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.

 

Photo-enhanced images show alien occupants in the Turkey footage

page: 5
83
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   
This video is quite something! Its only a matter of time before they use us as a pitstop and start communicating with us. I cannot wait for that day!




posted on May, 11 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
If you look and compare it with the translation you can see where it also says the tape was received on January 31, 2008. So the analysis lasted exactly less than one day. Intensive examination.


The scanned copy was a "pre-evaluation" report, which I'm assuming means it hadn't been fully analyzed. At the end, it says that further exams had to be done.

And even if, the english translation clearly states this in bold: The footage images of the object which visibly have a certain configuration are not computer animations, special video effects or studio re-created images or models. The footage is genuine.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]

[edit on 11-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Filmed over several nights and only one video/picture source?



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by cmazzagatti
Even if, the english translation clearly states this in bold: The footage images of the object which visibly have a certain configuration are not computer animations, special video effects or studio re-created images or models. The footage is genuine.


Well at the end of the first 'interview' video you posted the man on the left said he'd happily put the footage into an independent lab for further processing.

Has that happened yet?

I'm against this being completely genuine myself, there may have been some modicum of truth* in amongst all of that footage - but it's lost beneath a sea of greed now.

Dead fathers, ill mothers, understanding the cameras filters/zoom/exposure but not AM/PM, leading questions, a suppressed knowledge of aircraft etc. doesn't sit well with me.

-m0r

*The make of the camera.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   
It's interesting how the two aliens look different, one has a more bulbous head and looks like he's wearing a triangle hat of some kind the other alien head looks smaller and more refined "Could be male and female!"

If it was CGI you tend to get duplicate models of characters but here we have almost two different looking species. So I stick my neck out and say it probably genuine.


Man if this turns out to be genuine that's it game over!



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   
I'll just paste what I wrote in the other thread found here:


Originally posted by Chadwickus

Over the course of the video which according to the time and date spans several days this craft doesn't change direction or angle at all. Anyone think that's a bit strange?

gonna have to say a hoax on this one.


Until this can be explained properly it's pretty hard to believe this is real.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by cmazzagatti
 


This case has always intrigued me, but I think the photo enhancements discouraged me more than anything. What is the platform underneath the object that only comes out with the photo enhancements? It doesn't look like it belongs as part of the "craft." In fact, it looks a lot like a stand for a model-type object. There's not enough information to determine where, when or how this footage was taken, so we can assume that this is possibly just footage of a model, stand and all.



- Strype



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by cmazzagatti

Originally posted by Phage
If you look and compare it with the translation you can see where it also says the tape was received on January 31, 2008. So the analysis lasted exactly less than one day. Intensive examination.


The scanned copy was a "pre-evaluation" report, which I'm assuming means it hadn't been fully analyzed. At the end, it says that further exams had to be done.

And even if, the english translation clearly states this in bold: The footage images of the object which visibly have a certain configuration are not computer animations, special video effects or studio re-created images or models. The footage is genuine.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]

[edit on 11-5-2009 by cmazzagatti]




what the heck?

people are agruigng the dates on the camera...

is it really relevant to the filmed footage and the authenticity of it?

i think definitly NOT



furthermore, as some claim from the ingenious "date analysis", even if it is a one day study it is far more than any other CGI professional study of this footage out there...


so if nothing helps at the end it MUST be a model ?!?!

are we seeking for thruth here, or are subjective opinions enough for discussion....


as far as I'm concerned this footage is genuine,

I believe the CGI professional analysis ( no matter how long it lasted,I have no reason not to) ,

it is NOT ISS (too close for comfort and looking nothing like it),

it is NOT a model (no proof offered),

it does show movement in the footage (the illumination and angulation of the object changes during footage).

it IS in the air (referece point of the moon clearly shown during footage),

it is NOT an object on ground like stellar observatory or sth as some suggest (no proof offered )

we do not know what it is
therefore it is a UFO ....


one and only thing i'm not clear about is...why isn't the object's departure filmed in all of this... but there was an explanation that it stayed there till sunrise and faded out visually...I would agree on that



allhearthedly trying to debunk by lame date analyzing,duration of CGI analyzing, and subjective opinions, is NOT sth. that we are here for...

to search for the thruth of a phenomena like UFOs one is needed to think out of the box,not only to stand firmely on the ground of that same box...



