The only authentic UFO video I have ever seen

I'm sorry but if you find that the most authentic UFO video you have ever seen then I have some ocean front property to sell you in Nevada

Originally posted by H1ght3chHippie

Originally posted by NowanKenubi
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

Then stop talking to trolls and answer my point!

What is your explanation for not seeing the UFO past the trunk, in the holes between branches? There is one big enough that remains white all the way...

Yes you can see it between the leaves and branches.

I've watched all versions of the video now, and you can clearly see the object behind the trees, both in the first frame, and in the last three frames.

I'm watching the Video on my Linux box with VLC player / Gnome Movie Player on fullscreen on a 24" Full HD Screen, so I got a pretty good view of it.

I'm not sure about the authenticity .. but I think I went from "total fake" to "Well maybe that is something we got here" ... the Versions uploaded to Megaupload have a tiny bit of extra detail, and I get the impression that the whole object is rotating and I can slightly see a red shimmer underneath the object .. so if that Video is certainly 10 years old, I guess it might indeed be a real object. Would have been really hard to do that 10 years ago.

edit on 29-12-2011 by H1ght3chHippie because: (no reason given)

Also don't forget to look at the air currents just before it gets to the trees.

The most frustrating part is that somewhere someone had this video in full video resolution and what we are left with is but a remnant of it.

And you know if someone really spent time on this they could uncover more detail. As I said at one point 10 years ago, I could see the plasma detail much better. So the original codec, the legacy codec and a legacy player from 10 years ago might turn up more detail, or analysis in some high end graphics program with filters.

I am already convinced so I won't bother.

And it fits the M.O. It fits with what I would expect to find.

I see no reason not to think that flying disks should have a glass bubble on top seeing that since I was a kid, that was what I was told they should look like.

I have seen a lot of variations on a theme in many photos and videos but I think that I cannot see any authenticity in those videos.

I studied the Billy Meir videos with an open mind, even accepting the fact he could have made a model that they found in his shed, even though he actually saw disks. Finding a model does not discredit his work.

His work, discredits his work.

Not even his stories, I could understand all that and wanting all that to be true too.

But digging deeper and seeing the images? Ok, now we are really getting into the totally unbelievable rank amatuer unscientific realm of pretend there.

I saw some of the images from his trips to other planets from some place on-line where one of his followers were claiming these images to be the secret space travels of Billy Meier and the pictures looked like something from Plan 9 From Outer Space. That fake.

And this well, what can you say except busted

Now that does not mean that the Pleiadians don't exist. The Seven Sisters of the Pleiades are all over mythology. And astronomy.
And you know there is more to that story too. And it also correlates to the Anunnaki.
But the disks are not as Billy depicted them.

And the people well sure they are probably Nordics, but what everyone has claimed to have seen are little spindly aliens, like grays, and well for all we know they might just be androids or who knows what.

My understanding is they are like space suits.

This is the same, absurd debate as we had two days ago on the 9/11 forum with the "jumpers are not real" thread.

The pattern is always the same: The OP makes some statement which is bare any logic or gets easily debunked right away - then people come in and point out the OBVIOUS, but the OP never even cares to acknowledge the replies/criticism but continues and continues to repeat his own, already 1000x proven wrong point of view.

So..if you don't even have an interest in hearing an opinion by other people and are not willing to even consider to listen etc..why post in the first place? This is typical troll behavior and ONLY results in an idiotic, non constructive debate....8 pages trolling and insisting that you are right.

By the way you can upload as many "high def" videos as you want with "plasma" or whatever you have there...doesn't change the fact that the landscape moves and shakes and the UFO "magically" stays straight and is not affected by ANY movement of the camera and is not in sync with the rest of the picture, AT ALL.

It's so obvious that even an amateur with very little/no experience in video editing and photography can point this out.

Add the fact you claimed in the OP being an "expert" in CGI and video editing...

It's really sad seeing that ATS consists of many discussions on this level of ignorance right now compared to 2009/2010 where you could actually find GOOD discussions and cases.

Originally posted by Irish614
I'm sorry but if you find that the most authentic UFO video you have ever seen then I have some ocean front property to sell you in Nevada

Do I have to wait until next year???

[...] Now that does not mean that the Pleiadians don't exist. [...]

Yeah right.

