New alien footage. Real or fake? Experts, have yourself a look & discuss

originally posted by: Swills
...I agree the sound is cheesy but the footage is fantastic. Still not debunked eh?

Sure. But not being able to prove it is fake (i.e., debunk it) is not the same as proving it is real.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Well yeah, but fact is after all these years no debunk yet, that I know of. Usually with these alien videos they are debunked fairly quickly.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Well yeah, but fact is after all these years no debunk yet, that I know of. Usually with these alien videos they are debunked fairly quickly.

Hey! Great to see that the OP is still around!

I have seen this video many times before, thought the "alien" looked very realistic, and thought, well, if it has been debunked anywhere, it would have been debunked on here, ATS. So, sure enough, I found multiple threads relating to this video, this one seemed to have legs, so I resurrected it. Not in the hoax bin, nor could I find any definitive debunking.

UFO's are real, as proven in multiple threads on ATS. ET's are one of the explanations put forward for them, along with things like time travelers, multi-dimensional beings, paranormal activity and more. The ET explanation makes the most sense to me from an explainable physics standpoint, but I'm open minded (uh um, cough, unlike some others).

However, if this can't be debunked, I guess we have our answer to the UFO phenomenon, and we can get back to more serious things like whether Obama is American born or the latest ISIS atrocity /sarcasm off.

Damn, look at the detail of the head and neck, the veins, the way they pulse and disappear they way they do in a real human. It is said these beings are hominds, so you would expect an physiological similarity to humans.



If this was taken pre-1990's, the CGI capability did not exist to produce it, especially if it was taken in the 50's or 60's. In the last 10 or 15 years I think the CGI capability existed to produce something like this, but I'm not a CGI expert.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Yup still around, I'll never leave ATS, it's too good. But I think you'd be hard pressed to say that UFO's are real and proven right here on ATS. There are some good threads, lots of research but no proof. This thread is not proof of anything thus far. I haven't looked into this video in a few years so I don't know if it's been debunked. Logic says that it's fake but it's comforting to know that ATS hasn't debunked it yet. There are good thoughts about it right here in this thread though.

All in all, it's an interesting video posted by a mysterious youtuber. I wonder if he monetized these videos?

a reply to: Swills

When I say UFO's have been proven, or re-proven, I guess I should qualify that statement.

Even though we all know what UFO means, Unidentified Flying Object, the word/acronyn has become synonymous for an ET piloted craft, but that is not what I mean. I mean true UFO's, ones that have no known explanation, such as Rendlesham, Battle of LA, that famous Australian one, the 1952 Washington one, Kenneth Arnold, Phoenix Lights, there are hundreds.....they remain true and proven UFO's.

But the UFO-ET connection has not been proven, yet.

a reply to: flyingfish
I believe.
But all it takes for me, is to see footage of a supposed UFO with lights...and I'll call BS.
I also believe they have technology that could literally make us p!ss our pants. Why would they need lights?
Wouldn't you think they'd have something that would make GPS look pre school?


As for the OP's video...I have no proof and confident I need none, but it's jive from a jive master. The movie E.T. looks better.

originally posted by: RoadCourse

That makes sense, what you are saying about lights, so craft such as the Phoenix lights one, even though there were craft and not just the military flares shot off later AFTER most of the eyewitness reports on the craft, wasn't ET. How about the Travis Walton case, that sounded real, didn't that craft have lights?

So, if you don't think the video is real, do you think it is makeup/mask or CGI? Any reasons? What do you think about the pulsating blood vessels in the creatures head and neck?

The reason im calling fake is if you look at the edge of the top of the polo neck sweater its wearing, on its neck. The very top edge. There is an unatural black line along the edge of it, where the sweater touches its neck.
This is because the body part i'd say is off a real person and obviously the head is added in cgi.

Also it would be near impossible to get that sweater on over that humongous head.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
I appreciate the reply PlanetX.
I'll start off by saying that I probably don't know as much as you or a lot of other ladies and gentlemen here about these 2 matters that you speak of.
My comments were in reference to navigation. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough for anyone on what I stated. I was just typing my feelings and opinion. I try not to dress up things in writing, nor do I have the skills to do so, like again, a lot of other ladies and gentlemen on here who thoroughly impress me with theirs.
I watched the "Phoenix Lights" video and read a little about the Travis Walton case to try and refresh my memory before replying back to you.
To keep it short, not to say I won't continue talking/typing about it, to me there is no proof, unless I'm missing something, that not only is there no proof that that was something from outta this world, but if it was, how do we know if those lights were used for navigation and not from power train/engine source?
On the Mr. Walton case, I found myself not so familiar with. But after reading a little about it, I found myself to be getting less interested the further I read. Totally because of how I feel about stories that claim to be true. The "dressing up" or how it was being told raised that "red flag".
The first thing I said in my comment, other than thanking you for the reply, was "I believe". I DO, because I have witnessed MYSELF on 3 different occasions visually, with witnesses on 2 of them. All 3 were simular, but 2 were near identical. The 2 near identical, were at the same location 2 evenings in a row. And 2 more incidents involving a paralysis after waking up.
I believe mine because of course, I was there. Not saying any other incidents that have been recorded since the beginning of time aren't true or those individuals are stretching the truth or lying....I'm saying that I'm the type that believes in NOTHING but myself. Or shall I go on to say I am very skeptical of not all, but A LOT of subjects. This in particular is this reason why I am here on this site. This site, in a high volume of ways helps me connect some dots.

