UFOs Filmed in Dallas From a Plane - Analyzed & Enhanced - March 2012

Originally posted by AnonymousKid
reply to post by AnonymousKid

 

www.youtube.com...

Ok, now if that can't easily be debunked it deserves a thread of its own. What the hell?

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Could be a reflection of light on the inside of the glass window.

or fast moving swamp gas !

Im going out on a limb here as ive not looked at the video in any detail, but im assuming its cgi.

Im guessing its shown at the beginning briefly because thats the only time they have a decent tracking point....the wing.

If you look you can see the plane starts to rock once the object has passed...making it a pain to track. I could be wrong, but meh.

Im all debunked out for today so i will have a look tomos or the next day and report back anything i find.

Originally posted by UnumSecretum
The last video from this YouTube user was also from an aircraft, and that turned out to be a CGI hoax. I believe this one is no different. It appears they are just grabbing aircraft videos and adding CGI UFOs to them.

There's only two aircraft videos on that account as far as I can see, and they're both of the same thing. Have you got a link to the one you mean please?

Originally posted by Clairaudience
Interesting, speaking from experience in video editing and vfx this footage doesn't seem to be a product of computer generated imagery, a good catch for ones.

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
Yea thats one thing im pretty sure about that its not CGI.

Originally posted by intrptr
This is surely not CGI and the blow up is well...

How can you people say that? Take a look at this:



All you have to do is make a little white blob that is semi-transparent, and key frame animate it to dart across the screen, and you are done...... You don't even have to do motion tracking because it's so fast. This video can be made by someone with pretty much no experience with Adobe After Effects.

reply to post by UnumSecretum


Ok, that's just totally killed the buzz I had. Thanks for showing how easy it can be done anyway.

reply to post by robhines


This video:
www.youtube.com...

..and this video:
www.youtube.com...

They are both from the same person.
One flight is from Amsterdam to Dallas, and the other just happens to be from Dallas too.
Both videos are only 720p.
Both videos seem to have the same quality, brightness, and contrast.
Both videos seem to have the same exact sound quality.
Both videos are nearly from the same position in the aircraft.
Both videos show the UFO for a very short time in the beginning of the video.
Both videos show a few seconds of normal video after the UFO is out of view.

The first video from Amsterdam has many CGI flaws in it....

These should all be red flags to you...

-edit-

posted same link twice by mistake

We're getting to the age where even a real UFO could be replicated with CGI.

When that day comes (or perhaps it's here?), there will be no use for video evidence anymore.

reply to post by TheLegend


We are also at that age where anyone can get a YouTube account, and an Adsense account, and make money from having a popular video.

Since the UFO subject is so mysterious and popular, and it is so easy to make a fake UFO and fool people, it has become a prime target for people looking to make a few dollars using "shock and awe" as their marketing strategy to get the most attention.

I think all video evidence should be considered fake until proven real.

What made you even think there was one? Since it was going the faster than the speed of light to begin with. Impressive video however.

reply to post by UnumSecretum


Yeah I thought they were just showing the same thing? Am tired anyway so leaving it until tomorrow, will probably get what you mean when looking at it after some sleep.

reply to post by UnumSecretum


Did you post the same link twice by mistake??

I dont understand the point.

reply to post by UnumSecretum


You posted the same link twice, did you mean to post this one? (the obvious CGI hoax)

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist



Oops! Yes, I posted the same link twice by mistake.

This video:
www.youtube.com...

..and this video:
www.youtube.com...

The first one is CGI. The other has too many similarities with the first in regards to location, camera settings, style, uploader, etc.

Something people are not taking into consideration. A sonic boom.

The speed of sound (otherwise known as Mach 1) varies with temperature. At sea level on a “standard day,” the temperature is 59°F, and Mach 1 is approximately 761 mph. As the altitude increases, the temperature and speed of sound both decrease until about 36,000 feet, after which the temperature remains steady until about 60,000 feet. Within that 36,000–60,000 foot range, Mach 1 is about 661 mph. Because of the variation, it is possible for an airplane flying supersonic at high altitude to be slower than a subsonic flight at sea level.

The thing can only go so fast until we hear it.

It’s funny when people can’t explain something. In the end, it’s always CGI. Just a really good CGI that doesn’t look like CGI. How funny…

reply to post by UnumSecretum


I looked at your CGI video. I have to admit the objects look very similar to the ones in my video. I also have to say to myself ...just because CGI can create a very similar looking object doesn't necessarily mean it's CGI. I am waiting for crazybreakingnews to send me the original clip he received. When I do I would like someone to check it out. In all honesty I don't think crazybreakingnews made this video. For a couple of reasons. 1. He handed it over to me. All I had to do was ask him. He didn't care or act like it was his. 2. The second object wasn't noticed until much later...so why would he only focus on one object in his original video? I don't think he is clever enough to think ahead and let the youtubers find the second object. With all do respect to crazybreakingnews. I think those people "Ann & Jennifer Thomson" legitimately sent him that video clip because of his "UFO from Plane in Amsterdam" video. They saw that popular video of his and decided since they had a similar incident that they would share with him.

Originally posted by randomname
there's no way that was a jet. it wouldn't even be legal for a military jet to fly that fast and that close to a commercial airliner.

I've watched a jet fly just beneath an airliner on which I was a passenger at roughly that rate and distance- except I saw it coming from further away and it was very clearly the outline of a military jet as it passed. So yes, it could most definitely be a jet based on speed and distance from an airliner- but the outline of the object in the video was not similar to the jet I saw. That is what makes it odd. It looked more like a missile.

Regarding the CGI thing, it may be just me seeing things but the 2nd object seems to cast a shadow on the field?

Then again that would mean it would have to be travelling at a very low altitude. So maybe a shadow would be another sign that it IS CGI?

This whole CGI stuff confuses me

Originally posted by dayve
military jets cant go that fast... orrrrrrr can they... ?

Yes they could relative to the airliner. The airliner looks to be directly over Dallas which means it was extremely close to either DFW or Love and was on final landing approach (it appears to be descending) at low throttle with flaps deployed. A fighter jet or even small commercial jet (Lear or Falcon) would zip by in a blur like that. Now I'm just talking about speed, whether they would be flying by so low and fast right over a populated area seems unlikely, but I'd be more inclined to believe that than spaceships.

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard

This whole CGI stuff confuses me

yeah. that is the point.

just like in court...when you have evidence presented, you need to look at the totality of everything....NOT just what is before you.

for example (in the ufo world) the evidence itself (photos/videos), testimony (is it logical? does it match what is presented? can it be corroborated?), WHO is giving the testimony (are they known to post crap? are they making $$$$$ on what they are sharing? etc.) and can the evidence be faked in any way (CGI possible?).

i really wish people would stop.....and take everything into account instead of just blindly believing. the more people will be skeptical (does NOT mean disbeliever) but the more people will be skeptical, the less that hoaxers will get a high and a buck off people saying "aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh, oooooooooooooohhhhhhhhh YES, awesome! the real deal!".....

.....JMPO...

in regards to this video.....dont you wonder where the ORIGINAL UNEDITED video is?? we already know CGI has been done on this video - because there is text and red circles.....it is NOT authentic. it has already been run thru a video editing program......

if people really believe this is legit....demand the original unedited version....straight from the cam! betcha you wont ever get it!