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.

 

UFO Video London

page: 19
72
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by rightuos
 


Well that saves me a bit of work. GOOD FIND!




posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by rightuos
 


WELL DONE! Nice to see you caught that.

I wonder how long till he takes his youtube clip down too?

Ignorance Denied..



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 





That given, his reaction is typically British and phlegmatic. If i show your typical none musician, who has no interest in the instruments we use, a 1958 Les Paul, they will say. "Oh it's a guitar".. I show the same instrument to a muso and they will , probably, faint and go all misty eyed..


That is the worst analogy of all time man...c'mon...

A 1958 Les Paul has no large implications on "the big picture." You know like the one none of us 7 billion human beings fully comprehend? ET (which the typical human equates with being synonymous with UFO) does have large implications on "the big picture."

No one would film a true UFO like that. Maybe a 1958 Les Paul, not a UFO. The film has fake written all over it.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Well I don't mind admitting it when I'm wrong..

Certainly looks like the my space pic posted above..

I bet he panic d with all the attention it was getting..



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dainoyfb
 
Hi dainoy,
I found this in relation to LEDs as used in aircraft,

"The LEDs will “blink” (turn on and off)
at the PWM modulation frequency.
It is not uncommon for an aircraft to rise
or descend several feet in a few tenths of a second in turbulence.
A four-foot drop in 0.5 seconds is equivalent to 8 feet/second.
For an object traveling at 8 feet per second,
and an LED blinking at 100 Hz, the resulting dots
of light would be separated by approximately 1 inch (0.96) inches, appearing as a line of dots, which would be visually unacceptable.
At 400 Hz, the dots would be separated by
only about a quarter of an inch,
or the diameter of standard LEDs.
Thus, in a situation where the LEDs are moving
in a plane which is generally normal to line of sight,
the PWM modulation frequency is caused to be
at least sufficient to minimize the “line of dots” effect."



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by rightuos
Here is the guys MySpace page.

www.myspace.com...

check out page 2 of his photography and art pictures

uh oh someones busted

I took the liberty to snatch one before he removes it once others catch on



I say its time to label [HOAX] and case closed, ( should have looked into this before messing with stabilizing the video...

EDIT: He is oviously on ATS as right after I made my post with his myspace info he removed the pictures, too bad I have screenshots as well


[edit on 29-4-2009 by rightuos]



Nice work!

Certainly had me going for a while. I'd love to know how he did it.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Oh darn it.. I had so hoped this one wouldn't be debunked. It was fun while it lasted.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by dainoyfb
reply to post by Verklagekasper
 



(Just wave your cell phone cam wildly at an electric light source of your choice. In the resulting frames, you won't notice any modulation whatsoever, just straight lines)


Ok, I just did and I get a strong modulation effect even at 60hz. I will post it. I also have the necessary lab equipment to pulse lights at any frequency and duty cycle so I will set up and experiment with that.

Well I give you that. Oddly though, the pulsation is only noticable in that very frame. In all other frames, even under heavy motion, there's no such effect noticable. So I'd still say the departure of the lights is a not so successful digital effect. The rest doesn't look that odd; could be actually an optical effect, with reflection or something.
Btw, the clip is extraordinarily choppy. Especially at the beginning, there seem to be frames missing, with lights popping in and out without a motion trace. Like the clip was originally much smoother and then frames were just dropped.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Great job rightuos. There aren't enough stars in the galaxy to award you your just desserts.

Speaking of which, I am baking a big fat, hot steamy humble pie. I am saving 2 slices each for UKWO1Phot and Damod. Sorry guys, you were so busy patting yourselves on the back by claiming case closed and popping brewskis that you missed the big picture.

Which is why if you are going to kill someone and bury their body 6 feet in the ground, you bury a dead rat 3 feet. Most people stop digging there.

Granted most of us agree this video didn't pass the ATS smell test. I commend your efforts nonetheless.

But I can relate, these things take time and diligence. I've been there before. Now a glass of cold milk with your pie or another brew?



Regards...KK





[edit on 29-4-2009 by kinda kurious]

[edit on 29-4-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   
As far as the video goes, it is not good enough for any forensic. Some interesting elements, some lend themselves to CGI and some to a real event.

As far as the Facebook listing and the photo someone thinks is any proof of fakery, I think it shows more likely he is NOT faking.

In the frame showing the FPS multiples (frames per second) shows that he used the same camera as the shot posted on his site. If you know the camera model and it's specifications, the approximate distance of the object/s from the lens you can extrapolate the speed of the moving object/s by the number of multiple light images and the time code. That is only a very rough and approximate figure however you do it anyway.

An aspect either incorporated for trickery or in argument for it's reality is the non-standard two lights at the three apexes. I have nothing in my memory for such a configuration which leads me to believe it is ignorant foolery or realistic unknowns. You tell me.

They could be grabbed from video of car lights at distance and placed, animated and a shake plugin used for the whole thing, but I really think that is not likely. Looking at this mans information, he does not seem to have have the M.O. for this type of chicanery. The work is too good and would take a significant amount of work from someone who spends a lot of time with non-linear and digital FX. Could be a friend, so now you junior sleuths should go through all his friends to see if anyone he knows that fits the M.O. that maybe used him to release this. Not likely either, but in real research, criminology and investigative rigor are done first before anyone is accused of ANYTHING. As an American you should practice the constitution of the United States and not Nazi Germany in the last century.

Grow it up or throw it up.

So, my assessment is it looks good, but not enough data for or against. Needs study.

ZG



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by rightuos
 


Nice work.

All incriminating images are gone from his myspace page as predicted.

I didn't think this one was right...







posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Verklagekasper
 


In CGI, motion blur does just that. It "blurs" the light. Not show successive frames of discreet objects.

What you are seeing is how often the camera samples the CCD data in a single frame of video. So, it is not proof of anything but the cameras particular FPS spec.

ZG



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroGhost
 
You can't be serious after Rightuos' find!
look at this pic on the guys bed,
(another photo from his collection)

aftershock-the-band.com...



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Well now I am both angry because this guy wasted our time, and because I wasted my time (those images took me a second)(I'm still wondering how he made that reflection to make it appear as if it was in the sky). I cannot complain however because this is our job here at ATS. We must separate the good from the bad. We are a community of those that love to get to the bottom of things. Plus I gave my brain a nice workout and learned a few things so it was not a total loss. Be sure i will see you at the next debate guns a blazing (whether to debunk or not). You bet your ass!

On a positive note: there are a lot of things in this thread that can be used as reference for threads to come. Yet another reason why this was not totally in vain.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
For posterity. RIP UFO Video London.





posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by rightuos
 
Well done, that footage had me going until now. Anyway it's good to show this footage for what it is, a con artist trick.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Looks like stadium lights.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
Plus I gave my brain a nice workout and learned a few things so it was not a total loss.
That is the most important, if we learn something every time we will be much more knowledgeable after some time, even if we are still looking for the truth.


On a positive note: there are a lot of things in this thread that can be used as reference for threads to come. Yet another reason why this was not totally in vain.
And that is the second most important thing, the more we learn about when is not the better equipped we get to know when it is (if that sentence makes sense at all).



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 
I don't know if you got any stars,
ArMaP,but you should have,since you noticed the anomalies
and odd reflections yonks ago,pity no-one paid any attention.



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I was in the 'unexplained' camp but after seeing the guys Myspace I'm asking myself some questions.



new topics

top topics



 
72
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join