Skinny Bob Colorized and New Details

a reply to: Elyei

Information that may involve any people or agency will not be disclosed. There is not any reference which may link the material to any organization that is working today in the material exposed.

"working today", I guess that covers the blatant KGB Logo.

It must be really hard for Ivan to stay quiet all this time. If he's not dead that is..

originally posted by: BelowBottomPublicity
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Until then, its evidence. The strength of the evidence in this case is subjective depending on how real it looks to the individual. Many think its 100% proof because it looks real. Many think its 0% proof because it looks fake. This is a polarizing topic, the divide is to be expected. 

Well it's 0% proof not because it looks fake, but because in order to prove alien life you need physical evidence. To prove the reality of a new species on Earth there's a process that has to be followed:
- Scientists must gather a physical example.
- The new specimen must be throughly examined to see what existing group it belongs.
- Genetic/DNA testing is done to determine and confirm what exact species.
- Once shown to be a new species, a scientific paper is written and published in a scientific journal. It's passed on to other scientists in the same field to question.

These are several of the extensive requirements on Earth. A similar, but more involved process shouldn't be followed for an alien life visiting?
In the alien UFO connected world, you have no choice but to gather stories and find that as evidence enough to keep this alive. Stories are not based in scientific fact. The scientific fact that has to be used to even accept a new species here.

"You're comparing the fantasy of an alien to the reality of software" 
You think aliens and all info surrounding them is "fantasy"? I think they've visited and have been sighted and testimony should be taken seriously(with healthy skepticism). 

Yes. To this day, aliens physically on Earth is a fantasy. Why? Because with hundreds perhaps thousands of claimed alien abductions and decades of these claims there has not been a single piece of evidence to turn this fantasy story into reality.

Just because it's an alien, by default, it's not genuine? Any "grounded" explanation immediately outweighs genuine looking footage? 

Again, yes. Without evidence of this, you cannot create a genuine and valid argument for it to be alien in comparison to a grounded explanation with a history of evidence.

Do you believe aliens have visited at all? Do you believe any specific UFO video? Share with us what you most think is real so we can get an idea of your belief system

Aliens and UFOs are two different subjects. UFOs exist, meaning objects in the sky that people can't identify. No, I don't believe we've been visited.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

It's very likely that Ivan is dead-- not because he was knocked off, but because this is the kind of thing someone with a terminal illness might post before passing.

People in the youtube comments waste their time asking for "more videos" because Ivan doesn't have any more videos to share. I'm confident he shared all that he got his hands on. The fact that he states there is no one particular person in possession of the original copies... ?? The originals have probably been destroyed.

If a large enough entity wanted to know, they could probably get Youtube to reveal the IP address/location of the upload and the account's private info. But those sort of entities don't want to touch these documents and debunk them once and for all... and I ask myself why!!

a reply to: Ectoplasm8

Do we have physical evidence that Pluto exists?? Or just some obviously CGI photos and composites?

Sometimes... you have to have faith in the evidence presented because you trust the source. Nobody on earth has ever seen an actual piece of Pluto, or touched a rock from Pluto. All we've ever seen are pictures of Pluto. Yet we probably all believe that Pluto actually exists... and take those photos as scientific evidence.

Is it possible to create a CGI image of pluto? Yes...
Has it been done? Yes...

So... we can consider Pluto a fake until we get someone to go out there and get us an actual Rock and sit that physical cold, hard evidence in a museum... or...
we can believe Pluto to be real because the photo evidence is all we are currently have to prove to the world Pluto exists....

a reply to: Ectoplasm8
this is physical evidence. i was using percentages but in reality proof is an absolute. there is no 50% proof. there is evidence and with strong enough evidence, you reach proof. This is not proof, but it is good evidence.

There is evidence...UFO's, witnesses, videos, pictures, government documents.
There's 2 possibilities, hyper-advanced technology unbeknownst to the world, or aliens.
Can you think of a 3rd possibility? If you've studied UFO's for even a week
you'd know that there no other good explanations for the phenomena.

