new info: Pre-911 WTC UFO

whats next?

star wars is actually a documentry just covered up by the government?

please just lock this thread....

So, you're telling me that this massive UFO really did fly by the WTC on that day, and NO ONE in the towers, or on the ground had a camera to snap a picture of it, except this one woman in a helicopter, or even bothered to report it? There must have been THOUSANDS of witnesses to this thing if it was real. Oh, right, the government found them all in a matter of hours and shut them all up.

this WAS made by sci-fi to promote a new web site where
people sent in their own paranormal videos .
there was another fake i remember about a family on
a picnic and they were attacked by bugs .
it's a sci-fi make video . and a bad one at that .

edit -
look closely at exactly when she says " look at that " , there's
absolutely nothing there till the video starts tp zoom in .
a really bad fake .

[edit on 27-3-2007 by gen.disaray]

omg this video is still around, the first time i saw it was on the sci fi channel in the UK and it was one of them little promo skits they do just before a program starts, I reported this fact as soon as the video started showing up everywhere on the net (i suppose thats what viral videos are supposed to do).

Please, no more posting this video, it is not even meant to be taken seriously, if anyone still believes this is real is just too eager for a huge UFO video.
If this WAS real and no one owned up to faking it then this would be HUUUGGEEE! sadly its not real and only big amongst a few kids on youtube.

Interesting choice of movie...

Anyone with an understanding of current events could deduct that's EXACTLY what was being portrayed in Star Wars EP I, II , III.

The frivolous and deliberate use of the military (Jedi) to draw them out away from the homeland in a string of never-ending war. Secret societies using the Hegelian dialectic (Problem-Reaction-Solution) create chaos to subvert the REPUBLIC and democracy to install a absolute dictatorship. Using ill-gotten executive power to install the police state (Emperor's ORDER 66... A.K.A. FEMA/COG) And to crush the remaining resistance....

Most CHILDREN see this for exactly what it is, yet most adults are to predisposed to "Reality" to see what is right in front of them....

But since we are now using film, I quote another,

"You have not answered his question, what does God (sci-fi) need with a (9/11) starship?"

And how could the government POSSIBLY have found the thousands of people that would have seen it, not to mention the HUNDREDS that would have been on the observation deck WITH CAMERAS to shut them all up before it went big time all over the net and to their friends and family? And if you have to ask what the SCI-FI channel (as in Science Fiction? Space flight? UFOs?) needs with a UFO video.......

Originally posted by Zaphod58
And how could the government POSSIBLY have found the thousands of people that would have seen it, not to mention the HUNDREDS that would have been on the observation deck WITH CAMERAS to shut them all up before it went big time all over the net and to their friends and family? And if you have to ask what the SCI-FI channel (as in Science Fiction? Space flight? UFOs?) needs with a UFO video.......

Don't know exactly, perhaps the same way the footage from the 200+ cameras pointing at the Pentagon and the clear, eye-witnesses testimony also disappeared...who knows?

Besides, most folks don't seem to LOOK UP often.. Just try to discuss Chemical-trails with the normal Joe on the street...and you will get my point.

[edit on 27-3-2007 by ivymike]

First off all, as I and many others have stated repeatedly, how many of those 200+ cameras were actually pointed anywhere near the impact site at the Pentagon. Not many of them.

Secondly, you're telling me that all these people on the streets didn't tell a soul until suddenly the government agents were pounding on their doors threatening them and saying they'd be killed if they told anyone? People on the streets might not talk about chemtrails (which are kind of a joke anyway), but if a UFO that size showed up cruising that slowly by the WTC I'm pretty sure it would have made the rounds a lot faster than the gov't could have. But what I love about your reasoning is that they could have stopped everyone in the towers, and on the street from showing pictures or even talking about it, but they couldn't stop the helicopter, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT AND WHERE IT LANDED FROM THE ATC TAPES, and stop that video from being released, or them from talking about it.

People might not look up often, but SOMEONE would have noticed this HUGE UFO cruising slowly past the WTC. The shadow or something would have given it away. And even if no one on the ground saw it, there were THOUSANDS of people on the observations deck a day. NO ONE there saw it either? What, weren't they looking around, or were they just looking at the buildings?

[edit on 3/27/2007 by Zaphod58]

I just looked at the video for the umpteenth time. When she says "what is that?" the ufo is peaking around the corner of the tower. I can see that even with the poor resolution of the clip. She was seeing it in perfect resolution as she was there. Again, they were watching the white streaks coming down from right to left behind the towers. That is why they were looking in that direction.

