It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO filmed at Area 51-Finally conclusive video evidence

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 10:28 PM
link   
...just for clarification -


My analysis of the footage, as well as that of a few others, indicates to me that the craft in the Night In The Desert clips from my footage was not the 'Sports Model' in frame, but instead was the 'Jello Mold'.




posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: MarsIsRed
I agree he's utterly clueless. The filters he runs seem totally useless.

One technique that CAN be useful to get better information from averaging multiple frames, is called "frame stacking" (It's popular with astronomers for example), and he doesn't even use that at all which is more evidence that his claims to be some kind of expert are totally bogus.

As for UFOs over area 51, it's a base with a long runway working on secret projects so said secret projects getting airborne will likely be UFOs by definition. Unfortunately the bad filters give us no more clues about what it is or what it even looks like.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: A51Watcher

Actually, I'm the one who took this footage and created the video in the OP (Night In The Desert) with zoomed frames next to the original.

Sander has processed a lot of frames of my footage, and I find them quite impressive.

Especially if you understand what the processes are doing.


I see from the comments here readers are unsure of when and where this footage was taken (and of what).


It was filmed from the edge of Area 51, and at one point when one of the craft (I saw three total, performing test maneuvers) flew past fairly close overhead, I could see an elliptical spheroid shape, a dead ringer for 'the sports model.'

These craft perform impossible speeds and maneuvers such as 90 degree turns in- flight and dead stops and starts.

To allay speculation on when and where this footage was taken, I released this video showing where I was just before the 'Night In The Desert' footage was taken -










That's the problem here on ATS pal, some people really don't have a clue what sander's job involves..

More insults on this thread then input, same old same old..



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: skyblueworld

At 3:26 my computer stopped the vid to buffer it and at that point I gave up, about halfway into the 5:56 entirety of it.

If anybody sees any redeeming value in watching the whole thing through, please explain in graphic detail.

That feature, "graphic details" was never witnessed in the time I spent waiting for some semblance of ...well, just that, some semblance of graphic details.



The video is not in the quote, its is the 30 min long presentation video at the bottom of my OP.

Wonder how many others watched the shorter video without watching the step by step video.!!



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:35 AM
link   
By Sander himself:


The software I use is used by law enforcement and the military and specially designed to extract as much data from an image as possible. Special noise filters reduce the number of artifacts during the process. I also used techniques that average frames so noise visible in one frame is reduced in value in the following frame. This results in a more clear view with the noise still there but it is less visible to the human eye.
Show less



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: A51Watcher

People are aware of what the film is of. It's definitely a craft and it's flying above Area 51.

What people are skeptical of is the video process used. The diamond shape is a result of the camera. Unless the argument is that the craft is shaped just like an image artifact, the shape the analyst ends up with discredits his process. The same is true with blowing the image up. If you take an image and then blow it up to something at 3 times it's resolution it becomes very pixelated. The analyst basically does this as a way to zoom in.

Basically, the techniques claimed are crap.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: skyblueworld


That's the problem here on ATS pal, some people really don't have a clue what sander's job involves..

More insults on this thread then input, same old same old..


Should we care when the flaws in his methodology are intuitively obvious to the most pedestrian of observers?


Perhaps his employer should care.


So what, did all his buddies get together and decide to act as mouthpieces for him to circumvent his bannage? :-))



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Hello A51 Watcher. As you know I am out of the country at this time and unable to view any videos. But, I can vouch for the integrity of A51, I know him very well and we have worked on Area 51 sightings for several years now. If there is any of my work you need as official back up or enlightening anyone, you can just go ahead and post it for me or get in touch and let me know which processed photos you need.

As far as Sander goes. Both of us also worked together on many of A51s vids. His process is very different than mine but we both can pick out the goodies. I go after energy, he seems to go after the object within the energy field. With respects to A51s work both Sanders and I have blind tested each other several times and came to the same ends.

What are those ends A51 filmed at Area 51 you ask? Easy, They are shot down, captured or handed over Alien space craft that are most likely being test flown. They seem to have a test pilot school there where several of them go up at once and one of the craft, call it the teacher can over-ride the junior craft when needed. It is a sight to see. They seem to want to fly in the desert away from the actual Area 51 in case they crash. They don't want to take out the base in a split second.