As far as the video from this OP, Although it looks pretty bad@ss/cool, I ain't buying it, brother/sister.
As I said before, I have no proof. It's just an overwhelming feeling that it ain't real. I say that in confidence because of the movement alone. And there are some extremely talented people in this world. She!t....There are a lot of talented people on this site alone!

Again, I appreciate the reply, X.
Hopefully I answered your questions well enough to suit you....for it was from ME....not dressed up or sugar coated.

This "Skinny Bob" footage has been around for a few years now and in my humble opinion is absolutely legit ,100% genuine "leak", a real "Gray" i love it!

originally posted by: spacecadet51
This "Skinny Bob" footage has been around for a few years now and in my humble opinion is absolutely legit ,100% genuine "leak", a real "Gray" i love it!

I think having it hang around for years with no new information about it is more a sign that it is fake, rather than legitimate. I mean, we're already at a dead end, right? What more do we know about it? Nothing? Why would you have confidence in that?

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: spacecadet51
This "Skinny Bob" footage has been around for a few years now and in my humble opinion is absolutely legit ,100% genuine "leak", a real "Gray" i love it!

I think having it hang around for years with no new information about it is more a sign that it is fake, rather than legitimate. I mean, we're already at a dead end, right? What more do we know about it? Nothing? Why would you have confidence in that?

I don't know, the video being around for 4 years, and having no new information on it, I don't see how that is relevant or has any bearing on its authenticity; frustrating sure, but that is it.

a reply to: RoadCourse

Hey RoadCourse, thank you for your reply and participation. And don't worry about your style, I'm more concerned with substance, and I try to avoid judgement because I know it is just ego.

That is very interesting you have had some experiences, did you mean just with UFO's or with the alien grays? Care to share more of the details?

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
The reason im calling fake is if you look at the edge of the top of the polo neck sweater its wearing, on its neck. The very top edge. There is an unatural black line along the edge of it, where the sweater touches its neck.
This is because the body part i'd say is off a real person and obviously the head is added in cgi.

Also it would be near impossible to get that sweater on over that humongous head.

It could be fake, but no one has come close to proving that yet.

I don't see any unnatural line along the top of the turtleneck, there is a little weird part at the back though. For all we know the turtleneck could have a zipper at the back.

If this film is from the the 50's or 60's, even 70's or 80's (and I think it is from the 1950's), there is no way the head is CGI, the technology wasn't even close then. Nor do I believe it is a mask/makeup. I think if we can prove this was shot in the 1950's, we would be closer to authenticating it, but of course there is no way without the original footage.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

I haven't read this entire thread yet so I hope someone has not already provided this, but I found a 10 minute video posted Summer 2014 that provides some interesting information, that, if true, in my opinion, adds even more credibility to the footage being discussed.

m.youtube.com...

Basically, a UFO researcher vouchers for the media leak's integrity, and shows a (redacted) email that gives some tantalizing tidbits that I had not heard before, such as it possibly having a KGB origin, and the existence of an unedited version.

Also, I am still waiting for someone to replicate this! With the popularity of fake UFO footage being produced, I find it difficult to believe that there is nothing that I am aware of that depicts a creature purported to be an ET that comes close to the "realistic" style of the Skinny Bob film.

a reply to: seattlerat

I'm posting the video here and will make some comments on it shortly:

originally posted by: Just Chris
Just beat me to posting this!

It's hard to tell. I believe it's legit, and eagerly await the debunkers on this one...

But why do you believe it's legit?
We know that CGI exists.
We know that it's entirely possible to fake this kind of video.
We know that there are plenty of people out there willing to do so.

There is no rational reason to believe this is not CGI. Unless you can find something in this video to prove otherwise, all intelligent people would have to go with the more plausible explanation, and no matter how much people might protest against it, the most plausible suggestion is that this is a fictional video created using CGI.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
It could be fake, but no one has come close to proving that yet.

Why is it the job of those who rationally believe that it's CGI to "prove" that it isn't?

Suggesting that an alien species has visited us and been filmed while here is more outlandish and unproven than the fact that plenty of people can fake a video like this.

The need to prove something is not on those claiming rationally that this is CGI, the responsibility here is on those who claim it's a genuine video of a genuine alien.

Which is more likely, that an alien came here and was filmed, and that this film was leaked by unknown sources with little information to support it? Or, that someone with more money and more time than they know what to do with created a fake video with any one of a collection of widely available video editing programs?

Again, the existence of an alien visitor requires more proving than the existence of hoaxers. It's the responsibility of those claiming it's real to provide evidence in opposition of the most plausible and reasonable explanation.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This would qualify as an extraordinary claim, especially when we know how easy it is for any random person out there with a little technical know-how to create a CGI video like this.