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.


Capturing The Light DVD

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 04:21 PM
Go go go Palasheea!, your question was asked twice on the podcast!! brilliant! listening to it now and it's fascinating..

guys listen to the podcast, it's fantastic.. no bitching here just interesting stuff

[edit on 11/1/08 by October]

posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 05:11 PM
An incredible podcast, please give me your comments.

Through all the stuff we see every day coming on here this is the only thing that is tangible and genuine, a rare thing for ATS where we get all number of skeptics dishing their dirt, this is one where it's black and white to me, Dave Rabbit held the conversation brilliantly with Dorothy and i ask all ATS members to take time out to listen to the ATS mix. A breath of fresh air...

posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 06:23 AM
She seemed disgusted when Dave asked her my question, regarding a "gift exchange". Made me feel a little guilty. I think some of the user names may have offended her. You got people like "Lord 13" and "Sin Critter" asking a deeply religious old woman questions.

Looking back I think I would have had Dave just use my real name for the question.

Overall I really enjoyed the show!

posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 08:44 PM
I loved the show too!

And good that Dave pointed out to her about the name thing because I'm sure an 84 yr.old woman who's not computer savvy would have any clue whatsoever as to what That's all about.

posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 10:13 PM
The show was great!

Do you remember 'Batteries Not Included', Dorothy reminds me of the old lady fom that
she has an innocence about her and i cannot wait to see the DVD.

I loved it how she described the 'window' in which the ET's could travel, and that some of them even got lost.

Cracking stuff.

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:18 PM
Great interview!

Can't wait for the DVD to arrive!


[edit on 1/14/2008 by seentoomuch]

posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 12:17 AM
********************SPOILER ALERT******************************

I finally saw the movie and I have to say most of it was testimonies. I guess I was expecting more footage since they advertised "30,000" feet of footage. Most of it was talking and you did get to see some UFO's that would emit light in a split second of the frames on the film.

Don't get me wrong, the information was really good to hear how legit Dorothy is and I do believe what she is experiencing IS the real deal. There were just too many credible people involved with her and asked her on several occasions to film these objects with 3 different cameras they would give her and she would record the UFO with all three video recorders. They wanted her to use their cameras to make sure there was no tampering with the film.

Sure enough, she proved it again with all three cameras intact.

There was one scene at the end where they were interviewing the daughter of Dorothy with a few question in front of the camera. She appeared to be finishing up cleaning the dishes where a UFO just happened to show up by the window.

She was doing dishes answering questions and it was blatantly obvious that there was at first, a triangle shaped UFO or three lights in the shape of a Triangle, then the lights at the three corners merged together into a brighter ball of light and moved right to left.

Then a few second afterwards you can see a larger ship in the background.

This was the only part of the movie that actually made the hairs on my arms stand up. You just got the feeling this was real because you never seen anything like it before. I don't think CGI could fake this, it's just too real or unexplainable.

The other interesting thing about this movie is seeing the light or orb in the film move and then in a split second, her camera picks up strange lights that appears to be doing something I can't explain.

One point I was not sure about in this movie was orbs moving though the house caught on film. I don't know if this has anything to do with UFOs but the people in the movie seem to think so.

I have to check out the DVD to see if there is any other hidden features, but I don't think so.

posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 05:00 PM
I am ashamed to admit it but don't have time to listen to an entire podcast. Could anyone type in some of the most interesting q+a or commentary that she made during the interview?
Thanks for the cliffnotes!

[edit on 17-1-2008 by BOTAL]

posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 05:18 PM

Originally posted by senshido
Dorothy, and anyone else out there who can call upon ufo's to appear at their calling, do us all a favor will ya?

Buy a freagin descent camera already.

Seriously, splurge a little and get a HD camera, after all you are like the only person on earth capable of doing this..

Agreed. They didn't show any footage in the trailer (from what I can tell??) but they showed a quick clip of her holding her camera and I'm fairly certain that is a 1960's Super 8 handheld film camera. Wow. Great for silent, moody film school shorts but baaaaad for revealing ET evidence.

Even still, I would still like to watch the movie.

I think a few too many of you are worried about falling for a scam and passing judgement preemptively then taking the time to see what this offers. It's a movie and if it's all BS then maybe it's an hour and half of great comedy or entertainment. Either way it's still a night in and something to pop some popcorn for.