According to Mr. Bob Lazar they have 9 craft. I have processed and fell rest assured that A51 has caught on film at least 3 of them in flight. His films are the real deal. We have also researched others that are not. There is no longer a question in my mind if UFOs are real or not. There they are, right at the base, on film, processed by several processors with top notch computer equipment and programs. Not Paint or an etch-a-sketch.

So now the current challenge is to figure out how to catch some of the UFOs that are around and not being flown by humans. Hi tech has come a long way for us that process prints. We recently found a UFO in a 1947 print that had an energy field almost twice its crafts size and leaving a trail of atmospheric interference. Only objects that emit energy can produce such fields. Reflective light is the same size, less or angled.

To conclude: If you still don't believe in Alien UFOs, there will be little to nothing I can do to change your minds. For those of you that might or do believe. then A51 Watchers videos are the best in the field that I have ever processed.

Deuem



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Deuem


originally posted by: draknoir2

So what, did all his buddies get together and decide to act as mouthpieces for him to circumvent his bannage? :-))


I'll take that as a hearty "yes!".


I have noticed that this "conclusive video evidence" has been making the rounds on the more fringeworthy sites ... which is right where it belongs.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: draknoir2

I have also blind-tested Deuem's process, it was 100% effective.
We are planning to run some more blind tests on different objects to build up a solid base to compare UFO photo's with.
It's called research dudes.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: skyblueworld

I've not watched the videos yet really to busy to watch now, commenting so I can find it easier later
interesting find thanks for sharing



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Looks to me like a small RC drone with LEDS attached, easily purchased from a local hobbyist/Enthusiast's store



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Deuem

You destroyed any credibility you may have had by bringing up Bob Lazar.

-SAP-



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: playswithmachines
a reply to: draknoir2

I have also blind-tested Deuem's process, it was 100% effective.
We are planning to run some more blind tests on different objects to build up a solid base to compare UFO photo's with.
It's called research dudes.


Does it help to be blind when testing this "process"?



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Why is it that people STILL think you can do this? :



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: skyblueworld

Claims to use special software from law enforcement and military, uses commercially available art plugins for Photoshop.




Lucis® Pro 6 has nothing to do with microbiology

This guy is B.S'ing you in every frame of his video.




edit on 24-4-2014 by freelance_zenarchist because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: freelance_zenarchist
a reply to: skyblueworld

Claims to use special software from law enforcement and military, uses commercially available art plugins for Photoshop.



That sounds oddly familiar...



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2
a reply to: Deuem




originally posted by: draknoir2



So what, did all his buddies get together and decide to act as mouthpieces for him to circumvent his bannage? :-))




I'll take that as a hearty "yes!".





I have noticed that this "conclusive video evidence" has been making the rounds on the more fringeworthy sites ... which is right where it belongs.





Only by looking very deep into a video can one start to relize what is going on within it. And before i get jumped on, YES, Most videoes out there are garbage. When I started to work on this one I thought I hit gold. Where people see just a white bouncing light, I see a very neat saucer producing an energy field in the atmosphere. Noting like LED lights or any man made light source. I have a library of standards to judge against. The craft he filmed were nothing like any of the hundreds of standards for light. Emiting or reflective. Not matching any type of CGI or in or out of camera work.
The reason I chimmed in on this one is because out of the thousands of UFO files that have crossed my desk, this is still the best to date. It is kind of that simple to say. It is also impossible to judge this video just by watching it. The caft is too far away for a clear shot that the eyes can see. One needs to do a lot of work on it first.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: SloAnPainful
a reply to: Deuem



You destroyed any credibility you may have had by bringing up Bob Lazar.



-SAP-





Really, does that all it take now adays? A simple quote from another person. Guess you don't know me very well.
Thank you for the heads up.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deuem It is also impossible to judge this video just by watching it. The caft is too far away for a clear shot that the eyes can see. One needs to do a lot of work on it first.


It's the "lot of work on it" that's the issue. You can only manipulate an image from 1991 technology level so much. And some of us do have access to some higher end state of the art programs...so we know how it works.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join