Istanbul UFO is Back **May 2009** Video

I went to a UFO convention last year in The uk for UFO data magazine.

the 2008 version of the video was presented in all its length and glory. ( after the speakers half hour promo of his UFO museum)

Im sure there was a dog barking in that aswell. along with some random frames of a family throwing a frisbee around at the start, the clip of the oil rig and the ' ship' caused suspicion with me and my girlfriend on why the two shots never link smoothy, no panning or zooming between the two. straight cuts from one to another.

in my opinion its an oil rig and something saucer shaped filmed at the bottom of a garden. with two voices overdubbed.

plus now its not just minutes nor hour nor days now a year later yet the same two people didnt get any other witnesses , cops, fire brigade or anything with flashing blue lights on it..... except a Dog.

Sorry its fake, a good one but fake.

in my experience UFOs dont stick around long enough to watch all the series of 24.

I havent posted much on here but Im might put some of the Orbs I have filmed on here.

That pretty much somes up my issues with this case. IMO, credible video evidence would consist of multiple witnesses, multiple dates, and multiple locals - of the SAME UFO - Much like the thread I am about to post. Shouldn't be hard to find, it's the only one I have. Will return here and post link. Someone with knowledge of how to embed videos, your help will be appreciated.

Originally posted by cmazzagatti
reply to post by free_spirit

 

Sweet mother of *SNIP* christ it's hideous. Look at this photo-enhancement I made from one of the pictures you posted. Look at the creature in the center very closely. It actually looks like it has a SLIT running down the center of it's right eye, like a... REPTILE!? Could these be the infamous "Reptilians?" I don't think I'm going to sleep very comfortably tonight.

[edit on 6-6-2009 by cmazzagatti]

Mod Edit: No profanity please

[edit on 6/7/09 by FredT]

LOL CSI: Turkey
learn about compression, you are just enhancing compression marks and digital camera noise

The lighting seems wrong to me...I'm not an expert...it just seems like the craft is too well lit.

Originally posted by Cole DeSteele
That pretty much somes up my issues with this case. IMO, credible video evidence would consist of multiple witnesses, multiple dates, and multiple locals - of the SAME UFO - Much like the thread I am about to post. Shouldn't be hard to find, it's the only one I have. Will return here and post link. Someone with knowledge of how to embed videos, your help will be appreciated.

as promised:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just seems like, "WOW, Perfect camera and optics to catch a UFO on film".....

what is he filming at 1;50 to about 2;30,,, is that the ufo??
looks like an upside down spoon or something


also--- i know people say,,,, we won't even believe when we have real footage etc etc

but,,,, doesn't it seem a little to good
like how the camera zooms in so quick and all at once the image is there and crystal clear,,,,,,it's fuzzy, boom it's there crystal clear,,, in great detail

camera's i;ve used, seen don't zoom that quick,,, and in that quick show such detail

however,,, it does seem legit,,,, but my gut says something is wrong here

the detail when zoomed in seems to good to be true,,,,,know what i mean????

Originally posted by murnut
The lighting seems wrong to me...I'm not an expert...it just seems like the craft is too well lit.

ooh,,, i thought that too,,,, how come everytime he's zoomed in it's got just the right lighting to show such great detail,,,,,

where's the lighting coming from

is it the moon light or what,,, because otherwise it's pitch black out

reply to post by cmazzagatti


How did you get "Aliens" from that incredibly blurry, zoomed & enhanced image? And "Reptillian Aliens" no less.

That doesn't look like anything to me. Or, it looks like whatever you want it to look like, if one is so inclined.

Originally posted by free_spirit
yes I have a copy of the May 2009 videos on DVD transfered from the original camera.

free_spirit can you share the DVD version with us?

Looks like one of this ships on battle star galatica ehehhe

www.shipschematics.net...

Originally posted by Sam60
reply to post by tarifa37

 

That video is very dark & I can only make out a few points of light.
Can you make it a bit easier to view?

If you click on this link it should be in high quality. I can see it fine.
www.youtube.com...

They way I made the video is to have an object (my Seiko watch) against a black coat in a dark room with the bracelet obscured by one of the arms .Then just like in the Turkey ufo ,shine a light on the object( led keyring torch) so that it shows up and seems to glow.If you look at the turkey ufo it seems as though it is lit up by a light source that is being shined on it otherwise the camera would not see it in the dark.That is what I did to my watch.








[edit on 8-6-2009 by tarifa37]

[edit on 8-6-2009 by tarifa37]

reply to post by tarifa37

Thanks. It's still a little dark, but I can see it more clearly. There are some similarities to the video.
So based on what you did, I guess you think there's a fair chance the video has been faked. If so, how do you think it was done?

Originally posted by Sam60
reply to post by tarifa37

 

Thanks. It's still a little dark, but I can see it more clearly. There are some similarities to the video.
So based on what you did, I guess you think there's a fair chance the video has been faked. If so, how do you think it was done?

