azatoth Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 Most likely it's fake. That light show at the end put it over the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
data Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrFjWqCcjcA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 it looks very very fake. even before that flashing light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 What a surprise, a fake UFO video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke viia Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I'm not much of a UFO nut but that brazil video, fake or not...hmmm... I saw something really similar to that in 2003 with one of my friends on a country road in Nebraska (outside the small town I grew up in)... I didn't see anything just sitting there hovering, but both my friend and I (he was driving, it was around 11pm) saw the sky light up as if someone had taken a flash photo of the world, then the looks of things went quickly back to normal - except I stuck my head out the car window to try and see where the flash had come from, and directly above us was a trail of light very similar to the one that takes off @ the end of that Brazil video (which, again, does look like it could have been faked, I have no idea about that). The trail of light I saw didn't go all the way to the horizon, but it seemed incredibly far away and the trail left behind spanned what seemed like a "few inches" of sky from my view. The light trail sort of "lingered" for a moment and then faded away. Makes me feel like a loon even trying to explain that experience. As for that "alien torch" video, it's beautiful, but the flashing lights are - as one youtube comment casually pointed out - almost certainly the korolyov cross of the missile. Edit: exactly. What the last couple people said. It's usually fake until proven otherwise. I still don't know how to account for my own experience, but whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 it looks very very fake. even before that flashing light. well that vid should have gone to the Best ufo ever thread then. Anyway I don't get how you guys can tell "it looks very very fake". To me, it looks pretty real - all the more that it's in low-res. i think it looks fake not per se, but because it features a Ufo. Would they have inserted a normal plane instead of a ufo, and you wouldn't have found it "very very fake". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 As for that "alien torch" video, it's beautiful, but the flashing lights are - as one youtube comment casually pointed out - almost certainly the korolyov cross of the missile. Edit: exactly. What the last couple people said. It's usually fake until proven otherwise. I still don't know how to account for my own experience, but whatever. that's amazingKorolyov was a genius, I've read a bunch o' books about him. Good to see there's something named after him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertsk8er419 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 babar, the cloud is quite far away, but the UFO appears to land just beyond the trees. to me that indicates a fake. it seems like the camera is just pointed up into the the sky and the ufo is just edited in to me. not sure though. what surprises me is that no ones made a big deal about the the real jerusalem ufo videos, and those are INSANE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 everything about it reeks of fakeness, at first the thing is barely visible, then it looks like it could be some balloon and i don't see why anyone would stop a moving car just to film that. the object also doesn't blend in too well with the rest of the image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 babar, the cloud is quite far away, but the UFO appears to land just beyond the trees. to me that indicates a fake. it seems like the camera is just pointed up into the the sky and the ufo is just edited in to me. not sure though. what surprises me is that no ones made a big deal about the the real jerusalem ufo videos, and those are INSANE. *watches the brazilian video for the umpteenth time* the way the lights go down don't seem especially fake. I mean, they seem to land beyond the trees - i can't tell if they look to land just a few meters away from the trees or kilometers away. And it's pretty well acted as well. I don't speak portuguese, but the guy seems to be pretty sincerely excited about the UFO. in short : on a quick look, that doesn't seem blatantly fake. Hopefully, one of the frame was left unedited. about the jerusalem vid: i posted it in my best ufo ever thread. One of the videos has been dismissed as faked (the background was incrusted/was a wikimedia picture). But there are three other footage of this ufo. 1. they are all fake. 2. the mossad uploaded a fake vid to discredit the whole case. -----A. ufos are watching our nukes. -----B. Nuke storages tend to vary during political crisis -----C. