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.

 

A list of UFO videos/pictures that have yet to be proven fake.

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 06:58 AM
link   
I say we compile a list,of videos and pictures that have yet to be proved to be fake,as a reference to fall back on. Wether they are possible man made,or space orientated.

I'll kick start with this famous one from the italian airbase. As i'm pretty sure that's not been debunked as CGI yet. My guess,man made,but possible alien technology.


(if there is already a thread like this,please whack a link at the ass end of this and close it up,taa)




posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Hi there, a couple of points on this video.

My first thoughts are CGI but thats only a thought.

I was reading the comments on this video, il post the ones that caught my eye.


This secret NATO HTA mine-tracker was tested and filmed at Cellina river bed test site near Aviano NATO air base. It is using the coanda effect with jet propulsion which was first demonstrated in the fifties by John Frost with Avro VZ-9-AV Avrocar. For a closer look at the exact place it was hovering on the video go to Google: then choose "Maps" and enter cordinates in "Search maps: 46.13701,12.683201 Then choose "satelite" and zoom in. The Nato cameraman was filming from the east river side.


It was launched at coordinates 46.140872,12.678566 and flew 2 miles south then 2 miles west and landed safely at Aviano Nato air base.
It is clearly visible in front of the Experimental Flight Hangar at Aviano Nato Air Base: Go to Google Maps and enter cordinates in "search maps": 46.040591,12.606849
Then choose "satellite" and zoom in.


Dont know if anyone can check out those cordinates, im not tsaying that this is what it is, but worth checking out.

If it was CGI its a good one.


if this video were fake its a hell of a job to do so many keframes to animate the ufo and keep it in syncro with the foreground movement, im a visual effects producer and i know what im talking about CGI (computer generated images) are so hard to give them a real look, even in expensive movie productions sometimes you can tell they are not real sometimes they look cheesse, this one looks great



This isn't an Italian Air Force video. This is an evident hoax shown on TV during the program "Studio Aperto".


Again i dont know if anyone can verify the above.

All these comment's are from the youtube page, so only comments, but i thought a good start to what we are looking at here.

Although im sure Internos will know more....




[edit on 23-9-2008 by Denied]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


Battle of L.A.




here ya go.

[edit on 9/23/2008 by blupblup]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Denied
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I'd go with AVRO-car type craft. Note the rocking like with the ducted fan effect, then CGI at the end where it zooms off faster than the A-C could go.

Good links.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


"Battle of L.A." is a good one, but it has the usual 'trap' besides being a B&W newspaper clipping. The account and photo seem to show something, but just because it's unexplained why go to the 'ET' driving a 'craft'?

I see no craft in the picture. It's highly strange, sure, but doesn't even rise to the category of UFO in the non-terrestrial sense, because there's nothing visible. Rounds were fired, but nothing was 'hit'.

The account doesn't say 'rounds bounced off', they just burst in the air, IIRC.

I do suspect the military knows more about that than they're releasing, though.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 08:20 AM
link   
[edit on 9/23/2008 by schrodingers dog]

sorry wrong thread

[edit on 9/23/2008 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Oh come on, that video has been bouncing around on youtube for ages. I don't think anyone could ever look at that and say it's real! Its more suspicious than a hollywood actor wearing dark glasses and a trench coat leaving a cheap whores house at three in the morning!
Its size looks wrong, the way it moves appears wrong. . .
Its as fake as Pamela Andersons funbags!



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Badge01
 


Oh yeah i know that, but the OP was asking for UFO photos, not alien craft.

I believe we actually collaborated in another thread and were both of the opinion that nobody has a photo or any evidence whatsoever to suggest that any UFO is being piloted by aliens.


Plus it's definitely not CGI and is one of the only true, untouched UFO photos...

Now THAT in itself is SAD



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Yeah, I've wracked my brain trying to come up with an explanation for what the LA thing could be.

It definitely seems to block the searchlight beams. The small light circles around it - are they supposed to be air bursts from the artillery? Never heard anyone describe them as lights on the craft. In fact the newspaper articles didn't describe it as anything.

