Ufo? filmed over Milan 24/12/08 very clear footage of an object filmed in broad daylight

reply to post by Alter-Ego


From your message:

There is NO wobble or rotation... only jerky movements from the subject

and

I saw no "distance or hazing effect" on this object which for me rules out a real or model saucer and further substantiates my conclusion of this particular video to be computer generated IMHO

Me:
It does look CG as some sort of flying wheel.
Goodyear perhaps is into UFO ads.
Yet I think it amusing that people might make fake UFO
CG look like the real hardware to in list complaints about hardware
origin (Tesla.. banned by FBI.. CIA.. you name it).

reply to post by Nohup


So if the T man had a working model you might think otherwise.

The test flight with Sperry is shrouded in secrecy and surely
gone with the pilot and pilot seat of JFK JR's plane.

That is, far and away from anyone's mind and sight and knowledge.

I dunno about the video, not much to reference to, but I bet if you translate it you will get a spicy meatball recipe.

Oh at one point, if you see it is above the home/structure on the ground and beneath the jet contrails, you do the math.

Agreed.

Its a video of a house roof and sky and shaking around
and a brief catch of a trail and then added tire saucer CGI
with lights added.

It looks too CGI added.

this is a balloon that was built in yorkshire i beleive for a channel 4 stunt in the uk

the hunted few

Originally posted by Alter-Ego
Well, well... we are mighty quick to call foul here. I for one feel it necessary to study and research potential data and uncover little mysteries before I go calling something fake!

[edit on 2-1-2009 by Alter-Ego]

I would like to add these images to your tutorial showing indeed there is no line or
wire or string attached to the object. By embossing the frames the results are
clear. The white dots ARE FLARES as I will also show. Here is a frame embossed.



Here you can check a piece of the footage embossed, no line is visible just flares.

video.google.com...

And here is a high resolution video frame from the original footage explaining the
flares caused by the sunlight's reflection over the object's edge.




Once it has been established these were just flares and not the alleged line or string
we just have the CGI theory so let's wait to see who is the good one to come here
and present a professional analysis to prove this footage is a CGI creation.

To those who claimed there are no reference points - There were no zoomings.
Both wrong. Here are the evidences.

reply to post by free_spirit




if there is some type of line and it doesn't show up in the photo the embossing will not show it either.

so you can't say for sure there is no line holding the object up.

i could be wrong ?


here is a Meier photo just for an example of embossing

no string ?


still no string



i believe some one showed that there was in fact a string in this photo but i think they had the negatives to use.




www.mercuryrapids.co.uk...


so i think a simple embossing would not show a line if it was not present in the photo. what these guys did with the negatives of the photos i am not sure but it does show a string of somekind.


i am not saying the ufo in the Op is definitely on a string(i think it is)... i am only trying to show that embossing the photo might not reveal it.

[edit on 2-1-2009 by easynow]

Originally posted by BlasteR

Who knows. There are a couple explanations though..One possibility is that he was standing in front of a window that opens on the bottom but doesn't on the top or something. If he were holding the camera through the window opening below while he was talking against the closed top part, that would explain why the audio sounds like it does. But you would think he would have actually gone outside to see and track it (at least that's what I would have done).

[edit on 2-1-2009 by BlasteR]

Antonio Urzi videotapes most of his sightings through a small window of a bathroom in
his home, this may explain your doubts about the audio. To be more specific I will show
you some photos of him from inside and outside so you can see where and how Antonio
videotaped this footage in discussion. Click on the picture to get the full size

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by free_spirit

 

if there is some type of line and it doesn't show up in the photo the embossing will not show it either.

so you can't say for sure there is no line holding the object up.

i could be wrong ?


[edit on 2-1-2009 by easynow]

That's simple. If you check the still frame not embossed you see the white dots in a
diagonal position not vertical. If this was a model it's weight could not allow the line
to remain in a diagonal position right? would have remained vertical all the time
wich indicate these are flares on the camera's lens.

I have to disagree with you about the embossed test. It's been proved many times the
emboss test reveals any fishing line, wire, invisible plastic line etc. sustaining any
model in photos and videos. Most debunkers always present embossed images to
sustain a photo is a fake by showing alleged lines.

Recently there were some that tried to debunk the famous Rex Heflin UFO photos by
claiming new advanced computarized analysis revealed a thin line in the polaroid
photos and they presented embossed images to sustain their theory. Of course they
failed in their allegation as it was proven they manipulated the analysis results but the
point here is that a good emboss test to an image may reveal important issues
regarding the posibility of a hoax.

Of course the emboss test could fail at certain point but to date it has proven to
be accurate enough.