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkraver
it is NOT a model (no proof offered),


The onus of proof is on those making the claim.

The debunker/sceptic need only question every aspect of a tale to show 'how it could be wrong'.

'How it could be true' is not down to the debunker or sceptic but down to the person making the claim that it is true.

I'm cautious of giving any tale credence, particularly one with ill relatives being used as the scapegoat for it's not surfacing earlier.

The Vimeo link at a higher definition is pretty entertaining viewing. But entertaining is where I'm leaving it for now.

Where are these other eye witnesses, lab reports and the original footage?

-m0r



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   
I'm kind of interested in your thoughts on this.
I realize it is suggested that you could see an outline of an alien in the "enhanced" photos. Have you thought about how incredibly HUGE those alien would be if thier heads were the same size as the craft.
I am no shill or debunker. Infact I was following you until I saw the suggestion of the alien figure, and then got turned right off.

just want to hear you thoughts on how big those guys would have to be to see thier faces from that far away.




posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
I took another look at the alien on the right using photoshop and it looks Feline!!! Has anyone reported ever feline aliens? I have heard of reptiles but this looks feline! Frelling weird!


But we won't know for sure if it's real till original footage is analyzed, you really can't tell s**t of an flv file.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by MOTT the HOOPLE]

I did some work in photoshop on the face on the right see what you think



[edit on 11-5-2009 by MOTT the HOOPLE]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:01 AM
link   
Yalcin Yalman pictures / video is fake, i said it from the beginning it is a lamp hood or something ( in close up) or something else, it does not seem real at all. I have the strongest conviction that it is something fishy with this. :-( cant help it guys but that's how i feel. Had that feeling from start with these pics.


[edit on 11-5-2009 by Kukulcangod]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by m0r1arty

Originally posted by darkraver
it is NOT a model (no proof offered),


The onus of proof is on those making the claim.

The debunker/sceptic need only question every aspect of a tale to show 'how it could be wrong'.

'How it could be true' is not down to the debunker or sceptic but down to the person making the claim that it is true.


-m0r




claim of what exactly?

proof with what for what exactly?


there seems to be a misunderstanding of proof and claims definition

the footage is an offered proof here...

the CGI analysis is a proof...

the claim,as far as I am concerned is that this IS real UFO,othing more or less


now you can only offer me a "wrong" of the proof....

as I have seen none but subjective opinions and irrelevant insights about dates from a skeptic side here,I can not see how there can be an argumental discussion done here...

while there is a footage and an analysis on one side, there is close to nothing,dates and opinions on the other...
claiming it is a model needs argument...



from your feedback it seems debunking is quite an easy living...

"no it's not, it's..." and your daily mission is done....

how convenient for skepticism side


phage tried, but he himself must admit he is, in general,nowhere neary close to debunk this footage



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 
I've also been thinking about the angle of the object in relation to Yalman with his camera.
Not only does the angle not change as you have said, but the angle appears to be to shallow in relation to where Yalman is filming with the video camera.
It does not really look like Yalman is shooting up, so much as more front on at a shallow angle.
I also wonder about the line of darkness that demarcates the rear of the object.
Neither of those things look quite right to me.
Perhaps it could be a model.......who knows....



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by free_spirit
 




Maybe it's just me, but that ET on the left of the craft looking out with the somewhat caved in forehead looks similar to the one depicted in the Jeff Peckman peeping tom video.

