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

This video shows nothing that resembles a flying ship at all..where is anything here in this clip that would insinuate an alien craft? it's just a yellow blob floating around could be anything really....and most definitely not as exciting an answer as you'd like to get i'm sure.

I just really don't see how people can go from the classic wedding cake 1950s standard UFO to cigar shapes to triangles to amorphous small blobby shapes and claim they are 'alien craft'......i just don't see it. It's almost like most people here will jump at anything at all without even investigating the origin of the report..who is to say this isn't fabricated? I mean honestly...you're all going to just go on this jerk offs(origin of film NOT the OP) merit and opinion? ...wow.

reply to post by Haydn_17


but how did he know it was going to do it again?

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Vyncent

 

lol? what? your blaming the tv station for him making a dishonest statement to his own camera?

heres some advice for the cameraman. Predicting that orbs are going to appear makes it look like its completely fake. Next time do a peice to camera about what an amazing sighting youve just had. Not what an amzing thing your just about to see LoL

Nothing of the sort...I'm not claiming that this t.v. station is dishonest, or that Hernandez is dishonest, I'm merely stating that they probably took this segment of video, put that here, then took another segment, put that there... I could even see the t.v. station having Hernandez do the bit in front of the camera.

reply to post by Vyncent

either way its dishonest and doesnt do this video sighting any favours at all.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by yeti101]

Originally posted by Haydn_17
Man is outside and sees UFO with orbs coming out of it.
Man runs back into house to get camera
Man tells camera what he saw and what the UFO was doing.

Not hard to imagine.

Not everyone walks around with camcorder in hand.

You obviously didn't watch the video, or read what he said.

He was in a bus, told the bus driver to stop so he could film the UFO, and got out of the bus, and started filming the UFO.

Why was he carrying a video camera on a bus? Who knows.

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch
I just watched this on youtube, and as I'm not usually impressed by ufo vids, this one was pretty amazing. It's all in spanish, someone has added sub titles.. but I gather the guy taping it was on a bus, at first, and told the bus driver to stop so he could continue taping. There are plenty of points to show distance, and its a very clear video. Tell me what you think! Also, I didnt embed it here, sorry. At about 4:33 into the video, they really start dancing!

VIDEO
[edit on 5-7-2009 by Gemwolf]

Nice. We have a few birds and a plan or zepplin balloon.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Pathos]

reply to post by Yummy Freelunch


Looks like an Alien spaceship dropping pods of Aliens so they can
make more Crop Circles in order to Communicate with the Humans.

No Doubt about it ;-)

reply to post by InfaRedMan
You saw them too IR? Look anything like them I saw in my avatar?

I am yet to be convinced that the object seen is ET in origin and will persue the idea that it is a balloon/kite assembly.

I was looking around for similar sightings and came across this hoaxed video and thought it may provide a good benchmark for what is achievable with CGI:



I am not so sure that it is CGI but it would not be impossible to create a balloon/kite assembly that could replicate the object/actions seen in the video IMO.

I've seen this video before.

The honest truth is that I do not know what I am seeing.

The big question to me is what the technical specs of the camera used?

Without knowing this information none of you can say for certain what is in the video.

Next I have to say I have a problem with this host.

There is a video posted on you tube for a "morphing UFO"in Mexico. This video was a test by Mufon to see what the host would do. Mufon took a bunch of helium ballons and launched them into the sky near one of the regular contributors to the UFO show in Mexico. Another Mufon member was next to the contributor as the balloons flew over. With the human eye they were clearly balloons but on the camera they looked very different and when presented to the host of the show he was quite adamant that this was a fantastic video even when Mufon told him they had launched the balloons!!!

To this day you will find people hailing this "morphing UFO" as real evidence we are being visited and this is 100% not the case.

I only mention this case as it could readily apply to the video in question.

So to me this is just an interesting video and nothing more. I don't know what I am seeing and to apply any label beyond U.F.O. in the strictest sense is 100% speculation.