You just prove yourself that you are incapable of elementary logic and common sense and cannot even spot the most OBVIOUS fakes...so no wonder you believe in the pleiadians too...

Originally posted by flexy123

By the way you can upload as many "high def" videos as you want with "plasma" or whatever you have there...doesn't change the fact that the landscape moves and shakes and the UFO "magically" stays straight and is not affected by ANY movement of the camera and is not in sync with the rest of the picture, AT ALL.

The reason I am not responding to this argument is it is completely wrong.

Do a frame dump. Dump the images to disk, then examine them like a flip book.

Chart the images, draw lines. Use geometry.

What you are thinking you are seeing is not what is actually there.

Maybe you don't take a lot of cam corder footage yourself so you are being fooled by what you see.

Chart it, and show us your proof of what you are saying because my trained eye sees normal video footage as taken under normal circumstances.

Miles and miles and miles of video footage experience tells me that.

Here let me make this easy for you.

Here again is the video. The disk is in the middle, then it moves towards the top of the frame. It does not end in the middle of the frame. The camera moves down, the disk appears higher in the frame. The landscape moves higher in the frame.

reply to post by flexy123

post by flexy123
You just prove yourself that you are incapable of elementary logic and common sense and cannot even spot the most OBVIOUS fakes...so no wonder you believe in the pleiadians too...

You're on shaky ground there , I just clicked on the link in your Sig
incapable of elementary logic and common sense you say

Wow really, I go to sleep and this pile of garbage hits 9 pages and isn't in the hoax bin yet?

Regarding the video not moving and not being part of the scene or whatever the mistake you are making is that the cameraman is following the disk. So he is trying to keep the disk centered in teh frame. The disk is following a horizontal path and he as a person has a horizontal line of sight. The background is not horizontal it is hilly and sloped.

What you can do is capture a few frames along its path. Then take a small rectangle in paint, and match it with the top of the frame, and intersect the disk.

You will see the disk maintains a horizontal path relative to the camera, and the background changes.

But it is horizontal flight. And he is tracking the path as you would with the camera.

Another thing you can do with this video if you have the good quality download and VLC player is to view the video in slow motion.

OP- Well you lost me on your expertise when you said this :- "The plasma in the original was very clear, and at the time, it was not possible to do plasma as a special effect and I am not sure it can be done now even as well as it appeared in the original of this video."

If you seriously think that something like plasma cannot be reproduced by special effects then you need to update your so called expertise. Things like plasma can be faked on a home computer with the right software.

Video looks so fake even my wife said it is......

Originally posted by flexy123
[...] Now that does not mean that the Pleiadians don't exist. [...]

Yeah right.

You just prove yourself that you are incapable of elementary logic and common sense and cannot even spot the most OBVIOUS fakes...so no wonder you believe in the pleiadians too...

Well people believe in Jesus and people believe in Santa Claus and people believe in the tooth fairy. People believe in fairies. They really do.

People believe in things that have a lot less written about them, then the Seven Sisters of the Pleiades.

Do you think I am the only person who believes in the Seven Sisters of the Pleiades?

Think again lol

Does that mean the video must be fake?

Originally posted by Rocketman7
Regarding the video not moving and not being part of the scene or whatever the mistake you are making is that the cameraman is following the disk. So he is trying to keep the disk centered in teh frame. The disk is following a horizontal path and he as a person has a horizontal line of sight. The background is not horizontal it is hilly and sloped.

What you can do is capture a few frames along its path. Then take a small rectangle in paint, and match it with the top of the frame, and intersect the disk.

You will see the disk maintains a horizontal path relative to the camera, and the background changes.

But it is horizontal flight. And he is tracking the path as you would with the camera.

Another thing you can do with this video if you have the good quality download and VLC player is to view the video in slow motion.

I guess you have a lot time on your hands , answering everyone else's rebuttal ,asking and pointing out nonsense. How convenient,,,but you still can't respond to my last post,,,,wonder why.

Originally posted by Rocketman7

Originally posted by dilly1

Before it approaches the tree trunk (left side),the saucer appears visible thru the branches . But after ?? Not a chance. In fact the right of the trunk there seems to be a faint grey tone (lightly flashing) before the saucer approaches the exact trajectory line. Can you say freakin fake.


