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.

 

My uncle's amazing UFO footage and encounters, please help me unravel the mystery

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay
Walter Andrus, state director for the Mutual UFO Network, studied the case for three years. His conclusions were:

"The overwhelming evidence is in. Gulf Breeze is indeed one of the most incredible cases in modern UFO history."
[edit on 12-1-2007 by SkyWay]


Walt was the International Director of MUFON, and let us not forget that Walters offered MUFON alot of money to investigate his case. Andrus accepted those funds.

One need say no more. While I think Gulf Breeze is a case worthy of study past Ed Walters, MUFON's stance doesnt mean a thing.

I'm not busting anyone's b&*lls, but when you cite a case and facts pertaining to it, they have to be correct, or theyre just adding more noise which we dont need in the UFO research community.

Dream-if you wanna U2U me, I'll be waiting. Like I said I can provide you webspace to upload your footage to, and we'll go over it.




posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

Originally posted by SkyWay
Walter Andrus, state director for the Mutual UFO Network, studied the case for three years. His conclusions were:

"The overwhelming evidence is in. Gulf Breeze is indeed one of the most incredible cases in modern UFO history."
[edit on 12-1-2007 by SkyWay]


Walt was the International Director of MUFON, and let us not forget that Walters offered MUFON alot of money to investigate his case. Andrus accepted those funds.

One need say no more. While I think Gulf Breeze is a case worthy of study past Ed Walters, MUFON's stance doesnt mean a thing.


No offence intended, but I put more credence in MUFON and Walter Andrus than in you.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Doesnt have anything to do with me bucko, it's the facts. If you choose to ignore that, thats all you.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 06:39 PM
link   
A fake with very bad compositing. Issues with the motion blur that hasn't been able to keep up with the matte for the UFO (so done in a hurry I'd summise.) Also the color on the edges looks like a bad matte taken from the zdepth info and not a dedicated matte.

I'll bypass the bad modelling etc and ask the following question.... at such a 'momentous event', and with such a close up UFO why isn't there one sound of a persons reaction on the video? Even if alone you'd at least breathe or say 'wow' unless you were super duper cool as a cucumber.

Thus has fake written all over it in big 60 foot high red flashing letters.

Wayne...



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 07:04 PM
link   
The "dual image " effect is caused because the overlayed "ufo" footage has a different number of frames per second. I can't believe no-one has pointed this out yet, as it is only because the "ufo" footage was created on another program ond overlayed on top of the original video. DIFFERENT FPS MEANS ITS NOT REAL, NO OTHER EXPLANATION.

I'll bet someone a hundred dollars if you blank out everything but the ufo its movements would be MUCH more realistic. Thats because the maker didn't take into account the camera movements when they made the fake. Thats why so many people are saying "The filmer is tracking it too good." The filmer isn't tracking it at all. The ufo moves with the camera because its like projecting a picture of a moving ufo on a moving picture. Without expensive motion tracking equipment, it is very hard to match CGI objects with real ones. The fraud "artist" should hav held the camera still so he/she wouldn't have to worry about it.

This is truly a horrible amateur editing job.


ONCE AGAIN THE "UFO" ANIMATION IS DONE AT A DIFFERENT FPS THAN THE REST OF THE VIDEO. THE ONLY EXPLANATION IS FRAUD.

EDIT-------------------- MODS PLEASE READ BELOW....

On another note, I have noticed that Skyway posted rather enthusiasticaly about your video. Skyway seems to agree with you and back you up rather religiously. Hmmmmmm. I've also noticed that you both seem to post at the same time..... One time it seems they went out of their way to post at the exact same time. Mabye in case someone brought this up. That wouldnt be too hard to do with a laptop and a desktop, or simply 2 seperate internet browsers at the same time. But a mod CAN find out if they are posting from the same general I.P.

Mods????????

[edit on 12-1-2007 by Tiloke]



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I dunno, my first thought was just like any home CGI, the camera match is awful. If you hold the mouse on the scrub, it'll bob back and forth and you can see the building make a dramatic jump, and the UO doesnt follow suit in any fashion at all.

The more telling thing to me is the OP is posting for help, and as one of the FS's I'm offering it. No reply.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

Originally posted by SkyWay
-

Dream-if you wanna U2U me, I'll be waiting. Like I said I can provide you webspace to upload your footage to, and we'll go over it.


Im going to write your name down, i'll u2u you when i get my uncles other stuff. BTW thanks for the offer



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

Originally posted by SkyWay
Walter Andrus, state director for the Mutual UFO Network, studied the case for three years. His conclusions were:

"The overwhelming evidence is in. Gulf Breeze is indeed one of the most incredible cases in modern UFO history."
[edit on 12-1-2007 by SkyWay]


Walt was the International Director of MUFON, and let us not forget that Walters offered MUFON alot of money to investigate his case. Andrus accepted those funds.

One need say no more. While I think Gulf Breeze is a case worthy of study past Ed Walters, MUFON's stance doesnt mean a thing.

