UFO releases intelligent moving spheres!! First ever video footage!

Originally posted by Sunnygirl
I have some questions:

Pedro Hernandez claims to have spotted the UFO and spheres while riding a bus. He even made the bus stop so he could film them. Even if he was the ONLY passenger on the bus, surely the bus driver must have seen the UFO too? Has the driver come forward as a witness?

Has ANYONE else come forward as witnesses to this event? You can see houses in the footage, it was taken in a populated area, so it's hard to believe that Hernandez was the only one who noticed the UFO and spheres.

Hernandez also takes the time to film himself, talking to the camera, from around 4:20 to 4:30. He seems quite calm about it, he is obviously not worried that the UFO and spheres will disappear while he films himself. Why is that? I would not have taken the camera away from the UFO for even half a second if it was me who filmed this.

The "dancing" spheres looks like balloons tied together on a string. The long rows of spheres released from the UFO also look like balloons on strings. I think this is a deliberate hoax.

Originally posted by Stu2112
Firstly in the video the chap recording this ufo calmly points the camera at himself and proceeds to tell us he is going to film a ufo releasing orbs.
Then he points the camera to where the object is and lo and behold there is indeed a ufo releasing orbs.
Now,he had obviously seen this ufo releasing those orbs before he shot the actual footage that we are seeing here.
So why did he not start filming as soon as he seen this in the sky ?.
And,why did he calmly point the camera at himself and introduce this footage then amazingly turn the camera to the sky and right at that moment the ufo starts to release the orbs.
So how did he know that after introducing this footage that as soon as he points the camera skywards the orb was going to start producing orbs.
Was he not taking a big risk in missing this footage by introducing it first,but no,plenty time for the introduction and the ufo will release the orbs as soon as i turn the camera to the sky,hmmmm,strange.
Im sure if i had a video camera in my hand and had seen this in the sky then i sure as hell would not waste time by "introducing" the footage i was about to record in fear of missing the event.
There is something not right about this footage,i mean the first shot you see this ufo releasing dozens of orbs,but only two or three stay near the ufo,so where did the rest of them go.

Pay attention to the video between 4:30 and 4:32. While Hernandez is in front of the camera talking, you can hear all kinds of background noises, but when he starts zooming in on the UFOs at 4:32, all background noise goes silent, and you once again hear the commentator speaking in Spanish.

This tells me that he did the part in front of the camera as a separate piece..and, in those few seconds, it looks like the shots actually change. I'm not trying to debunk this, I'm merely providing an angle as to what may be going on there.

Seems like this thread are about to reach it's end.

A bit to much attitude in here now, which usually chases me out from a discussion where it usually turns towards personal stuff.

But I want to say one thing though.
Alot of people talk about "CGI is the most logical explanation...".
Well, in cases like this, or any case regarding probable alien crafts, plasma creatures etc, we should refrain from thinking logical.
I say this because we simply don't know if these things live by the same logical standards as we do.

Our logical thinking is based upon how the logics works here on earth and in relation to our own physicle bodies.
To use our logic to explain something that perhaps isn't complying to our logic at all would be to explain to a blind from birth 5 year old what colour a banana has with math. It just doesn't relate and it would be impossible for the kid to understand the colour.

I've ruled out balloons since I can't figure out how balloons would act like this. The "mothership" shoots out the little ones like if they would be propelled by a jetengine. And it actually looks like the jet streams shooting out from a blackhole...kinda.

We don't know the altitude, but I think most of us can agree that they are pretty high up. This would mean that the distant from the "mothership" and along the path they are traveling would be a pretty long distant.
There is no way to get balloons or helium balloons to travel that fast, in such a long distance without raising in altitude.
So for me, balloons?...no.

CGI, ofc this could be cgi, everything we see could be cgi. This is the downside with todays tech.
Sure this is a fairly easy clip, but still it isn't. There are so much elements to take in consideration. Out of focus, fog, shakes, animation, lightning, grain and more. When dealing with multiple elements like this you seldom get a shoot perfectly done. Even Hollywood have their glitches, and they work months and months with just one scene sometimes. ( Just check the extra material on the Starwars movies for example ). Still, the scenes in Starwars are more forgiving where their whole sets are cgi. Much easier to make it look good and hide faulty particle collisions.

