ETs, dimensionals or both?

a reply to: Hunkadinka

I don't know about that video man.

If they had an advanced cloaking device what the hell are they doing sitting in the middle of the road endangering other drivers. Very easy to edit out if you have one frame of background.

Earth is teeming with life in every crack and crevice and corner.

Rest of the observable universe: absolutely dead

a reply to: Hunkadinka

I watched the first 3 accidents.

It is clear to anyone who has edited pictures/motion pictures

The "other crashee", has been edited out from the vid, at least from the first 3. I did catch the cues, i do not understand why you do not catch them?

Picture is all wobbly for heavens sake! If you want to be sure, just watch that picture frame by frame..

There are commenters saying in the YT vid, things like "mad editing skillz bruhhhh", but in reality, nice editing software, and mediocre user, in my humble opinion.

I would argue, that no dude who has experience with editing digital pictures, can be fooled.

just my 2 frames

ETA: and about those bystanders, wouldn't you react when watching accident unfold?

originally posted by: Hunkadinka

I included that video because it was a compilation. Since you also claim they are the result of CGI, and you must be an expert to state so without revealing to us your knowledge, then how you can you include anything similar that is not CGI?

Watch the videos. It is blatantly obvious those are edited videos. Watch the background. Watch the sides of the "supposedly edited area" Watch the debris. Watch the crash-in-progress. After that, you cant be asking that seriously.

originally posted by: Hunkadinka
I could have included other videos that show strange appearances that cannot all be due to CGI.

Why you did not? Also, be aware that any random dude with basic+ skills in machine learning will be able to output some fancy looking and very bizarre footage, on to which one will have little chance explaining them away as a poorly constructed video-edit.

I think it is going to get quite interesting, machine produced videos and youtube. Just think about all the reaction videos lol

To all the EXPERTS on above top secret that say it's CGI please tell me how it's done. The exact workflow , whatsoftware is used. I'm skeptic when it comes down to all is CGI.

early 2000

I know for fact that there was a video on internet from an accident in china that was quite old (early 2000's). To make
something like that one has to have an good understanding of camera tracking , physic engines lighting and animation. In early 2000 on a pentium 90 even rendering out a single frame took hours. Why did they make it ? (if it's CGI)

All CGI ?

I don't think it's impossible that all is CGI but what exactly is the point here ? Confusing people , getting a few click , fun in working for hours on useless projects ? In ferengi language 'where is the profit in that.'

All Real ?

Not a day goes by that I don't see another 'proof' of reality being fluid. Something just doesn't add up with the scientific explanation of spacetime. isn't more like spacetimeinformation ? If the perception of information changes reality changes maybe ? All real , means it's time to redefine reality. Maybe reality is a produkt of collective consiousness. If people really want see bad stuff , it just happens. who knows ?

When thinking about this stuff, I generally end up circling back around to the fact that we're pretty intelligent little monkeys on this moist rock spinning through space, but that doesn't mean we're as smart as it's possible to be. It's possible that in the future or someplace far away there exist creatures (maybe advanced humans) who are vastly more intelligent than we are. What would reality look like to them? Would they have a better -- or at least different -- understanding of it than we do?

So when we see a "flying saucer," for instance, we filter it through our own level of intelligence. We see a saucer, that looks like it could be a metal machine of some kind, because we're familiar with saucers and machines. We can even take a photo of it, but we're still just going to see a machine. But is that what it really is, or are we just too stupid to see its true form and purpose? Maybe it's not metal, or a machine, or it's just a small piece of something we can't even perceive.

A cat can look at a pile of papers on your desk and maybe they'll see a nice place to lie down. But to you it's your tax return, because you're smarter than a cat. So when we're looking at UFOs, we're the cat seeing a piece of paper, and not seeing a tax form.

The trick is that we might never be able to fully understand some of the paranormal stuff around us because we're just not smart enough.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: Hunkadinka

I genuinely think there is no point whatsoever in trying to figure out if they are ET or dimensionals................ What's it mean, what are they, where do they come from, what is there purpose, why they hide from us most of the time, why this why that. The subject is totally over our heads in trying to understand it and we must wait for them themselves to explain themselves what's going on unless we discover them first like the Emu

Good thread while it will not provide the anser as it lies somewhere out there

Sounds a bit ended so edit..................................

