It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Could this be the Best UFO Footage Ever? (Clear Video of UFO)

page: 13
28
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Elmer_Dinkley
To say that all video footage is meaningless is extreme
to say the least,seems to me you are poo pooing the subject
matter!
I think this one is hoax too,but to dismiss it out of hand
before it has been gone over with a fine tooth comb,and
analyzed properly by the right people ,is criminal imo.
If this has Jaime Maussan involved,then I`m
pretty sure it`s a fake,as he`s in it for the money imho,
until we have the footage from the guy who filmed this
to analyze,then I agree with you kindred,to an extent LOL
So you believe that ALL footage is fake then,and if not
what`s a good example of what you believe to be real?


Hi Elmer, I never said all UFO video footage is fake, but unless it's from a reputable source and is the full footage and not just short clips, then I personally wouldn't waste my time with it. Eye witness accounts lend credence to any sighting, but even then it doesn't mean it's definitely an Alien Spaceship, but atleast it can be proved that it's probably not a hoax.

You make me sound like I'm a UFO debunker,
which couldn't be further from the truth. I've always been interested in UFO's from an early age, ever since I went to watch ET at the pictures. From that day I became hooked on anything to do with UFO's and the paranormal. I bought every magazine I could get my hands on, subscribing to UFO magazine, UFO reality, Sightings and Quest magazine. In recent years my interest has waned considerably, mainly because I don't think we are any closer to finding out the truth. 50 years is along time to wait for the truth and I don't think my patience stretches that far.

There's been plenty of good sightings and good video footage, which is why I believe we probably are being visited by ET, even though it's still yet to be proven. The Belgium sightings of flying triangles and NASA UFO footage are probably some of the best cases. I personally don't think we'll ever know the truth and like I've said before, the governments don't seem like there going to come forward with the truth any time soon and I very much doubt that Aliens are going to making contact for atleast another 200-500 years. We are just not civilized enough for contact and relations with another higher Alien civilization.


P.S Thanks for the star skept!cal.




posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup

Originally posted by hammanderr
We can all speculate all we want, but without the original video analysis even the scant contribution that this video could provide to the ufo community is lacking.


Quite so. Perhaps it might be possible to get a decent analysis from the original video. But the best we could possibly say about it is that if it's a hoax, we don't know how it was done. \That's nowhere near saying it's "real," and a few billion miles away from verifying that it's some kind of craft controlled by time travelers or aliens or leprechauns.


[edit on 21-4-2008 by Nohup]


Nohup, I agree that saying it's a hoax is nowhere near saying it's real.

Jeesh...


I'm so glad you agree with me that there are no physical biological beings out there visiting our planet -- now or in the past or the future, for that matter, in their marvelous flying machines!

Good to see that there are some members here, like me and you, who know that such stuff is nothing but sci-fi fiction!


[edit on 21-4-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Based on this thread and the many others like it I would go so far as to say that we have to move beyond mere photographic or video evidence in this day and age. In an age where any fool can create convincing looking evidence we are truly getting nowhere with all of our conjecture and "conclusions" as to the realness or or fakeness of any given photo or video.
Unless an object can be shown to be performing some function or have some intention or be identified as definitely extraterrestrial or otherwise extraordinary, what difference will it ultimately make? Those who are already convinced will be more convinced and those who are not will continue to be unconvinced.
I cannot see that this video nor others like it, (i.e. clear yet entirely inconclusive objects which exhibit no observable properties or lights moving against a dark background which are similarly inconclusive) can ultimately lead to anything other than mere speculation.

[edit on 21-4-2008 by hammanderr]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Palasheea
Nohup, I agree that saying it's a hoax is nowhere near saying it's real.

Jeesh...


That's not what I said. I said that not being able to prove something is a hoax is not the same as saying that it's legitimate. Just because you don't know how a magic trick is done, doesn't make it any less of a trick.

Some people here fail to see that distinction. To them, if an image or bit of footage can't be proven a hoax, that means it's "real," and joy reigns as all the evil debunkers must be forced to admit their shameful defeat.



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nohup

Originally posted by Palasheea
Nohup, I agree that saying it's a hoax is nowhere near saying it's real.

Jeesh...


That's not what I said. I said that not being able to prove something is a hoax is not the same as saying that it's legitimate. Just because you don't know how a magic trick is done, doesn't make it any less of a trick.

Some people here fail to see that distinction. To them, if an image or bit of footage can't be proven a hoax, that means it's "real," and joy reigns as all the evil debunkers must be forced to admit their shameful defeat.


Oh, I see, so you don't think "magic" tricks are hoaxes.

Well, I think they are but that's just my own opinion.


In any case, the day I see a regular debunker here admit defeat is the day hell freezes over.


[edit on 21-4-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Palasheea
 


Congrats Nohup....you have been "obtused".....my new verb.



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by Palasheea
Below are two frame-shots from that section of this clip showing the location of that bird. It's flying in a straight line OVER/ABOVE that object.


Thanks for the frame-shots. The bird zips by pretty quick and the stills helps to freeze it a bit. So, it looks to me like the bird is just as focused as the object. I don't think that object is much larger than the bird.


Well, actually no. The bird is flying BEHIND that object. One is more focused than the other.


Um, just saying that you were right in the first place when you said that the bird was flying behind that object but then I showed you that it was not only flying at a further distance from where we are seeing that object in this vid but that that bird is also zipping by OVER/ABOVE that object too!

So I agree with you that the bird is BEHIND that object but still am perplexed why you still are saying that that object and the bird are on the same plane and that they are both equally focused when they are clearly NOT.