And finally we get this perfect footage, clear and unshaken, of a real live alien and idiots disregard it as impossible and too good to be true. there's a large history of evidence for aliens. some of it actually compelling. it's impossible to prove, we know this already, but we still have plenty of evidence.

aliens and UFO's are not really 2 different subjects. they go hand in hand, because it's unlikely our governments have created tech that's a hundred years more advanced than what's available.

UFOs exist, meaning objects in the sky that people can't identify. No, I don't believe we've been visited.

How much time have you spent looking into UFOs? You've seen all the best ones and still think they are ALL FAKE?

a reply to: Elyei
While I don't think we should "trust" any source completely, I agree that the standard of "proof" seems to be 1000x higher for aliens than it is for whatever NASA/CNN puts out. It makes sense but it shows the bias, some people just believe what they want to believe.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
K I apologize for any insults but when you say things like I 've provided 0 evidence when I showed you the differences between real timecode and fake and spent my time explaining why its fake and where you can see it only to have someone with limited to no education on the topic tell me I don't know what I'm talking about It's a little insulting.

So far the only pros I've seen on ATS have said the same things I have. Outside of that I've only seen a few posts on reddit and youtube of people claiming to be pros. There aren't "just as many professionals" that think its real, there are very few in fact.

I have provided more evidence than 0%, lol the fake timecode should be the nail it the coffin but I tried explaining the "tells" on the Alien himself first, I explained the 3D terminology and software specific items that led me to conclude it was fake and was blown off so I focused on something you could visibly see.

Here let me present this again here is fake timecode vs real timecode




If this were real timecode then explain why it looks so aged when older timecode looks significantly better?



If this is real why does it have hallmarks of digital effects on it like shadows and alpha gradients/textures on the timecode?

a reply to: spiritualarchitect
I would lean in that direction but there are several things that visually point to CGI one of which being cost, CGI is much cheaper and would involve far less people.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity
All you did is bump up the contrast, where is the reflection/refraction in/around the eyes?

a reply to: Somniferum
I know but seeing as I come from the old school ufo days, I felt having professionals in the thread might bring back some credibility to ATS. Someone needs to present clear evidence so we can stand a bit taller as a community, so when I have time I intend to combat ignorance here on ATS and contribute while I'm able.

a reply to: kobalt7
We already said everything we could about the timestamp. Why would this person create all of this and leave in such an obvious flaw? They wouldn't, because it's from the digital camera and that's obviously not a secret. It's the most obvious thing to pick up on yet people still ask "why is there a projector sound". It's honestly making me lose a little bit of faith in humanity.
a reply to: kobalt7
I used a forensic program called "video cleaner" which is an AVS script. I used to 'histogram' feature which brought out a lot more than my video editor could with simple brightness/contrast adjustments. I've tried many programs and it was not easy to bring his eye out with such clarity. Where is the reflection...he seems to be wearing some sort of sunglasses contact lens and the shadows are really heavy to begin with. Why no reflection here previews.123rf.com... ?
I don't know and I certainly can't answer for the alien.
a reply to: kobalt7
Clear evidence you say? Well I have some clear evidence for another case.
let's see what you think. youtu.be...
If you don't believe it, I'm sure you'd be much quicker to believe half-baked counter-evidence.

a reply to: Elyei
Gonna need to break that up into paragraphs that was hard to read.

From an anatomical standpoint the neck could not support the head, gravity would add enough stress that a quick breeze could snap it.

Those are several reasons why I never considered it a puppet, fluidity of motion with puppets is limited and costly.

