Battleship UFO

What do you think ? fake or real ? It is kinda big, and it hovered like 6 hours there.


www.livevideo.com...

Nice footage, that ship must have been absolutely huge.......I hope they are friendly lol

Hmm very interesting clip which I have never seen before so thank you very much for posting.. Well the comentator states its real , I wonder how credible that is , but if it were real (and could be proved) then well it will be hard to debunk as swamp gass or a commercial airplain

Impressive footage...although why does he immediately conclude that it is something extraterrestrial? Couldn't it just be a classified government aircraft?

Do we have anyone with a day shot of the area ?

If not do we know anyone here in the area who could get us one ? Reason being quite simply there might be for all we know a hill or mountain in the background.

For all we know we could be looking at a hillside blaze the way those wind's are kicking up could be making that intense red glow ?

Has anyone put this forward as a possible explanation if in fact there is a hillside or mountain there ?

THE BEAT GOES ON!

Regard's
Lee

reply to post by h3akalee


Yes, there is a previous thread where the consensus was that it is a fire on a hillside. You can even see the gray smoke.

I'll see if I can find it.

Edit : Ok, found it.

Here is the most relevent post[/url]

Originally posted by Gazrok(emphasis added)

According to the author and videographer, these videos were the same area, and all show the hill, so the author himself is establishing that there is a high hill there beyond the streetlights (easily seen in video 12). We've also got the description from the videographer of the "object" "hugging the hills". So, regardless of WHAT the light is from, we CAN easily establish the presence of a high hill there....

Then, we have the absence of any movement of the lights in the video...they are stationary.

So now we have stationary lights, on or above a high hill.

So we're left with two conclusions....either it's some kind of stationary "object" on the hill, or an airborne object hovering slightly above the hill, in which the videographer for some reason never continued filming until it left the scene, but instead ONLY while it was motionless. So, which is more plausible?

[edit on 11/26/2007 by eaglewingz]

reply to post by eaglewingz


Yeah -- the first thing I thought of while watching this was "hillside"...but I thought it was cars parked on the hillside -- the red being tail lights and the grey color being trees lit up by their headlights. A fire seems more likely, and more to the correct scale of the scene.

One would think that a person would't only film the motionless ship, but would wait around to film the ship while it was moving. I know I wouldn't leave until the ship did.

AMAZING!!!! I started a thread on a similar looking UFO about 3 years ago - looked almost identical but with more detail. I MUST find that thread and link it into this one so you can all see the similarities.

Ok, same video - taken by a member of ATS named Worldblend. Visit This Thread for more info on the video.

I have linked yout o page 8 that has the full, unedited video but recommend that you read the entire thread as Worldblend gives alot of data on this recording, including a daylight video fo teh area. VERY fascinating to say the least.

Looks camera phone filmed- definitely real in my opinion and you'd have to be one of those idiots that need an actual alien to appear infront of them to believe if you say its not.... It looked ridiculously huge...and for a ship that big to be flying around a city that low is pretty freaky...No idea what the intentions would be...maybe they want to be noticed??? That ship is anything but man-made.

Hey Guys snap out of it....thats a fire on a hillside in the near distance....come on man. Its so easy to see that.

The gray area to the top and right is smoke from the brush fire, you can even see the fires licking up and down to the lower right

[edit on 26-11-2007 by blueyedevil666]

Originally posted by blueyedevil666
Hey Guys snap out of it....thats a fire on a hillside in the near distance....come on man. Its so easy to see that.

The gray area to the top and right is smoke from the brush fire, you can even see the fires licking up and down to the lower right

[edit on 26-11-2007 by blueyedevil666]

harhar..
no.
is turning.fires dont turn.
its our NWO/Lockhead-friends.they already developed anti-gravity ships which can turn invisible.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 26-11-2007 by anti72]

NO Fire on the hillside.

It is a good example of our latest technology that will be exposed soon to the G.P.

Our Technology, not Alien.

Good to see them finally getting more proficient at flying them.

I think this is real cant see someone putting their ass on the line without thinking of other possabilities first and as an earlier poster said(with diff words) sad how some people need an ET to deliver the milk to know its real, although i do find it odd that it stuck around for so long without someone taking a pot shot at it? it is turning and fires dont turn.. nice video

The guy who filmed this must have Parkinson.
If not, it is obvious he's doing a shaking video so that nothing can be seen clearly. So yes, it must be a fire on the hills.

It's a Star Destroyer! The Empire finally found us!

Now... seriously... It is a fire on a hillside. I'm a 'bleever' but even i can see that.

666 is a number assigned to NERO.......check it out......St John had to disguise his name not to be killed.

Pretty weird but its against a black backdrop with no frame of reference. Plus, could be a blimp, could be stationary. Looks cool though!

p.s. You know what I dont understand about videos like this? Where does the UFO go? I mean, its hovering there and he's filming it but how come you never see the ufo leave? Does the camera man get bored? If I were filming something I believed to be from another planet or extraterrestrial I'd be filming it all night, not just three minutes and walk back inside.

If I saw a "battleship" in the sky I would probably try to take more video of it or at least record it until it left. It baffles me.

reply to post by azzllin

I'm not trying to be difficult here...it's just that I don't see anything "turning". I do see another batch of what I see as flames kick up to the right of the main group of "flames" then die down again.

If the ship was "turning", wouldn't the red lights on the left hand side change with the change of perspective caused by the UFO turning?

Truely, my first impression of this video upon seeing it were "lights on a hill". Then I read some of these posts saying it was a fire, and that made much more sense. But I never once saw this as a "floating object".

EDIT TO ADD:
reply to post by D.Gribble

...and not only that, if it were a UFO hovering for many hours, don't you think a news crew would have been there to film it?

[edit on 11/26/2007 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by D.Gribble
Pretty weird but its against a black backdrop with no frame of reference. Plus, could be a blimp, could be stationary. Looks cool though!

p.s. You know what I dont understand about videos like this? Where does the UFO go? I mean, its hovering there and he's filming it but how come you never see the ufo leave? Does the camera man get bored? If I were filming something I believed to be from another planet or extraterrestrial I'd be filming it all night, not just three minutes and walk back inside.

If I saw a "battleship" in the sky I would probably try to take more video of it or at least record it until it left. It baffles me.

you sir took the words out of my mouth!