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc. -----D. Israelians move their nukes. -----E. Ufo fly over nukes. -----F. People film it and upload their files on youtube. -----G. mossad do something about it. Personally I believe in 2. I haven't "investigated" the jerusalem UFO (i did spend several hours googletranslating pages from roscosmos.ru, in order to identify the "alien torches"). A thought: it's terribly painful to find original vids from youtube. Most of time they get copied dozen if not hundreds of time and people who do it don't mention the source of the vid. Youtube should do something about it: it'd be cool to be able to "source-protect" your vid, so that when people re-upload your vid, a link to your vid inserted in the description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 i don't see why anyone would stop a moving car just to film that. wow. I'd stop the shit out of my car ! A Fucking gigantic ufo hidden in a cloud ! That's a once-in-a-life sighting. And you forget that what is shown through the vid, is not what the guy (allegedly) saw. In real life, that'd have been clearer and a lot more exciting. This is like when you see a red moon. You think "wow that's amazing" and decide to take a pic of it. Back home, you upload the pic on your computer, and figure out the moon is tiny on the pic and that it's redness is barely noticeable. Same thing applies to ufos (there are tons of ufo vid where people just film a dot in the far-out). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertsk8er419 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 babar, the cloud is quite far away, but the UFO appears to land just beyond the trees. to me that indicates a fake. it seems like the camera is just pointed up into the the sky and the ufo is just edited in to me. not sure though. what surprises me is that no ones made a big deal about the the real jerusalem ufo videos, and those are INSANE. *watches the brazilian video for the umpteenth time* the way the lights go down don't seem especially fake. I mean, they seem to land beyond the trees - i can't tell if they look to land just a few meters away from the trees or kilometers away. And it's pretty well acted as well. I don't speak portuguese, but the guy seems to be pretty sincerely excited about the UFO. in short : on a quick look, that doesn't seem blatantly fake. Hopefully, one of the frame was left unedited. about the jerusalem vid: i posted it in my best ufo ever thread. One of the videos has been dismissed as faked (the background was incrusted/was a wikimedia picture). But there are three other footage of this ufo. 1. they are all fake. 2. the mossad uploaded a fake vid to discredit the whole case. -----A. ufos are watching our nukes. -----B. Nuke storages tend to vary during political crisis -----C. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc. -----D. Israelians move their nukes. -----E. Ufo fly over nukes. -----F. People film it and upload their files on youtube. -----G. mossad do something about it. Personally I believe in 2. I haven't "investigated" the jerusalem UFO (i did spend several hours googletranslating pages from roscosmos.ru, in order to identify the "alien torches"). A thought: it's terribly painful to find original vids from youtube. Most of time they get copied dozen if not hundreds of time and people who do it don't mention the source of the vid. Youtube should do something about it: it'd be cool to be able to "source-protect" your vid, so that when people re-upload your vid, a link to your vid inserted in the description. yea i'd agree with number 2 as well. i definitely believe benevolent extraterrestrial forces are watching the nukes of the world govt, ever since Hiroshima, for certain. have you ever heard the case of Admiral Byrd? also, here is the latest evidence i've seen supporting the Jerusalem UFO as real event... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPwQS895DfM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Jew-F-O Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 so they have nuke launchers hidden under the temple mount ? that's clever. Arabs wouldn't bomb it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertsk8er419 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 so they have nuke launchers hidden under the temple mount ? that's clever. Arabs wouldn't bomb it. lol don't know how you came up with that conclusion. this sighting seems to be more for display reasons, not nukes, as its kinda flashy (heh) and over such a significant spot in human history... following your logic, you must believe that every legit UFO sighting must relate to observing/interfering with nuke activity, when in fact most are for making some sort of emotional connection with other human beings as to inspire a kind of shift in their consciousness or belief systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke viia Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 i'd be careful about using phrases like "in fact" when discussing UFOs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertsk8er419 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 i'd be careful about using phrases like "in fact" when discussing UFOs... well..... i've made the 'emotional connection' i speak of, and it certainly feels like fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fiznuthian Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 babar, the cloud is quite far away, but the UFO appears to land just beyond the trees. to me that indicates a