From Wiki - Battle of LA:

The blobs of light which show an apex of beam angles were made by anti-aircraft shells

Initially the target of the aerial barrage was thought to be an attacking force from Japan, but it was later suggested to be a lost weather balloon, a blimp, a Japanese fire balloon or psychological warfare technique, staged for the benefit of coastal industrial sites, or even an extraterrestrial aircraft. The true nature of the object or objects remains unknown.


Normally, they'd scramble some jets, and they alerted a squadron, but they remained grounded. They were described as 'objects' (note the plural) and they were moving but slowly.


Pilots of the 4th Interceptor Command were alerted but their aircraft remained grounded. The artillery fire continued sporadically until 4:14 a.m. The objects were said to have taken about 20 minutes to have moved from over Santa Monica to above Long Beach.


Other observers thought they could see nine objects, described as 'slivery planes'. Few of these comments were verified and some people saw nothing while others thought the artillery scored some hits.


Editor Peter Jenkins of the Los Angeles Herald Examiner reported, "I could clearly see the V formation of about 25 silvery planes overhead moving slowly across the sky toward Long Beach." Long Beach Police Chief J.H. McClelland said[1] "I watched what was described as the second wave of planes from atop the seven-story Long Beach City Hall. I did not see any planes but the younger men with me said they could. An experienced Navy observer with powerful Carl Zeiss binoculars said he counted nine planes in the cone of the searchlight. He said they were silver in color.


Unfortunately, in all that time they didn't take motion pictures, or put a plane in the sky and call off the bombardment. No evidence these 'objects' did anything.

To me theories they were balloons seem silly. Balloons don't block searchlights or fly in echelon.

I have a bit of suspicion that someone knew what they were - thus the decision not to scramble some planes. It seems strange to just start a barrage before identifying what was flying.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


Acidtastic~Good post,I think the Italian footage is computer generated but the Battle of L.A. pics are very interesting.
Theres some good pics featured at the link below including images of UFOs flying over the Whitehouse airspace corridor during the ´Washington Merry-go-round´ incident of 1952.
These objects (and the incident itself) are also difficult to refute as the UFOs appeared twice on consecutive Saturdays,were witnessed by hundreds of people on the ground,seen and pursued by military pilots and plotted and tracked on radar by trained professionals.
Cheers Karl


[edit on 01/12/01 by karl 12]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Badge01

It definitely seems to block the searchlight beams. The small light circles around it - are they supposed to be air bursts from the artillery? Never heard anyone describe them as lights on the craft. In fact the newspaper articles didn't describe it as anything.


I don't think that photo is fake but it is far from being a photo of a UFO. Reports are that there was a lot of smoke in the air from AAA. I don't see any "object" in that badly exposed print. Looks like many very intense searchlight beams converging on a cloud of smoke. Any reason the "light circles" couldn't be lens flares?




Normally, they'd scramble some jets, and they alerted a squadron, but they remained grounded. They were described as 'objects' (note the plural) and they were moving but slowly.

I'm sure you didn't really mean jets.

The interceptors were not scrambled because there was no definitive indication of direction, location, or number of "invaders". It's not a good idea to send the few available planes up under these circumstances. It's probably a good thing they didn't takeoff, with all the AAA in the air it's a good chance they would have been shot down.




To me theories they were balloons seem silly. Balloons don't block searchlights or fly in echelon.

The number and variety of reports, pretty much all of which are conflicting, indicate that there's a very good chance there was nothing in the air over LA that night but AAA bursts and searchlight beams. The reports were coming from a panicked populace. Remember the Halloween broadcast of War of the Worlds? People were reporting Martians in their backyard!




I have a bit of suspicion that someone knew what they were - thus the decision not to scramble some planes. It seems strange to just start a barrage before identifying what was flying.

This was very early in the war. Remember Pearl Harbor had been attacked only two months before. Do you think anyone might have been a little bit on edge? It has been reported that a single balloon, carrying a flare started the aerial barrage but once it began it got completely out of control. Panicked, unblooded, homefront, not well trained soldiers shooting at something they thought they saw. The firing was going on all over the LA basin, not in one localized area.

It seems to me that it wasn't until much later that this incident became part of UFO lore. Here are a couple of sources with information about what the known facts are about that night and what happened in the investigation afterward.

www.sfmuseum.org...
www.militarymuseum.org...


[edit on 23-9-2008 by Phage]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   



You get an almost negative shot in the video and can clearly see several objects.

