Just for info Saladfinger of the youtube video is a member of OM and is a CGI buff he worked this vid up in a couple of hours..But even he is now leaning towards the real camp according to his last post..

Originally posted by CthulhuRising
Just for info Saladfinger of the youtube video is a member of OM and is a CGI buff he worked this vid up in a couple of hours..But even he is now leaning towards the real camp according to his last post..

Would be nice if you quote him here and give his opinion why.. I believe the video he made more then the pictures btw..

Originally posted by Cygnific

Would be nice if you quote him here and give his opinion why.. I believe the video he made more then the pictures btw..

Originaly posted by saladfingers elsewhere


« Reply #565 on Today at 9:36am »
Morning all,

Thanks to everyone on their comments on my vid over at youtube. It wasn't an exercise in creating something convincing... more just to get a feel for what something like this could look like if it was there in front of you. To see if it 'feels' right.

I'll watch this thread closely. It's fascinating... hoax or not.

Cheers


« Reply #570 on Today at 12:27pm »
Ya know.. I'm having a bit of a change of heart. I'm thinking it might be a real physical object. Not computer generated.

Not sure why... I'm just ..well, I've just got a feeling.

Hmmm : /

Ask ye shall receive
Unfortunately he has not posted again yet so not sure exactly why the change of heart...Maybe he is planning on picking up the hoax with a full length CGI video himself.Hmmm

Originally posted by CthulhuRising

Ask ye shall receive
Unfortunately he has not posted again yet so not sure exactly why the change of heart...Maybe he is planning on picking up the hoax with a full length CGI video himself.Hmmm

Thanks! Indeed, it would have been nice, if he said why he did have some doubts.

Originally posted by Springer


Hi Mechnic32,

In what way, exactly, are they possibly "'different"?

Springer...

They appear to be different, due to the blurring observed in the bottom pic in my post.

That does not mean conclusively that they are different; it only means that it lacks the clarity (compared to the top image) needed to assert that they are indeed the exact same.



edit for typo and clarity

[edit on 5/25/2007 by Mechanic 32]

Originally posted by schuyler

Actually, I noticed several posters to this forum joined about the time of the craft showing up.

I would think that since this is a very interesting thread; not only because it sort of lends a little bit of credence to the C2C drone pics, but in it's own right as well; it could sway several lurkers, to join up and contribute.

2 cents

So now we have pics from 4 different sources and a very credible sounding witness who described the same thing. Is the reality of this thing sinking in yet? I suppose someone faked every photo and claims to be 4 different people in 4 different places though.
Believing that the thing is real is beginning to make more since then saying the thing is fake. IMHO, those CGI experts who claim fakery are doing so because they look at it as something fake they need to prove as fake. Ever stop to think that maybe you cant prove something as fake when it is REAL? They could probably take a photo of anything and point out little things that make it seem fake.

edit: nevermind, misunderstood poster

[edit on 25-5-2007 by yuefo]

It is interesting that with the exception of the last post , all of these objects are reported to derive in or near central/northern California. I submit a quick reference map I made to give a little perspective on the distances between sightings and the relative proximity.





I submit this just for the sake of debate not to prove an one particular point. I found myself wondering just where in California these "sightings" were taking place and thought it prudent to post my findings as to the geographical positions of these three particular "sightings".

It is quite plausible to ascertain that other people in this triangular area between the red circles, given the apparent slow moving and low altitude behavior of theses "alleged" craft would have also witnessed these events.

The mere fact that three (separate?) groups of people have recorded these "drones" in separate locations could lend some credence the pictures OR further discredit them if any correlation between the three groups can be made or if it can be determined that a single person or group is responsible for them thus validating the perpetration of a hoax.

As with all these theories any scenario is possible considering the vast amount of variables, just thought I would toss up my finds on "sighting locations" being I don't think this has been covered or even explored.

Hope your hungry, more food for thought.....

The color of the sky looks wrong in the center of it, but what do I know? I'm interested in the CG people weighing in.

ok, now if people can't see what poor cg job this is compared to chad\raj, then i'm giving up.

this one doesn't even look worth my time.

i really hope people don't focus on it too much because it detracts from the impact that the chad\raj images have.

this image, the white truck image, and the crappy usgs story are about enough to make me pick up my toys and go home...

Originally posted by spf33
i really hope people don't focus on it too much because it detracts from the impact that the chad\raj images have.

this image, the white truck image, and the crappy usgs story are about enough to make me pick up my toys and go home...

It allmost looks like dis-info to me, but it could also be a person who knows the story, and tries to make the story look real.

This speaks VOLUMES about Linda Howe, doesn't it?

it sure does. not that i was a fan or anything before, but this development is enough for me to discount anything she reports from hear on out. on any subject.

just wow. no wonder the field of ufology is continually scoffed at!

this almost makes me want to go ahead and delete all my posts here and at omf.