Always look on the bright side of life

posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 03:19 AM
reply to post by TheInfamousOne

i saw the film over the weekend and was terribly dissapointed..nothing but 'well..this has got to be real because dorothy is just such a nice old lady she couldnt possibly lie'

a few shots of flashing lights and a very dubious scene where dorothys daughter is cleaning up in front of a window....and..AMAZINGLY...a UFO appears behind her over her shoulder (supposedly without her knowing)...and just coincidentally moves from left to right as she moves in the opposite directions...her body movements just look VERY contrived...and the inclusion of 'orbs'..which are just specs of dust and stuff in the evidence for UFOs and aliens totally discredits anything else the film claims..

why..if this is real..are these people selling their films? someone else has said..get a better camera...or..better this is an earth shattering thing thats happening here...get a tv station involved..get them to stay over and film these things professionally..

awful...just awful..

[edit on 1-12-2008 by alienesque]

posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 02:41 PM
reply to post by alienesque

im dissapointed to hear that you didnt find the fact that she was getting light anomolies on her 8mm film which cant be done without thousands of man hours and very expensive equipment. the fact that she has 35,000ft is very telling too.

its odd that you didnt find the 'light' outside the window which moves in a location where there is no ROAD which was then confirmed by industrial light and magic (currently working on transformers 2) to be non conclusive.

Its saddens me to think that you failed to pay attention to the part when she used 3 video cameras at once to capture the same object while it hovered.

where were you during the video

this documentary was awarded best footage 2008. im sorry i own the video and its exrememly important.

posted on Dec, 2 2008 @ 04:41 AM

Originally posted by LordThumbs
reply to post by alienesque

im dissapointed to hear that you didnt find the fact that she was getting light anomolies on her 8mm film which cant be done without thousands of man hours and very expensive equipment. the fact that she has 35,000ft is very telling too.

its odd that you didnt find the 'light' outside the window which moves in a location where there is no ROAD which was then confirmed by industrial light and magic (currently working on transformers 2) to be non conclusive.

Its saddens me to think that you failed to pay attention to the part when she used 3 video cameras at once to capture the same object while it hovered.

where were you during the video

this documentary was awarded best footage 2008. im sorry i own the video and its exrememly important.


how do we know she has 30000 feet of film showing these things?..will she be releasing them all foot by foot and charging for the privilege?

what do the aliens think about her charging money for these films?..why would they be part of something that makes a few people some money?..wouldnt they show themselves to someone who would simply hand over the 30000 feet of film to a tv station and let them air it for nothing?

[edit on 2-12-2008 by alienesque]

posted on Dec, 2 2008 @ 06:29 AM
I was initially a little angry about the making money angle for the dvd, it seems that every FREE podcast I download has some major plugs for books, dvd's etc and i'm really sick of it to be honest.

Even though i still haven't seen the dvd everything i have heard about it comes out positive which can only be a good thing in my opinion. Just got to get my hands on the dvd!

posted on Dec, 2 2008 @ 09:36 AM
if you wanna see it for free, click here

posted on Dec, 2 2008 @ 10:46 AM
reply to post by alienesque

ive heard this argument about truth should be free etc.etc.etc. so i wont argue this point at all.

and as for the 30,000 feet of film argument im not sure your even posing a question thats worth the discussion sorry. sounds to me like your more eagar to prove to yourself shes an old liar than truly listen to whats been said. not to mention you completely ignore the fact that the survey panel has confirmed the length of film in feet at 35,000.

if this woman was in your family something tells me your disposition would shift DRAMATICALLY

how do the aliens feel? ummmmm
if you again 'payed attention' you will hear that dorothy 'gave' the opportunity to OUT OF THE BOX FILMS to due with the footage whatever they like. dorothy by any means has not produced this documentary for profit, ill say it again, the people she left the film with decided to slap a label on it and make a profit (in order to help the cause to convert the rest of the 8mm to digital format)


[edit on 12/2/2008 by LordThumbs]

posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 04:39 PM
The developed film showed an explosion of movement with what appears to be a "signature in light"...

