UFO releases intelligent moving spheres!! First ever video footage!

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Akezzon

 

congrats you win retard of the year

i knew someone would say this. If it was the other way round and phoenix lights were during the day you would say nobody seen the mexico event becuae its dark at night and theyre all inside

whatever suits your agenda you go with.

Like the kid who posted about the dragonfly/butterfly cropcircle his was even better. He was saying CCs like this are too perfect to be created by humans when someone pointed out the wings looked like they were diffrient sizes he said "yeah well nothings perfect in nature and you get these things so it still could be aliens"

its the middle of the frickin day in a built up area . trying to justify how there arnt thousands of witnesses makes you look like a complete psychotic beleiver idiot. You need help

I think Akezzon was refering to the second event during the pheonix lights not the ones which were supposedly flares, the phoenix lights were not just one sighting. You also want to take into account when the phoenix lights began which was around 7:00 pm, many people were still awake by that time.






[edit on 8-7-2009 by avat178]

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Akezzon

 

congrats you win retard of the year

i knew someone would say this. If it was the other way round and phoenix lights were during the day you would say nobody seen the mexico event becuae its dark at night and theyre all inside

whatever suits your agenda you go with.

Like the kid who posted about the dragonfly/butterfly cropcircle his was even better. He was saying CCs like this are too perfect to be created by humans when someone pointed out the wings looked like they were diffrient sizes he said "yeah well nothings perfect in nature and you get these things so it still could be aliens"

its the middle of the frickin day in a built up area . trying to justify how there arnt thousands of witnesses makes you look like a complete psychotic beleiver idiot. You need help

Well well. retard you say? You're trying to recruit new members for your club? No matter if I am retard or not, I would stay out of that club anyway.
I always am retarding solo...if you know what I mean.
Don't even know why I put down energy to respond to this but here we go.

You seem to assume to much.
Why would I say that if it was the other way around?
You sceptics put your trust into our logic and common sense.
Well, I just used common sense. Do you disagree that a light would be easier to spot on a dark sky than a blue daylight sky?

The phoenix lights were not just a few lights up in the sky, it also involved people seeing a huge..ish V-shaped object glide on a fairly low altitude. So yeah, I think you shouldn't compare this video with the Phoenix lights. And try to skip the name calling.

This is still a discussion and not a "Win the argument" competition.
But I guess my LOL to you got you all fired up..

[edit on 8-7-2009 by Akezzon]

[edit on 8-7-2009 by Akezzon]

Originally posted by necati
Some astonishing footage. Hope this will not turn out to be some sophisticated particle rendering engine of one of those major 3d_appz like 3dsMax or Maya. If not it's really mind boggling!

I'd put my money on Particle Flow for 3dsMax.

My reasons: 1, the shooter is just WAY too calm to be shooting something this extraordinary. Maybe it's just me, but if I were capturing on tape what could potentially be one of the most important discoveries in the history of history, I'd probably be a little more worked up than this.

2, Carl Sagan and others point out that UFO technology seems to advance in lockstep with our own current photographic technologies. First it was tinfoil frisbees. Is it pure coincidence that UFO's now are doing tricks that just so happen to be very similar to what can be done with CG workstations? Is it pure coincidence that there is now a renaissance of amazing UFO footage, now that YouTube exists?

Why weren't UFO's emitting particle streams like this BEFORE there just happened to be computer tools here on earth that could create the same visuals? Wouldn't we have seen something like this in the 90's? Or 50's? Why aren't they doing something that we DON'T have the ability to simulate with our own technology?

Just sayin'...

Why would I say that if it was the other way around?

exactly the same reason crop circle kid chose to have it boths ways. Its a common trait in eager believers their behaviour is so predictable.

The phoenix lights were not just a few lights up in the sky, it also involved people seeing a huge..ish V-shaped object glide on a fairly low altitude.

a giant v shaped craft? theres no footage of that but their is footage of the phoenix flares which some people to this day still claim is a single v shaped craft. why would i compare the OPs video to a video that doesnt exist?



[edit on 8-7-2009 by yeti101]

reply to post by avat178


In fact there where several events and some simultaneous. It is a landmark case for this and other reasons.

Here is the definitive study of the event. I helped the author with some modeling based on the many descriptions that came out of the event. Watch the videos explaining the specific times and objects to see how complex this was. The author animated each sighting in a timeline so you could actually see it all happen in Google Earth.


