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.

 

Woah - Russian Crashed UFO Video

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 03:54 AM
link   
I haven't seen this video posted on here before so if it has been I apologise, but its very very interesting.

I have to say though anything Russian usually turns out fake or hoax.

www.alienvideo.net...

PS: I have seen the photo's of this crashed disk in B&W somewhere on here before but not a link to the actual footage.

[edit on 21-12-2006 by mazzroth]

[edit on 21-12-2006 by mazzroth]




posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Hi Mazzroth.
Yeah this has been on ATS many times, in fact a thread was on here only yesterday about the same thing.
I think its suggested that either a fake, or some sort of training video, the ground around the alleged saucer does not add up, and there is speculation that its not a saucer at all, something very man made, unrelated to anything of that nature.



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:01 AM
link   
I apologise for this being a repeated thread, I read most new topics on ATS but must have missed that one. Seeing that the date was 18th Dec I thought it was relatively new.



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:03 AM
link   
heres a good example.
from your link they show this.




Very thin for even the smallest alien.


One skeptical viewpoint suggests that the object's thickness is far to small to support any would-be alien pilot. Highlighted in the image ( right ) is the craft's outer edge. While it is only 12 to 36 inches, it is not necessarily indicative of the overall thickness of the craft. This particular image was taken from the only part in the video sequence where the craft's edge is visible.


Or maybe its upside down??


And since the camera never goes behind, there is no way to tell how much depth the craft may have on the other side. Additionally, if you consider the side facing us may be actually be the bottom, we can easily see that this craft can easily fit the traditional "flying saucer" shape as demonstrated by the below images.


Gif, on original link.

www.alienvideo.net...

scroll down.

[edit on 21-12-2006 by Denied]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Denied
Very thin for even the smallest alien.


Naaah! It's not to thin for even the smallest alien. Take a look at the center, it's a bit broader. The example is from Men in Black (M.I.B) movie. It can even be a space probe thats controled remotely...

7A

[edit on 21-12-2006 by 7Ayreon]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Point taken about the edge of the craft as you would think that the leading edge of any craft designed to fly fast would have a sharper tip.

Could it be an ejected hatch of some kind as I have heard of disc like objects leaving a main body of a UFO as reconisaince craft ?

[edit on 21-12-2006 by mazzroth]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7Ayreon

Originally posted by Denied
Very thin for even the smallest alien.


Naaah! It's not to thin for even the smallest alien. Take a look at the center, it's a bit broader. The example is from Men in Black (M.I.B) movie. It can even be a space probe thats controled remotely...

7A

[edit on 21-12-2006 by 7Ayreon]


Yes true, i suppose an alien could be any size, and have heard of reports of tiny crafts, possibly indicating small aliens...

Could be upside down, as the link says, with a small dome underneath it, again, all this means nothing if it is a fake.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 12:12 AM
link   
That article has a flash movie demonstrating how the craft is embedded into the ground.

www.alienvideo.net...


Also I thought was interesting, is that apparently this footage actually has the original film reel and Soviet KGB metal canisters to go along with it. According to AV this means its damn close to being 100% authentic.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 02:43 AM
link   
There is one "rule of thumb" I have stuck to over years of surfing the net and it goes like this...Any media release Russian in origin or starting from pravda.ru is to be taken as fictional, dis-info or blatant hoax.

This rule is like a Law of Nature


Sorry if there are any Russians on this Board offended but its simply a fact I wish to share with people who stumble onto pravda.ru and read outlandish claims and want to believe it.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 03:20 AM
link   
What is it with the skeptics round here? Of course the edge of a flying saucer is going to be thin. Good grief.

And "all Russian UFO films are hoaxes". Indeed. Thanks for that piece of advice, it'll certainly save me the effort of thinking for myself whenever I see anything from Russia ever again!

I first saw this film years ago on a documentary on British commercial TV, I think it was ITV rather than Channel 4. The programme included footage of the autopsy, and the programme makers, post Glasnost (which is obviously how this footage came into the public arena) actually went to Moscow and found the room where the autopsy had taken place in a Government building. You could see from the floor tiling, the placement of the windows, and certain fixtures in the room, that it was the same place.

Also, in the footage I saw, there was a clear shot of the cross-section of the craft. I think it might have been as the soldiers were loading it onto a truck for removal, so the stuff about it being too small for aliens was well and truly exploded.

I don't think it's a hoax.

Let's just spell it out.

People using contemporary Russian equipment, film stock, uniforms, and with access to Russian government buildings, create and film an elaborate hoax about UFOs in a country undergoing massive social upheaval such that most people are too preoccupied with making a living and trying to figure which way is up to have much thought for anything else. They then smuggle the one copy they've made out to the West, along with some very well-forged KGB documents to back up its authenticity. Some of the most interesting and problematic footage then goes missing.

OR, it's a genuine film and just what it looks like.

[edit on 22-12-2006 by rich23]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join