Alledged UFO Captured on Film, very close.

Doh! this thread made it to the top of the board?
I saw this one earlier and didnt have anything nice to say about it so I didnt say anything at all..
I have decided to stick to that pledge and not saying anything at all..

However I dont see why it made itself to the top of the board?
This one really? how many times do we have to go threw this on here..
Okay its kewl.. I understand.. its an ongoing thing.. Video after video.
There will be more like these to come in the passing days.
More stuff like this, that will work on manipulating our minds.

I dont need a fake video to know they are real. I already know 100% they are out there. You either belive it or you dont in this day or age.

Well said zysin5,

These things will appear as top of the list for reasons unknown to all, perhaps it's the context of the footage and the different take on how it is filmed. Behind the glass sitting in the passenger seat looking at it in such detail has not been done for a long time and i think it's that "Newness" (If there is such a word) that peaks the interest of members.

Again as someone has already stated the audio gives it away straight up for me, not one single gasp or "Look at that" tells me that this person hasn't thought out his/her hoax. I have to say that there are elements of the vid that entertain me, glimpses of what it COULD be like to experience that situation but i think we are a long way from a youtube posting to give us definitive evidence of something going on up there.

I personally think it will come to light in more obscure ways, perhaps we are slowly being conditioned to accept the truth without us really knowing it...

reply to post by zysin5


There are good reasons and one is the point I brought up in my first post. There are many new members on the board every day, members that don't really have all the skills necessary to spot a hoax or rope an OP out. You just have to think of these threads as training ground and either learn things you didn't know or teach things others don't know.

One member was specifically asked about hoax IDing. Should we just ignore them because it's just another run of the mill fake UFO? I ignore 98% already but sometimes I like to help the newbies out.

Now, as far as the diggs go, I would have to agree with you. I can't for the life of me figure out why people would digg it.


[edit on 7-3-2008 by jbondo]

i think your right, their is no way to know, if the video is fake or real, i cant tell.

Originally posted by jbondo
Now, as far as the diggs go, I would have to agree with you. I can't for the life of me figure out why people would digg it.

If the diggs lead right back to ATS.....something of this miserable quality can't look good to the Digg community.

Okay, "despicable" may have been kinda' harsh.....how about "grudging acceptance?"

Just ringing in my two cents:

It looks way too smooth to be real. The lack of detail would be another pointer, but im no expert on these things. Good call

Some excellent points have been made: now, IMHO,
There are some facets of the whole story that need to be clarified.
The author of the video claims, in the video description:

A UFO captured from the window of a Blue Panorama flight from Rome to Paris, on april the 29th, 2006

In the comments, he claims (in italian) that the video has been aired by
some TV channel's news, at "lunchtime" some days after the sighting.

Regarding these statements, still hasn't been assested:

• a) IF Blue Panorama covered this air course on 2006
  In according to their website,
  www.blue-panorama.com...
  the routes that are being covered are:
  -Brazil
  -Cuba
  -Madagascar
  -Maldives
  -Mexico
  ..but Paris **may** have been an intermediate stop, and besides, their "about us" page reads: Created to service the main Italian airports, the European capitals, and the tourist resorts of the Mediterranean basin.
  Anyway most likely the route was actually covered, i don't think that he has chosen a random Airline to mention.
  
  
• b)IF a Blue Panorama Airlines flight Rome - Paris actually took place on april 29th, 2006
  
  
• c)IF Blue Panorama Airlines is supposed to be aware of the "sighting".
  
  
• d)IF the wing that we are looking at match one of the following models' wings:
  
  Boeing 737-300
  Boeing 737-400
  Boeing 767-300ER
  Boeing 757-200
  Piaggio P-180
  
  the ones of their fleet.
  It seems that some of them may have different wings configuration, but we have some actual experts in airplanes here, so i guess that this one will be clarified soon.
  
  
• e) IF actually some TV channel news aired the second part of the footage some days after April 29th, 2006:
  if yes, the of course wouldn't prove its genuinity, but at least would "locate" the footage on april 2006.
  
  
• f) IF the video allegedly submitted to the TV channel has been submitted anonymously, or if there was a NAME behind it.
  
  AND
  
  
• g) IF the author of the video is available to share the original, uncutted
  video.
  
  
• h) Why the author of the video, who joined youtube one year ago, decided to upload it just NOW (two days ago).
  
  
• i) Why are we so unlucky:
  this video is the only one taken on a Blue
  Panorama flight in which the plane window SUCKS.
  
  

  Google Video Link

  
  
  
  www.youtube.com...
  www.youtube.com...
  www.youtube.com...
  
  Of course this proves nothing but, as said, that we're unlucky: pheraps if we'd sleuth then we'd find more than a couple of videos in which the plane windows sucks.
  
  
  
  

IMHO, if not all, many of these questions need to be answered.
I've emailed the airline asking infos about all the points a, b, c, d, e:
if i won't get a response within a short lapse of time, then i'll try to phone.
I didn't contact the author of the video in order to send him an invitation
because this has been already covered by Drexon.
Many issues of the video have already been pointed out: some excellent point have already been made, IMHO.
But we need the palm tree to put this one to rest conclusively: and pheraps this time is not inside the video, but in its background.
I look forward to welcome the author of the video, hoping that he'll join ATS ASAP.

It's certainly an excellent video either way. A real UFO, or a fine piece of art. I find the video extremely real, but the lack of commotion just kills it.

Video 10/10
Audio 2/10

I read something about scanlines earlier but I didn't recognize what was being said.