Actually, I am happy that posters like Bone_Z have offered counter-arguments to what the video pertains to show. Could it be CGI? Possible, but not in this video. The contrast remains the same throughout the whole video, and it is in contrast where CGI fails assimilation into scenes having their own illumination. CGI content has a tendency to look sharper and more 'real' and separate from the content with which it is embeded into.

In some of the scenes of the video, the orbs pass 'behind' cloud and reappear without any change in contrast. You can fake it, but not without it being detectable or perceivable. This video, as SaturnFX has stated a few pages back, depicts a straight forward 'point and shoot' event, and does indeed show scenes filmed in one go, without break except when the fellow doing the filming turns the camera on himself to add 'notes'. The YouTube vid with Maussan is an edited version, and no doubt, has been treated to enhancement procedures, but not with added CGI treatment.

One or two posters have asked the question regarding how so much material can be ejected from the principal object without it losing mass, or even how it can carry so much material and eject it, when it doesn't seem to be large enough to carry so much? It's a fair and significant question...the material ejected looks to be made of the same material as the principal object, having the same contrasted illumination and colour - a kind of sulphurous yellow. Perhaps, the colour is being determined by the smog? Also, regarding the illumination of the spheres, they may not actually be the size that we as viewers perceive them to be. Internal light source of the spheres, and the ambient atmospheric conditions, also the lens of the camera at zoomed in level, may be combining to make them appear to be larger than what they actually are? Whatever they are?

What about flight characteristics of both the principal object and the spheres? The principal object moves slowly and seemingly controlled; its flight is neither erratic nor subject to atmospheric conditions: we perceive it moving under its own guidance. The principal object them seems to 'eject' smaller objects that to our perception appear spherical in shape. They have the same contrasted illumination and colour, and are seen to be ejected both left and right (assuming the principal object as a left and right?) in a long pearl-like string (but we do not see interconnective material between them).
The spheres remain 'paused' in a line (what is the distance of the line?), and then separate into their own free-flight dynamics. At first glance thay take on the characteristics of balloons, but intuitive and visual clues regarding atmospheric conditions dismiss this thought as holding any truth: the viewer soon realises with a high-degree of confidence that they are not ballons. In fact, my second thought was that their flight dynamics seemed to mimic that of kites, rather than balloons. There is a scene where we see 4 of the spheres dance around each other (5.57 onwards) and around the principal object, and that on brief occassions when they fly close to each other (following kite dynamics), the one that goes behind the front sphere is briefly obscured, equally so by cloud, too. These objects are actually there!

Are these objects, both the principal object and the spheres extraterrestrial? I truly believe that no one looking at this video could truly claim them to be so, as the video does not supply any evidence whatsoever regarding their origin: no claim to them being 'extraterrestrial' can be put forward with any certitude at all! Of course, it can be speculated that they are, but that is not proof, but merely suppositions culled from visual clues effective upon our own expectations. We have to caution ourselves to 'seeing' what we want to see. Sceptics, of which I am one, have every right to question the evidence put forward as proof, but they do not have a right to belittle others with alternative viewpoints...not by any means.

Originally posted by fleabit
I couldn't even imagine how many weeks it would take (and skill) to create this with cgi.

I'm sorry for this but.. WEEKS??
More like an hour max.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

Originally posted by elysiumfire
Actually, I am happy that posters like Bone_Z have offered counter-arguments to what the video pertains to show. Could it be CGI? Possible, but not in this video. The contrast remains the same throughout the whole video, and it is in contrast where CGI fails assimilation into scenes having their own illumination. CGI content has a tendency to look sharper and more 'real' and separate from the content with which it is embeded into.