The fact that this is the only footage known to exist is not evidence that it isn't authentic. Their denial may be considered as evidence that it is a hoax, but I don't buy their denial or that this is a hoax based on other evidence that I feel is more convincing.

What are those white streaks? If the video was a Sci-Fi hoax then why did they include the white streaks? They never acknowledged them or made use of them in any way. I believe that is because they were overlooked or otherwise not included in the original clip that was aired. If it would of made it to air on an episode they may have shown the whole clip along with the white streaks.

I think the white streaks were originally left out in effort to provide a highlight of the incident to attract viewers. Instead, pressure was applied to key individuals to halt the whole story from being revealed in any subsequent episodes. So the clip we see is all we get, but it is enough for me. I know that Barbara's focus was the white streaks before she saw the UFO. I believe that the white streaks never being mentioned in her denial is evidence of a cover up.







[edit on 27-3-2007 by imrippinit]

Right, so that would mean that all those actors in movies where there's nothing really there are looking at something real too, because they "interact" with it, by looking surprised, or scared, or whatever.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Right, so that would mean that all those actors in movies where there's nothing really there are looking at something real too, because they "interact" with it, by looking surprised, or scared, or whatever.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Dan Akroyd did a documentary where he acknowledged his own experience with UFOs. That doesn't make the existence of UFOs any less plausible to me. In fact, it makes it more obvious that it is happening more often then some would like to think.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
First off all, as I and many others have stated repeatedly, how many of those 200+ cameras were actually pointed anywhere near the impact site at the Pentagon. Not many of them.

Secondly, you're telling me that all these people on the streets didn't tell a soul until suddenly the government agents were pounding on their doors threatening them and saying they'd be killed if they told anyone? People on the streets might not talk about chemtrails (which are kind of a joke anyway), but if a UFO that size showed up cruising that slowly by the WTC I'm pretty sure it would have made the rounds a lot faster than the gov't could have. But what I love about your reasoning is that they could have stopped everyone in the towers, and on the street from showing pictures or even talking about it, but they couldn't stop the helicopter, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT AND WHERE IT LANDED FROM THE ATC TAPES, and stop that video from being released, or them from talking about it.

People might not look up often, but SOMEONE would have noticed this HUGE UFO cruising slowly past the WTC. The shadow or something would have given it away. And even if no one on the ground saw it, there were THOUSANDS of people on the observations deck a day. NO ONE there saw it either? What, weren't they looking around, or were they just looking at the buildings?

[edit on 3/27/2007 by Zaphod58]

Well since you are intent on destroying this thread for your own personal gratification or perhaps some ATS points, I would rather accommodate you, then persist in your egocentric bantering Mr. "Thread Killer Extraordinaire".

But before we do, lets look at the evidence available, the way you make it sound, this object is a 50 mile long city crushing capital ship. But on the video itself, it looks so be a tad bit bigger then a large modern interceptor aircraft.. say an F-15.... Another is that although I have never been there, it appears to me that for observers on the rooftop to have seen this craft they would have to be leaning over the side of the building to see this at the mid point of the tower. ( Forgive me if I am wrong, but I thought there was a barrier in place to prevent leaning over the side with your body.)

Additionally, it is a well documented occurrence that U.F.O.s sometimes have the ability to effect their observers in ways as to impair judgment and rational behavior. ( Missing Time, Illusions, Temporary impairment, ect. Please see the official handbook : "Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control")

As for chemtrails, I don't know where you reside, but for you to know how REAL condensation trails are formed, and then see this persistent filth smeared across the sky, increasing the surface temperature and decreasing the local visibility, sprayed right along side authentic aircraft engine condensation, at regular intervals and almost never following published federal airways (i.e. Tick Tack Toe..) I am afraid that perhaps you don't get out / look up that often.

So I say again, who knows?

You said that it's obvious that she's looking at something, but when you watch a movie that does a lot of green screen work, for a lot of that there's absolutely nothing in front of the actors for them to look at, but the green screen. But they convince you that they're looking at whatever it is. Same thing here. She ACTS like she's looking at it, but there's nothing there but the towers.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You said that it's obvious that she's looking at something, but when you watch a movie that does a lot of green screen work, for a lot of that there's absolutely nothing in front of the actors for them to look at, but the green screen. But they convince you that they're looking at whatever it is. Same thing here. She ACTS like she's looking at it, but there's nothing there but the towers.