I saw Izatt's DVD at a MUFON meeting, Jan '09, and there was group speculation of 'signatures', spelling out "Dorothy" too. I can clearly see white lines on the right corner of the shot that would appear to be signature-like, from a human perspective on the shot provided. However, if the "light beings" are communicating in writing, what is their alphabet? Are they trying to copy ours? If they are capable of communicating with Dorothy using telepathy, why hasn't a ufo researcher thought to short-cut the "Light Show", and go right to Dorothy with OUR questions for the "light beings"? Do the light bursts constitute a "language", or perhaps "books" of information that we are to decode? I guess I'm waiting for Dorothy to explain it all in her next DVD.

I admit to not knowing much, but I'm full of questions.

What I found fascinating in the light bursts were the curved broken lines, and the severe elipses, light streams apparently generated simultaneously from each of the ship's light array, in 1/18 of a second! I counted 6-10 lights where the bursts eminated from which changed with different filmings. (See the still provided by palasheea) I would like a bonified energy physicist, if he dare post here, to explain how curved broken lines of light could be formed in our atmosphere, and be directed to form these tight elipses? And what human source of energy/magnetic force could bend light with seemingly complete control, matching the bends of other independent lights above a mountain in Vancouver?

I know that some of the still photo's Izatt provided in the DVD are ones reproduced later and are on the Net. The broken radius lines in the stills, at least, would imply a 3-dimensional curve, as some come around to meet their origins. I don't know how that could be created by a human source without a computer CGI function, or by perhaps adding radius layers to the still photo later. And also, I've never seen real light travel in broken lines, as it typically appears as dots, particles, or lines. Some of the radii appear like gobs of plasma as they are not uniformly shaped in length or diameter, in the segments, end to end, or in width. Wait, I think I've seen broken lines in pictures from cyclotron atom smashers, which are the trajectories of particles, but their origins are from a single point of impact. Dorothy's lights have multiple light sources, and most travel independently of other lights, some intersecting, and mixing, but I've yet to see the radii segments intersect or combine in any still shot so far. I've seen three. Imagine what we'll learn when all 30,000 feet of film is digitized.

Wondering as I wander...

posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 08:18 PM
pretty interesting stuff
thanks for posting

posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:04 AM
In the newer Dorothy Izatt thread that’s just been started, mmiichael posted some commentary regarding the camera being faulty, as supposedly raised on the CBC TV show, “On The Road Again".

If that's true about the camera being faulty, that tears a fairly big hole in a lot of Dorothy Izatt's high-profile videos.

However I haven't been able to find anything about the CBC "On The Road Again" episode in question, to verify that.

I think the business about the “orbs” in the house is silliness. Those “orbs” are obviously out-of-focus dust particles that are close to the camera.

I think the video of the objects seen through the kitchen window during the interview is interesting.

posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:50 PM
I was turned on to Dorothy Izatt thanks to a post from a member here in a different thread and then spent probably 3 or so hours last night doing internet searching and reading upon the case. I also listened to the interview with Dorothy and Frank here on ATS, and i must say, that was a fantastic interview, handled with class and even touching in places.

It is interesting to me that i have not come across the Dorothy Izatt case before, as i've been intrigued in the UFO phenom for a few years now, at least in terms of actively exposing myself to different authors, theories, book etc. Why it is interesting though, is because it is, geographically speaking, right in the neck of my woods.

To me this case is the perfect combination of both credible and astonishing, astonishing because of the quality of some of the photos. I have not yet seen the DVD, but plan on purchasing it soon though I would be more inclined to do so if it were available for download. Perhaps that could be suggested to the people selling it, i don't know the logistics of how possible or easy that would be for them to do however.

I think a video like this should be supported because if it is as Franks says, and the profits from it go towards digitizing all of Dorothy's footage then it would hold value for future UFO research, and could be restored and archived for future generations as the actual film would deteriorate eventually over time.

Anyways, i realize i am late to the party and this thread is likely a couple years or so old, i didn't check when the last post was but regardless of that, i would just like to express my thanks for an excellent interview, and to these forums in general for turning me on to Dorothy Izatt's story and her UFO footage, which is mind blowing and boggling. Look forward to seeing the DVD sometime soon.

Peace. ~

edit on 28-9-2012 by Runciter33 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in