fake. it seems like the camera is just pointed up into the the sky and the ufo is just edited in to me. not sure though. what surprises me is that no ones made a big deal about the the real jerusalem ufo videos, and those are INSANE. *watches the brazilian video for the umpteenth time* the way the lights go down don't seem especially fake. I mean, they seem to land beyond the trees - i can't tell if they look to land just a few meters away from the trees or kilometers away. And it's pretty well acted as well. I don't speak portuguese, but the guy seems to be pretty sincerely excited about the UFO. in short : on a quick look, that doesn't seem blatantly fake. Hopefully, one of the frame was left unedited. about the jerusalem vid: i posted it in my best ufo ever thread. One of the videos has been dismissed as faked (the background was incrusted/was a wikimedia picture). But there are three other footage of this ufo. 1. they are all fake. 2. the mossad uploaded a fake vid to discredit the whole case. -----A. ufos are watching our nukes. -----B. Nuke storages tend to vary during political crisis -----C. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc. -----D. Israelians move their nukes. -----E. Ufo fly over nukes. -----F. People film it and upload their files on youtube. -----G. mossad do something about it. Personally I believe in 2. I haven't "investigated" the jerusalem UFO (i did spend several hours googletranslating pages from roscosmos.ru, in order to identify the "alien torches"). A thought: it's terribly painful to find original vids from youtube. Most of time they get copied dozen if not hundreds of time and people who do it don't mention the source of the vid. Youtube should do something about it: it'd be cool to be able to "source-protect" your vid, so that when people re-upload your vid, a link to your vid inserted in the description. yea i'd agree with number 2 as well. i definitely believe benevolent extraterrestrial forces are watching the nukes of the world govt, ever since Hiroshima, for certain. have you ever heard the case of Admiral Byrd? also, here is the latest evidence i've seen supporting the Jerusalem UFO as real event... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPwQS895DfM oh my fucking god that video just made me feel very uncomfortable if that is an elaborate fake of some kind, then wow that is some incredible work on someone's part i think i'm going to start praying nightly to our obviously superior intergalactic neighbors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yikes Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ7CAY9EWFU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fiznuthian Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ7CAY9EWFU damnit guys i'm afraid to take a shower now.. i just had to know if those videos were real, and managed to find this, which is comforting: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread663159/pg1 http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread658652/pg1 i still have my doubts. (man photek rules!) it is true that with digital technology it is likely that most of these so-called UFO sightings are fakes. but what i think is most important are the anecdotal experiences that many people on this planet have shared. even some of you feel strongly that you've witnessed oddities in the sky.. i believe you. i remember fondly playing a game of football with an old friend in the yard when he yelled "look up!" and we both stood there for a few minutes watching what appeared to be a very bright and distant glowing red dot in the sky, both hovering at moments and then zipping erratically and quickly beyond the clouds. and then it was gone. it weirded us out so much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 well that second link is very enlightening. and maussan is a clown btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertsk8er419 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 well that second link is very enlightening. and maussan is a clown btw. This business of "mirroring" and "tiling" presented by those at ATS has another question mark hanging over it, imo. In the demo's that have been shown, there is a moment where "mirroring" is seen along the edges of the screen, but there is totally no need for it from a hoaxing perspective. If you are aiming to con people, why add effects that are not needed? And aren't those sorts of effects standard with crappy cell phone cameras anyways, like for stabilization purposes? Instead of concentrating on second-hand copies of the event, which not a lot can conclusively be proven from, these derbunker detectives should try doing some proper investigating (cctv sources) before they start pontificating and bragging about their cgi skillz. and maussan being a clown is your opinion, he's just some harmless ufo guy with a bad accent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babar Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 so they have nuke launchers hidden under the temple mount ? that's clever. Arabs wouldn't bomb it. lol don't know how you came up with that conclusion. this sighting seems to be more for display reasons, not nukes, as its kinda flashy (heh) and over such a significant spot in