The algorithms,physics and kinetics involved in anatomical 3d motion have been around for a long time before Bob, there no need for a programmer they can be easily achieved with plugins and some easier things like Walk cycles and facial expressions come prepackaged and ready to plug into any model, we also have body/face motion capture(mocap) software that's just as old and made to work with multiple software and mimic the fluidity needed to cross the uncanny valley.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

In the sunglasses photo the reason you don't see a reflection is because the way he is facing the camera the light is at an angle that prevents its visibility, any movement would have shown some reflection and because the overcast light is diffused so you see no gradation. In the bob image you have heavy light/contrast and head movement that would no doubt provide a strong reflection/or refraction on any glossy surface from the floor, the walls or any white surface hit with that light, even a matte surface would show at least some form.

I remember that turkey ufo vid lol, I thought it was legit I must have watched it a dozen times when it first came out, it was huge news because of the little occupant and went on for a few years. Haven't seen much on it since but from a digital standpoint it had to be hard to dissect because of the video quality.

originally posted by: BelowBottomPublicity

And finally we get this perfect footage, clear and unshaken, of a real live alien and idiots disregard it...

FAIL.

Way to go to shut down intelligent discussion.

This thread is dead. Or, more accurately, it's a zombie wandering about when it should return to its 2011 grave.

a reply to: kobalt7

I should add that at this point there is a matte black which does absorb all light called vanta black, which would be impossible to see thru since it absorbs all wavelengths of light and was created to hide planes from radar.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Lol I was hoping to put this to bed quickly for you all but it just keeps going.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Idiots disregard it as "impossible" or "too good to be true". If you run on that ideology then you have no business in the paranormal community. The evidence that aliens have visited is overwhelming, to say its all fabricated is far too dismissive for someone on a conspiracy theory website. People are quick to think something is debunked but hold the opposite to ridiculously more scrutiny from bias.

I dont see how that statement affects the discussion. We're right where we left off.

a reply to: kobalt7

We're talking about an alien here, reflection from his lenses made of unknown material will have unknown reactions. It doesn't get us far because I can just say "if it's cgi lighting, wheres the reflection?" If you watch the original video, you would know there's little chance of pulling out all the detail. I could barely find 1/300 frames that showed his eye somewhat clearly. And now that you mention it, there were a few frames where reflection seemed to occur.

I'll find em later and you can come up with another reason why you were right all along. How many times do I have to show you things you thought weren't there...at some point you should do your own investigation instead of putting it all on others to debunk your random claims.

a reply to: BelowBottomPublicity

Idiots disregard it as "impossible" or "too good to be true".

Idiots believe it's real because they want it to be real , there is enough evidence to conclude the " Skinny Bob " videos are fake so the question is what do you have to prove they are not.

a reply to: gortex

What evidence? Arguing the timestamp and projector sound is terrible evidence. Got anything actually good?

There is no evidence to prove they are fake, there is no evidence to prove they are real. But there is a lot more evidence to support than there is to condemn. The lack of tells apparent in most alien videos is evidence in itself.

Almost every good alien video on the internet has been proven wrong, not this one though. This one has people grasping as straws and stretching the realm of possibility to infinite lengths to confirm their first impressions.

I will admit that there ARE idiots who "want to believe" and believe far too easily. The same goes for the idiots who want to disbelieve and will do whatever they can to support their suspicions. Both sides have their bias, very few people overall have a legitimate open mind with healthy skepticism.

The people who say "its real" and "its fake" arent thinking objectively. The people who say "i think its real" and "i believe its fake" are the people who know what theyre dealing with. A mystery.

a reply to: Elyei

Do we have physical evidence that Pluto exists?? Or just some obviously CGI photos and composites?

Sometimes... you have to have faith in the evidence presented because you trust the source. Nobody on earth has ever seen an actual piece of Pluto, or touched a rock from Pluto. All we've ever seen are pictures of Pluto. Yet we probably all believe that Pluto actually exists... and take those photos as scientific evidence.....

You didn't think your reply through at all did you?

I really can't believe people are still debating this. But your point above is ludicrous. Anyone on Earth with enough resources and eyesight can purchase or rent a decent telescope and with enough astronomical knowledge be able to see Pluto in the night sky for themselves.

I think you'll agree that you can't just go and see real aliens that look like Skinny Bob for yourselves.