hard when I was in 7th grade math I got all As, and the high schoolers oh boy. They’re very street smart but ask then a basic science question and they are dumb as bricks

              • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
                0·
                1 month ago

                Middle aged me calls it a science trick and understands at a basic level how it works. 8 year old me would have said “Hey man! Hey man! Hey man! Check this out!” not having a clue how it worked, but it’s cool because it involves fire and magic. And promptly proceeding to set the town on fire.

                Ditto potato guns, soda bottle launchers (top half a soda bottle, a coffee cup, a little water and a firecracker), Mentos granades (coke and mentos), flamethrowers (just hairspray and a lighter), vacuum cannons and other things that burned, went boom or did something else exciting.

                Give the kids a break, they may not be able to communicate their understanding in standard language, but they understand far more than they, and their test scores, realize.