At a guess from watching ufo orbs phazing in and out of this reality then does that mean these things are dimensional or as David Icke said we humans are almost blind compared tpo thether animals and they can see what we can not, so maybe not dimensional maybe just a different band of the eyesight frequemcy we are blind to til they allow it. If getting manna ti appear when they exit this dimension to another and the rain of the candy floss type substance ....................... Yeah ok decision time - Plus astonomers don't see em flying in and out of our Planer so here we must lean towards Dimenssional

My point for the thread was, as most members here believe (and, really, most of humankind), UAOs automatically means extraterrestrial yet there is no evidence for this belief. The ET belief is fueled by media and Hollywood. Human minds are easy to condition, with exceptions such as me: I don't have a belief system 'cause I wasn't conditioned to believe as a child. While there may be ETs, in my book they gave not made their presence known. But other dimensions exist and they're not dependent on UAOs or ETs to exist. A huge amount of videos attest to this. When a UAO blinks out they have to blink in somewhere invisible to us. So how do UAOs connect to our reality? Were there other realities when humans were "created"?

I could go on with my questions to no avail 'cause they are not answerable. There must be many dimensions where all of the weird stuff we glimpse exist without sharing.

Probably the best "authority" for the reality of other dimensions was the late Robert Monroe who founded the Monroe Institute. He proved the reality of other realities/dimensions. His work has stood the test of time. While dreams may be the product of the mind, proper training can result in your accessing the dimension of dreams. Now, while you're awake you consider yourself conscious and while sleeping you're "unconscious". Yet you can become conscious in your unconsciousness! I know, I've done it.

So UAOs can be here and "there", and if there are beings in the UAOs and they travel to the moon and Mars, aside from that they may not necessarily be from light years away, they're local out there and in the dimension to which they blink out to.

originally posted by: Baddogma
a reply to: KKLOCO

Yeah, obvious cgi is obvious.

BUT ... there was that one semi-documented car crash with something invisible in Suburban Chicago a few years ago... woman sideswiped something she couldn't see and the damage to her car was unusual and no foreign paint or material was found.

I wondered if she hit a parked military vehicle with camo on, but it could be "dimensional" interlopers, too. Things that pop in n out of this world seem to exist... in some manner.

That was an amazing case. MUFON took paint chips to a big name Lab for analysis, and when they went to retrieve the report, they told MUFON personnel that someone from MUFON had already picked it up, plus all the data was wiped from the lab computers and no one knew anything.

Feds must have gone in there and squashed it into oblivion.

a reply to: frenchfries
Why its quite obvious there are a bunch of dedicated people out there who spend hours and hours, days and days, sometimes months and months, on faking youtube videos, all so that the 10 people who watch them, get a kick out of it.

It does happen. But the invisible, is not usually filmed.

a reply to: Hunkadinka

An apology to all who viewed this thread and accepted the video as real, it's not. I have looked at the videos, playing them in 1/4 speed and frame by frame as some of the more astute members suggested. I had done so but this time I did it with my eyes open and I saw processing that shows that the videos, while well done, are the result of CGI. I'm ashamed to say that in my old age I've become slightly gullible.

However, my apology is for the video only. My views on the existence of other dimensions still stands.

a reply to: Hunkadinka

When I didn't see skid marks, or tire tracks, even with those "accidents" that occurred on wet pavement that was the dead giveaway of Deep-fake CGI for me.

Was disappointed that a fully-loaded gasoline tanker truck didn't hit an invisible brick wall. Or a freight train travelling at 70mph didn't do the same. That would have been epic!

originally posted by: Hunkadinka
a reply to: Hunkadinka

An apology to all who viewed this thread and accepted the video as real, it's not. I have looked at the videos, playing them in 1/4 speed and frame by frame as some of the more astute members suggested. I had done so but this time I did it with my eyes open and I saw processing that shows that the videos, while well done, are the result of CGI.

However, my apology is for the video only. My views on the existence of other dimensions still stands.

I think that is the wisdom of the old age! To be able to look stuff again with new eyes. I find it excellent that you really did what i quoted there.

I would still argue, that the edit of the video is not well done, but obvious fakery. Also, i would argue, video is not a "CGI-video". It is simply edited footage, frame by frame, using automation provided via software used. (in tune of Adobe Premier, After Effects, Sony Vegas, Final Cut, ...) Video was so poorly done, i don't think it's a "deep-fake-video". Just beware, when the time is ripe for Johnny The Random guy to upload some real deepfakes of UFO-substance. The gullible audience will explode, i think

I do not refute the existence of ET/ED/whatever, i too have some experiences i cannot explain, i have seen stuff i cannot explain et cetera. It is only the video, what did not play well with the dimensionals-idea. I feel, stuff like the video takes us further apart from the realization of ET/Dimensionals.

originally posted by: Topelius

originally posted by: Hunkadinka
a reply to: Hunkadinka

An apology to all who viewed this thread and accepted the video as real, it's not. I have looked at the videos, playing them in 1/4 speed and frame by frame as some of the more astute members suggested. I had done so but this time I did it with my eyes open and I saw processing that shows that the videos, while well done, are the result of CGI.

