Can Someone debunk this anti-gravity rotorless helicopter?

Its obviously fake, that said the reason to use a helicopter is economics. Simply grab a cheap helicopter and modify it rather than have a new body and flight control system custom built.

look at the picture of the green copter ...look at the aft portion you can see the reflection of the rotor someone forgot to PS out...LMMFAO

It doesn't make any sense to make an antigravity craft and then shape it exactly like a helicopter, minus the propellers. It's got to be a fake piciture. That shape would never be chosen by any engineer for an antigravity craft.

On the first image in the thread, you can clearly recognize one of the "texture" filters you can apply to an image in photoshop.

Its a rather strong telltale for edited images.

There's other artifacts in the images that suggest editing.

This is one reason why I only seldom visit ATS anymore, the number of useless time-wasting posts from spammers who just want to fill the boards up with obvious fakes has been steadily increasing and the sooner these are moved to the trash the better.

Rant over.

I thought this chopper had been debunked maaaany times already...

OK, I think the following image should end the discussion to Page Two.

why are ` debunkers ` being demanded to do the work here ?

this is a poster child for the maxim :

extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence

and to put it bluntly any one who can make an genuine working ` anti grav ` mod toa helicopter would demo it at any airshow - and have UNLIMITED orders and funding instantly

the reasons are obvious

airsea rescure / air ambulances etc would buy it - cos they can land in confined spaces - hover inches from cliffs - ignore ships masts etc etc

the military - obvious uses -as above - pluss no rotots to get shot off and being able to land in jungle / forests by ` brute force `

PS - i will kick the first retard who bleats ` its secret tech ` in the balls - look at the website - its alledged inventors are publicising it

i totally agree. photoshop 101. look closely at the X51 on the rear midsection. this section is oval shaped from the cockpit to the tail. if you look closely you will see there is no contour or curve to the X51 tag. this is a rookie mistake. straight copy and paste. X51 looks flat. it should have a more 3 dimensional curved look. hope this helps.

why block the exil data.
"Unable to extract some or all of the Exif data"

at lest it does not come back photoshop like the drone hoax photos.

Some of the photos on the site are of a B2 stealth bomber
AV-05, tail number 21070

this is another site by paolo mazzilli.
www.geolandia.com...
same ip address

[edit on 25-9-2008 by ANNED]

[edit on 25-9-2008 by ANNED]

[edit on 25-9-2008 by ANNED]

[edit on 25-9-2008 by ANNED]

Hi all,

I found these couple of links which some may find interesting but other than that I would say a hoax or something along those lines.

www.whitehouse.org...

jnaudin.free.fr...

The second one I found to be quite interesting.

Peace.

Originally posted by Doc Lithium
I thought this chopper had been debunked maaaany times already...

OK, I think the following image should end the discussion to Page Two.

lmao. BAM right on the money. the piece that was copied is also on the tail section.

I can tell you positively the photo of the "X51" is a fake; in fact my four year old can Photoshop better than that. I have been a graphic artist for thirteen years and an amateur must have done the Photoshop work on that pic.