But another item no one has mentioned is :the flying saucer make or type is from the 1950's. I mean the video itself is a cliché. You mite as well have Charlie Chaplin holding hands with Tin-Robotic-Alien, skipping along.


I mean to really think that this hunk of junk came from a distant galaxy 100 light years away,let alone from our orbit. Lol. You think that pour excuse of a UFO can withstand the temperatures of our atmosphere?
C'mon man!!! You know its a fake.

That's piece of bullcrap wouldn't last 2 minutes with an F-22 fighter jet. And you're telling me that came from space. ,,,,,,,oh and don't tell me its a prototype from Lockheed or NORAD. Give me a brake. You have nothing, just your delusional guesses. You're not even an expert in video. Maybe you're an expert on DVD's,,,no ,,no ,,, you're an expert on VHS tapes.


Its a fake, and all of us are idiots for wasting a single character on this thread.

If it was fake, it would show clearly as it moved through the trees. The limitation of the camera and or the codec used to compress the video, MPEG originally, lacks the ability to define the contrast since the contrast is in too narrow a band. Remember that raw video footage this size might be 400 plus megabytes, and compressed it was compressed to 2 megabytes after it was turned into a mpeg. So there is a loss of data. A substantial loss of data but it was meant to be a strategic leak, providing just enough proof of its authenticity, then, when the people approached the governments for funding in 2000 or 2001 when this was leaked, they merely had to show them a better copy and say see, this has been leaked, and we could not stop it, and it will forever be out there and we cannot remove it.

en.wikipedia.org...


A fighter jet? How about 8,000 miles per hour, flying aorund a missile in the air, shooting a beam of light, disarming a missile? That was recorded on video by the military.

And of course people have claimed speeds of 25,000 mph.

There is no reason to think it can't do the speed of light once it gets going. SInce it can apparently nullify inertia.

It has to in order to do the things people claim, such as make 90 degree high speed turns. Otherwise everything inside would turn to jelly.

There is a document at the MJ12 papers site that claims the Manhattan project came from the investigation of a crashed disk in 1941.
Here it is, its an interesting read, until they start talking about remote viewing and making references to other flights of fancy. Why do they do that if not to keep from being hit on thhe head?

The First Roswell pdf

edit on 29-12-2011 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)

Your source is "Wikipedia"?

Seriously?

Read my post correctly, I said "that saucer" is chump change verses the capabilities of dueling against a fighter jet. Regardless if its a UFO from the 50's or any era. If it came from space it should be more advanced than our best fighter jets..

You have no proof of any object flying 8000mhp,let alone a beam of light..lol... And stop with the wikipedia crap.

"People have claimed it going 25kmhp"?what???????

Listen Sheldon, eyewitness accounts,videos and photos are not viable evidence when referring to UFO or ,,,,the Yeti.. All of it can be fabricated.


Lightspeed is impossible. Do you here me Sheldon! Impossible!!!! You are aware the people reading your thread are not from some comic book.

Do you believe everything your government tells you? I'm willing to bet NOT. But you certainly blindly believe any document that conveniently falls on your lap.. Why would you gladly swallow advertised UFO/alien government information as authentic ,or credible.. Why??.... And when I say advertise ,I mean you conveniently having access to information from the government(classified or not). Are you special?


And I don't understand this UFO branding crap. Why is it Unidentified. Its not Unidentified to the people who probably designed and constructed(not saying this pathetic video displays an actual FO) the dam vessel.

Is everything man made an UO if you haven't been informed or notified to what your exactly witnessing?

So basically if someone wakes up from a coma, lost 20 years, is everything a freakin UO or UFO to them? Does that mean that person suddenly decides "if it unidentified then its alien"

You see my point

My take is ALL Flying Objects are man made and we have no freakin right to know every item in the ski. Its man made get ove

reply to post by dilly1

post by dilly1
My take is ALL Flying Objects are man made and we have no freakin right to know every item in the ski. Its man made get ove

What even the ones the were reported before we had the power of flight ?
Bit of a blinkered view you have there .

reply to post by Rocketman7

if it were real why didnt they follow the craft?

Originally posted by TheWretched
OP- Well you lost me on your expertise when you said this :- "The plasma in the original was very clear, and at the time, it was not possible to do plasma as a special effect and I am not sure it can be done now even as well as it appeared in the original of this video."

