Undeniable non-fake UFO footage in Amsterdam

Even if this was real, don't you think this would have made international headlines by now? Like with the Pheonix lights. Why is it that the only people that caught it or saw it had a video camera on hand? With, something that bright and big hovering over a crowded city, you would think that more than 4 people would have seen it.

reply to post by vasaga


All users posted the video. They all joined within the same couple of days.

Also, not sure of the other videos, but the first is obviously an animation. The ship has faster frames than the camera. This is something seen in most animations mixed with real life. Even in movies. It's why you can tell they are animated. They go at different frames.

Originally posted by vasaga

Thoughts?

[edit on 20-6-2009 by vasaga]

Without any doubt FAKE!

Why?
1. The explanation the 4 'filmers' give, both, verbal and written next to the Tube vid, is too detailed to be true.

2. It's very poor acting, how they 'meet' each other along side the IJ. If you listen closely is cristal clear they rehearsed the text several times.

3. The 'voices' on 3 of the vids are all from the same guys.

4. IF this footage was in fact genuine it would have been on the local telly AT5 followed by other news/media programmes.

5. The 'shape' of the Unknown Object isn't the same on all vids

Nice try guys! Bet they study at the AHK (Amsterdam Highschool for Arts): The Nederlandse Film en Televisie Academie which is located not far from where the last vid was taken.

The Obligatory Close Up



I dunno what to think of these kind of videos, even though I have no particular method of proving or disproving anything, It doesn't really impress me much.

without reading any of the posts to keep the bias neutral, that was definitely CGI. without a doubt. i'm in the industry and there are just certain things about this/these vids that scream cgi.
thanks for posting though. it never hurts.

What a terrible CGI UFO.

Sounds like the guy took video from a variety of locations and dubbed over the video with his own audio. If you look where the people are in each video and listen, the acoustics do not match the environment. It sounds as if they're speaking into an external microphone.

[edit on 6/20/2009 by ZombieOctopus]

Originally posted by vasaga
And if it's only one person, there should be more reports. If it's multiple videos, they probably worked together... So I guess in the end, it'll all be discarded and be thought of as fake.

It's not just because there are more videos, it's because all other videos are as dubious as the first one.

Multiple sources are good, but only if verifiable, and that is what is missing here.

If we can find where is that thing that looks like a church tower or something like that, as we already have one location we can see if the videos were taken while pointing in the same direction (the place where the UFO was) or not, if they were not then it's obviously a fake.

This will be my last topic made based on UFO sightings. I'll let other people do their own work about this stuff, and I won't bother finding different perspectives of the same event.

Please don't, that way you are acting in favour of the hoaxers, you should keep on looking while being sceptical about the sources.

Edit:
I forgot to say one thing; don't you find it a little suspicious that only four guys in Amsterdam see this thing all four have cameras running?

[edit on 20/6/2009 by ArMaP]

reply to post by whiskeypoet

Originally posted by whiskeypoet
Classic CGI, lack of reflection of flash etc on surrounding structures.

I noticed that myself. Seems kind of odd that something with a flash that's seemingly as bright as it is would most certainly cause some kind of reflection on the surrounding area and even reflect off of the clouds above it.

In addition to that in the first and second video the sky is a lot darker than the sky is in the last two.

If it happened at the same time I'd like to think that the sky would have looked the same if in fact it was the same time and area.

You can't blame camera quality for failing to record the sun rising.

How could two videos record the same object with obvious day light while at the same time never seeing it ascend while two other videos capture the "same object" ascending into the sky without any daylight at all?

Am I failing to understand the physics of the rising sun or do these videos scream fake to anyone else?

This is a hoax.

At the two-minute mark in the third video, the photographer points at the UFO. You can see him doing this at the 43-second mark in the fourth video. This lets you know they are filming at the same position, just a few feet apart. At the 2:15 mark in the third video and the 58 second mark in the fourth, a light-rail train passes in front of the buildings across the river. This lets us know they are filming at the exact same moment.

However, comparing the two videos at the 2:15 and 58 second marks, the UFO appears over different parts of the video, despite the photographers being in the same position and filming at the same time. The UFO also appears bigger in the second video, despite a wider angle being used.

Video 3:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fb360f52f83e.jpg[/atsimg]

Video 4:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/00fed92aeeae.jpg[/atsimg]

As much as I want it to be real, it's a very good coordinated shot video of trickery. 4 people, or 3 maybe, went around and filmed the same part of the city --the unmistakable cloud gives it away.

The same person, or actually a copycat of the very good "circling" Mexico City UFO closeup hovering by the downtown buildings did these.

Man, and I had my hopes up.

