You Tube Video of Girl Talking about her UFO Sighting And What She Later Found On Her Cam.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Maybe this is shaky 'evidence' ... but the girl never claimed it was evidence of aliens.

[edit on 30-11-2007 by NewWorldOver]

Never claimed it was evidence of aliens? The title of her video is "Alien or not.Plz watch." This means she knows what she thinks it is, as Chimp said earlier:

Originally posted by PartChimp
3)The title of this video is not "What is this strange video?!" it is "Alien or not. Plz watch!" 4)Because of the videos name, a multitude of people here, including the OP, have attributed the "thing" in the video to extraterrestrial life.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
I'm not the only person who feels this way.
[edit on 30-11-2007 by NewWorldOver]

With all due respect, I could honestly care less about how you or others feel when it comes to you getting upset about people doing exactly what this forum prides its self on. Denying ignorance. I'm after facts. The video is now in the e-mail in-boxes of 5 people I would consider professionals when it comes to video and/or the paranormal. Let's see what they have to say.

If they disagree with your assessment of the video though, I'm sure you'll dismiss it anyway. So for those that see no point here, or can't seem to understand why this research is important for an entire echelon of people on this web-site that do not take everything at face value, then maybe it's time to move on from this thread and in to one the "there's an alien living in my skull!" threads.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
If you say so

It seems alot more like people trying to satisfy their own doubt than anything else. The burden of proof lies with those who want to say that this IS an E.T.

Nope, that't not what I am doing. I have no doubt that this is NOT an alien, spirit, entity, trans-dimensional being, etc.. Burden of proof does lie with the OP.

However the bulk of this thread is being carried by those who want to prove it is NOT.

Quite contrary. The bulk of the thread is aimed at getting the OP to validate her claims other than just dropping it on the ATS community as evidence or proof of aliens because a) she believes the girls story and b) she is an expert in ITC.

Why not just admit that it there is no proving either way? Obviously the most logical explanation is that this is NOT an E.T. So what is the point in picking apart the already obvious conclusion?

We are asking the OP to give us something more than her opinion. She started the thread, she believes the girl, she's an expert, she's funded by a university involved in this same research. It is up to her to prove to us that it is what it is and not the other way around.

I truly believe that skeptics are uncomfortable with letting a subject lie to the reasoning of others. They want to force their own perspective. If the logical explanation is clear to all, than there is no need to do this.

How can there be logical explanations and discussions without perspective? This makes no sense. And, if we apply your thinking to this site, it would be pretty drab and boring, don't you think?

Trying to convince through empty speculation and TIRESOME nit-picking is soooo silly.

I agree that there's been speculation, but I hardly feel that it has been empty as you suggest. The evidence is inconclusive but many of us feel that a very LOGICAL explanation exists given the circumstances of the video and the girl's story.

I'm not the only person who feels this way.

That's nice to know.

[edit on 30-11-2007 by Freenrgy2]

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
It seems alot more like people trying to satisfy their own doubt than anything else. The burden of proof lies with those who want to say that this IS an E.T.
[edit on 30-11-2007 by NewWorldOver]

I apologize for glossing over this part of this post. You are correct; the burden of proof is on the shoulders of the presenting party. Maybe, just maybe this thread is a reaction to the endless vortex of threads started by users with "evidence" or "proof" that really contain none. That, or the OP just wanders off, like they have no real intent to finish what they start.

reply to post by NewWorldOver

It seems alot more like people trying to satisfy their own doubt than anything else

Or more then likely, there are people who really want to "believe", yet keep being presented with such phony bologna evidence, that our hopes of something existing are so low. And when people provide evidence that such phony bologna material is in fact phony bolgona.....well....you know.



[edit on 30-11-2007 by greeneyedleo]

I see this thread has made no scientific progress, although many have tried. What a surprise.

Re: the latest images posted here, I can honestly say that they look like my late uncle's bald pate, but I'm pretty sure it's not him trying to attract attention from the other side.

The question for the "photographer" & Co. is: Who do you know who's bald and has access to your camera because that ain't no alien?

Originally posted by Dae
Wow, it took me a while and I was about to write the OP off as mental but I can see the face now and it looks like Ming the Merciless!

Dae,
Lol, I don't know if that head and face looks like Ming but I can see a mouth on that face too.

Too bad we don't have access to the original movie and hope this girl reconsiders and sends it to us because I'd love to see it!

But at least one of her friends stopped by...