human history... following your logic, you must believe that every legit UFO sighting must relate to observing/interfering with nuke activity, when in fact most are for making some sort of emotional connection with other human beings as to inspire a kind of shift in their consciousness or belief systems. i don't buy the shift in their consciousness or belief systems theory. They watch nukes that's all i don't think they want to show us the path to light and better days. And as i've already said, our french ufo bureau made a statistical analysis about UFOs. Turned out sightings correlates with radioactivity. AND what was i thinking about ? ah : They're watching our nukes because it's a serious threat to life on earth which they probably consider as the most precious thing on our little rock (either morally or materially(science, business etc…). In short, I think they're defending their own interest. Now, let's talk about skeptics. i found this stuff http://ibelieveinhumans.com/index.php/ufo-hoax/ In November of 2008, we found ourselves sitting around one evening discussing pseudoscience and the large numbers of people that still believe in its various guises. We had always had a strong interest in why people were so easily fooled by such irrational superstitions as psychic ability, spiritual mediums, alien abductions, and the like. Despite the lack of evidence to support these notions, we were baffled. How could so many people in an age of science still buy into dogma that is no more or less ridiculous than the notion of an elderly obese man delivering presents to every child on Earth in one evening? And like most other people, we had always heard about the uneducated farmer spotting an alien spaceship hovering over his farm, but we wondered if that amount of gullibility could be found in our upper-middle class hometown of Hanover, NJ, and the surrounding cities. That's an aggressive start, one might say it's a bias, but i'll consider this is their hypothesis. So ufos are fake. Always. Here's their experiment We hatched the idea of tying flares onto helium balloons and launching them in a nearby field…The media coverage the incident received over the next few days was extensive. Both local and national news stations were covering the UFO over New Jersey. The local paper had a field day with it, quoting a doctor who said the mysterious lights traveled against the wind, and quoting another man who said the object “didn’t appear to be manmade.”… [at one point a ufologist gets discreted when he says the UFO is real] This begs an important question: are UFO investigators simply charlatans looking to make a quick buck off human gullibility, or are they alarmists using bad science to back up their biased opinions that extraterrestrial life is routinely visiting our planet?[this question is only rhetorical +10000pts] … [CONCLUSION] If a respected UFO investigator can be easily manipulated and dead wrong on one UFO case, is it possible he’s wrong on most (or all) of them? Do the networks buy into this nonsense, or are they in it for the ratings? How can a television network that has pretensions of providing honest and factual programming be taken seriously when the topic of one of their top rated shows deals with chasing flares and fishing line? In fact, we delivered what every perfect UFO case has: great video and pictures, “credible” eyewitnesses (doctors and pilots), and professional investigators convinced that something amazing was witnessed. Does this bring into question the validity of every other UFO case? We believe it does. this is not science. Their methodology is wrong. I recently stumbled upon this aphorism by Deleuze: "the job of the philosopher [and the scientist(?)] is to make concepts, the job of the artist is to make percepts.". They made percepts, so i suppose they are artists of some kind. But one could retort : "but it was a social experiment !". Yes and no. They do mention that they're conducting a social expriment (we wondered if that amount of gullibility could be found in our upper-middle class hometown ) but their hypothesis is based on the belief/intuition that UFOs are not UFOs. And their conclusion concerns the ontic value (exist/don't exist) of UFOs. And you can't prove something doesn't exist by making a fake version of it, even if you "believe it does" Skeptics vs believers ? Basically, believers believe UFOs exist. Skeptics ? "Skeptics" ? It's more complex. Ideally a skeptic doubts of anything - withing a certain range: he stops doubting when he feels he's entering the land of delirium. That's exactly here the divergence between believers and skeptics occurs - the latter consider UFOs and ET belong to imaginationland. As a consequence, in the context of ufologyufomania, a skeptic is a person who doubts that UFOs exist (i mean extraterrestrial spaceships) and a believer is someone who believes UFOs exist but doubting and believing are roughly one and the same thing : possibility modalities. Nothing factual and determined here. Thus : a skeptic is a person who believes UFOs don't exists and a believer is someone who has doubts about their non-existence. Sounds strange ? I have a couple stories 1. I wrote a topic about my August 2007 sighting on an astronomy forum (my sighting = the sperms/alien torches from the past weeks). They told me it was a meteorite/comet. Turns out it's most likely a soyuz or a missile using the same technology or another kind of rocket. 