A Geospacial correlation of witness reports

Craft 1

Craft 3


ZG

Well there is a Tesla way of doing things as some have said.
As I have acquired some of the main stays I feel there is a way
to join into the topics.
Glad to join this respected ATS community and state a few things
along with others.

As for an electrically active ship carrying other similar ships,
I don't see it.
However the larger ball of fire may not be an electrically overloaded
ship of the same size as the other Foo/Phoos.

reply to post by yeti101


Not comparing the video...comparing the event.
You asked why not more people saw the OP's video event when so many saw the Phoenix Lights.
And I then told you that the P.Lights where easier to spot plus that a high number of witneses saw a low V-shaped object fly over their heads.
No there is no video on that fly by, as far as we know.
And after that you began with the retard thing...

But again, I don't mean you shouldn't compare the videos, but you shouldn't compare the event cause they were captured and witnessed under diffrent circumstances.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by Akezzon]

Hmmmm, those who proposed "things" attached to a string seem to have had a good guess.
Which means I might be wrong

My friend whom I asked to take a look at the clip (yes the crappy one) also thinks that it must be something fluffy like cotton attached to a string. Something that possibly disintegrates to some sort of powder.

Sounds weird huh? That's what he says Okay you may laugh but watch the clip first.

However I've uploaded a short sequence of the mentioned frames in real time and slo-mo.




What do you think?

edit: Ooops, have forgot to mention that it is of course a forward/backward animation of the frames. The cut is of course after the things snap back in line again.


[edit on 8-7-2009 by necati]

reply to post by Akezzon
You speak much sense there about the people not noticing the ufo orbs in the sky. Unless you are interested in the sky you do not look up, most people just look sort of ahead and down as they live their lives. I recently saw two orbs in the sky as I walked out the supermarket and there were people everywhere, nobody noticed them until I pointed them out to some, people just don't notice a few dots in the sky when they are preoccupied with normal life.

Originally posted by ufoorbhunter
reply to post by Akezzon

 

You speak much sense there about the people not noticing the ufo orbs in the sky. Unless you are interested in the sky you do not look up, most people just look sort of ahead and down as they live their lives. I recently saw two orbs in the sky as I walked out the supermarket and there were people everywhere, nobody noticed them until I pointed them out to some, people just don't notice a few dots in the sky when they are preoccupied with normal life.

I've noticed from a few comments on ATS that they appear to be somewhat similiar to balloons, perhaps that's what the bystanders on the ground thought.

reply to post by Akezzon

this event and the phoenix flares are both lights over a densely populated area. With 2 starkly diffirent number of witnesses.

Your deluding yourself if you think lights during the day are hard to see so theres only 1 witness. What a coincidence the only man with super vision in the city happens to have a video camera.

i cant even believe im discussing this. last post

[edit on 8-7-2009 by yeti101]

wow..just when you think yu seen it all
at one point it looks to be spitting out a hole line of them

reply to post by yeti101


well, if you find it just as easy to spot a single light source far up in the sky during daytime as it is to spot several lights in the sky night time, then fine. That is your point of view, and I respect that.

But to me, it isn't.

reply to post by avat178
The general public just don't notice these things in the day time. They just look every other way than up, like you say even if they do look up by chance and notice them they will think balloons, the general public have a debunking mentality preprogrammed into their brains anyway.

reply to post by necati


Well on your video it looks like it.
But I kinda think a thread with cotton is kinda far fetched as well.

If it would have been a thread with cotton it had to be alot closer than the airplane. And if it were that it had been kinda gone with the out of focus during the zooming. That's atleast what I think.

Bah, Still hope to see that RAW footage.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by Akezzon]

Originally posted by necati
My friend whom I asked to take a look at the clip (yes the crappy one) also thinks that it must be something fluffy like cotton attached to a string. Something that possibly disintegrates to some sort of powder. [...]
What do you think?

Could it possibly be some kind of substance on a single strand of spider silk, reflecting in the sunlight? Droplets of some kind of yellow fluid, perhaps? Maybe something like this, but with obviously lousy resolution and funky color, and some kind of wind blowing the drops around:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/d028265bb79a5c08.jpg[/atsimg]

Or maybe even a spider egg pouch that is releasing tiny spiders that first scurry down the web and then jump off?

