It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How do you want it?

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 06:52 PM
Ive read alot of posts here and something seems to stick out to me.

Either a photo/video is too clear "must be cgi" or to fuzzy/distorted, "cant tell".

If I took a picture of myself that was crystal clear would you not believe it??

It seems to me that for absolute truth we would need the clear photo/video!

If I had genuine photos/video of a ufo in my back yard, I KNOW their would be some who would call it a hoax!

I've read through the haiti video post that was labeled a hoax, I dont think it was. Someone once tried to get people to post a hoax phot/video here and no one even came close to that.

With as many members here, I would think someone could duplicate that, but the haiti vid was "Too good" for me.

Why was it called a hoax?? And the picture of the 2 trees DO NOT match up exactly, they are close.

But the point is what will be good enough?? do we want it just a little blurry? or not quite so fuzzy??

Really doesnt make any sense at all!

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 06:56 PM
I wouldnt automatically label anything a hoax without proof, but I also wouldnt label anything as authentic without proof, there is just too many things wrong with the haiti video to confirm that its not a hoax. And yes, you are right that some people dont keep open minds but if it bothers you so much than just ignore their opinions

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:10 PM
reply to post by OzWeatherman

Its just not the "haiti" video I'm talking about.

The point is "too good"/ "Too fuzy"!!

What do we want!!??

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:16 PM
If I remember correctly there was something on the news the other day about the people who made the Haiti Video admitting it was a hoax. While I agree we shouldn't label everything that's clear "Hoax" I must also say that it doesn't benefit us to label everything that is clear as "Real" either...

My reason for saying this is: A)If we start labeling everything real, then people will come forward with Hoaxes that look very real, and we'll just loose more credibility in the UFO community (that is to say few people take this stuff seriously in the 'main stream')
and B) IF we start agreeing that everything is real if it's clear then we just confuse a subject that is already very confusing and riddled with contracting theories and the like.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:21 PM
Well what I want is a clear pic plus some immediate reaction by the big New channels. If it's legit or very unusual, they would be the first to know or investigate I think. Just being on YouTube doesnt mean that much to me if there is no outside reaction to it except by the posters of Youtube.

So heavy on the news channels means lots of good investigation and most likely quick answers.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 08:25 PM
reply to post by redseal

I know its not just the Haiti video, all im saying is that there are people out there that will automatically call it hoax because they are skeptical. So wherever you post a video/ pic of UFO's etc you will always get someone dispelling it without any evidence.

Personally I dont care if its too fuzzy or too clear. There are people on this website that do know a few things about photography and CGI so listen to them if they have a basis for making a call on whether or not the image is a hoax or not. If someone just says fake with no backup evidence then just ignore them if it bothers you so much. Please dont let this stop you or anyone else for that matter posting images, just be aware that some people will give you negative comments

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 09:25 PM
Well all I know is I usually am skeptical but at the same time leave my mind open and hope someone proves it worthy. Too many fakes going around th net now that look good so it's only human nature to think it fake.

[edit on 31-8-2007 by Somerset]

new topics

top topics


log in