To the OP:

I applaud you for the effort you put into this hoax. Doing the shots in different locations, setting up "confirmation" people for the last two clips.
The good cam seems to be an HD cam... why the hell is he unable to keep a sharp image when zoomed in?
Along with that, I'll support the notions of the other nay sayers in the thread. Thanks for wasting our time, have fun a film school.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by vasaga

 

All users posted the video. They all joined within the same couple of days.

Also, not sure of the other videos, but the first is obviously an animation. The ship has faster frames than the camera. This is something seen in most animations mixed with real life. Even in movies. It's why you can tell they are animated. They go at different frames.

Good catch

OP... do better next time please. Oh wait. Don't do it again!

[edit on 20/6/09 by flice]

reply to post by flice

Maybe I missed something.....,

Did we decide it was the op who was the hoaxer?

Or, did the op simply post videos made by the hoaxer & ask for our opinions?




[edit on 20-6-2009 by Sam60]

reply to post by flice


You should not mix the people who post with the people who make the videos, the just went looking for more information about this case (as anybody interested in the subject should do) and he(?) posted what he found.

If this (as it looks) is really a hoax, nothing points to the participation of the OP in the hoax itself.

Originally posted by leakingignorance
In addition to that in the first and second video the sky is a lot darker than the sky is in the last two.

If it happened at the same time I'd like to think that the sky would have looked the same if in fact it was the same time and area.

That is one of the reasons why I want to know where is that tower we can see on the first video, to know the direction in which the camera was pointed.

During these days closer to Summer solstice, the more to the north you are the less night you have (that is why there is such a thing a the midnight sun near the poles), so, if the camera was pointing to the north on the videos with the sunlight visible then it could be that a camera pointing south would see a darker sky.

That effect happens everywhere, but is more noticeable the closer you get to the poles.

But even far away from the poles you can still see some sunlight after sunset if you look in the direction of the Sun.

It just doesn't look real, surely that should be the only thing that needs to be considered?

Why is it everyone on earth can tell CGI a mile off even in the most up to date and expensive blockbuster films yet they act like they can't tell the difference when it's some low budget obvious nonsense like this? I mean if you really believed this then surely I could show you something like Jurassic park and you would be convinced that they bought dinosaurs back too?

I'm not a computer graphics expert but I can see it instantly and I'm pretty sure everyone else can too. It amazes me that this site is about denying ignorance yet it seems to be populated by inverted skeptics, people who refuse to to even consider forgery or rational explanations because it goes against what they WANT to believe, selective hearing, selective reading and selective seeing! if there is anything as bad as refusing outright to believe there could be life on other planets then it's surely people who are so desperate for it to be true that they are in denial of any signs of a rational explanation and actively avoid any form of investigation.

You'll only ever know for sure when you eliminate all other possible explanations, that's not skepticism, that's dedication to finding the truth!

UFO footage is fake. CGI done.

Originally posted by vasaga
Ok, first, this is focussed to the non-believers:
I know what you're thinking. "OMG another one who's gonna post some random videos". Well, guess what. This is NOT random. These are 4 different people, filming the exact same event from different locations.

In this one, notice how the object rotates. And what really intrigues me is the two flashes at the end of the video.

The second one is of worse quality. You can't see the object spinning, but the flashes at the end are exactly the same..

The third one is from some guy taking a walk at night after being woke up by snoring of his girlfriend. He wanted to film his walk to not get in trouble with his girlfriend accusing him of cheating, and then he saw this thing between the buildings. Notice the rotation is exactly the same, but there are no flashes at the end of the video.

And the last one, is from the guy with a good camera in the 3rd video..

Thoughts?

[edit on 20-6-2009 by vasaga]

If all these video people saw the same thing then how come the phoney warp away is missing from them in 2 vids?

Seems a rather blatant error unless someone wants to try a 'directional light' excuse..

reply to post by ArMaP


This church steeple could be what we're seeing in the first two videos:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7d2faa66830c.jpg[/atsimg]

Oude Kerk

I've also located where the second two videos were shot, a foot bridge near Nemo museum.

I've also squared the steeple in the picture as well:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f426ab798a06.png[/atsimg]
(right click to see the full image)

And a 3d view through google earth looking in the direction of the steeple from the bridge:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a9ff5e363952.png[/atsimg]

I'm not too sure what to make of it, getting a bit later here at the moment but it may help your investigations.





[edit on 21/6/09 by Chadwickus]

Hmm after comparing the steeple from the youtube vid with Oude Kerk, I'm doubtful it is the steeple/tower we see.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a0987a262f50.png[/atsimg]

reply to post by Chadwickus


It's a little difficult to know, someone that knows the place would be helpful.

Thanks anyway, good job!