posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 09:07 PM
Thanks Isaac, this is as entertaining as it is important.
There is not much more that forensic video analysis can do for old work, and you have proven that you really do not need to go there when you have the
real stories behind the images.
One thing that always bothered me in Ufology... was the fact that our later cell and smart phones have some rather dense pixel resolutions. If you
study how CCD's/CMOS sensors in these camera's are manufactured, you know that not any 2 are really 100% alike. Some have missing pixels, others
faint and others over-bright. Way to small to see without special equipment, but these anomolies exist, and anything recorded from them, have the same
defects imprinted in them. Of course, you need the raw, high resolution recorded video, with no external enhancement.
Why has there never been an attempted authorization of an alleged video clip, by authenticating it with the CCD that it was claimed it came from?
This is not rocket science, and it would be very do-able by a video forensics expert.... Perhaps too expensive, but if you think about it, in many
cases, the proof would be in that analysis that at least the camera had taken the shots, and with some GPS, authorization about where the camera has
been.. Just some thoughts on it.