The other one just looks like a generic gray that I've seen in many photos, particularly the one taken after the Roswell incident where it shows the gray with a bruised neck or broken neck.

I first thought that maybe they were just placed in that picture, but I really don't know.

Also, I read that this particular video is somehow affiliated with a guy who owns several UFO museums in Turkey or somewhere around there. Can anyone verify this?

[edit on 11-5-2009 by arbitrarygeneraiist]

[edit on 11-5-2009 by arbitrarygeneraiist]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   
As a native speaker of the language, I can tell you that the conversations during the shooting sound somehow staged to me...I mean there is no panic, excitement, or shaking in thier voices. Plus it just sounded like they didn't care too much about it. Or maybe they've been filming the thing for so long, they got used to it.

Second thing is, the so called UFO looks nothing like we've ever seen. To be honest it looks like an ordinary spoon with lights reflecting on it.

Thirdly, as far as I'm concerned that area(Kumburgaz) has no oil refineries, but there is a huge natural gas storage facility nearby. Those lights that they fimed during the first hours of daylight seem like ordinary lights to me, since they never change their formations during the filming process even on different dates.

But who knows....I'm not convinced yet...though that doesn't mean its staged but I have a feeling that it is.

Regards.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Why is it that whenever we see these videos, especially by people who expect to video a repeat performance like these guys, they never bring a tripod to steady the camera?

It's like the Mt. Shasta investigation. A whole team of so called "professionals' go out to film UFO's. They shoot video from 5 miles away, again without a tripod.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   
I'm very cautious.

It seems too good to be true. But then, isn't that one of the most complex parts to any investigation into these things? We say we need evidence, and then when perfect evidence comes along we are immediately suspicious of how good that evidence is! This is why many millions of people will simply not accept visitation until they see an alien being land on their lawn.

I profess to be one of those people.

I don't think we are alone, and I am certain that we have been visited in Human history, but the ability to fake these things makes the proposed evidence always suspect.

However, this is some of the most compelling evidence I have seen.

Someone mentioned the figures of the beings within, and seemed to suggest "why would they even look remotely humanoid?"
Well, the fact is, no other planet in our solar system supports humanoid life. Earth is very specific in that it has a breathable atmosphere, water, diverse organic matter. So we can assume that life (humanoid in nature) would need at least some basic factors in able to support such life.
Perhaps a Humanoid shape is the normal result of these combined factors?

Personally, even if these are alien craft, I am reluctant to believe that what we are seeing is an outline of an alien being within. There is not enough evidence to say that they are beings on film, they could just as well be the result of light at a specific angle, refraction, decoration even!
If I had seen an arm come up and wave, then I would accept that there is a humanoid life on board a floating craft.

Ultimately, I think we are not alone. They have been here before and when they have reason to they'll return and land.
Maybe we have seen them, and maybe this is evidence of it, but there are far too many possible chances of falsifying such evidence for me to simply accept it.

It's interesting, but until I see an alien being land on my lawn, that's all it is.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by MOTT the HOOPLE
I took another look at the alien on the right using photoshop and it looks Feline!!! Has anyone reported ever feline aliens? I have heard of reptiles but this looks feline! Frelling weird!


But we won't know for sure if it's real till original footage is analyzed, you really can't tell s**t of an flv file.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by MOTT the HOOPLE]

I did some work in photoshop on the face on the right see what you think



[edit on 11-5-2009 by MOTT the HOOPLE]



Holy moly its a ninja turtle.


[edit on 11-5-2009 by tarifa37]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   
That's probably the most compelling UFO video I've ever seen. And I've seen a lot. Incredible.

Not sure about the alien heads though - the scale seems a bit off. It's also kinda funny to think they have all this technology and they end up gawping out of the window
I think it's most likely part of the "craft."

As for the people moaning this is a repost. Well, I visit here often (granted, not the UFO forums much) and I've never seen this video before. I'm grateful it's on the front page now.



new topics

top topics



 
83
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join