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: 8
83
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by free_spirit
reply to post by cmazzagatti
 


Interesting case from Kumburgaz, Turkey. This is another frame from the video by
Yalcin Yalman. Courtesy: Haktan Akdogan.






This isnt directed at you cmazzagatti but its images like that that get me annoyed, now do people think its a dark head with glowing eyes? or two small white skinned heads (or 3) protruding from a opening in the vehicles upper surface... or are they just some moving part of the vehicles exterior or interior going over a dark patch on the hull?.

If it looks like a face its more than likely NOT a face, humans have real problems with the fact we see faces in everything. Its half the problem we have with the skulls on mars pictures, we all do it we see faces where their are none... heck ive done it myself in everyday life and its hard to train yourself to not see em.

My other problem is given the OP's enlarged stills is that the craft seems far to small in the vertical for the occupants to be reside inside (unless its got T.A.R.D.I.S like properties). or the visible part is only a fraction of the craft and the rest residing bellow the lit area is to dark to be made out with any sort of enhancement.

Personally I believe that each white blob is infact an entire entity. That would make the craft to being size more realistic. But people need to stop seeing faces where their are none, or should I say maybe none.

Its still some very decent footage however.

Edit:- hmm looking at it closer I can see what your talking about now cmazzagatti I saw the wrong 'face' in your pic falling into the seeing faces trap I talked about
and I apologize for my original slant although I still think its finding faces in blurry over blown pixels syndrome still for the most part. Its just impossible to say 'yes' they are faces.

If only they had some good non digital stills of the craft since at least enhancements of them would be alot more certain... digital, especially digital film just cant be trusted in my mind when subjected to enchantments.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by BigfootNZ]




posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
I don't have much to add other than my ability to be tuned into a persons vocal patterns. The voice patterns of the videographer are my only reservation about this film. I detect a highly masked but forced pattern of amazement in the voices. I feel that when we do get the smoking gun video that the voice of the videographer will give it away as the real deal. When someone realizes for the first time we are not alone, that they are witnessing something of an extraordinary magnitude and that they are shocked over what they are seeing... you will hear this in their voice, there will be unmistakable tremors and patterns. I guarantee you when we do get the real deal it will not only be the footage that raises hairs on your neck but the voice of the videographer.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by contemplator
 


How can you say how someone would act? I would think they would be so shocked that they would be pretty quiet. The majority of the population isn't like ATS (unfortunately) and aren't dying to see a UFO or meet an alien, let alone prepared like a lot on here are.


Example disproving your hypothesis

This is a known HOAX, but according to your hypothesis the language and reaction of this witness must indicate it is real.




I believe your statement on judging authenticity from reaction is very ambiguous. By the way, I am not being a a-hole, I am just participating in the debate trying to determine authenticity of this video.


[edit on 5/11/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


I think it is not a stretch at all to make the connection of the faces (which even from the bad resolution look exceptionally like the classic Grey alien) in the craft being faces of Greys. I know that humans see faces in a lot of things, that's called pattern recognition(it is part of what makes us smart). But if you compare the faces in the video to lets say this........

NOTE: The following pictures ARE NOT actual depictions of aliens!!



Courtesy of reflectionsinthenight.com

Or this....



Courtesy of hyper.net

Or the supposed REAL alien in the picture I posted last page.

Sometimes the obvious is the obvious, humans also tend to over think things as well.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
hey no offense taken whatsoever, in your above video i detected a 'fun' pattern in that guys voice, felt very manufactured like they knew it was a hoax mainly a key moment when he said 'holy #', the way he said it gave it away for me. In the OP video the moment that gave me the fake voice vibe was the "what is this?" and the moments of banter when they were looking for it. I could be wrong, all I can do is go on my gut which doesn't let me down too often.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Some people discredit the most legit evidence we have on UFO's, which should be labeled as ETV's, today.

Really, I ponder a moment, to know why it's so hard for people to believe that extra terrestrials do exist. We have the evidence in so many pictures, documents, the 400+ witnesses, and that bob white object which damn sure resembles no part of a meteorite or asteroid to me. How are there still skeptics out there this current year, denying cold, hard cased evidence today? As far as physical evidence is concerned, even from a downed ETV, the military would be there just 10 seconds after. Not the every day military in particular. The military that runs Black Operations belonging to a group tied with parts of the CIA and National Security and they have NO congressional oversight what-so-ever. When they go to collect, they set up perimeters with a radius of 3 miles or more and they dig up every cubic inch of ground just for scrap. The chances of you ever getting in there are 1/1,000,000. I am astonished that Bob White is not pronounced "Death by Suicide" yet like most people involving sensitive information.

