Mass UFO Sighting At Minor League Baseball Game writes:

A UFO was spotted at a Canadian minor league baseball game. One of the teams scored four runs about the time of the sighting, causing some to speculate it was “cosmic intervention.”

The game was at the Scotiabank Field at Nat Bailey Stadium in Vancouver. In the sixth inning a shiny blue object was spotted over the right field fence. The Vancouver Canadians scored four runs in that inning, and went on to win the game 5-1.

Tweeters began using the hashtag #luckyUFO, and even the Canadians team tweeted about the UFO. At least two baseball fans tweeted pictures of the object. One says he saw the object hovering and moving up and down before it disappeared.

34 Comments on "Mass UFO Sighting At Minor League Baseball Game"

  1. Simon Selvfed | Sep 8, 2013 at 9:17 am |

    Looks exactly like a plane howering…Even has wing lights

  2. lethargyclad | Sep 8, 2013 at 9:59 am |

    Looks like a plane taking off away from the camera.

  3. Someone stated it on the youtube comments: “looks like an airplane taking off. there’s no hovering in this video. vancouver international airport is 1.8 miles away in that same direction (over the right field fence). google map the stadium, then the airport to the sw.” I’m going to have to agree. Unless UFO’s stick with the standard lighting practice for wing tips 😀

    • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 5:24 pm |

      You can see the object rise and fall several feet in comparison to the treeline, its quite clear its not an airplane and the light pattern is the first clue its not. I’m certain its a small drone someone launched to get a rise out of the crowd, I’ve seen enough genuine UFOs (saucers, orbs) in my life, worked with MUFON investigating my own sightings and taken enough video (hundreds of hours) to be an unofficial expert on the subject.

      • ….. You’re a terrible unofficial expert…. First off… Is the camera on a tripod? No… It’s not…. Even as the camera pans it’s bobbing up and down…. NOW… If you focus on an object far away, this flying object, with objects in between, trees, with a non-fixed camera angle what will happen? That’s right… The flying object will BOB!!! Do you know with 100% accuracy how much drop/raising the camera did during the film? Can you 100% definitively say it only bobbed 1 or 2 inches? what about 5? 6? Go outside RIGHT now… Line the moon up with a street lamp… now bend your knees and lower your head… now straighten your knees… OMFG!!! A BOBBING FLYING MOON!!!! If you watch FULL screen, 1080p between about 0:08 and 0:11, you can CLEARLY see what looks like the blue and red of the wing tip lights (something on a drone that would spin given that it isn’t restricted to forward only flight. It would have the ability to spin, thus interchanging the blue and red light). Furthermore it looks like it’s approaching with the nose up on a take off. I live in a flight path of Toronto airport… While you may be an unofficial expert on UFO’s…. I am one on planes taking off given that I have seen one take off every few minutes for the past 18+ years of my life while I lived in that home… But… Really… I think the fact that you claim to be an expert but you don’t even mention the fact that it wasn’t on a tripod to be a possible source of the bobbing says it all… You’re not that smart… Sorry dude…

        • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 7:38 pm |

          Take your Meds and take a nap.

          • Ad hominem FTW! So…. it ISN’T on a tripod is what you’re saying? 😉 Good work Expert. I don’t know how I’m going to refute your expert rebuke…. 😉

          • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 7:47 pm |

            It’s tiny and moves just like a hobby store drone between a clearly solid and low treeline a few hundred yards away at most (certainly no more than a hundred feet high) and smaller trees at the edge of the outfield wall Copernicus.

          • So now you’re attempting to refute the actual substance of my argument instead of slandering me? Good work killer! 😀 So, again, you never try this with the moon? You can make the moon bob if you film without a tripod… You get this right?Or no? The further an object is, the smaller it is.. But again, going back to the drones… I want 2 things from you.. Find me a drone on the market that has a blue light on one side, and a red light on the other… Now find me a video of it bouncing up and down hovering with ZERO spin…. Because I can find a video of the MOON moving with this technique of non-fixed filming point ….. OR is it really hard to get? DId you not try the experiment of lining up the moon with the street light? or are you going to ignore that and just reitterate your points?

          • … So you haven’t really addressed the fixed camera angle point mr Expert…. Can you point out the make and model of that sort of drone with blue and red lights like that? Can you also point out a video that shows a drone with lights like that that DOESN’T spin at ALL while raising and lowering? Also, can you explain why an object far away would remain STATIONARY while the camera angle ISN’T fixed? Did you try that moon experiment? 😉 Because all of these things are much EASIER/BETTER explained as a bobbing camera angle and an airplane clearly ascending into the sky…

          • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 8:31 pm |

            I’m not giving in to your poor attempt to troll me into following links, posting links, debating the youtube research and google investigations you’ve done. You don’t dictate how I approach a debate.

            Thinking deeply doesn’t mean you’re thinking clearly. You cant see a jumbo jet through a solid treeline Golgothan.

          • Hahahaha; I totally concede in regards to it being a drone vs an airplane; I stand completely corrected in regards to the trees in behind. But that DOES NOT change my point about fixed camera angles and YOU KNOW IT. Which is why you are not even addressing this point, correct? You’re right I don’t dictate how you debate, but to claim I’M trolling YOU when YOU’VE replied to MY POST is highly illogical. I would say the inverse would be argued more readily given that you didn’t answer my point about fixed camera angles as well as your use of ad hominems instead of actually attempting to debate. You WEREN’T debating when you told me to take drugs and nap…. Were you?

          • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 8:58 pm |

            I’m not going to argue about camera fixed camera angles, the video is plenty clear.

            Yeah, I poke fun at everyone but most of the regulars here do to separate the wheat from the chaff. We mostly hold each-other to the fire so be aware of that if you’re going to comment with nonsense like you continue to.