If you seriously think that something like plasma cannot be reproduced by special effects then you need to update your so called expertise. Things like plasma can be faked on a home computer with the right software.

Video looks so fake even my wife said it is......

Well I wish I could show you the example of plasma but I can't. I can show you fake plasma sure.

You can see pictures of lightning right? What about an area under a craft with faint lightning, clearly moving like electricity does on top of a Van de Graaff generator?

You know where you hold the ball and it makes your hair stand on end.

So ok picture that, picture a haze around it, and picture that not looking truly distinct like it was faked, but looking quite real and interacting with the atmosphere.

Thats what I am talking about.

And as far as your wife thinking it is fake how do I know you have a wife really?
Just saying.

Originally posted by freeman2128
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

if it were real why didnt they follow the craft?

Well it looks like a staged event. He was supposed to be there to film it as shown and he was probably quite nervous about the whole thing but kept it together really well. Like holding your breath and saying to yourself ok this is it this is the big one and steadyyyyy, and phew.

He was probably shaking all day after he took that video.

Not out of fright, but any time you are part of some great event, you can't help but feel a little bit overwhelmed by it.

People who chase UFOs in cop cars and that as stated numerous times in different places, are chasing lights in the sky.
There have been reports of day time sightings of triangle craft right in cities by police officers but this is not like that.

You have to wonder what they saw, if they say they saw a black triangle going down the street and chased it with their cop car.

But there are no pictures and no video. And well, who can say why they thought they saw what they claimed but just because they are a police officer, does not mean their mind could not be messed with and them made to believe they saw something.

In the same way people get guns and shoot up a military base or a donut shop and said vocies in their head or God told them to do it. Well we know they did something, and we think that they are crazy for doing it, even if God told them to do it.

But the seeing triangle craft in broad daylight in a city, with no proof, falls into the category of mistaken observation as far as I am concerned.
Unless someone provides video that can pass scrutiny.

There are those who promote the black triangle paradigm, over the flying disk paradigm.

Mythology is not dead. Don't ever for one moment think that people do not still have mythological leanings.
They just don't talk about it.
And the mythology moves men to do things today just as it did 2 thousand years ago.
UFOlogy is modern mythology.

In this case we have some proof of a flying disk. And it is not like a hi res video that is crystal clear and all the rest. There are plenty of those in youtube. When you are making a fake, you want it to look real.

This is different. It is the subtle things in this video which make it real.

No one is on the net with this video shouting hey! Did you see the red glow beneath that disk!
Are they?

Just me here saying you know if you have a copy of the original that I have from when it was leaked, there is a lot more detail in that video than you can see in youtube.

ITs not a new video. Its at least 10 years old. I have had a copy for 10 years my self.

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
That's likely one of the sketchiest UFO vids I've ever seen. At the 0:10 mark, the "craft" seems to pixelate the branch it passes behind, and is it me or does the camera wobble not match the wobble movement of the UFO?

Exactly what i was thinking. The wobble doesn't match. Sorry but i don't think it's real.

reply to post by Rocketman7


For anyone familiar with electrogravitics this video should be intriguing. The following flight characteristics common in other flying saucer shaped crafts are also present;

1.) Slight wobble
2.) Excited gas surrounding (plasma) – barely visible
3.) Counter-clockwise spin

Each of these features are critically important because of the type of propulsion used. As stated by the Op, we are dealing with electrogravitics. This type of propulsion is estimated to require minimum 100 million Volts of electrical energy for thrust and use gyroscopic spin to counteract imbalance.

Based on Op's observation of corona discharge, plasma and time of release(10 yrs) I am inclined to believe this video is authentic. It is unfortunate we don't have a higher res version as it may shed more light on the propulsion system.

Yes,

keep ignoring others and me pointing out how the horizon/trees/ground is shifting and wobbling, up and down and the disc is STEADY.

Again, you lack common sense and understanding since even if he "followed the disc" (which obviously is your explanation) the DISC WOULD NOT BE STEADY but the camera pans and shakes (horizontally/vertically) would affect the WHOLE picture, including the disc. (REGARDLESS what he follows with the camera). The disc is so obvious detached from the other footage it is ridiculous.

Sorry..i have better things to do than wasting my time "debunking" one of the worst UFO footage out there. This thread is a waste of my time. And..your pleiadians suck at faking.