[edit on 30-11-2007 by Palasheea]

reply to post by Palasheea


So...that's it? That's your expert analysis; that you can see eyes and a mouth? What?!?!?! You're kidding right?

Once again, you've completely ignored any of us here asking for you to substantiate your claims. Instead, you post in response only to those who agree with you?

Perhaps it would be wise for you to have the mods close this thread as you did with the previous thread. It is quite apparent that you are not genuinely interested in serious analysis of this video. It appears that you are a sensationalist and only interested in highlighting your "credentials" to the ATS community.

reply to post by Palasheea


Palasheea... As one member to another, could you please respond to something Freenrgy2 or I have said in oh.. the last three pages?

I would like a copy of some of your collegiate report-backs to send along with the videos.

reply to post by PartChimp

This is just a sick game that she is being allowed to play with us. I don't know why, but it's pretty clear I'm not the only one here who now thinks this. There have been other posts.

What's gone on with this thread is highly unusual. She needs to (WARNING: BATHROOM HUMOR) poo or get off the pot.

Let's have something substantial, Pala. Otherwise you're just wasting everyone's time.

I had this file in one of my folders and I'm trying to locate the website that had information on it but as I recall, it's an image of a strange being that was spotted somewhere in Scotland's countryside by an ex-policeman who was hiking to or from a relatives house one afternoon. See image below:



I'm showing this image because it's one of those rare cases where the person who photographed this strange being, actually saw it with his own eyes!

So apparently there are cases when people actually have seen those beings that they are photographing. As for what this strange being is, of course, we will never know, at least at this point in time. But I myself find it fascinating because it bears some resemblance to those strange beings I've been capturing my cam during my ITC sessions where sometimes I get them when just recording with my cam outside of my sessions too.

Are these beings extraterrestrial or are they terrestrial? But as I said before, sometimes they can actually be seen with the naked eye.. as was in this case.



[edit on 30-11-2007 by Palasheea]

reply to post by Palasheea


Your last phrase would be correct if we were sure there is an alien in this video. We are not. Your analysis of this other picture is inconsequential to the thread. Please Pala, give us some responses to the earlier postings.

[edit on 30-11-2007 by PartChimp]

Originally posted by _Mr.X_
It seems when ATS members are faced with something they don't quite understand they bash the messenger. It's their modus operandi, almost exactly like the republican party...


In any case lets get back to the subject. Lets say she IS telling the truth. Now look at the photo of the alien. Anyone ever see the movie "fire in the sky"? That alien sure looks like the alien described in that movie. (that movie was based on a actual abduction)

Mr. X,

I applaud you for allowing yourself to view this young person's account of her experiences with an open mind instead of doing what some members here do on a consistent basis which is to automatically call such accounts and movies fakes.

There are times when we need to be open to the possibility that the person who is reporting their experiences is actually telling the truth. And in this case, we are most definitely seeing an image of a head ... and when it's loaded into an editor, one can darken and increase the contrast of that image (a frame-shot) to find that it's a head and face that is very similar to what this girl was describing in her You Tube presentation.

It almost looks like there's some kind of a energy field, for lack of a better term for it at this moment, that surrounds that head and this is the shape that we are seeing in this movie that she found on her cam that she had lightened up along with her presentation too -- this in addition to You Tubes' compression utility rendered her presentation and that movie to a poorer quality... The original movie would be more detailed showing more shapes and outlines but unfortunately we don't have that orig. available so for now we just have to make do with what we do have... at this present time.
Great analysis and thanks for your input!


[edit on 30-11-2007 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by Palasheea
Mr. X,

I applaud you for allowing yourself to view this young person's account of her experiences with an open mind instead of doing what some members here do on a consistent basis which is to automatically call such accounts and movies fakes.

WRONG. WRONG! WRONG!!!!

Some of us have NOT automatically called this a fake. We've asked you quite plainly to prove to us that it is what it is. We've looked at the video logically, applying Occam's Razor, taking into account the girl's story and have SUGGESTED that there is a logical explanation for it. In this case, she accidentally recorded her foot.

Great analysis and thanks for your input!

Super. Someone throws up a pic of a movie prop for comparison and you call this a great analysis.

Originally posted by PartChimp
reply to post by Palasheea

 

Your last phrase would be correct if we were sure there is an alien in this video. We are not. Your analysis of this other picture is inconsequential to the thread. Please Pala, give us some responses to the earlier postings.

