The most convincing UFO video footage we have.

Several responses for earlier comments:

denybedoomed
Can't post the vids, but I was always most impressed by that STS footage, especially the one with the broken tether. Something about those videos always gave me a sinking feeling. It's very convincing.

These videos really are amazing, but a large part of that is that most people just aren't familiar with the visual environment of spaceflight and are thus prone to misinterpret cues in terms that are irrelevant to the new universe we're operating in. I try to give examples here:
www.jamesoberg.com...

jhn7537
On the video below, from STS-75 tether incident, you will see a long 12 mile tether that snapped off into space. The object when seen in the video is roughly 75-100 miles away from the astronauts. NASA is using ultra-violet light sensitive video cameras. ...... In clips like this you either believe the NASA explanation or you do not. Do you believe it's just dust particles or ice particles? which is a common NASA explanation we see today when it comes to any space UFO incidents... Many have traced the trajectories to some of these objects, to show that they can not be ice particles. Not only do they seem to pass behind the tether. The objects make turns, decelerate and accelerate

Also, STS-114 UFO incident is a crazy clip in itself... NASA video shows white orb @ 2:18 mark come into frame from the right stop and then reverse. What in space can do that? Most things in space travel in straight lines and don't stop.

You're being tripped up by reasonable assumptions and analogies that actually are invalid for the different visual field of outer space. Also, some of the things you think are 'facts' just aren't -- it wasn't a UV camera, for example, and movinfg objects often change direction in the vicinity of the shuttle, for reasons that are 'normal' in space but totally alien back on Earth. I've tried to summarize these differences here, based on my many years of experience looking at exactly such videos in Mission Control, and any suggested improvements/elaborations would be welcome:
www.jamesoberg.com...

jhn7537
.... I've always been a Dan Aykroyd fan from the Ghostbusters days (I was just a little child then) and when I heard about his UFO interview video and I had to watch it. Surprisingly, he's quite knowledgeable on the subject and is a good listen in my opinion..

Dan is a superlative tale-teller and pretender, but a reality-analyst, not so much. His imaginary telepathic dream message from space aliens, for example:
www.jamesoberg.com...

UFO/Foo fighter over Capao Redondo

Arbitrageur
They are flares. The pilot from the group who dropped the flares in a training exercise is interviewed, and video evidence confirms they disappeared behind the mountain range.

Correct. The actual video of the Phoenix lights is flares dropped from aircraft.

The real UFO was not videoed, but witnesses gave great descriptions of the craft, and it appears there was still some daylight left in the sky when the craft flew over.

_BoneZ_
reply to post by roncoallstar

 

That is very horrible CGI. If you download the video and use VLC Media player to slow the video down, you'll be able to see that they couldn't keep their CGI moving exactly with the movement of the camera. Happens every single time with CGI.

This "most convincing" video is a very convincing HOAX.

Poor "matchmoving" as they would say in the industry. It's easy enough to model, texture and light your UFO. The hardest part is matching the animation to camera shake. They can either make the foreground stati and claim the video has been motion compensated, or they can use advanced tools like BouJou (www.metrics.co.uk...)

_BoneZ_
The real UFO was not videoed, but witnesses gave great descriptions of the craft, and it appears there was still some daylight left in the sky when the craft flew over.

Someone presented another video, but I haven't been able to confirm its authenticity. However I wouldn't be so sure the real UFO wasn't videoed. See 43 seconds into this video:

dsc.discovery.com...
However I wouldn't call that video the most convincing evidence, as the quality is too poor even if it is genuinely the object to which you refer. It's also too poor quality to ascertain if it's really blocking out the stars behind it or if it's a group of planes flying in formation.

_BoneZ_

Arbitrageur
They are flares. The pilot from the group who dropped the flares in a training exercise is interviewed, and video evidence confirms they disappeared behind the mountain range.

Correct. The actual video of the Phoenix lights is flares dropped from aircraft.

The real UFO was not videoed, but witnesses gave great descriptions of the craft, and it appears there was still some daylight left in the sky when the craft flew over.

I always wondered whether they were the exhaust vents of the interceptor aircraft with their afterburners on, especially since they seem to disappear at the silhouette line of the mountains.

The weirdest UFO I ever saw, was a couple of orange cones (looking like > >) that shot past our jumbo jet on a night-time flight over Europe. Left afterburn images on my retina. Just shot by like moving your hand rapidly across in front of you.

Any thought`s.. ?

omeninc
Any thought`s.. ?

Yep, yours was definitely debunked, and was a hoax. The chappy who set it up admitted it himself that he had done it in a documentary. It was covered in a thread on here not so long ago about crop circles.

Cool

reply to post by Arbitrageur


I wish I could star your post 1000 times. I've never seen that video, and it looks just like what many of the witnesses drew on paper. I wonder why James Fox didn't include that video in his documentaries since his included the latest investigations on the Phoenix lights.

