Interos and Beverins, you both seem correct. It relates to the Grannies video much closer, but a direct match? Either way, nice work gentlemen. I think we are all much happier while we are debunking than trying to figure out the rules of engagement on this board. I suppose that is for the owners / mods to decide.

I still have my doubts about ummo, but probably one of the few who do. Still waiting for more images to cinch it for me.

regards.....kk

added >>>BTW, I went to review the Grannies video and if you believe YouTube, Barzolff814 was logged on an hour ago. Why is "he" not back here?




[edit on 24-8-2007 by kinda kurious]

WoW! ATS'ers in a love fest with a hoaxer, chit chatting and embracing this individual that at all levels what's trying to deceive this audience.

Do you guys really want to go down that path? You are opening the door to every person that want to make one of this projects to keep making them to later claim fame here. You know what's going to be the result of it, that we don't even going to be debunking junk, but also trying to deal with the different people that would claim the work as theirs!!! It has happen already with IHTE, trying to hoax the hoax!

I seriously don't see the need of having UMMO in this board at all, only if he came to apologize for the time wasted by everyone and for trying to deceive, but he can even apologize for that because that was his intent since day one.

You now what my friend UMMO, next time you want to do anykind of experiment or what ever else or check how good is your work, do something like other respectable artist or companies do, like pre screening or something to that effect, that don't deceive and you can possibly get a more accurate review of what is it that you need to work on. I don't see how trying to deceive the one that has no knowledge helps you in anyway.

To the people that feel the need to chit chat with him I say this, I don't think that this very same thread should be the place, after all we were intentionally deceive by this person IN MORE THAN one way in this very same thread. If you feel like chatting with a hoaxter just start a new thread and see how that goes.

And Ummo I apologize if I'm kind of harsh, but IMO there is no satisfaction that I can get by deceivng people, may be you see it some other way, but we don't need that here, we have prove hoaxes here way before you got here and we will continue to do so after your gone, so I don't see how much of an asset can you be to us, unless the staff sees it different.

That would be their decision to make, if the feel that an ATS marriage with hoaxer is need it from some reason then is their site and they can do with it what they wish, but it will be really disappointing to see this site go down that path.

[edit on 24-8-2007 by Bunch]

[edit on 24-8-2007 by Bunch]

Originally posted by 2believeor0
On his on admission, he wanted to study the public reaction (cant quite buy that though, seems more like an ego trip). For that EXACT reason, GhostRaven was outed and banned!

I think that there is a difference.

GhostRaven was a ATS member and started a hoax-based thread.

Ummofriend made a hoax and latter joined ATS. The only thing that I think may be against the T&C is his first post, but we should not judge him in the same way as someone who joins ATS with the idea of making us his "guinea pigs".

---

To all:

I don't think that the fact that this was a more or less successful hoax will make this type of hoax a common thing because most people, even if they get the software, don't have the expertise to do it.

That is why with so many digital cameras and cell-phone cameras we do not see an explosion of good photos, we see an explosion of the number of photos but the really good ones are still a small percentage. Many people own a Ferrari but they are not Formula 1 pilots just because of that (although I suppose some think that they are...)

As for the hoax in itself, I want to learn the most that I can about it, in the same way I learned with the "Australian UFO wave" of last year.

Don't let an opportunity of learning something pass you by.

Originally posted by ArMaP
Don't let an opportunity of learning something pass you by.

This arguement is really nonsense IMO their is plenty of members here on ATS and many other places that don't abuse their skill for deception, instead they use it to try an unmask and in the same process teach us, the one that don't have any how to point the flaws on this videos or pic. Those are the real heroes of this site.

And he DID use us as guinea pigs, he said that in the LA Times article, and demonstrated it by getting involved in the debate.

Edit to add

I rather read a thread 100 pages long with every post made by 11 11 than give this person a minute of my time. At least we know where his coming from and what side he is on.

(Sorry 11 11 don't take that as an attack please)

[edit on 24-8-2007 by Bunch]

[edit on 24-8-2007 by Bunch]

Many pages ago, I decided not to comment on this thread any further. As the arguments raged on, I kept my word. I also kept watch. Now I will break my silence, but only to post what appears below. As always, I apologize if I inadvertently offend anyone; I also heartily encourage moderators to delete this if it is deemed inappropriate for the thread.