This just seems like to much work for such a video.
If it is a cgi, then this is a pro job, that would have taken some time to do.
And who would waste time on that? Well, not even Once Once would waste time... So why would anyone else?

I said in my first post that it actually might be a critter in labor ( though Zorgon got the credit for that, bah...he stole my fame. =) Nah, just kiddin )
and it might be, it might be an alien craft, it might be something man made, it might be anything really. Everyone has the right to have it's one beliefs and their own point of view.

I seldom pay any attention to the debunkin being done, cause most of the time the debunks are made in such way that someone finds another picture that has alot of similarities with the ufo video and that is often enough for the sceptics. Mostly cause it fits into our logical world.

For example, Let's say we have a footage where you can see something shiny floating around. Pretty soon you have someone finding a close up picture of balloons that resambles and pretty much look like the object we see. "CASE CLOSED" according to the sceptics. They don't really need more, that is enough evidence for them. And that is ok.
Then a new video emerge where we see it lands and a bit more focus on it.
....then it is cgi.
So no matter what, people will always try to debunk. It is in the human nature to find a natural cause to unatural events.
So try to debunk, by all means. I think that is a good thing. But it is when discussions comes into pie tossing I step back.

Anyway, I will still believe this clip is out of the ordinary until it is properly proven to be cgi or anything else. Unfortunally I think we'll never see a proper evidence since it would mean we would need the original tape first of all and alot of other infos as well.

So all we can do is to lean back and enjoy the show.
Cgi or not... it's good #.

Originally posted by solarstorm
Excellant footage....Then again Im sure some booger flicking skeptic will attribute the object as some sort of bird taking a major dump during midair flight. Wash ur windshield everyone.

You're getting stars for this post? You added what to this discussion? Perhaps I am missing something.

Great video OP. Honestly, I'm really not sure what to think about it yet. Far different from any I've seen thus far. I'll finish reading the responses and watch a few more times, then I shall report back. Hopefully I don't run into any more nonsense.

Cheers,
Strype

reply to post by werk71

your point strenghtens my idea of it being military aircraft of clandestine origin.
Whatever military they are,they send them to poorer countries for tests as there is less chance of being filmed and put on TV.
It's an Aircraft Carrier...

reply to post by Akezzon


not only do you look just like a guy I went to school with, but you're speaking sense

Our laws of physics, don't have to apply to everything in the universe.

It all looks a bit fishy to me, some of the orbs seem to move with the camera indicating to me some sort of visual effects

Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
Right after the guy films his face, and then zooms into the sky, there is what appears to be a "fade transition".

That's because it is a fade transition.

I have noticed that many people look unaware of this fact, the second part, after the guy filming his face, is the same as before, only with some "retouching" from the TV crew.

I'm not trying to use this to disprove the video in the O.P., but I just wanted to give an example of CGI that fooled a LOT of people, and still to this day fools people, even after it was proven and confirmed to be CGI by the actors in the video.

The fact that I told you it is CGI before showing it will usualy make you see it different.

That said, here is the Sci-fi channel commercial;




Like stated before, anything can be done in CGI, so it can't be ruled out.

Originally posted by ArMaP
That's because it is a fade transition.

Yes, I know.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by 0nce 0nce]

Originally posted by Acidtastic
reply to post by Akezzon

 

not only do you look just like a guy I went to school with, but you're speaking sense

Our laws of physics, don't have to apply to everything in the universe.

No they don't,but we have to start somewhere...and where better to start than what we do know and not what if's or maybes.

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Mark of a true "skeptic" right here ladies and gentleman.

No, a true sceptic says why he/she is sceptic and presents his/her opinion, while not making fun of other people's opinions, because a true sceptic is sceptic about his/her own explanations also.

reply to post by ArMaP


Best definition of a true skeptic. We need to question everything and double-check everything.

But how are you gonna prove that it's CGI if you don't have the original video? Even that wouldn't prove everything here on ATS.

Edit:

People often say on different threads that the video is 100% proof of aliens and yet these videos don't "wake up" anyone..
Then they go around saying that be open minded etc.. Reply rudely to skepticism and if the skeptic does the same he is labelled as a bad guy by the majority of members..