I'm going to download and save that one.

reply to post by roncoallstar


Hey folks. I see most if not all of you are posting someone else's material and arguing about the authenticity.

I am sharing with you all a video that I personally, shot back in Jan, 2002. By the way, I was interviewed by Art Bell about this particular clip. In addition, I was interviewed by the local news media.

I am not going to try and make believers out of the non believers, that is your choice. All I can tell you is that this is not a helicopter or a conventional air craft. The footage is black/greenish because I filmed it in night shot mode with my Sony Handy cam camera. Also, I used manual focus, which takes out a lot of the blurriness that you see in most footage.

We (my wife and I, girlfriend at the time. ) were driving home from my brothers house. We were headed east. This craft was heading west, towards us. What made me notice this craft was that large ball of light that is in the center. That ball is actually a lot lower than the other lights around it. It was bright red, and you cant tell that in this video. Bright red, hanging down below the other lights, which were amber.
So, i pulled off the highway in a driveway to a business. At first my wife grabbed the camera and forgot to take the lens cap off. I took the camera from her, while she looked on with binoculars. I put the camera on top of the cab of my 1994 Isuzu trooper to steady the shot. She was setting on the bumper. Why is that important info? You will hear me say something about she is shaking the truck. that happened when she jumped down off the hood.
So, this flew due west, approx altitude was 1000-3000 feet, i'm guessing.

Anyway, I think this is some of the best material I have seen, and maybe its cause, its my own footage.

Im not going to go round and round with people that want to argue about its authenticity. If you have an issue with believing, i can point you to the news story where I was interviewed and so was a military guy from the air force about my footage that could not identify it. '

Enjoy! www.youtube.com... 4-overview&list=UU3Bw4au9HKgmXHg1fRKuFfg


Ok..you talked me in to it. Video from this being in the local news. www.youtube.com...

JimOberg
This is definitely a boisterous conversation.

But there's a bigger question -- how could a newbie enthusiast entering this arena, be able, using existing internet search engines, to find conflicting and 'debunking' versions of such famous videos and cases? Is there any way to reliably 'automate' the hands-on process that these contributions represent?

One thing that could be done if someone wanted to, would be to go through the ATS UFO directory (which in some cases does include hoaxes) and look them up there.

Jkrog's New and Revised Chronological UFO Thread Directory 2012.

You would find the skeptics views buried somewhere in the thread, but you'd have to dig for it by reading the sometimes long thread. ATS hasn't taken an official position on some, but they have taken a position on those moved to the HOAX category (See "Some Known Relevant Top Hoaxes"). Some, like the Turkey UFO being boats and the Mexico FLIR images being oil rig fires are probably in the same category as Buzz Aldrin's UFO, meaning he was pretty sure it was one of the 4 panels, but the certainty was a hair under 100%. In other cases like the famous Phoenix lights video being flares, that could be 100%.

So if someone wanted to take the ATS directory or similar list of the most famous cases, and put a status update for the cases listed, whether still unsolved, or likely solved in some kind of summary format, which then linked to the detailed threads, that might be helpful, however who would make that determination, as opinions vary? The person who posted the Mexico FLIR video knew about the oil rig fire explanation and chose to dismiss it, so how much it would help even if we did that I'm not sure. It's an idea worth thinking about though.

_BoneZ_
I wonder why James Fox didn't include that video in his documentaries since his included the latest investigations on the Phoenix lights.

I'm going to download and save that one.

Good idea to download it, because I also had a youtube link and it was deleted from youtube. I've heard several documentaries saying the video doesn't exist, so either they are saying that because they doubt the authenticity, or else they are poor researchers and don't know about it, or maybe they even know about it but didn't want to show something of such bad quality? Who knows, but it's not as well known as the flares video, that's for sure.

Arbitrageur
.... It's an idea worth thinking about though.

It would save newbies, whom we always need and welcome, a lot of time and some embarrassment, but I'm still baffled on how to implement a 'Wiki-UFO' kind of summary of opposing views for big cases. Let's keep pondering ponderously.

reply to post by roncoallstar


This is a mad one,but iv'e been blessed in life to have had absolute clear daytime sightings,one was a metallic saucer and the other was an Orb much like the one that buzzed Concorde.

www.youtube.com...

Here it is.

reply to post by carl6405


Here are your videos:







You only need the video number for the forum code. You can hit the "quote" button on my post to see how I did it. I'll comment on this video momentarily.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


BomeZ... Thank you!
Guess you could see I was having some difficulty.

Grimpachi
I am a skeptic about UFO's however I would really like to see evidence proving my intuition wrong.

I keep reading the threads and watching the videos with that hope. Maybe one day I will see that evidence but it doesn't seem like it will be today.

Same here.

Perhaps a better title for the thread would have been: "What is your most convincing hoaxed/CGI UFO video?"

LA 1942


www.youtube.com...