I don't buy that it is CGI special effects. I have seen analysis by a special effects engineer as well as a defense contractor post 911 stating that it wasn't possible to do as good of a job as what was done. The vapor trail being created by the extreme compression of a vehicle easily exceeding the speed of sound in a very short distance at a very tight bank. Then throw in the location of the 2nd impact on 911. Then throw in the white streaks that were unaccounted for in Barbara's denial even though they were obviously what she was observing before she even saw the ufo.

For me and many others its obvious. I understand why some don't believe it. There has been an effective disinformation campaign. If it weren't for the 2nd impact being at the same exact location as where the UFO peaked around the corner of the tower the clip probably would of never remerged with such a solid following.





[edit on 27-3-2007 by imrippinit]

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You said that it's obvious that she's looking at something, but when you watch a movie that does a lot of green screen work, for a lot of that there's absolutely nothing in front of the actors for them to look at, but the green screen. But they convince you that they're looking at whatever it is. Same thing here. She ACTS like she's looking at it, but there's nothing there but the towers.

Agreed, I already stated that portions of the video are obviously faked. (The vapor trail looks like a noise generator, found in the material editor on most 3D animation packages, with a touch of motion blur added for effect to a particle system using some simple hyper NURBS objects ) NOT impossible to fake by any means. But THIS effect IS BAD! POOR QUALITY! And as such breaks the suspension of dis belief for the viewer. I would think Sci-Fi could do better when I have made better smoke in Cinema 4D....


My question is WHY add the painfully obviously amateur effect in a otherwise excellent shot? It looks like a real rotorcraft in flight, why risk the abrupt aerobatics with a FULL bird over a major city for a silly TV spot? And why the PRE-9/11 WTC?

I believe that PORTIONS of this video are authentic. The ones that matter.

Originally posted by ivymike

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You said that it's obvious that she's looking at something, but when you watch a movie that does a lot of green screen work, for a lot of that there's absolutely nothing in front of the actors for them to look at, but the green screen. But they convince you that they're looking at whatever it is. Same thing here. She ACTS like she's looking at it, but there's nothing there but the towers.

Agreed, I already stated that portions of the video are obviously faked. (The vapor trail looks like a noise generator, found in the material editor on most 3D animation packages, with a touch of motion blur added for effect to a particle system using some simple hyper NURBS objects ) NOT impossible to fake by any means. But THIS effect IS BAD! POOR QUALITY! And as such breaks the suspension of dis belief for the viewer. I would think Sci-Fi could do better when I have made better smoke in Cinema 4D....

I disagree. the vapor trail is different from what you see when you look into the sky and see a jet's contrail. The contrails are formed by jet exhaust cooling. The UFO has no exhaust. The vapor trail is formed by compression alone. Very rare. High performance jets can pull this off and they can only do it at the edge of the pilot's ability to withstand G-force. Even then the vapor trail due to compression is nothing like what is seen in this clip.

The vapor trail is real and it isn't something that most people would know to include. The UFO is traveling extremely fast when it performs a very tight turn creating the compressed air and release of vapor. The vapor trail ceases when the UFO straightens out.



[edit on 27-3-2007 by imrippinit]

The envelope you are seeing can be formed on all kinds of aircraft, it does not require extreme load factor or supersonic speeds. I believe it is caused by Bernoulli's principal creating a low pressure / temperature region on the surface and cooling the surrounding air mass to it's dew point.

Please see image links below...


www.aeronautics.ru...

www.bugimus.com...

www.cloudcroft.com...


I just know that there is a aeronautical engineer among us to prove me wrong / right

[edit on 27-3-2007 by ivymike]

(edit to remove quote of preceding post)

[edit on 27-3-2007 by pantha]

If you have ever seen the REAL full version of this video, the vapor trail is what makes the sci-fi channel logo. It had to be included so that you could see the logo. As for fighters doing the vapor trail "at the edge of a pilots ability to withstand Gs" you are SO wrong on that. I've seen it happen ALL THE TIME with everything from a 747 to an F-16, from less than 2Gs. It has to do with the moisture content in the air, and the airflow over the wings. I've been on 737s and watching vapor trails come off the back of the wings in straight and level flight on landing. I also used to see F-15s do it all the time, making about a 2G turn from their downwind leg to their final approach leg when they were in the landing pattern, with flaps and gear down, in a fairly low power setting.

I have also seen vapor trails spin off of the wing tips of a jet liner in damp conditions.

I should of added "on a sunny day"

[edit on 27-3-2007 by imrippinit]

Can anybody else see the white streaks the OP is talking about? all I see are some compression issues.
Op can you make stills of the white streaks & circle where they are?
Also what do you think these white streaks are?