However, my apology is for the video only. My views on the existence of other dimensions still stands.

I think that is the wisdom of the old age! To be able to look stuff again with new eyes. I find it excellent that you really did what i quoted there.

I would still argue, that the edit of the video is not well done, but obvious fakery. Also, i would argue, video is not a "CGI-video". It is simply edited footage, frame by frame, using automation provided via software used. (in tune of Adobe Premier, After Effects, Sony Vegas, Final Cut, ...) Video was so poorly done, i don't think it's a "deep-fake-video". Just beware, when the time is ripe for Johnny The Random guy to upload some real deepfakes of UFO-substance. The gullible audience will explode, i think

I do not refute the existence of ET/ED/whatever, i too have some experiences i cannot explain, i have seen stuff i cannot explain et cetera. It is only the video, what did not play well with the dimensionals-idea. I feel, stuff like the video takes us further apart from the realization of ET/Dimensionals.

It's not too late for me, but i'm definitely slipping. I live my life only with what I experience. I'm not a believer so I don't have any posters on my walls that say "I want to believe". Instead, I want to experience. I've had only a couple of extra-ordinary experiences but you need only one to tell you that there is more than our reality.

I used to have great threads here receiving many kudos. The ol' brain has seen better days.

When I looked at the videos a short while ago I paid attention mainly to the debris and I saw that some of it would disappear and reappear. Reminds me of a video I saw of a massacre somewhere and the bullet shells being ejected didn't hit the ground and roll around, they disappeared. So the alleged massacre was not a real event and they also showed a rehearsal massacre. But it was the disappearing shells that everyone latched on.

Thanks for your clear-headiness.

originally posted by: frenchfries





To all the EXPERTS on above top secret that say it's CGI please tell me how it's done. The exact workflow , whatsoftware is used. I'm skeptic when it comes down to all is CGI.

early 2000

I know for fact that there was a video on internet from an accident in china that was quite old (early 2000's). To make
something like that one has to have an good understanding of camera tracking , physic engines lighting and animation. In early 2000 on a pentium 90 even rendering out a single frame took hours. Why did they make it ? (if it's CGI)

All CGI ?

I don't think it's impossible that all is CGI but what exactly is the point here ? Confusing people , getting a few click , fun in working for hours on useless projects ? In ferengi language 'where is the profit in that.'

All Real ?

Not a day goes by that I don't see another 'proof' of reality being fluid. Something just doesn't add up with the scientific explanation of spacetime. isn't more like spacetimeinformation ? If the perception of information changes reality changes maybe ? All real , means it's time to redefine reality. Maybe reality is a produkt of collective consiousness. If people really want see bad stuff , it just happens. who knows ?

I often have hard time to take the badge of "expert", as i identify just as an Jack of many trades. So, not an expert, but i have some answers for you.

Foremost, i think you have mismanaged the word CGI. As we all know it stands for the "computer generated imagery".

Well, editing a video with a video-editor, is not CGI. The final "rendered" video is not CGI. Its just a motion picture.

When those guys make the video, they do not render the whole image; this is what you are suggesting, right? It is correct, that p90 took ages to render just one tiny image, but this is not what these videos are about.

With the P90, you could still use FFMPEG to extract all the frames (~25 frames per 1 second) and then proceed with your fancy photoshop program to manually edit the pixels. I'm really not sure if ffmpeg was around at the prime time of p90's, but i have a feeling it was. If not, there was something similar tools available.

If you do it like this today, you have real possibility to make a GOOD footage, quite fast. I know i could!!
If you do it with the help of machine learning, you have an outstanding possibility to make the best footage ever seen in YT.

Deepfake-videos will be the next major thing in faking-video-business. I believe, something is already cooking.

Regarding my expertise on the subject, i faked stuff with Windows Paint and fax-paper in the late 90's, so i've done some LOL

Once got caught because the blue on my dads inkjet didn't quite match the blue on the back of the receipt. Cops congratulated me because the receipt was otherwise excellent quality fakery, by a 14 old kid. The blue-hue was wrong tho. I took the chances anyway and failed.

a reply to: Hunkadinka

With age comes experience, and with experience comes the wisdom! Simply changing your mind is undervalued feature in todays everyday living.