2. I stumbled upon this vid (jump @ 1:30) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4Xx66ba36o&feature=related I thought "comm'on babar, don't be lazy, try to look for an explanation". So i went to the same forum. They told me "ahahaha it's bacterias ! Have you never looked in a microscope ?" like if i was ome kind of ridiculously retarded animal. I thought "shit" and found some nasa guy that was at war in some remote thread on a form. They were discussing this very video. I sent him a mail and asked him if these were bacterias "not at all" he said "it was shot in space" and he gave me some link to his own theory on the matter (= dust particles). I went back to the first forum and presented the claims of the nasa dude to the "microbiologists". They dismissed his theory ("childish") and sticked to their bacteria theory. I still don't know what this vid actually features, but I believe those are UFOs (non-linear non-uniform movements in orbital space). super-cool-stories bro thanks you're welcome ciao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 well that second link is very enlightening. and maussan is a clown btw. This business of "mirroring" and "tiling" presented by those at ATS has another question mark hanging over it, imo. In the demo's that have been shown, there is a moment where "mirroring" is seen along the edges of the screen, but there is totally no need for it from a hoaxing perspective. If you are aiming to con people, why add effects that are not needed? And aren't those sorts of effects standard with crappy cell phone cameras anyways, like for stabilization purposes? Instead of concentrating on second-hand copies of the event, which not a lot can conclusively be proven from, these derbunker detectives should try doing some proper investigating (cctv sources) before they start pontificating and bragging about their cgi skillz. and maussan being a clown is your opinion, he's just some harmless ufo guy with a bad accent. easy, since the handheld effect was added they used mirroring so no cropping would be visible. probably a default setting of some sort. why do you think someone even bothered to check for mirroring, probably a common thing. and maussan is a clown, I've seen his stuff probably my whole life, he's very famous here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 i found this stuff http://ibelieveinhumans.com/index.php/ufo-hoax/ In November of 2008, we found ourselves sitting around one evening discussing pseudoscience and the large numbers of people that still believe in its various guises. We had always had a strong interest in why people were so easily fooled by such irrational superstitions as psychic ability, spiritual mediums, alien abductions, and the like. Despite the lack of evidence to support these notions, we were baffled. How could so many people in an age of science still buy into dogma that is no more or less ridiculous than the notion of an elderly obese man delivering presents to every child on Earth in one evening? And like most other people, we had always heard about the uneducated farmer spotting an alien spaceship hovering over his farm, but we wondered if that amount of gullibility could be found in our upper-middle class hometown of Hanover, NJ, and the surrounding cities. That's an aggressive start, one might say it's a bias, but i'll consider this is their hypothesis. So ufos are fake. Always. Here's their experiment We hatched the idea of tying flares onto helium balloons and launching them in a nearby field…The media coverage the incident received over the next few days was extensive. Both local and national news stations were covering the UFO over New Jersey. The local paper had a field day with it, quoting a doctor who said the mysterious lights traveled against the wind, and quoting another man who said the object “didn’t appear to be manmade.”… [at one point a ufologist gets discreted when he says the UFO is real] This begs an important question: are UFO investigators simply charlatans looking to make a quick buck off human gullibility, or are they alarmists using bad science to back up their biased opinions that extraterrestrial life is routinely visiting our planet?[this question is only rhetorical +10000pts] … [CONCLUSION] If a respected UFO investigator can be easily manipulated and dead wrong on one UFO case, is it possible he’s wrong on most (or all) of them? Do the networks buy into this nonsense, or are they in it for the ratings? How can a television network that has pretensions of providing honest and factual programming be taken seriously when the topic of one of their top rated shows deals with chasing flares and fishing line? In fact, we delivered what every perfect UFO case has: great video and pictures, “credible” eyewitnesses (doctors and pilots), and professional investigators convinced that something amazing was witnessed. Does this bring into question the validity of every other UFO case? We believe it does. genius. i love these guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.