Do you seriously expect them to make a landing in a crowd of people and just present themselves? With this crap going on? It's a snowballs chance in hell that will ever happen due to our hostility today. Make do with what you go. Who knows, we could have ended up with nothing.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
 
Hi,
You need to look at the link for the video of the cameraman
being interviewed,to hear what he was doing at the time, and why.


Thanks, i finally found the interview .





It answers most of my questions, but he could have simply zoomed out at any point. I know i would, since thats the flaw in most UFO videos.

Other than that, its a great footage, especialy the illumination part, where it slowly starts from the right side of the craft and it soon covers all of it. Then it changes back from the left to right and something appears on its middle upper part.
Anyone got any ideas ?
It seems to be the same craft every time, or atleast the same type of craft.

Edit: New on video links


[edit on 11-5-2009 by nforcer]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 



My other problem is given the OP's enlarged stills is that the craft seems far to small in the vertical for the occupants to be reside inside (unless its got T.A.R.D.I.S like properties).


It has been said many times that the ETs posses some type of "dimensional manipulation" or "mass manipulation", whatever you want to call it. This has also been stated by many government whistleblowers.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I am still curious about the single frame picture,
it is not in the videos that I have seen..it says 2007.
I still say there are three guys there,
with no reason to believe that their
heads are sticking out of the object.
The cameramans estimation was that the object was in size
around 15 meters,say 50 Feet,so if the "Window" is only a tenth of that then there is Five Feet,enough for three heads and plenty for two.
As for the "heads" the guy on the left actually looks quite normal with shaven head and maybe a earphone in his right ear,
and perhaps wearing lipstick

the guy on the right looks a little like a dog with its tongue out
but otherwise quite normal and the guy at the back is the only
one who looks a little alien.
I don't see any pixilation at all just poor resolution,
from extreme zooming,but still good work from the cameraman.

[edit on 11-5-2009 by smurfy]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   
First off, let me point out I'm a believer, have had 3 sightings of my own yadda yadda yadda...but when a thread for this vid popped up here last year I couldn't believe the reaction it got! To me (regardless of what some might say) it's a ludicrous fake. Not CGI, but still a fake. I went on to provide analysis of why I thought so and a diagram of how I believed it was done...unfortunately I can't seem to find said thread...damn...anyway, I still think it's a fake.

*EDIT: Here you go, about halfway down the page...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

(thanks to Phage for finding the thread, I don't know why I couldn't find it...)



Originally posted by cmazzagatti

What some of you may not know, is that they analyzed the footage by two different organizations: 1) The Sirius UFO research center, and 2) TUBITAK -- The Scientific and Technological research center of Turkey. Both of them came down to the same conclusion: it's 100% authentic.



They might have come to the same conclusion, but why should I believe these organisations have the requisite skills to come to such a conclusion and make such a definitive statement? Just because something has a fancy title doesn't necessarily mean it's 100% legitimate. I for one have never heard of these groups before (although that proves nothing, I'm just saying) but who decides that groups like "The Sirius UFO Research Centre" have any kind of credibility? The fact that they have "UFO" in their name leads me to believe they might be ever-so-slightly less than objective about the whole thing.
I also love the way the "Sirius" guy in the other vids you posted starts giving it a "model" name and going on about how "we know from Roswell that" blah blah blah. We actually don't know a hell of a lot from Roswell other than a lot of hearsay and speculation. I'm also struggling to believe a night-watchman from Turkey has the need to take an expensive video camera (and attachments) to work with him - repeatedly! I'd be having a word if I was his employer. Likewise I find it hard to believe he knows all of this stuff about video cameras but doesn't understand the difference between a.m and p.m.

The more I think about it, the more ludicrous the whole thing becomes.


Originally posted by Sam60

In the several previous threads about this, it has been claimed to be:

1. A dinner plate
2. A spoon
3. An oil rig




I'm sure the oil rig claim was about another part of the video entirely.


Really, I am flabbergasted that people are still taking this seriously!





EDIT TO ADD: Why, if the UFO is over the sea with no town lights for reference & with only the moon for illumination, is the FRONT of the UFO illuminated? Surely the moon would be above and behind the thing, and we'd see more of a silhouette than anything?

I'd also like to know why the guy spends all that money on the camera and the lens attachment thing but doesn't even buy a cheapo tripod?

To those who keep taking the mick out of the skeptics by ridiculing the ISS claims then maybe you should watch the ENTIRE VIDEO and then you'll see exactly what they're talking about - it isn't this UFO here.



Anyway, IF IT SMELLS LIKE A TURD....

[edit on 11/5/09 by sotp]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Interesting video... I have never seen it before.