            I apologize, didnt mean to hurt your feelings.. I’m attempting to curb nonsensical comments and when I’m on the receiving end (which I am regularly) I don’t nut up about it, I rethink my position.

          • I guess you don’t realize I DO comment here fairly regular… And I DID rethink my position by conceding about it being a RC.. That being said, you clearly are NOT rethinking your position in terms of what I’ve said in regards to the ascending and descending. You’re showing that with your first sentence. You’re telling me I’m “nut up about it” while saying you need to curb nonsensical comments. Yes it is an RC, but that doesn’t change what I’ve said about it potentially not actually raising and lowering the way you think given that the view point isn’t fixed. You can’t argue this so you aren’t. Unlike how I literally said I was wrong and you were right in regards to it NOT being an airplane. I’m happy to rethink my position and am quite happy in the flames, you seem to ignore the reciprocal treatment 😉 Do you figure because you’re right about it not being an airplane you don’t even have to address the point I actually made more repeatedly? Sorry for not rethinking my position enough to fully reflect your position wholly encompassed. There is also no need to bring feelings into it and claims of knowledge of others emotional state. That vaguely feels like your main form of argument is ad hominems interspersed throughout points. You’re the only one throwing verbal jabs… Insinuations that I am medicated; calling me a shit monster; Telling me I’m emotionally upset because of how awesome your points are. Telling me I am badass with telescopes… While all I did was refer to you by your self appointed title you presented first; Expert 🙂

          • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 9:36 pm |

            If you’re not upset you might reconsider the caps, that universally indicates raising your voice.

          • You’re concerned with my typeset over everything else?

            Caps can mean plenty of things. Especially given that typing is English in the written form and not a spoken form. Typically in written form exclamation points, which I haven’t used, are used to indicate shouting.

            Typically BOLD TEXT in almost all written form is used to indicate words you’d like to highlight within an overall text.

            The first definition of BOLD TEXT I get from the internet is as follows: “Bold font weight makes text darker than the surrounding text. With this technique, the emphasized text strongly stands out from the rest; it should therefore be used to highlight certain keywords that are important to the subject of the text, for easy visual scanning of text. For example, printed dictionaries often use boldface for their keywords, and the names of entries can conventionally be marked in bold.”

            Given that this is the FIRST definition I found, your “universal” indication isn’t so universally accepted… 🙂

            Facts are fun!

            To prove this, look up the Bold Font Method 😉 It’s a method of studying where you only read bold words from a text book, because that’s >70% of the test content. (Trololol Urban Dictionary)

            So does that mean bold in textbooks should be shouted if read out loud? 😀

          • jasonpaulhayes | Sep 8, 2013 at 9:59 pm |

            You’re not using bold text, you’re using caps.

            I digress, were definitely done here Agent Mulder. There will be a rental car waiting for you at the airport, were taking you off this case.

          • Actually… I didn’t once hit the caps lock button.. I pressed shift to create bold text… I’m asking earnestly: Do you know the definition of Bold Text? Thanks for yet another Ad Hominem… You’re really showing your true colours and proving you can’t reply without slinging insults. Thank you 🙂

            You probably would have been best off not responding at the point where I conceded that it wasn’t an airplane. *shrug*

        • Heavymellow | Sep 9, 2013 at 1:28 am |

          If you look there are the trees lit up by the baseball field lights, and then behind that there are another row of trees much taller, you can see them against the sky, the object is in front of the trees. The object is about 3 feet across at the most. Most likely a drone.

          • I totally conceded that if you actually read this full thread instead of responding to portions of it 🙂 On my 5th post, 4th reply.

          • Tony Baloney | Sep 10, 2013 at 6:31 am |

            Responding to the full breadth of your replies here Gergith…you are a nut who needs a real life with real people to interact with and to practice fostering relationships with…mellow out with your online hostility.

          • Fun AND informative 🙂

            If responding with lots of words and bold words at that makes me a hostile nut, then so be it 😀

            Especially given the fact I’m NOT The one who continuously threw around Ad Hominems on this thread. I was LITERALLY called a shit demon and I’M considered the hostile one? :p Look up Golgothan if you think I’m exaggerating… But I have lots of hostility 😉

            Have a GREAT day 😀

            Thanks for that blind basically anonymous judgement of anothers life 🙂 Especially given that you have no actual way to verify how your and my life differs.

            I hope you got the response/satisfaction you were looking for from your post 😀

  4. I concur, as someone who believes there’s something to this UFO business. This video is just plain foolish.

  5. Charlie Primero | Sep 8, 2013 at 3:08 pm |

    It looks to me like an object that is flying, but can’t be immediately identified. Perhaps they should come up with an acronym for such things, something like NFO – Non-indentified Flying Object, or something. That would be cool.

  6. Margaret Mayhemm | Sep 8, 2013 at 5:35 pm |

    Who starts video recording a potential UFO and then turns it over to a baseball game like “Oh…better catch this play.” What????

  7. no UFO’s in Canada, the Chinese already know all they want to know about us.

  8. Victoria Frank | Sep 9, 2013 at 5:41 pm |

    It’s nice to see, in the video, that other Canadians don’t panic easily.

  9. A stupid argument with big words, is still a stupid argument!!! Neither one of you were there so neither one of you can say WITH CERTAINTY, if it is or isn’t a UFO!!!

  10. Richard Frith | Sep 9, 2013 at 7:47 pm |

    You can find alleged photos of the object in question taken by other fans who were present that evening with a simple google search. Granted they are taken with smart phones and are low quality. May help solidify your opinion in whatever direction you are leaning.


Comments are closed.