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.

 

[HOAX] Haiti UFO Video - YouTube - [HOAX]

page: 80
61
<< 77  78  79    81  82  83 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:16 AM
link   
@ seentoomuch

Uhhh, duh?

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 22-8-2007 by 12m8keall2c]

[edit on 22-8-2007 by BlackedOut]




posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by future flow

edit;
they finnaly aired thier whole story and said it was a french guy who did it at home on his macbook pro using the vue 6 program.
wheather you belive them or not is on you but thats what they said.
and that was after spending two hours of hype leading people to belive it could have been real....when they already knew it was fake...prolly from checkin here lol but still what do you guys make of this?

[edit on 22-8-2007 by future flow]


Did ANYone happen to catch this on a DVR or something? I dunno if Barz gets foxnews :-) I'm sure he'd love to post it on his page.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackedOut
@ seentoomuch

Uhhh, duh?

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 22-8-2007 by 12m8keall2c]


I think that should be directed at me, and not at seentoomuch? :-)

Anyway, if anyone hasnt seen it yet, here is a nice basic rundown of how this sort of thing is done.

I'm using the same software Barz is, but not the same amount of talent!


How to use Vue Xstream


Found another one from the excellent work of Manbird on youtube - he also shows how he did it at the end. Unlike my video, he is using Vue 6 exclusively.

Another UFO Insider look



[edit on 22-8-2007 by beverins]

[edit on 22-8-2007 by beverins]



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   
FOX News just showed this clip. The anchors seem to think it is somewhat genuine.

FOX News UFO Clip



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Yeah, I saw the Fox vid


When people say 'identical' (re: the palm trees) is it beyond the wit of either Fox or the LA Times to understand that the word does not simply mean 'similar'?! Identical, as I'm sure we are all aware in this instance means exact duplicate. It is, however, interesting that the capabilities of the folks who spotted the tell-tale signs of 'fake' were bought into question by such an ignorant point. If anyone from Fox News is reading this... I expected no better of you



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Expecting anything from news anchors - who are just talking heads reading prompters. Is expecting too much.

www.break.com...



If it's fox you know they are going to sensationalize it to the max.

beverins you clip is good the spacecraft model needs work but I don't think the original was made in Vue 6 just the background.

[edit on 22-8-2007 by Torlough]

[edit on 22-8-2007 by Torlough]



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   



beverins you clip is good the spacecraft model needs work but I don't think the original was made in Vue 6 just the background.


I just slapped this one together to sort of help debunk Barz's video LOL. Like Barz said in the LaTimes interview, I thought it was kind of scary how people wanted to believe. So, like the Wancoco fellow who flew his codename through the scene, I figured nobody would be fooled with some spheres - proof of concept and all that.

Anyway, from what I can understand how Barz made this is that its at least 3 seperate pieces of software. I believe its Modo (very nice modeler program), Lightwave (good all round 3d animation package) and Vue 6 (unsurpassed atmosphere and vegetation rendering). My video shows Lightwave running the Vue 6 Xstream plugin - the people at e-onsoftware made it because lots of people were complaining about integrating their software with Vue. So they made a plugin that jacks into Maya, Lightwave, 3DSMax, Softimage XSI.

Basically, all the tech jargon aside, no longer is advanced 3D technology only for large companies and graphics firms. Certainly, the cost of some of these items is normally quite steep, but with 30 day trials or deep student discounts (register for a three credit course in some college and you can get all three pieces of software for the price of one). Barz is very skilled, and indeed is working to make a movie. However, take a look around youtube and see the level of art that is being made even by non-professionals.

Of course this all has pretty deep implications for "I'll believe it when I see it" type folks. Nothing is what it seems; anyone interested in this sort of thing has to research visual mediums. Even if 3D animation and rendering tech bores you to death, if you want to hunt the paranormal you are going to have to brush up on what people are doing nowadays. People like Linda Moulton Howe, I'm talking to you!

Not only that, but this sort of thing doesn't stop with UFOs or ghosts, either. I wonder how many digital edits have been foisted on us by those we trust to bring us actual factual data...



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Ummofriend
17 hours LOL! , no teams of animators or render farms crunching away for weeks
I was wondering where you got the “Gasp” sound bite from, someone here posted a obscure link to it, I would be surprise if that’s where you got it from, Do tell



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
I think it's one of the standard sound clips included with SoundTrack



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ummofriend
hi,
I'm here for a couple of hours now and then again later this evening(european time).
the code is "YES"


Just in case anyone was doubting him: the word I gave him was "YES". Member ummofriend is, indeed, Barzolff814.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by paulnzl
FOX News just showed this clip. The anchors seem to think it is somewhat genuine.