Just a possibility. But if there's a possibility of it being something other than an alien UFO, and nobody knows for sure that it was an alien UFO, then nobody can make any claims.

reply to post by yeti101

You really need to ask the next ten people in the street how many planes they've seen flying over today. Unless they are into planes or ufos the answer will be none

reply to post by Nohup


Ofc it could be. But again. Don't think so.
Since I believe it is pretty far away.
And even if it looks darn similar, how do we make those drops shoot out in a large number, in both directions from a larger drop or egg?

I admit it looks similar, apart from the color and the behavior.
But do I think it is that? No.

And I just want to add that, the word UFO is sooooo missused. Not only here but also in the mainstream media. Especially there.
Media seem to refer the word UFO with Aliens automatically.
Which kinda program most people to think that a ufos ARE of alien orgins.
This annoys me a great deal.
Ufo's have NOTHING to do with aliens, or in better words, aliens have just as much to do with the word UFO as planes, birds and gas have.
But a ufo is simply an object in the sky that we can't identify. And just because it unidentified it doesn't mean it is alien.
However...
Why I believe some of the ufo's ARE in fact aliens or critters have it's base on that there is so much that points to it. Not gonna go into what the points are, you have to do your own research for that.
Your point of view is sacred. Cause you are the only one who can have it.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by Akezzon]

reply to post by necati


I think we have to consider some reality here, (as unreal as that can get)

Yes. YouTube is worthless for any analysis of CGI, but, if you see a YouTube of a Teddy Bear robbing a bank, you might be able to classify that fairly accurately as CGI or other video foolery methods without actual analysis or evidence of CGI. Conversely, you can see qualitative visual data and know it is likely real too. You need to have some experience however with the technologies involved to make anything approaching a viable determination.

With respect to the digital aspects of a fake, most can be discovered in the original. For me, the end of the investigation usually is realized when you cannot get the original file. In this case it is still possible and there are witnesses to the event, and original footage some have seen and have found viable and likely real.

I saw the best faked UFO photo while attending an official MUFON session by Marc D'Antonio last year.

You can see details here.

Caret Hoax Site


Caret Report


I disagree the whole of the cases are hoaxes for some reasons most do not think about. Firstly, this case found government involvement that needed to be squelched, so, with good counter intelligence methodology I believe a fake was produced (by a dark info management team?) and put into the mix with enough ear-marks and resolution that a careful investigation would find problems.

Marc did a brilliant job showing the photo was a fake, but no one has looked at the other material evidence and the witnesses where scared off by the "so called" official classification as a hoax. So this was an incomplete investigation. These agencies know how much effort is afforded such a case and effectively diffused it.

A perfect counter intelligence operation. The case has such merit otherwise that is then immediately ignored. They threw out the baby with the bath water.

On faked video, many attempts to duplicate film of Billy Meier's Intergalactic Adventures with The Pleiadian Beamships have met with disaster. But people are so polarized now by fakes created by over zealous members of his following and associated individuals it has convinced some otherwise smart people that everything is fake. But there are irrefutable events on official record that say otherwise that Billy himself is telling the truth.

Remember Billy had no CGI. This was film, and expert visual effects people that do film effects for major movie studios have found no explanation for these films and photos. Some were convinced themselves after their analysis. Yea some was faked, but only a small few have been properly debunked. What about the rest?

There are many other examples of faked and real videos. You need to spend years looking at, and reading such studies to get a proper picture of this. Joe anybody off the main street of anywhere America has no chops for this and will not be a good judge. You need informed science savvy and media savvy individuals to parse this intelligently.

CGI is just a part of this process. Science is a bitch. You need to look at the nature of things in many dimensions, and sometimes dimensions you would not think logical or related.

We have other tools also beyond science but shown to be reality. Non-locality and psychic awareness for example. Even the military uses these tools for remote viewing and similar. Prove that is fake.

In any case you need to study this issue well beyond the obvious areas to be any closer to truth. Social anthropology, psychology, media and other sensibilities take over when the mechanist tools of things like CGI are insufficient.

ZG

reply to post by Akezzon


i never said it was just as easy. I'll even agree it would be easier at night. Lights during the day= easy, lights at night = very easy. Theres nothing hard about it. 1 solitary witness, even people walking past him would look to see what hes filming. But no we have 1 supervision man with a camcorder. Your trying to say a drop by 99.9999% of witnesses is down to the sighting being during the day. Your insane. Get help

[edit on 8-7-2009 by yeti101]