Have a look at the plane wing's top "line" towards the end. Why is it 'creeping' like that part of the video is low resolution, when the reflection of the camera in the window is ultra sharp?

Just my 2 cents before I hit bed.

reply to post by internos


Thanks for the post internos I really like the way you approach these cases! Very nice indeed

Cleverly doen but on seeing it it screamed fake to me. Because primarily people would have come off that flight and started talkingnto the media about an amazing sighting. Additionally it being an aircraft full of tourists why is there no more film, photos of the event, as many more people would have had camera with them. Finally surely this would have been picked up on radar by air traffic control and a report logged...so all these things suggest to me it is fake. Good fun though and makes you think what would REALLY happen if a UFO came up close and personal to your holiday flight !!!

I KNOW HOW WE CAN PROVE IT TO BE REAL OR FAKE:


I watched the video and there is no actual evidence that it is real or fake. BUT I think I have a way to figure it out.

If its fake that means someone somehow "made" this video.

If it's real that means someone actually filmed this craft outside a plan.

So....... If it's fake that means it should be able to be duplicated.

Can any of you duplicate this video or know someone who can? Would you consider this evidence?

Can any of you duplicate this video or know someone who can? Would you consider this evidence?

Well, this point has been raised many times on 'good' UFO videos, and i'll say what i always do.

ANYTHING on film can be reproduced these days, most of the time to be more believable than the original film. It doesn't prove anything about the original footage to be able to recreate it anymore.

Take the Caret Drone case for instance, there was better models, even moving video made by debunkers during the case, yet that still wasn't enough to discredit the original images in some people's minds.

It is up to personal judgment and common sense whether you believe certain videos or not. Personally, my BS meter hits the roof and breaks it's case with this video.

Interesting point I can't help think that if someone duplicated the EXACT video and showed how they did it that that woudn't somehow tell us that this video was fake. If ANYTHING can be duplicated then duplicate it. What harm would it cause?

of course its a fake, dont u think the world would know about this one .. whats really funny is how people throw around the letters CGI, oh its cgi this and well u know, cgi maybe apart this. but its surely created on a high end rig, using, inferno, or flame, and correct me if i am wrong, but its the layering which is throwing people off, guy takes a video of pov from plane, then layers it over the original, its that simple, that and a few tweaks here and there, why waste all your time trying to debunk it, its a fake has to be, just look at the dpth of field created verses the composed size of the created ufo, its not only our of synch with the movement, but its actually not that good.

Just a note on behavioral manners in extreme stress or shock situations and to address the lack of vocal response from the camera man.
It's known as the 3F's : freeze, fight or flee ( with freeze being the worst one to have)
Unless you yourself have ever been in a situation of extreme stress or shock you can't tell in advance how you'd react !!
It is consistent that IF the camera man is a "freezer" he wouldn't have shouted out.
I've seen all types in the field, some freezers even losing control of basic bodily functions.
HOWEVER even for those, it is inconsistent that the eyes would not follow the threat as long as it's within their initial field of view.

Why would the person who recorded this remarkable UFO keep silent about it? Nothing is being said at all on the You Tube page about anything about that person.

Common sense says that anyone who captures such a close shot of a UFO like this would be taking it to the press and telling their version of what they saw at that moment when they were recording it and seeing it.

But... as in the vast majority of vids like this, the person who supposedly recorded it is SILENT -- when in fact, there would be no reason for them to be that way ... that is unless, of course, the video is a CGI... that this is what it looks like anyways that SILENCE speaks for itself.

Originally posted by jbondo
reply to post by zysin5

 

Now, as far as the diggs go, I would have to agree with you. I can't for the life of me figure out why people would digg it.
[edit on 7-3-2008 by jbondo]

I digged (dugged?) it. If you read the comment on digit I said watch ATSers discusses the topic. Any time there is a discussion that can be done intelligently with out personalized nastiness tossed in, is a positive step in educating people.
Personally (not directed at jbondo) I can not for the life of me understand why anyone in this thread would complain about any topic brought up or belittle someone for posting or giving an opinion. With the amount of stuff on the site, if it bothers some one, read a different topic.
I appreciated the topic started by earth2, and the continuing conversations from long standing members who give reasons and can back them up with expertise.


[edit on 8-3-2008 by starskipper] spelling x2

[edit on 8-3-2008 by starskipper]

In my opinion, it's a hoax created by refilming a rendered animation through a fake window. The focussing seen throughout is the giveaway. The only object ever seen in focus is the window itself with its very obvious scratches. Neither the plane's wing nor the UFO are ever seen in clear focus because there was never a wing or UFO to focus on. It's pretty obviously a professional camera. The operator focusses and refocusses throughout the video, but we never get anything better than perfectly clear scratches on the window.
The UFO animation was probably created in a similar fashion to the debunked Haiti UFOs using LightWave or Maya. This could then be played on a monitor screen set behind a scratched window. I suspect the monitor screen was never gotten into focus for obvious reasons. It might give too many clues to the technique.
I'm sure I could reproduce this effect given a large camera, a UFO animation and a piece of scratched plastic sheet.

WG3


[edit on 8-3-2008 by waveguide3]

Ok...not knowing the physics of a UFO...I can only assume that it is a physical existance in our space and time...so it would have to adhere to the same physics as the aircraft it is following...if this thing is traveling at the same speed as this jet, the angle of attack is wrong... with it tilted like it is the wind forces would be insane and it would need some incredible thrust to keep that angle of attack. Unless, of course, it is not a physical existance in our space and time.