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

reply to post by Lazyninja


sorry bud. people would be less likely to visit mexico if they knew roy g biv color ufo's were flying around. Cancun will suffice

reply to post by ZeroGhost

Some of these flotilla and orb videos go back many years. Most were from Mexico, the land of 3D opportunity? Low probability.

........ Again, I haven’t seen everything by any stretch, so I am accumulating a “probability” based on this knowledge. It is a low probability in my estimation that these are CGI for this and many other reasons I have no time to bore you with.

Speaking of “probability” is exactly what the proponents of “probably 3d” do. They try to point out that as long as you can’t rule out that probability by analysing the original footage you can’t say that the footage is genuine; nothing more than that.

It’s simply too silly to try analysing that Youtube crap over and over again.

You underestimate the skills of so-called amateurs who have lots of time at hand. We both know that even the most expensive software packages are “easily available” for download. Whenever I browse some of those forum galleries I am amazed by the incredible work of those amateurs. Think of some Brazilian CGI artists who produced some incredible stuff.
I will try to contact someone around here and ask if he’d be ready to provide a similar effect shown on the OP footage. Hope he isn’t too busy.


As you said:

Again, I haven’t seen everything by any stretch, so I am accumulating a “probability”

That's fair!

______________________________________

but then again i would visit for the chance but 99% of people would be repulsed by that opportunity.


thank you pedro. thumbs up and i can say that we are in interesting times

I know how it was done, watch the video posted below and you will see that after the plane has gone past the film cuts to a new piece of sky where a very out of focus object (some sort of balloon) is being spun on a wire or rope probably very close to the ground but with the camera shooting from below to give the illusion of hight.The main central object can be seen to wobble on its axis as it is spun hard and then small balloons are pulled out of both side at the same time.Then we cut to a new piece of film where balloons are released and jostle around in the up draught much the same as other videos shown on this thread. So there is you answer it was made in Three Parts 1 the plane 2 object spinning balloons pulled out, 3 balloons released into the air . Simple

Please watch the film carefully to see what I mean as it is better than the original and gives the process away.

reply to post by tarifa37


If that's the explanation, and the balloons were released close to the ground but then moved upwards, why do they remain the same size the whole time then? They should be getting smaller, and they weren't just moving in a line, they were floating around the spinning object later on, and the same exact size the entire time...

the clues to this being fake arnt the objects themselves it EVERYTHING else about this sighting.

1. The camerman lies. He says the plane passes then he was able to zoom in on the objects. As tarifa37 points out this is not what the video shows. After the plane passes it cuts to a new peice of sky it does not zoom in,he's just tried hard to make it look that way.

2. Strange behaviour doing a peice to camera in the middle of a sighting. How many genuine ufos are captured on film? and this guy takes them out his view finder...riiiight...

3. Hes filmed from a built up area in the middle of the day yet we dont have 1 other photo/video or witness to this event...riiiight... considering the phoenix lights had 10,000 witnesses we should have thousands for this too.

4. the video ends abruptly we dont see it to its conclusion. Why not?


THINK McFLY THINK!

Its fake as fake can be especially becuase of point number 3. I dont need to spend anytime looking at the objects becuase the rest of it doesnt make any sense.

Originally posted by yeti101
the clues to this being fake arnt the objects themselves it EVERYTHING else about this sighting.

1. The camerman lies. He says the plane passes then he was able to zoom in on the objects. As tarifa37 points out this is not what the video shows. After the plane passes it cuts to a new peice of sky it does not zoom in,he's just tried hard to make it look that way.

2. Strange behaviour doing a peice to camera in the middle of a sighting. How many genuine ufos are captured on film? and this guy takes them out his view finder...riiiight...

3. Hes filmed from a built up area in the middle of the day yet we dont have 1 other photo/video or witness to this event...riiiight... considering the phoenix lights had 10,000 witnesses we should have thousands for this too.

4. the video ends abruptly we dont see it to its conclusion. Why not?


THINK McFLY THINK!

Its fake as fake can be especially becuase of point number 3. I dont need to spend anytime looking at the objects becuase the rest of it doesnt make any sense.