Someone mentioned this was a "successful hoax". I'm not questioning that poster -- and in fact, I agree. But we should wonder what makes a hoax successful. In an unrelated thread, I've attempted to discuss hoaxes in general. The tiny research I have done (thus far) has afforded me an interesting look at the phenomenon. In the past, many hoaxes were clearly aimed at making money. In these days of high technology, hoaxers are evolving. They remain anonymous, persistent, and increasingly difficult to figure out.

What we have failed to realize is that the audience is the reason for the hoaxer's existence. This thread's discussion spiraled down in the direction of the Isaac/CARET incident -- even featuring some of the same players and the same arguments. Fortunately, this helped kill my declining interest. I was fascinated, however, when sub-hoaxes popped up; finger-pointing arose ("It's someone in this thread!!), and people appeared to take the bait. Members actually appeared in the forum to claim responsibility (Ithastoend et al). The battles raged on.

If the purpose of this hoax was to indicate the flaw in this community's approach, then it served its purpose. But now, as the videos have been declared the work of a hoaxer, would it not be prudent to analyze the hoax itself? The videos are an irrelevant part now; it was the people's reaction that was the prime objective. Yet, this is neither the biggest nor the last hoax of this magnitude to occur. There will be more, inspired by this one. Should we not prepare ourselves to ensure that this does not happen again?

Again, my apologies if I have offended anyone. This argument will continue, and in time, a new one will arise. It may be time to define a new approach to "working together as a team".

I'm conflicted on the matter.

On the one hand, yes, Number Six made a video as a hoax and released it to an unwitting audience.

On the other hand, he appears to have done it partly as an experiment, and partly as a demonstration.

He's basically saying, "If I (or anybody else) wanted to make a convincing fake, it could be done. Watch out."

Let's face it, the creator of this video could have never spoken up, and some of us might still wonder about the video.

And yes, now that I have seen the creator's other work, I do happen to think he's pretty cool. So what? Cool people can do some pretty un-cool things.

In the future, I hope Number Six doesn't try to fool anyone. If he continues to create animations, I know we would appreciate them more if they were labelled fake. In fact, might it not be the truly greatest experiment to produce and release the ULTIMATE convincing video, label it as a fake, and watch the debate as many try to defend the self-labelled fake as being the real deal?

CGI videos of unexplained phenomena cannot be avoided. There will be more, and they will get better and better. It may be time to agree that if a video was not in evidence prior to, say, 1995, that it is automatically under suspicion of being CGI.

As I said, I'm conflicted.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXBlackedOutXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Originally posted by Mr Jackdaw
If the purpose of this hoax was to indicate the flaw in this community's approach, then it served its purpose. But now, as the videos have been declared the work of a hoaxer, would it not be prudent to analyze the hoax itself? The videos are an irrelevant part now; it was the people's reaction that was the prime objective.

Thanks for posting that, it helps me explain what I said before about learning something from this case.

We can learn about our own reactions (did we believed it was real or fake, did we got upset, angry or amused when we saw this as a hoax), about other people's reactions (why are some people so desperately wanting to believe in aliens, why are some people so desperately wanting to prove that UFOs do not exist), about the capabilities of the software available to a common computer, about the little things that can show a fake video, about the reasons that make someone try to hoax other people, etc.

I am sure we can learn something with this case, and if we can, we should be angry with it.

Hey All,

I'm working on a longer statement but I have to process everything I've just read to make my self as clear as possible and it's going to take me a minute so I'll post it later.
In the meantime, I want to make it known it wasn't my intention to ridicule anyone.
I've been fascinated by ufos for as long as I can remember and drawing them ever since I could hold a pen.
I've seen a pretty wide array of human responses to ufo haiti and I just want to remind everybody, we chose the way we respond. If we feel cheated, amused, enticed, engaged, or enraged, we are responsible for our own feelings.
No one can make you feel angry if you don't let them. That's a fact.
It seems I might not have my place on this board and I'll still be available on barzolff814 for those who wish to keep contact but I think it'll put some minds at ease if I eclipse myself.
ATS has been a huge part of this experience for me and showing up here was a way to share and give back whatever some might have felt I took from them.

That's it for now and thank you.

Barz

PS In my opinion Chad drones are fake.

just before leaving the thread, kinda kurious, you're wasting your time, it's the same ship,
the only reason you don't see the circles in Haiti UFO is that when I imported the model in Vue 6, I don't know why, the software lost them.

Originally posted by ummofriend

just before leaving the thread, kinda kurious, you're wasting your time, it's the same ship,
the only reason you don't see the circles in Haiti UFO is that when I imported the model in Vue 6, I don't know why, the software lost them.

