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.

 

try to debunk this

page: 8
7
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by BrnBdry
This is one of my favorite ufo videos. I've yet to see this here on ATS. Unless I didn't look that hard.

To me this is the proof............. not that I really needed any to begin with.


Enjoy.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 26-2-2009 by BrnBdry]


The qestion was, proof of what. The answer is, proof of UFOs. Clearly unidentified, and clearly doesn't move terrestrial.




posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrnBdry
The qestion was, proof of what. The answer is, proof of UFOs. Clearly unidentified, and clearly doesn't move terrestrial.

In my opinion this doesn't prove anything, except that this is a video. The footage is from a documentary that is highly controversial, so taking it at face value would be premature I think.

There are far better cases If you are looking for evidence of UFOs, that can be verified unlike the video you linked above.

Furthermore it is generally accepted, atleast here, that UFOs are real. Like Nohup pointed out what these craft are and where they come from is the thing we need proof of the most.

The footage you linked is interesting none the less.




posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by BrnBdry
 


It is a UFO in the strictest sense. It is an object. It is flying. And we can't identify it what it is. Outside of that no claims can be made. Is it extraterrestrial? Who knows? Is it a government black project. Once again, who can say? Could it be a multitude of other things as well. Absolutely, and in fact likely. One cannot watch this video and claim that this object is not terrestrial. Nowhere in the video is that claim supported by any kind of evidence. Instead, it is a preconceived belief that you are applying to this video.

And just so we start using proper terminology, nowhere in Unidentified Flying Object is the term non-terrestrial, and people need to stop using it as such. If you think something is an extraterrestrial craft then say so, it would probably prevent a lot of useless posts in this thread if you made your beliefs of what we were supposed to debunk clear at the beginning. At least now you say that you believe it is non-terrestrial which gives us something to work with. Unfortunately, this claim cannot be debunked as the video doesn't really give any evidence to this claim in the first place. As I stated at the beginning of my post, the object is unidentifiable, which means no conclusions can be made about it. However, this entire argument is moot considering the evidence that has been provided that this is a hoax that you continue to ignore.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 





It is a UFO in the strictest sense. It is an object. It is flying.


Well, in the strictest sense, it's not even a UFO. It's a video from the internet. A modifiable string of 1's and 0's. It is supposed to represent a UFO, however the question of whether or not this is legitimate footage is still apparently up for debate. One poster a few pages back remarked that it is a reconstruction of an actual event, meaning the video itself is a hoax. You're merely viewing a representation of a representation of a UFO encounter.

The only way to add any weight of validity to the video is to know it's background and history. Thus far, the furthest anyone has verifiably traced this video back to (at least, presented in this thread) is to link it to a documentary filled with known hoaxes.

So the only proof of anything I see in this thread is that the OP's video proves that ATS allows embedding YouTube videos within user posts.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by BrnBdry
Clearly unidentified, and clearly doesn't move terrestrial.


Correct on the first part; we do not have information enough to identify it.

However, with the second claim you need to demonstrate how it moves in ways impossible for convention aircraft.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 

No he is correct. It is not terrestrial. It is not on the land.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ridhya
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 

No he is correct. It is not terrestrial. It is not on the land.


Terrestrial is generally used to mean belonging to the planet (thus why Extra-Terrestrial is usually used to describe an alien or non-Terran life form), a more correct term for a land based thing would be tellurian. But who cares about proper word meanings these days...



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ridhya
No he is correct. It is not terrestrial. It is not on the land.


Semantic games again.



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Marshall Ormus
 

Ah okay thanks! I thought it just meant 'of the earth' as in land, not planet.
Its not 'games', if my interpretation is what he meant.

If he thinks its aliens without proof then let him, you've already proven your point... and I agree with it



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I'm sorry, but that shadow over the clouds is just a little too convenient. Clouds are basically a fog layer. In my 28 years of flying military and commercial aircraft, I don't ever recall seeing an aircraft cast a shadow over a cloud layer.

Sorry, but to me it appears to be a hoax.



posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution-2012

Are you suggesting that whoever Roger Moore is was suggesting that they we're KGB craft?



Oh no. did you just say "Whoever Roger Moore is?" o.O

Blasphemy!!

j/k.

But yea this video as internos says is a re-creation.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join