Having had some experience in filming in low light conditions I would say that the object has been lit from below. By shinning a beam of light directly on to the object it will a, make the object show up on the camera and b, look like it is emitting light. Think about it, in the dark why would a unlit metal object seem so bright? It has to have been lit from below. With mine at the end of the video my object seems to disappear in fact I just covered the led torch with my finger so as to make it look as though it had faded out . Because without a light being shined on it the camera does not see it at all.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by tarifa37]

reply to post by tarifa37

I watched the UFO video again & I see what you mean about the lighting fading in & out.
I also would have thought there should be more atmospheric distortion if the object was really being filmed at such a distance.
Another thing I don't understand is what is being shown at 2.08. It almost looks like some sort of shower fitting in a bathroom.

Originally posted by superstef
in my opinion its an oil rig and something saucer shaped filmed at the bottom of a garden.

Jeez, that oil rig theory simply refuses to die. You can club it to death, bury it six feet under ground and it still pops right back up a page or two later,

That must be an oil rig, huh?

Are there any oil rigs in this area? Did you bother to check (I know you didn't bother to read through the thread)?

I did.

As far as I've understood, the only oil and natural gas concessions in this area are held by Merty Energy Oil and Gas Exploration Production Inc, notably concession 4328, 4397 and 4398 (I'll make it easy for you and link you to a PDF file with pics):

www.mertyenergy.com...

IF there are any oil rigs on these concessions - and I couldn't spot any on the given coordinates with Google Earth (you should be able to see them if they're there, no?), then they are at an absolute minimum distance of 50km/31 miles from Kumburgaz, and probably more towards a 100km/62 miles distance.

Now, go outside and film an oil rig from a 50km-100km distance, then show us what it looks like. Can you even tell that it's an oil rig?

And what about the physical characteristics of this supposed oil rig? What about those four orange lights in perfect alignment, suspended in mid air, is that the flame tower of your oil rig 50-100km away? And why are there four flames instead of one (I've only seen oil rigs with one flame tower)? Is that four oil rigs perfectly lined up next to each other (remember, I couldn't find a single one, but that's just me), or is that just swamp gas floating around creating an optic illusion of four lights?

Or perhaps F-16:s dropping flares?

And why is the dog barking at an oil rig 50-100km away (oh that's right, he's barking at a supposed person in the water that doesn't appear on film)?

And how come not a single person familiar with the area have stepped forward and explained what those lights are, because an oil rig is supposedly lit up every day and of course known by the local population?

I have presently no satisfactory answers to these questions, although I'm sure that in a few more posts another absent-minded person will figure out on a whim that this must be an oil rig.

Sure as hell looks like one, lol...

reply to post by Heliocentric



Yes the oil rig thing doesn't want to die. Neither does this:

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by FlySolo

 

Think you're funny?

DOMES

Istanbul has lots of domed buildings.

Do I need to spell it out for you?

[edit on 6/6/09 by Chadwickus]

This one really gets me. It's even less probable. A page or two back I try to compare the distance involved to see a lit domed structure 40 km away.

ok - well went through all 14 pages to see if you had translation yet, and you don't (although you have plenty of 4 year old colorful language - is that to get serious people to tune out instead of looking at possible ufo discussions? I often see that on youtube as well and wonder if the fights are men in black disinfo tactics

questions - before my friend and I go back for translation:

1) why doesn't anyone think the dog is the thing in the water at first?

2) why wouldn't art copy life - isn't it presumed that lucas etc. would hire people with clear ideas for ship designs (perhaps even from experience real or imagined?)

3) how american to question why a turkish night watchman hasn't gone out and bought top end video equipment? may I suggest ... the price?

4) I saw one post with an explanation for the sound anomaly - Internos, do you agree with that being a common problem and not necessarily proof of fake? Or do you have any suggestions as to why the waves don't cut?

5) If this is a "best of" edited version it makes sense that we hear clicks and see cuts. In general I think he does a lot of things right. He zooms in and out, gets a tripod or something to stabilize the shot, has it date stamped, situates us geographically, shows night and day/dawn... and maybe the full version has more markers. If he isn't a hoax, shouldn't we be politely suggesting what else we need?

No need to insult anyone who may have managed to answer a question re if we're alone in the universe, especially before proven guilty of anything. It can't be easy to film what may be an unearthly object of intelligence. This may be a very disconcerting exercise and we should cut him some slack, even while those with ideas offer improvements for next time.


ok Internos - off to your translation

Originally posted by FlySolo

Wow! Now I'm a douche bag?
Hey champ. Was I even talking to you? Sink a little lower perhaps.

I know you weren't talking to me, I was merely stating what I thought of the way you were responding to posts (not just mine).

I stand by that opinion.