I'm not busting anyone's b&*lls, but when you cite a case and facts pertaining to it, they have to be correct, or theyre just adding more noise which we dont need in the UFO research community.

Dream-if you wanna U2U me, I'll be waiting. Like I said I can provide you webspace to upload your footage to, and we'll go over it.
My take on the double image is that it is simply de-interlaced frames (filmed on cell phone), because the building also has a duplicate faint outline. And to clarify when i ask for help i am asking for analysis to some extent, but mostly i am trying to see if anyone has had similar experiences/ seen similar UFOs



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 07:36 PM
link   






Your kidding right? The building is not "doubling" at all. Granted the top picture has some very slight amount to it, the bottom has none. And if it were real All obects "double" would be at the same exact angle and distance from the original. In your top photo the buildings "double" is directly above and close to the original, the "UFO"s is waaaaay off to the side. So even if its a real ufo, it was edited into this background footage.
This effect is caused by the "ufo" footage changing frames while the normal background footage does not. DIFFERENT FPS MEANS FRAUD, PERIOD.

You can give me a WATS vote if you agree..........

[edit on 12-1-2007 by Tiloke]



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 09:13 PM
link   
...

I'll chose the 'Hoaxing for Dummies'' Alex.

''Okay, could you please identify the object in this video''

''Umm yes, What is a ufo??''

''I'm sorry, the answer is; What is CGI, thanks for playing!''

The video screams fake. The way it moves, the way the camera can follow it almost simultaneously, your story, the fact that you THINK it was from a cellphone, the way..well...the way everything is actually. If you could post some of your late uncles picutres, I don't think I'll buy the sketches because you could make those in a second, scan and post. Show us more pictures or videos. And why do you want to keep your anonimty? Do you think the government is out to get you because your posting videos like these ones????

If you are hoaxing, don't worry, we'll find out soon enough. If you want to go out with some decency, you might aswell say you hoaxed it (if you did!) Because if WE catch you, then you lose all your honor, respect, and well lots of things, plus you get banned! So, it's your choice DM. (I'd make a good negociater
)


You want to talk some more? Just reply!

Proud ATS member -Jimmy- (Oh crap, now the government knows my name!)


ps. Just to put the facts clear, I didn't insult anyone, atleast I didn't mean too, so sorry in advance if I did. Bye, hope you all hade wonderful holidays!



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tiloke
On another note, I have noticed that Skyway posted rather enthusiasticaly about your video. Skyway seems to agree with you and back you up rather religiously. Hmmmmmm. I've also noticed that you both seem to post at the same time..... One time it seems they went out of their way to post at the exact same time. Mabye in case someone brought this up. That wouldnt be too hard to do with a laptop and a desktop, or simply 2 seperate internet browsers at the same time. But a mod CAN find out if they are posting from the same general I.P.

Mods????????

[edit on 12-1-2007 by Tiloke]


I assure you! I am in no way conspiring with Dreamachine. That should be obvious to the mods.


I just enjoyed the video and believe it to be real. I think his uncle was telling the truth when he related his encounters with ufos to Dreamachine. But people have a right to be skeptical, or to just disbelieve altogether. There are bound to be more doubts these days because of the progress in video special effects that have been made easier. But the ufo fits into the environment to well, and the light-value of the ufo is in perfect match with the light-tone of everything else in the video. Besides, hoaxes are usually kept simpler, and not made more difficult for the hoaxer by such complicated maneuvers because it's too easy to make a mistake that way.



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jimmy910130
If you are hoaxing, don't worry, we'll find out soon enough. If you want to go out with some decency, you might aswell say you hoaxed it (if you did!) Because if WE catch you, then you lose all your honor, respect, and well lots of things, plus you get banned!


Whoa...! And get a 20 year life term!!


Wow Jim! That was a tough one!!

But that darn alien piloting that 'UFO' must have gone berserk!!
Or is he learning to fly the darn thing? Or was it some janitor from Area 51 who mistakenly punched the wrong buttons in the 'UFO'and zoomed off in uncontrolled flight?

I would think that aliens were better trained to handle their machines!!



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   
it looked to me the film should have been longer, but was condensed in to 15secs, also it does look like CG


the eratic movment doesnt look natural to me



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   



You can give me a WATS vote if you agree..........

[edit on 12-1-2007 by Tiloke]


Give you a WATS for what I pointed out?

I figured give some other members the opportunity to draw their own conclusions from the screenshots, this is a hoax, plain and simple. I am not a skeptic nor a believer, more or less on the fence. Its just unfortunate the amount of BS you have to sift thru on this site to try and find out what is real and what isn't. There should be a minimum age requirement for starters.



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I too am perplexed by the OPs seeming lack of interest in
help offered by an imaging pro.

If you'd like the FS to review the info then you need to supply
us with the facts and the evidence available.



posted on Dec, 10 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SkyWay
 




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join