Originally posted by Nohup

Originally posted by Zenagain
Speaking of disappearing posts, I posted about 10 minutes ago asking why the guy in the video claims it's in MO and my post has disappeared.

Missouri is well-known for its numerous palm trees. However, I'm still pretty sure that this is footage of a hillside fire in California.

I have seen fires on the hillside myself. I don't believe it's a fire not enough smoke.

Smoke usually has a huge trail from the hill fires and it easily visible where this photo has almost none and is confined to a small area.

The two images are clearly not the same location. Here is my evidence





I changed the contrast and brightness of the ufo video capture. You can easily see now that the light post does not extend above the arch like it does in the daytime pic. The light is reflecting off of the vertical light post very intensely, why would it not reflect the part that protrudes above the bend? It is the same material and still below the light source.

That, in my opinion, debunks the daytime photo. Meaning this entire case is inconclusive without any evidence.

I am not going to comment one way or another on the validity of the video, I think the poster and quality says it all.

However, I would like to mention the extremely low bar of proof some of you hold up. The initial vid and the subsequent daytime photo have only only one thing in common...

A light post.

There are approximately 100 million lightposts in the USA.
Many.. MANY are the same variety you see in the vid.

The quickness of some of you to assume the two photos are from the same location is just mind numbing. I can understand the need and want to believe but honestly if you are satisfied and don't even try to question it I feel sorry for you.

Not that you believe.. thats all fine and good but because in every day life there are so many situations that require critical thinking and this would be one indicator that you don't have that.

Again, I am not questioning anyone's belief, but the vid could be many.. many things and to outright dismiss it as being ONLY a mothership and using a daytime photo of questionable location.. is just sad.

A few of you actually use the daytime photo as proof it isn't a fire.. cars or anything else in the distance., pointing out that the angle is too high, the object would be too high to be a car, a fire or anything but a mothership..

Incredulously using science only when it suits you?
You are using something not provable to be the same place to eliminate possibilities...

doesn't anyone see a problem with that?

(crickets...)

Originally posted by alyosha1981
I used the term "mothership" here as a generic discription for what I believe I saw in the vid.Could be any other type of craft but imo larger then the typical objects seen on other vids.

How about we just stick to the generally accepted UFO? It does not indicate an alien spaceship (contrary to popular belief).

Otherwise, before too long, people will be posting "OMG!!! Just saw XG7118 class Y mothership!!! ROFL PONIES!!!"

Originally posted by DaedalusLXIX
Looks alien to me.

If you stare at it long enough, you'll see an alien waving. That's the proof. BAM!

Originally posted by daddymax
.armed to the teeth that is! Looks cool...

I'm sure your pathetic earthly weapons are no match to the alien overlord flying that mothership.

Seriously, what will it do? Just go and look, and if you're too scared, then don't go even with a rocket launcher.

Originally posted by detachedindividual
My gut tells me it isn't a fire, because I see no evidence of the smoke or fire having movement that I would expect to see. It certainly looks like a solid shape with lights beneath.

You won't exactly see the flames flickering that far away.

You can definitely tell that from the trajectory of the video it is taken at a higher elevation (apartment window or something) than than the photograph. Hence, it would appear that the lights are above the hill. Unfortunately I would have to say, in my opinion, that these are either flares or fires on the opposite side of the hill similar the the Phoenix Lights.

Originally posted by internos
Do you know what in my opinion is needed in order to debunk this one?
To PROVE that that hill was burning that day
OR
to PROVE that something else produced that effect, that day

The burden of proof in this case is on the witness. You heard the saying, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

There is no effort on the part of the witness to submit any evidence. In fact, the evidence submitted (day shot) is more proof that the witness cannot produce any evidence that will aid him in his purpose of establishing this as a UFO or alien craft.

Hence, there is no case. There is nothing that the "skeptics" have to do to disprove the witness. The witness did not present satisfying evidence. Period. It's really that simple.

I was fairly interested in this one, but after seeing the contrast-reduced version, it seems pretty obvious (to me at least) that this is a fire on a hillside. Those are hills, I am amazed people don't see them. They are obvious. So unless a mothership was hanging out around mid-hill level, I'd say yea, it's just a fire.

its A BUSH Fire hate to burst your bubbles., look at the large plumes of smoke that move out and retreat back in first there are 2 red heat sources and a 3rd then one in the back lights up..its probably on a hillside.

Just to add to the pictures not being the same location.

in the night time vid there is a road just left of the lamp post.

And the daytime pic would suggest that there are palm trees groing in the middle of the road?

Huh?? Yeah you guessed it....load of bull!!