[edit on 30-11-2007 by PartChimp]

Agreed, this has absolutely nothing to do with the video in question. Looks like an attempt to side-step answering the hard questions.

I've gone back and watched this video again. I've gone through these frames back and forth. You can most definitely here the girl speaking. It sure sounds like her. I ask others to have a listen. It sounds like she starts to say "So I...".

The green/yellow splotch at the bottom looks like a print pattern of some sort. For example something you might find on pajamas, a blanket, bedspread, etc.. I can't be sure of the material but it looks like pajama material.

The bulbous thing above this is definitely flesh-colored, leading me to believe that it belongs to a human being.

In order to see what Pal sees, you would have to disregard the flesh tone, look in the middle of this mass of flesh-colored tissue, adjust the contrast and pick out several dark areas of pixelation that somehow suggests a face or, better yet, Ming the Mercilous.

My thought on this is that area of tissue is round and very smooth, like a fingertip or the underside tip of a toe, etc... As such it is reflecting light in spots. The contrast adjustment shows these more reflective areas as dark pixels.

I've done my analysis Pal, still waiting on yours.

[edit on 30-11-2007 by Freenrgy2]

Ok Pala, I see you're faces in the ITC photographs and I can see where you're coming from with images looking like faces, now what? Obviously the point of the girl's video is that she sees something plainly on the video and is confused on what it is. I researched ITC and I don't see what a video of an "alien" has to do with trying to find spirits in video....i've never heard of an alien ghost but you never know.

Urg. This thread has gone on far enough. I call on all posters to in the name of the quality of the information on the board DONT POST ANYMORE!!!

Originally posted by Darthweezer
Ok Pala, I see you're faces in the ITC photographs and I can see where you're coming from with images looking like faces, now what? Obviously the point of the girl's video is that she sees something plainly on the video and is confused on what it is. I researched ITC and I don't see what a video of an "alien" has to do with trying to find spirits in video....i've never heard of an alien ghost but you never know.

Think of it this way. Here we are in an Aliens and UFOs conspiracy forum where the founders of this forum are doing everything humanly possible to inform the general public that aliens and UFOs DO exist. So because of the 'outlandish-ness' of this subject matter, they know, that in order to convince the general public of this FACT (that aliens and ufos do exist), they know that they need to set up 'STANDARDS' for public consumption and keep out the woo-woo stuff.

In the ITC community, those STANDARDS are set for public consumption for the notion of LIFE-ATFER-DEATH.

And just as there is plenty of evidence that's outside of The Nuts and Bolts UFO/Alien ufology viewpoint to support .. say.. Jacques Vallee's perspective too -- but because it's not relevant to those premises supported by the UFO NUTS and BOLTS community.... it's the same kind of thing in the ITC community where the main focus is the Survivalist Hypothesis and that ITC images and EVP recordings support that there is life after death; anything outside of that... like those images showing "other beings' that are outside of those images of 'humans' are shoved off to the side and ignored because those organizations that are most involved in ITC research are focusing exclusively on life after death.

Some of us ITC experimenters are getting more of these 'other beings' images and audio recordings than others. Those who are not getting such material in the ITC community are obviously perplexed at such information because most of them are not getting them as clear as those of us who are.. So it's very hard for them to somehow fit those types of images that we are getting into their own survivalist viewpoint... (but lol, some groups are saying such images are those of DEAD ALIENS!!!) -- it's outside of their own frame of reference in this regard at least on an experimental level but even when getting such images they are shoved off to the side somewhere because they are focused primarily on life after death -- not strange beings..


But there are problems-- BIG TIME-- when trying to set up standards as in most cases, those STANDARDS are only reflecting those viewpoints of those who create them.


[edit on 30-11-2007 by Palasheea]

Originally posted by PartChimp
The video is now in the e-mail in-boxes of 5 people I would consider professionals when it comes to video and/or the paranormal. Let's see what they have to say.

If they disagree with your assessment of the video though, I'm sure you'll dismiss it anyway.

Pretty much. There isn't enough footage and the quality isn't good enough to convince 'experts'. You hand things like that to experts KNOWING that they will not risk their integrity or reputation by considering it as plausible evidence.

Like I said, I'm not the only person who feels that skepticism is a lost cause. What you see is not enough evidence to you, and that's where the investigation ends. You should be able to leave it at that. To go on and on trying to convince people that the evidence is faulty just seems asinine.