It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Was this U.F.O ever identified or has it remained unidentified?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 07:01 PM

originally posted by: nOraKat
a reply to: BIGPoJo

The "orbs" that the "ufo" is depositing are behaving like they are attached by a string or rope, because they are. I have seen this video before, its not CGI, its real. It's exactly what I said it was, a balloon cluster. Look at the S curve of the "orbs".

If it were the wind that was propelling the balloons, how would it propel the balloons in opposite directions?

Read back a few posts and the answer is obvious.
Drag and inertia.

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 12:27 AM

originally posted by: Blue Shift
For me, the true value of any video or photo is what happens with it down the line. Do we learn anything more from it? Is additional evidence found?

In this case -- no. Even if it is aliens or trans-dimensional drones or whatever, it doesn't make any difference because nothing new or further ever resulted from it, placing it squarely in the file cabinet with all the rest of the crap.

Even for you folks who firmly believe it to be authentic and true... authentic and true of what? Some odd thing in the sky that we can't identify? Sheesh.

This is correct, in my opinion, and the video should be regarded as insubstantial and proving nothing. This supports the lack of cgi to me, as the video subject is just so uninspiring to warrant the effort. It has to be something else.

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:05 PM

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Ophiuchus 13
How about; CGI?

At first I didn't accept your answer and BIGPolo was closer but still no seegar. Then I looked at the double video posted by reldra - Defender of Balenor
posted on Jun, 29 2016 @ 10:10 PM link quote: reply a reply to: Ophiuchus 13
Here's the longer version with 2 angles

I viewed the video and the video on the right is not really from 2 angles. It's the same video but reversed. Study it, as I did. But where the CGI consideration comes in is that one video has a cloudy background, the other is clear sky. So, yes, based on my observations I have to also vote CGI.

posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 12:55 AM
a reply to: charlyv

Link please.. I dont see your "drag inertia" anywhere.

The video is not flipped either. Easy to see that.


top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in