In the initial seminar by the gentle man that was narrating it, he had mentioned it was videoed in the NW area of AZ. And that the individual was quite admirable with his dedication to the UFO phenomenon.
I for one don't think it is a "Brush" fire, for the "Brush" fires in AZ are rarely heard of and the vegetation is sparse at best, a side from landscaped areas of the area.
Now, this is where my post takes a turn for the reason why I wanted to post on this thread....

My parents and my younger sister had moved to Kingman AZ. back in 1986-87. It had been a while since I had seen them because I was in college in OK. and decided with a friend of mine from SD to go and visit them and split the cost of the trip. It was just before Thanksgiving and seemed a proper time to spend with family, which my friend I had mentioned was considered part of the family by association. So, we dead headed it for AZ. nonstop.
We had been there for a couple of days when my Father and Mother invited us to visit their places of work, my Dad was a transporter for the Colorado belle Casino and my mom was in-house house keeper for the "High rollers club at the Riverside Resort. Which both places are located in Laughlin NV. They had too leave at an earlier time to find out if it was alright for us to get a "Grand Tour" of both proprieties from the PYB. And they said they would call us to let us know if it was alright with the exec's for doing this.
Mean while, we (My friend and I ) were invited to go on a picturesque "Nature walk" with my younger sister in the plateaus of the surrounding area, which was very enjoyable.
When we had got back to my folks house, they had called and confirmed the "Grand Tour" and gave us directions to how to get there by way of the HW that went through the mountains and how we would be gaining an hour because of the time meridian change. We were also informed that we could bring a camera if we wished but there were some areas of rather secretive principles and we would be unable to take pic's of those areas.
So, we decided just to leave the camera at the house, instead of lugging it around.
As we were driving through the mountain HW, which was approximately 8-8:30 PM or so, I was admiring the surrounding high peeked hills and bluffs, when out of the blue I had seen something that looked like car headlights on a distant road high above where we were. I had mentioned it to my friend, and without stopping to take a good hard look at what we were seeing, we continued down the road. I kept my eye on it until it was out of range, but the strange thing is, "It looked eerily similar to the footage that was posted by the OP of this thread." Even down to the red radiant lights were very accurate. And for lack of a better word, it was huge, try to write it of as higher elevation traffic, but until this very day, I have never shared this story with anyone except for my friend that had taken the trip with me.
I wish I would of had that damn camera, it would of validated my experience of that night, but when I seen this footage, which I had never seen before this thread, I had to make a statement of personal experience of the same type of sighting.

Well, that's the just of it and I do believe that the video is authentic, there is no way anyone would of known what I had seen that night and the chances of me actually seeing basically the same shape, size and color thing again is too uncanny for a slap in the face reality check for myself.

Great Thread OP, and for the record "This is a seen before object, I know this because it was me who had seen it back in the late 1980's."

Let's clarify one thing once for all: the video was taken by some guy whom first and last name are KNOWN: this makes the story very delicate and in order to call the hoax you need to PROVE it, PERIOD. To debunk something requires some counter evidence: where, when and by whom the video was proven to be a HOAX? Is there someone who want to share his/her first and last name before blaming Mr. Rob Kritkausky ? I am not endorsing anything, just saying that it's necessary to be VERY careful before blaming some guy of being an hoaxer, PERIOD.

What also bothers me is the video in the OP's post. Here you have someone giving a presentation and remarks how you didn't hear about this in the news. Then, the only thing he says to state the validity of this video is that it came from somone he has known for four years. After he shows the video he remarks "what do you think of that?" which then receieves a smattering of applause in return.

Is the UFO consortium that gullible? Do they want to believe so badly that they throw objective reasoning out the window? You're just going to take someone's word that a "mothership" is hovering over a spot in Arizona?

ATS did a bang up job reporting from the ranch out in Washington back in August. Yes, they saw things, but they didn't rule out simple explanations like hikers on the mountain, etc..

This photo is in fact fire on a hillside. Think about the daylight photo. Why wouldn't you take a photo from the EXACT SAME SPOT during the day if you were so sure that you had spotted a UFO and wanted to vet this? Well, you wouldn't if you knew that it would clearly show that your vantage point revealed a hillside.

This video should be labeled as inconclusive.


[edit on 20-11-2008 by Freenrgy2]

I have run this through some filters and in this pdf, it clearly shows fire and smoke .

It's a well-known fake. It's obviously a forest fire on a hill. that pic showing a lamppost to put it into 'context' is absurd -- could be any lamppost, and in any case it's obviously the wrong angle.

The dude's gloating tone when he's presenting this footage in the video betrays him to be an idiot -- he challenges non-believers to debunk what he reckons is incontrovertable evidence. Pur-lehze.

Don't be takin in by this garbage. The quest goes on (sigh)