One is behind and the other is in front... this means they are on 2 different planes... not one. This also explains why the object is more focused than that bird so I'm sorry but I'm not quite understanding what you mean here.

But the bottom line is that you were right in the first place that the bird is behind that object so this is an important fact in the overall analysis of this clip.



[edit on 21-4-2008 by Palasheea]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   
edit for reworking

[edit on 22-4-2008 by Sys_Config]



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by The Coward
 


thats so fake you can see its a toy why isnt anyone else watchingand you wouldnt stand there filming you would shout to your friends or family to come and have a look at this



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by The Coward
 


It looks like a modified Top Hat Spacecraft.
They need to land the ufo.
Maybe next year.



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Well, actually no. The bird is flying BEHIND that object. One is more focused than the other.


Um, just saying that you were right in the first place when you said that the bird was flying behind that object but then I showed you that it was not only flying at a further distance from where we are seeing that object in this vid but that that bird is also zipping by OVER/ABOVE that object too!

So I agree with you that the bird is BEHIND that object but still am perplexed why you still are saying that that object and the bird are on the same plane and that they are both equally focused when they are clearly NOT.

One is behind and the other is in front... this means they are on 2 different planes... not one. This also explains why the object is more focused than that bird so I'm sorry but I'm not quite understanding what you mean here.

But the bottom line is that you were right in the first place that the bird is behind that object so this is an important fact in the overall analysis of this clip.
[edit on 21-4-2008 by Palasheea]

I am posting what bird shots I could get to help and get an idea of whats happening, when the birds come to the defense of our planet, retreat actually, or perhaps are disinterested as it might not make a good nest
but they do appear to be on different planes, the object is clearly the most focused, and of course on magnification, it seemed to dissolve first, indicating, I guess, it must be behind. And boy was that bird hard to snap!







Thanx for helping us all understand a little better.

I had a roof section posted here earlier and found its not anomalous, so wound up answering my own question.






[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Markshark4
I found a UFO pic at UFO Casebook that looks EXACTLY like the one in this video!


UFO April 11, 2008 - Houston, Texas




UFO April 24, 1993 - Jalisco, Guadalajara

Turn the pic upside down and it is an exact match!






1993-Jalisco, Guadalajara, April 24-This photograph was taken in the state of Jalisco in 1993. Several years later more reports of UFOs are made: On Saturday, January 3, 1998, at 3 a.m., airline pilot Gary Sanders who has 24 years of flying experience in the USAF saw a reddish-colored light move rapidly from east to west, then the object suddenly changed direction by about 135 degrees of turn and very sharply, twice, defying "any laws of flight and physics that I am aware of." On Saturday, December 5, 1998, between 7 and 7:30 p.m., thousands of people in the states of Jalisco and Aguascaliente in Mexico watched a UFO described as "a very bright white light" fly over the Sierra Madre mountains.

www.ufocasebook.com...





[edit on 21-4-2008 by Markshark4]


Here is some more info on the UFO from 1993 that is an exact match with the one in this video:

www.analuisacid.com...


Also, another witness has come forward!

His testimony will be in Jaime Muassan's report!

[edit on 23-4-2008 by Markshark4]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I agree the this is pretty cool, but all of the footage would be better. Something about seeing them fly away at incredible speeds facinates me. Before I believe this is real, I'd need to hear from the experts and see the whole vid. Until then it is just another cool vid.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Markshark4
 


Look an awful lot like the UFO reported by the forester's in the "fire in the sky"abduction(I use that cause I dont remember the name of the abductee....err............Randy something?)But anyways the guy went missing for 5 days and then reappeared.Everyone proly knows of this,it's well known and has not been debunked.


Also has MUFON looked at this pic yet?



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   
I just noticed that picture number 1 and 5 with the birds, show reflectivity, i don't mean the blur of wings either , totally absent in the craft, yet both ar exposed to same light source. why is that?. Its been my experience the sun shines on the wicked as well the just?
I agree, we want the whole video, and as mentioned before, I take Jaime with a grain of salt. He keeps being bought up as he were the max planck institute and clearinghouse of ufology. Thats one name that does not inspire confidence, and probably hurts luckys case.

[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Hey from the movie 'Fire in the sky' his name is Travis Walton, my dad and uncle both told me they used to wait at the same bus stop every morning to go to school. In Snowflake, AZ, they only lived there a couple of years but they both said that he was probably the strangest person they ever met and that was obviously well before the incident, so they don't believe it. But I do, skeptics tend to exagerate if they don't want to believe something. I stayed with my great grand mother in her cabin who lived there untill she died last year but it was creepy being alone way out probably close to where he got abducted. Sorry, I never get a chance to tell people that.

Anyway, if this is real, that heap of ugly Alien technology must be an old beater, he probably don't get much alien tail with that thing. Nah, its fake.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny
Congrats Nohup....you have been "obtused".....my new verb.


I know, man! I don't know how many ways I can rephrase my statements. When I read them over, they seem to make sense. They seem to be grammatically correct. So I can only assume the communication is failing on the other end. Oh, well.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Sheeper
 


Now THAT was an interesting case mate.

The Travis Walton UFO Abduction Case

Cy Gilson Polygraph Test of Travis Walton

The Walton Abduction

An Ordinary Day
By Travis Walton
Condensed from the book, Fire in the Sky

On ATS:
"Fire in the Sky"...the Travis Walton story...



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Thanks for that link, I didn't know he wrote a book about it. I'm gonna read it. Interesting thing is if he wanted fame and fortune, why become a reclusive hermit afterwards, anyway, Good on ya mate




[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sheeper]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Internos, you must tell me where you got that ats bowling ball, it looks better and more real than the video for sure!



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join