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by free_spirit

 

here is a Meier photo just for an example of embossing

no string ?

[edit on 2-1-2009 by easynow]

Right...no string visible in the Billy Meier embossed image, then I suppose the photo
shows a real UFO not a model don't you think?

By the way the last two embossed pictures you are posting showing lines are not by
Billy Meier, they are from Adriane the controversial contactee from Miami.

reply to post by free_spirit

By the way the last two embossed pictures you are posting showing lines are not by
Billy Meier, they are from Adriane the controversial contactee from Miami.

so are you telling me the website i got them from is wrong ?

www.mercuryrapids.co.uk...

no doubt the Meier craft. this info is posted elsewhere and i will have to look for it again

i would like to hear more opinions about the embossing and what it actually can or cannot do.


[edit on 2-1-2009 by easynow]

Originally posted by free_spiritIt's been proved many times the emboss test reveals any fishing line, wire, invisible plastic line etc. sustaining any model in photos and videos. Most debunkers always present embossed images to sustain a photo is a fake by showing alleged lines.

No, something like that can not be proved, at least by people that know what they are talking about.

The emboss filter, like all other filters, use the available pixels and works with that, so it can not find lines that there were not there before. The fact that some people do not notice them does not mean that they were not there before.

And while the presence of lines may help to prove a hoax, the lack of a line does not disprove something as a hoax, just that there wasn't any line on the picture, not on the original object(s).

Also, the direction of the emboss is important, if you do an emboss that creates the effect in the vertical you can not find a vertical line that way.

It's too late here for me (I am still recovering from what I suppose was flu), but tomorrow I will post a photo to see if you can find any line.

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by free_spirit

 

By the way the last two embossed pictures you are posting showing lines are not by
Billy Meier, they are from Adriane the controversial contactee from Miami.

so are you telling me the website i got them from is wrong ?

www.mercuryrapids.co.uk...

no doubt the Meier craft. this info is posted elsewhere and i will have to look for it again

i would like to hear more opinions about the embossing and what it actually can or cannot do.


[edit on 2-1-2009 by easynow]

Please check this page easynow to find the Adrian photos in question.

Right there you will see also the emboss test made by Mr. Ritzman revealing those
lines in the photos, a good emboss test by the way.

www.ufowatchdog.com...

Originally posted by ArMaP

And while the presence of lines may help to prove a hoax, the lack of a line does not disprove something as a hoax, just that there wasn't any line on the picture, not on the original object(s).

But you forget everybody said there was a line attached to the object filmed by Mr. Urzi
ArMap, check the theard again, So how is it posible that people see a line when the
tests don't show any line? Because those were speculations caused by the confusion
made by those flares, simple and natural.

Now... you say “ the lack of a line does not disprove something as a hoax, just that
there wasn't any line on the picture, not on the original object(s).” That's precisely the
point, the issue here is the existence or not of an actual line attached to the object.
The emboss test proved there is no line but not only that, I presented other arguments
explaining those white dots are flares. People got confused, that's all.

But we still need some good analyst that can prove this footage is a CGI composition
with hard evidence (if he can). I'm patient.

reply to post by free_spirit



they do not look like the same photos to me and if you look at the Meier beamship at the top of my post and compare it with others in my post ...they all seem to match in my opinion.


there are other places on the web that show the report done by oriental guys that investigated this and found strings in the negatives. i would have to hunt to find it again but i have seen it.

with all that said i will agree with you that jritzman did a great job on debunking that using the embossing enhancement. the lines are easy to see. maybe Jeff can verify if these are the Adrian photos in my post ?

Click here for more information.

reply to post by free_spirit

they are from Adriane the controversial contactee from Miami.

no they are not the Adriane photos...i found another website that says they are Meier photos

meiercase.0x2a.info...






i see a string in these cropped pictures from the video.








here is a video showing a fake ufo on a string that you can't see







[edit on 3-1-2009 by easynow]

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
reply to post by Nohup

 

So if the T man had a working model you might think otherwise.

The test flight with Sperry is shrouded in secrecy and surely
gone with the pilot and pilot seat of JFK JR's plane.

That is, far and away from anyone's mind and sight and knowledge.

Including your own. That was exactly my point. Of course you know that "It's a secret, that's why I can't provide any real evidence," is in fact not providing real evidence. It's just a flight of fancy. If you want to write a science fiction book that paints Tesla as the God of Electric Air and Space Travel, please feel free. Because as far as I'm concerned, the bulk of your posts are fiction, anyway.

There's an old saying you might not be familiar with, "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." You, I'm afraid, only have the Tesla hammer.

[edit on 3-1-2009 by Nohup]