Another joke. It's not impossible to add blur and make it look grainy.
+ Youtube itself is a big quality killer.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

I didn't believe this was CGI, but the movements of the small spheres at 4:59 are too suspicious... Although I'm not saying they are in fact CGI, but I find it weird that the move down when they camera moves down right in that moment.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Radiobuzz]

328 flags and 27+ pages of comments in less than 24 hours, and for what? A low-quality YouTube video showing something that can be done in CGI in a couple of hours? This is absurd.

Then again, ATS hasn't had an explosive UFO thread for about a month, so I guess it was overdue.

[edit on 7/6/2009 by SonicInfinity]

Originally posted by DGFenrir

Originally posted by fleabit
I couldn't even imagine how many weeks it would take (and skill) to create this with cgi.

I'm sorry for this but.. WEEKS??

More like an hour max.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

Originally posted by elysiumfire
Actually, I am happy that posters like Bone_Z have offered counter-arguments to what the video pertains to show. Could it be CGI? Possible, but not in this video. The contrast remains the same throughout the whole video, and it is in contrast where CGI fails assimilation into scenes having their own illumination. CGI content has a tendency to look sharper and more 'real' and separate from the content with which it is embeded into.

Another joke. It's not impossible to add blur and make it look grainy.
+ Youtube itself is a big quality killer.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

My note here is, how many Mexican computer programmers do you know? Would a guy that rides a bus in Mexico be one of those guys? Wouldn't a programmer in Mexico be pretty sought after? Wouldn't he make a better comparable living? If it was me shooting this footage with no skill in CGI at all, wouldn't you still claim it to be cgi?

Major Cop Out...

Not many people (relatively) know how to design 3d graphics with a higher level of skill. Saying some random bus riding mexican is a talented cgi artist is stretching. Not because he is mexican, but because he isn't the kind of guy you would classify as programming material....

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
328 flags and 27+ pages of comments in less than 24 hours, and for what? A low-quality YouTube video showing something that can be done in CGI in a couple of hours? This is absurd.

Then again, ATS hasn't had an explosive UFO thread for about a month, so I guess it was overdue.

[edit on 7/6/2009 by SonicInfinity]

Why does everyone always assume that everyone on earth knows how to design 3d graphics?

As far as I know it is not common knowledge.. Most people can barely work a computer let alone program one...

For everyone that barely watched the vid. Go to 4:34

[edit on 6-7-2009 by DaMod]

reply to post by DaMod


There is no need for any skill or knowledge to do a video like this. You only have to take the video clip, get it on your pc, open the program, add a few dots, assign them movement trajectories, add blur/grain and you're done.

Edit:
It's not rocket science.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by DGFenrir]

Originally posted by DaMod
Saying some random bus riding mexican is a talented cgi artist is stretching. Not because he is mexican, but because he isn't the kind of guy you would classify as programming material....

Nobody is claiming that he is the one who created the CGI effects.

Usually the actors in the movies don't do the special effects.

Originally posted by DaMod
My note here is, how many Mexican computer programmers do you know? Would a guy that rides a bus in Mexico be one of those guys? Wouldn't a programmer in Mexico be pretty sought after? Wouldn't he make a better comparable living? If it was me shooting this footage with no skill in CGI at all, wouldn't you still claim it to be cgi?

Major Cop Out...

Major generalistion of Mexicans more like - shame on you for perpetuating such ignorance!

reply to post by DaMod


Makes you wonder though because in the same show I referenced above Mufon did some investigation on a different Mexican U.F.O. case and the pictures had without a doubt been manipulated once the digital pic data was studied. Without knowing that bit of information you would of -sworn- this was a real spacecraft. The guy who took the pics swore nothing had been manipulated and the Host supported him and when presented with the evidence of the manipulation they both denied it.

Truth is the softeware to manipulate video is easy to obtain and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out.

So lets see.

-Don't know specs of the camera involved-Check
-Host will support any claim that keeps his viewers-Check

Based on that anyone who doesn't place this video clearly into the "be skeptical" zone is just fooling themselves.