They did show the clip ... but the anchors in no way thought it was genuine. They explained that it was a hoax and they explained how it was done.


Originally posted by Torlough
If it's fox you know they are going to sensationalize it to the max.

ALL News stations often sensationalize. (why single out fox for that?) However, in this case the FOX people did not. They just showed the clip and explained that it was a hoax and how it was done.


I LOVED this hoax. Although it was obvious that it wasn't real, I thought it was done very well and the people who put it together should be hired by Hollywood.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I tried to edit my post above, but was not able to.

In any case, now that it's been "confirmed" that "ummofriend" is barzolff814, I think it's worth taking another look at his first post to this board. Remember, the words you're reading are no longer just another new poster's opinions; they are a statement by the (purported) creator of the video.


Originally posted by ummofriend

Hi all,

I've just read all 71 pages of this debate. One thing keeps nagging at me.
Don't you find it a bit suspicious
a) that so much talent was deployed to make one of the best fake ufo sightings ever for no apparent economic (I don't buy the viral marketing theory) reason?
b) that all this effort was made only to be immediately undeniably debunked because a crude and flagrant "mistake" no self-respecting CGI guy would ever allow himself to make?
It seems obvious whoever did this wanted us to find them out.
It's like a game and we're behaving like tamed little boys and girls finding the clues exactly when expected to.
The effect of this clip is manyfold.
First effect will be to instill doubt in the face of further video-recorded sightings, no matter how real they may seem, which is in my opinion a good thing.
Second, by putting forward mainstream CGI software that allow for the creation of hyper realistic footage, authentic footage will now be drowned in the soon-to-come flood of amateur fake clips.
To me this smacks of preemptive debunking for potential genuine encounters, which are probably near if we're witnessing so much effort to discredit it.
What we should be trying to figure out is why it's been so easy?
Why would someone deploy such perfection and then commit such an amateurish blunder? It doesn't make sense except if you envisage that this was done on purpose and this is all unfolding as planned.
Remember, the boy who cried wolf did get eaten in the end and amongst all these hoaxes will we recognize the real ones?



Thoughts?

[edit on 22-8-2007 by BlackedOut]

[edit on 22-8-2007 by BlackedOut]



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackedOut
Thoughts?

If he is the video creator, it certainly looks like his first involvement here was to perpetuate the hoax a bit longer... which seems to conflict with the information published by the LA Times.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
If he is the video creator, it certainly looks like his first involvement here was to perpetuate the hoax a bit longer... which seems to conflict with the information published by the LA Times.


Which brings me back to my earlier point.

The FIRST video posted to YouTube, containing these video elements, was posted by user "ladave1969," several days before the barzolff video appeared.

Now, we have a story in the LA Times, written by a man named Dave (David), which mentions only the username "barzolff814." I find it suspicious, though I have really nothing more to add.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXBlackedOutXXXXXXXXXXXXX



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Hi,

I'm back home and at my computer and ready to answer any questions you have and debate about the place of hoaxing on the internet.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackedOut
The FIRST video posted to YouTube, containing these video elements, was posted by user "ladave1969," several days before the barzolff video appeared.

Now, we have a story in the LA Times, written by a man named Dave (David), which mentions only the username "barzolff814." I find it suspicious, though I have really nothing more to add.


August 6 - ladave posts the DR video
August 9 - barzloff posts the Haiti video

both are done using the same software, as is evidenced by the trees.

are they the same person? are they working together?

valid questions.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   
ummofriend/barzolf -

What did you mean when you posted:

"To me this smacks of preemptive debunking for potential genuine encounters, which are probably near if we're witnessing so much effort to discredit it."

Thank you.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXBlackedOutXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   
You probably read your youtube mail, Ummo, but you got a mention (about 10 minutes long) on National Public Radio today. They interviewed the Web Scout fellow at LaTimes about your video, and he pretty much just repeated the story he wrote.

He said you also did the Brooklyn videos - was he right in that? Those were simpler but also effective. I wish I would have seen such UFOs in Brooklyn


By the way - nice model in the grandma video, I finally got to see it in all its glory.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I am him and he is I. Both youtube accounts are mine.
I also did the brooklyn ones and ufo over paris.
About the debunking quote, I'd been following the debate on ATS (in fact, it's the comments I saw here about the DR clip that spurred me to make the Haiti one) and I thought the debate was being weighed down by neverending technical considerations and I thought the preemptive governement debunking hypothesis was interesting in the context of such a viewed document.



posted on Aug, 22 2007 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Regarding the poor quality of the brooklyn videos, I was stranded in bed-stuy with only my laptop and cheaper software.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 77  78  79    81  82  83 >>

log in

join