Short attention span, fast conclusions: they are like plague in the minds of youth (i feel oldish and im just 36yrs lol)

I think future will prove us all, the value of "the real".

Just think about this:

You cannot draw conclusions from external (i mean any 3rd party / external / not LIVE) outputs.

You simply CAN NOT put trust on face value to any

AUDIO
VIDEO

and by extension

To news, ideas, thoughts

The only way to stay saneish (in my humble opinion) is to stand tall with the inner peace and feeling which emanates from "the inside". Expect good stuff to happen, and help it to manifest - would be sound advice.

"You" (as any individual) really need to get your "facts straight" or you will be taken into a ride like a leaf in the storm.

----

I find it super-hard to communicate what i would like to, cant just find the grammar.

I have this time of weird experiences in the past. And only common ground i can find from that time, is the concept of how i perceive the Me/I, and the environment.

Slighty, i feel like i "won/claimed" myself. I'm very careful to say that because also i'm afraid "it comes back" LOL?

The time of weird # happening was like weird electronic happenings of various kinds, physical material jumping around. Radio playing songs with contextual meaning in-situ. "Thoughts and environment in sync" - and this is the trickiest one. This is the one i'm trying to explain, all in all.

It really drives one insane, when environment is seemingly syncing with your own thoughts. It's like someone is listening, but with instant reaction speed.

I had my share. I got scared. At last, basically it all went to hiatus when i said to myself often enough; i will manage through this. I am stronger than the trickster. You (the entity/dimension/happening) will not "steal my wind".

-- i'm getting very tired of writing with this weird language called english. Saddened, that i cannot put to words the concepts and ideas i would like to. Maybe next time.

The takeaway is somewhat like this: stand tall: your energy is all you have. Take care with the dispersion. Make the best out of you what you've got.

Interesting thread, in a way relating, is the raging "soul thread" - i can look at it the way, like inhalexhal is like an angel to the minor arguing. Tons of valuable life-data for sourcetruuth to ingest. Just waiting there to be understood.

a reply to: Topelius

whooo ... thanks for the reply. Well FFMPEG was around in 2003 I know because i was a teacher at the time in computersciences. Well yes CGI is a misused term. I agree that it's possible to make GOOD footage now. But back in 2001-2003 it wasn't really possible to do that. extracting on framebase is very very tedious. in 2003 adobe and coreldraw was a crime. I mean doing a retouch did take ages and and also with only 20GB of harddisk space and avicoded compression one had to had very expensive equipment. also xp windows wasn't that stable of a system and with slackware linux it was impossible to get decent video. So theoretical faking a footage with a p90 was possible because the tools already existed but practical ? Well I don't think so. maybe it (chinese road accident) it was done with a Optical printer ?

Nowadays i use piping under linux with FFMPEG... and hardware accelerated h265 compression. and making a deepfake isn't that difficult/ Ive faked a flying droneman using blender and camara tracking.... But still it takes a lot of time to make it convincing

:

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

hmmm... how stupid of me... was just a simple overlay... Thanks for sorting that out !

a reply to: frenchfries

I agree, making fake videos wasn't anywhere near practical with those P90's and the software available. heh

FFMPEG is just a collection of various little programs, wrapped into executable, i read it was published in Dec 2000, so quite late, with regards to P90. I cant recall the fact of common video resolutions.. I guess something in tune of 640x480 for the HQ video, heheh

I don't even know about optical printers, so... there goes my expertise LOL

WinXP... was it so bad? Nah, but it was unstable allrite!

I do not recall ever seen the chinese vid, unfortunately.

About deepfake, ie ML image generation, you just need lots of computing power (money atm). Few 1080ti's wont cut it.

Cool stuff, and a bit scary and dangerous.

Hidden and dangerous anyone btw?

a reply to: frenchfries
Well not into computers at all, what the hell is an overlay! But generally when they add in sound effects. Its to mask the sound effect that cars make when they crash into eachother.

And also aliens and multidimensionals dont just land there craft or phase all willy nilly over highways and go invisible. That would be silly.

In reality, this or others they do it by throwing a dart at a map of the world to see were they should land or phase in, about 80% of the time or at least here, it lands over some ocean. Because? Well the world is 80% covered by water, and the rest of the 10% is all farmers fields or forests. There you go, mystery solved.