But I have seen the deline UFO footage it takes it's audio from.

You've already stated it's a hoax and I know from personal experience that the deline footage audio is what was on the original tape.

Anyway... gave me a laugh. Thanks.




Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by contemplator
 


How can you say how someone would act? I would think they would be so shocked that they would be pretty quiet. The majority of the population isn't like ATS (unfortunately) and aren't dying to see a UFO or meet an alien, let alone prepared like a lot on here are.


Example disproving your hypothesis

This is a known HOAX, but according to your hypothesis the language and reaction of this witness must indicate it is real.




I believe your statement on judging authenticity from reaction is very ambiguous. By the way, I am not being a a-hole, I am just participating in the debate trying to determine authenticity of this video.


[edit on 5/11/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by bloodline
 


Okay...........This Deline footage is what??? Where???

You can't just say something and expect it to be taken seriously.

Either way, there are many more hoaxes that have the strong language and dramatic acting in it. While in contrast the legit ones have the witness (s) being more calm.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
What am I saying that is to be or not be taken seriously? That the audio was from the deline footage? It is from the Deline footage.

If you haven't seen it then, here you go:


That's that northern Dene accent for sure.






Either way, there are many more hoaxes that have the strong language and dramatic acting in it. While in contrast the legit ones have the witness (s) being more calm.


I don't have an opinion on this.

I wasn't even challenging anything you said.



Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by bloodline
 


Okay...........This Deline footage is what??? Where???

You can't just say something and expect it to be taken seriously.

Either way, there are many more hoaxes that have the strong language and dramatic acting in it. While in contrast the legit ones have the witness (s) being more calm.


[edit on 11-5-2009 by bloodline]

[edit on 11-5-2009 by bloodline]

P.S. How do I post a youtube video correctly?

[edit on 11-5-2009 by bloodline]

[edit on 11-5-2009 by bloodline]

[edit on 11-5-2009 by bloodline]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by bloodline
 


Post only the alpha-numeric sequence inside the brackets (spaced so it doesnt actually come up)

[ yvid ] enter number here [ / yvid ]


No spaces in the real thing and dont put in the "v=" part.

EDIT to add: Sorry I thought you were trying to debate what I said,lol, I am in a debate-type mood for some reason,lol.

[edit on 5/11/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
One thing I never see is anyone doing edge detection on the photos. Some photos may be too blurry but a lot of clearer photos never get negativized and do edge detection. You'd think it would help a bit with this kind of stuff to see the actual shapes of the objects...

[edit on 5/11/09 by MoothyKnight]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   
It wouldnt matter for some if a ship landed and aliens came out and shook their hands!
There are always going to be sceptics-no matter how convincing any evidence is.
I wonder what these sceptis will say when the moment of full-disclosure is upon us



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


No problemo.

Still can't get the dang youtube to work but I'm sure I'll figure it out sooner or later.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 



I wonder what these sceptis will say when the moment of full-disclosure is upon us


Project Bluebeam

think the one liner is acceptable........



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Perhaps it's been posted before but here's some points worth considering...

1). Comparing the GL1 or 2 with common everyday camcorders is like comparing apples with oranges. The GL1 was considered an entry level professional camera in it's hayday, (3 CCDs -vs- 1 CCD among other interesting functions like being able to shoot at 24 frames, etc. I believe Michael Moore shot his documentaries with the GL1, just to get an idea). Those who could afford them, (~US $5,000 new in early 2000s) put a lot of wear on them. They're work horse cameras. Most people don't get rid of them until something malfunctions (like the LCD or time stamper, etc). Then they'd sell it on e-bay for ~$1,500 - $3,500, which at this point they have a lot of wear and tear on it. More than likely, the camera owner bought a used one, with a common malfunction of the time stamper.

2). Again, 3 CCDs = good quality. I DO believe you could get pretty good definition/clarity with a telephoto lense using a GL1, even in low lux conditions... Not the best, but close enough for jazz.

3). I believe the camera man was arguing about having problems with his tripod... So more than likely, he used a tripod. If he was shooting hand-held at that magnification you wouldn't have been able to see a thing... I don't think a steady-cam operator could have shot it strait at that magnification. He probably kept the tripod loose just in case it tried to move away.

With all of that said it does raise a question for me. A GL1 (probably used even) and a telephoto lense... Not very common equipment for a common person. Still, doesn't prove anything either way. If I had a GL1 and knew UFOs were hovering around the area sporatically over a year or two, you can sure as hell bet I'd have that thing charged up and ready to go at all times!



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Lovely vid! A mosaic of other footage I've seen before, although the audio on this one is a bit muffled.
I get your point though.




top topics



 
83
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join