Yeah you've really cleared that one up Einstein

Balloons..man, I just dont know..but I really dont think so..I just dont!!!!
Ask Free Spirit, he has the original dvd sent to him..he's seen it all....the whole shot!

reply to post by woodwardjnr


i sense a touch of sarcasm in your post. I know common sense doesnt come easy to eager belivers but if you think this event could happen with no other people seeing it or getting video/photos your completely frickin Insane, deluded or psychotic. Maybe all 3.

Ok, I also have a point, I posted on Myth's thread..IF this object is full of balloons, and releases them..

WHY DID IT NOT SHRINK!!!!!

If it has 25, 30, however many balloons inside it, OBVIOUSLY it will get smaller..but it didnt!!!!!!!!

reply to post by Yummy Freelunch


Yeah that's what I was saying above, unless the guy filming constantly zoomed in on the objects as they got further away, but then the clouds would have appeared getting bigger and filled the screen if that was the case.

Look at 5:25, the spheres are right next to the cloud and you can see he zoomed out, not in.

[edit on 7/8/2009 by bl4ke360]

Originally posted by bl4ke360
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

 

Yeah that's what I was saying above, unless the guy filming constantly zoomed in on the objects as they got further away, but then the clouds would have appeared getting bigger and filled the screen if that was the case.

Look at 5:25, the spheres are right next to the cloud and you can see he zoomed out, not in.

[edit on 7/8/2009 by bl4ke360]

Agreed 100%..thats using the ol noodle..lol...and the original yellow blob would be just an empty bag...

Originally posted by necati
reply to post by free_spirit

 

I know because I have a copy of the raw footage since June 2009. It was sent to me in a HD DVD for evaluation and analysis as I sustain permanent correspondence with colleagues not only from Mexico but from the US, UK, Brazil, Turkey, Japan.

If this footage remains a UFO that will be splendid don't you agree?

Based on your odd reasoning and on the fact that you didn’t share the Kumburgaz/Turkey film I assume that you’d prefer not to share the footage mentioned above because it would be “splendid” if it remains a UFO.
Perhaps the government exactly follows your reasoning: “Wouldn’t it be splendid if the public remains uncertain about the UFO phenomenon”.
So we have also a cover up by ufologists of certain material.

Or is it because of copyright infringement? Commercial reservations by people who allegedly want public disclosure?

Star for your post. The one person I've seen posting here who has had better evidence about this case says they think it would be splendid if it remains a UFO?
I think what would be splendid is if we learned the truth, whatever that might be.
I'm here seeking the truth, whatever that truth may be, I hope most other people are here for the same reason. Maybe someone with access to raw footage is also seeking the truth and we can get it evaluated by some pros, as the ATS site owner offered to do.
However, I have to say, if no raw footage is ever provided for analysis, one would not be unreasonable to question the motivations of the people not making the raw footage available, whether they be for commercial gain, or hiding the truth, or whatever. I don't see how their motivation for not sharing raw video could be called "seeking the truth".

If we don't have access to the raw footage, I think it's impossible to determine the cause of the objects in the video. Alot of you are thinking this is a fake due to the fading between scenes, and how it ends with the object still there, and how it fades to a different section of the sky after the airplane leaves. If we saw the raw footage (assuming this isn't a hoax) then we can actually analyze it for it's content. The way I see it, the original footage was shortened and edited for the news reporting segment it was on.

[edit on 7/8/2009 by bl4ke360]

reply to post by bl4ke360


i think its fake becuase we dont have any other video/photos or witnesses to an event that supposedly took place over a built up area in the middle of the day.

phoenix lights had 10,000 witnesses. This event has 1 LoL thats all you need to know its fake. Will 1 eager believer out there make my day and say "its possible nobody else saw this" rofl.



[edit on 8-7-2009 by yeti101]

Originally posted by necati
reply to post by ZeroGhost

 

Speaking of “probability” is exactly what the proponents of “probably 3d” do. They try to point out that as long as you can’t rule out that probability by analysing the original footage you can’t say that the footage is genuine; nothing more than that.

It’s simply too silly to try analysing that Youtube crap over and over again.

You underestimate the skills of so-called amateurs who have lots of time at hand. We both know that even the most expensive software packages are “easily available” for download. Whenever I browse some of those forum galleries I am amazed by the incredible work of those amateurs. Think of some Brazilian CGI artists who produced some incredible stuff.
I will try to contact someone around here and ask if he’d be ready to provide a similar effect shown on the OP footage. Hope he isn’t too busy.