The software lost them? Did I find a clink in the armor?
Why, of all the credilbe posts, did he address me and this?
C'mon all you 3D mavericks,
what in the heck is he talking about?

As always...kk

I found this site from google looking for anyone talking about ufo haiti.

My motivation was because of how cool the video was. so much so that it baffled me at first viewing. I came here and was very impressed by the great investigation that went on by so many people. In the beginning even the pro's in the cg/animation world could not comprehend how anyone could have made this video so realistic.

mainly becuase everyone assumed the trees were real and therefore the creator must have shot the scene with a handheld camera and so the motion tracking and compositing work would be an overwelming amount of work. Once we realized the entire scene was cg, to me that was the nail in the coffin. no more compositing etc.

I have zero negative feelings towards ummofriend for what he has done. he's been dabbling in the opportunity of what youtube has to offer him for a while now by posting various "ufo hoaxes" to see what kind of reaction he would get. why not?! isnt that what youtube or the internet is all about?

Personnaly i would love posting something i made and get a reaction like that. It happened to me on a smaller scale several years ago when a site that me and my pops made was Shockave site of the day (back in the joe cartoon days) and my server (i was hosting it from my home) started goin nutz and i got so many hits i couldnt even check my own email or use any of my computers. maybe some think thats an ego trip but i see it as bayback for having an interest in something and a passion for it and putting long hours/years into i t and finally having a large group of people being intrigued by it. or respecting your work.

its up to the viewer to decide whether they want to be a part of it or not.

he's an artist. he posted something that blew people away and started this forum. it has done nothing but good as far as i am concerned.

and why not bask in the overwheling responce you get from a piece of your work that you created soley out of your own passion and interests.

he wasnt trying to scam people.. he comes across to me as a very humble and genuine person who is willing to share his work with anyone who is interested.

I understand what other people are saying about this not being the forum to do so. ("stay on topic") but i really dont think that the guy needs to be "BANNED"... point taken. if the majority doresnt want him here then so be it and i am sure he will leave.

i think some of you need to lighten up a little bit.

Originally posted by kinda kurious

Originally posted by ummofriend

just before leaving the thread, kinda kurious, you're wasting your time, it's the same ship,
the only reason you don't see the circles in Haiti UFO is that when I imported the model in Vue 6, I don't know why, the software lost them.

The software lost them? Did I find a clink in the armor?
Why, of all the credilbe posts, did he address me and this?
C'mon all you 3D mavericks,
what in the heck is he talking about?

As always...kk

try importing a complex model into a different application than what you created it in and you will have the answer (at least 5 times out of 10 i would bet)

Originally posted by kinda kurious

The software lost them? Did I find a clink in the armor?
Why, of all the credilbe posts, did he address me and this?
C'mon all you 3D mavericks,
what in the heck is he talking about?

If he used NURBS based geometry for those parts its entirely possible that VUE couldn't convert / import them. Without getting into the different types of gemometry used in 3d apps such as subdivision surfaces polygons NURBS etc some apps can have a problem importing them. So that part actually is correct as I've had it happen in the past with apps myself.

Wayne...

[edit on 25/8/2007 by the secret web]

So this is how it ends? The hoaxer bows out with kudos from our group while only offering us one single image of the many promised? And BTW, not an EXACT image at that. Then writes a short "Dear John" with the promise of a longer one to follow?

Now this thread will go wherever it is old threads go off to die. We've gotten no official comment from site owners either way. Sorry, but I need some "closure from disclosure".

So here is my little "Social Experiment". I am offering this Pre-Post to allow mods a "heads-up" to delete my next two. I am going to follow this post with one that reads:

"Star this post if you think what ummofriend did was wrong and should be banned".

And then....

"Star this post if you think what ummofriend did is OK and should be treated like a Rock-Star".

First post with the most Stars wins. Sound fair?

OK, I realize I could get warned or banned but am hoping the mods take an exception. FYI, you can only star a post 1 time AFAIK.

Thanks for playing....it's been fun....as always....kk

"Star this post if you think what ummofriend did was wrong and should be banned".

Disclaimer: "Not a one-line post, no purchase necessary, void where prohibited, must be present to win”.

"Star this post if you think what ummofriend did is OK and should be treated like a Rock-Star".

Disclaimer: "Not a one-line post, no purchase necessary, void where prohibited, must be present to win”.