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

Wow, great footage. I wonder if these type of sightings are starting to become more prominent. I personally have not seen one yet. This is def. on my top ufo proof list as far as videos go. wow.

reply to post by Akezzon


I find the actual video and post's very entertaining to say the least.


People's pre-programed idea of a ufo(alien ) craft is limited to their own knowledge of google and youtube or bing.

So the fact that all so called sightings of luminous spheres and the fact that they are the same design does not trigger your rational thinking that perhaps these might just be our little toys.

Or has it been established that all non terrestrial intelligent organisms with the ability of interstellar travel have identical craft's. If thats the case, if this is a real craft with non terrestrial intelligence controlling its movements then im George Washington.

Humans are a funny species.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Mark of a true "skeptic" right here ladies and gentleman.

No, a true sceptic says why he/she is sceptic and presents his/her opinion, while not making fun of other people's opinions, because a true sceptic is sceptic about his/her own explanations also.

yeah, i was being sarcastic.

I was taking the wee wee out of the apparent skeptisism of matey, as they'd offered nothing but snearing as their opinion. I agree with you, true skeptisism is open to actually finding out the truth, and a willingness to see from more than 1 angle is imperative. But that is most certainly not the impression I got from the poster i quoted, who basicly said "what i say is right, and you're all complete idiots for thinking anything different" the "true skeptic" remark was a dig, a deserved one at that.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by Acidtastic]

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
Right after the guy films his face, and then zooms into the sky, there is what appears to be a "fade transition".

That's because it is a fade transition.

I have noticed that many people look unaware of this fact, the second part, after the guy filming his face, is the same as before, only with some "retouching" from the TV crew.

why would a faker fade from a cloudy sky to a blue sky as in this video if he was trying to hide something?...

maybe the video has just been edited to shorten it...we need the full video.

Originally posted by Acidtastic

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Mark of a true "skeptic" right here ladies and gentleman.

No, a true sceptic says why he/she is sceptic and presents his/her opinion, while not making fun of other people's opinions, because a true sceptic is sceptic about his/her own explanations also.

yeah, i was being sarcastic.

I was taking the wee wee out of the apparent skeptisism of matey, as they'd offered nothing but snearling as their opinion. I agree with you, true skeptisism is open to actually finding out the truth, and a willingness to see from more than 1 angle is imperative. But that is most certainly not the impression I got from the poster i quoted, who basicly said "what i say is right, and you're all complete idiots for thinking anything different" the "true skeptic" remark was a dig, a deserved one at that.

Are you implying that I don't try to see things from different angles? Or are you talking about yourself. If I saw things only from one side then why the hell am I on this site?
You're just trying to make me look bad.

Edit:
And I never said anything like that or even hinted at it. I hinted that if some members here wish then it's their call to be ignorant and refuse to even consider this being CGI.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

nevermind

Wrong bloody topic...

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Gorman91]

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Gorman91]

reply to post by Solomons


Well, true.
But not all doors lead to the same corridor.
If our logic door doesn't comply then we should try the next door.
The problem is that many refuses to try another door and persists that the answer lays inside the door with our worlds logic.

Alot of people don't really wanna go to unknown territory when they are safe at home so to speak.
So to prevent this, one might need to try the other doors first.
In other words, thinking out of the box.

I didn't read all 24 pages because I assumed most of it entails argumentative blather so if someone has already brought this up forgive me....

Having said that, IF I believed that crop circles were not the creation of very talented terrestrials and IF I believed that crop circles were the creation of extraterrestrial artists, then this video might explain to me how these crop circles my be constructed.

The Ship hovers over the field belching out these little guys who descend on the crop, do their thing and return to the ship.

Hmmmm...IF I believed in that sort of thing....maybe.

It reminds me of that old man who died recently that was interviewed on UFO Hunters last season..He was stationed at the base right near roswell in 1947. He said 3 or 4 days Before the Roswell crash there was 3 Golden Orbs that were a few hundred feet up and seemed to watch everything that went on at the US Base right near where the Roswell crash happened... I tend to think these orbs pull in all sorts of data, from video to audio to radiation in the air to things we probably don't even have meters for yet..