posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 11:04 PM
Im a skeptical person as you have probably noticed although open minded and I must say im surprised by some of the comments on this so im going to
debunk the debunkers.
1) It doesnt change angle.
First of all it does, theres a frontal and side shots of it on distinct days. Why would it change angle during a three minute filming? A craft on
route to a destination, a plane for example flies linear, it doesnt weave around and dance about like the more rediculous "UFO" videos ive seen.
Its almost like people expect UFOs to behave erratically which I find crazy. Logic suggests theres no reason for a pilot, alien or human to be bobbing
and weaving around like a madman unless they have a cause to do so, showing off, making a display, evading something, chasing something, linear flight
en route A to B is normal.
2)No background reference
The camera is pointing to the sky at night, what landmarks is he going to see? He has a single valid point of reference which any decent cameraman
would use, the moon, and he does indeed use it more than once during the footage which to me indicates a person who is genuine not fake suing the most
logical and normal in frame refrence he has.
3) No movement
Take your digicam outside and film the night sky. How much movement do you see. Nothing right because its black? Movement is judged against
surroundings movement in pure black from a camera lens is impossible to judge since the cameraman is tracking the object it will obviously appear
stationary. Again exactly what you would expect from a genuine footage.
Im confused, people who HOAX these films often make sure they include all of the things you ask for in order to "appear genuine" and yet they are
In some cases you need to just imagine situation. A person filming a night sky object is not going to get much background with that quality of camera
you wouldnt even get the stars as the light isnt sufficient. You wouldnt get the "reference" material because at that angle in many cases there
would be no ground object to provide it. He used the moon.
Id agree that later shots are probably normal phenomenon, an oilrig I believe is a great suggestion.
However for me the earlier footage of the craft is very thought provoking and realistic and I see no reason to discredit it what so ever. I would say
the craft looks man made, maybe some evolution of the stealth fighter or something along those lines but theres something dictinclty "human" in its
design. Ive no jumping reason to question filming commentry though as everything there adds up and I see no flags or bell which indicate to me this is
stage, everything seems very natural and fluent which for me HOAX footage rarely achieves.
Yes it lack component UFO buff seem to look for but then again not everyone things like a pro cameraman, the importance for me is trying to look at
the behavior of the cameraman and his shots and consider how natural they are to the situation. In this case i see no case for immediate hoax claims
on the basis of any of the reasons given.
My first concern is the shaky hand. His hand has abmormal shaking which in itself isnt unusal, on my wifes side of the family her dad, brother, and
sister all have very shaky hands which seems to be genetic to them so I know its not a freak event. None of them can hold anything out without shaking
(when I first noticed it I asked my wife why the hell they shake so much and she told me she doesnt know they take after her dad, probably
So im not going to damn the guy for it but thats my real prime concern, aside from that its very nice footage. Id have like to see a verified report
of authenticity from one or two sources who study film for tampering, again the fact that people dont provide these things counts as a suspicion for
In a field where proving is everything im very wary of people who dont make the effort to prove the point. Thats my biggest issue with it.