Always been one of my fav cases.... just because it wasn't big-business like it is now, and it wasn't a case that was trying to make money or rip folks off.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

This vid seems to show the movement and artillery charges going off and clouds moving. You still can't quite make out any object.(s).

Moving 25mph, could it have just been a strange cloud formation? On several shots you can see the beams continuing to shine off into the sky not interrupted and the reason they seem to stop is probably because of the existing clouds. It's worth hearing Byron Palmer's original CBS radio broadcast.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Badge01
 


I think you're right actually.

I was gonna post the vid you did, but that music drives me mad....so cheesy and OTT


But, i love the original broadcast.

[edit on 9/23/2008 by blupblup]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Some other pics.



brumac.8k.com...

brumac.8k.com...

brumac.8k.com...

brumac.8k.com...

[edit on 9/23/2008 by blupblup]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


Acidtastic, it's an honour that you choose my forum for sharing this stuff.
The video from Aviano (Pordenone) is a very well known one: it was analyzed by some of the best guru's available on earth, people that was working in Hollywood everyday
and their general consensus was that it's NOT CGI. Maybe not some alien spacecraft, but definatey something that was caught on camera and that was actually THERE. I will post here all i will be able to gather about that video: i just wanted to thank you and all the other posters.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 



I remember Zorgon posted it in a thread a while back, that's when it caught my attention.

As you say, maybe not alien craft, but certainly not terrestrial craft in respect to the way it moves/looks...




Do you have any links to the findings of the gurus?

Cheers


[edit on 9/23/2008 by blupblup]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
The number and variety of reports, pretty much all of which are conflicting, indicate that there's a very good chance there was nothing in the air over LA that night but AAA bursts and searchlight beams. The reports were coming from a panicked populace. Remember the Halloween broadcast of War of the Worlds? People were reporting Martians in their backyard!


I tend to think that the whole thing was a result of a huge snafu involving a lot of miscommunication and jangled nerves. An oil platform near Santa Barbara had been attacked by a Japanese sub like two weeks before this, and people were really edgy. I figure a flight of Army planes coming back from coast patrol decided to cut across Culver City on their way back to their base in Orange County. Newly-installed radar and searchlights spotted something, illuminated a patch of that low-lying fog common to the area, and the party was on. The planes managed to avoid getting blasted by flying out to sea south of Long Beach, but the AA continued pumping metal into the sky for quite a while. A pretty ignominious episode, and not good for public morale.

So here's where the conspiracy comes in. Rather than just admit they screwed up, the Secretary of War answers all the calls for an explanation by hinting that the thing was basically a formation of possibly up to 15 unknown planes, possibly piloted by saboteurs or Third Columnists from hidden bases out in the desert. It puts the proper spin on it, and actually helps with the internment of Japanese citizens, which had just started. Army looks like they're doing their job, more Japanese get rounded up with less squabble, it's a win-win!


Maybe there's some old paperwork on the cover-up buried somewhere. Possibly some of the pilots from the patrol flight still alive. Or maybe not. It was wartime. Lots of things like this just get smoothed over.

That's my wacky theory, anyway. You can stick with alien flying saucers if you like. Who knows? Maybe it was crippled enough by the artillery to drift off and crash in the desert of Nevada. At Area 51!


[edit on 23-9-2008 by Nohup]



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Why would the craft have 'fins'?

You can see the fins, right? They look like the ones on the YB49.

Also check the maneuver. It's as though the pilot is trying to display his craft to an observer (who always manages to keep it pretty well centered in frame) than do a site inspection fly-by.

Then we have the classic 'zoom off' into the distance. To me, there's several 'tells', though it is pretty well done.

Note when it crosses in front of the tower - you definitely can see pixel bleed along the top of the craft and a stripe on the tower.

2 cents.



posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Badge01
Then we have the classic 'zoom off' into the distance. To me, there's several 'tells', though it is pretty well done.


That zooming off into the distance thing is the hardest effect to get right, apparently because it involves reducing the size of the object at just the right rate to make the shift in light natural and the pixellation accurate. But you have to do something, or you end up with footage that just stops, leaving everybody to wonder, "Well, what happened then?"


[edit on 23-9-2008 by Nohup]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join