As you said:

Again, I haven’t seen everything by any stretch, so I am accumulating a “probability”

That's fair!

Well you agree with the fact that I don't know everything (thanks.. I think), but I might know more than what you read here too.

I've been ranting about considering at all any YouTube UFO footage being used to prove or disprove the validity of anything. This is no exception. But due to Free-spirit's post, he shot it out of the park. Star that. A few original frames of that could say a lot.

For any accurate determination you need the original. Anything else is only a partial opportunity for understanding. Science demands more. We have some gut, or vitalistic abilities too you understand.

You underestimate the skills of so-called amateurs who have lots of time at hand. We both know that even the most expensive software packages are “easily available” for download. Whenever I browse some of those forum galleries I am amazed by the incredible work of those amateurs. Think of some Brazilian CGI artists who produced some incredible stuff. I will try to contact someone around here and ask if he’d be ready to provide a similar effect shown on the OP footage. Hope he isn’t too busy.

People have tried to do good fakes, but it is not easy. Not easy to fool everyone. You can ask your friends/associates but they might know how hard it is to really fool us.

There are many instances where studios and CGI experts have been asked to duplicate actual UFO footage or photos. No one has been successful. The reasons are technical, but it is way harder than they think at first. Some things you can't fake or mask. Even in conversion to reduced quality YouTube formats.
.

Time is not the only thing you need for good animation and visual trickery. You are correct in your faith in the ingenuity and time that some people have, but we might be overestimating too. The examples of talented work faking UFO's you reference do not really show any exceptional skills, mostly a lack of character that used some easy tricks to get people to notice their work. But people may also have noticed they are not very trustworthy, or, even informed about the phenomena they mocked. Fakes only cloud and buffer. They can't turn off truth.

If UFO's are real and the possibilities are as great and world changing as we can imagine, it is of the utmost importance that we practice integrity when dealing with the subject. People sense that.

And, yes the high-end packages, plug ins and shaders, models efex and textures are all available, cracked and Bittorrented . Even fully functional trial copies for anyone. Not many can use them with any skill I think.

95% of UFO videos are real. But that 5% keeps everything in check. I just believe people are waking up. We can't hold the dam back indefinitely.

ZG

[edit on 7/8/2009 by ZeroGhost]

reply to post by ZeroGhost


I agree with you Zero, most ALL youtube vids, I dont even click on! It just so happened I did click on this one, I subscribe to LuckyMauro. I really never believe anything much on youtube, IM mostly there for music vids..

But, as you say..Free Spirit does have the original..or at least a dvd someone (contacts of his) sent him..if I can assume that right. He does know..He has posted here...He has said..its NOT CGI OR BALLOONS>...in his opinion...hopefully..I'm stating this correct.

Even Springer, the owner here, has a hard time believing anything from Jaime, BUT..you pursue long enough..you will get the golden egg...and maybe Mr Hernandez and Jaime FINALLY got one!

reply to post by ZeroGhost

Well you agree with the fact that I don't know everything (thanks.. I think), but I might know more than what you read here too. I've been ranting about considering at all any YouTube UFO footage being used to prove or disprove the validity of anything. This is no exception. But due to Free-spirit's post, he shot it out of the park. Star that. A few original frames of that could say a lot. For any accurate determination you need the original. Anything else is only a partial opportunity for understanding. Science demands more. We have some gut, or vitalistic abilities too you understand.

I already pointed out that Youtube crap is almost good for nothing as far as a thorough analysis is concerned.
I also asked for the original footage to have a better look at the Kumburgaz case to no avail.
Why should I star a posting which simply says “I have the original footage” with no announcement that he will make it available or even is allowed to share it with others.

The problem is that some have read your text and consider it to be some kind of analysis which rules out any probability of CGI as an explanation.

People have tried to do good fakes, but it is not easy. Not easy to fool everyone. You can ask your friends/associates but they might know how hard it is to really fool us.

Sorry but au contraire, the UFO community has been fooled over and over again. Even when some creator announced that it was CGI people insisted to believe.
The so-called believers are quite steamed up about those hoaxes. Which alone indicates how effective they are.
Read this thread as an example about the work of Pilipe3d (Philipe Kling David): www.abovetopsecret.com...

Watch the “Midlands UFO” and some other creations of TheFakingHoaxer. Please watch into the clip until the point where he adds the camera shaking, grain etc
TheFakingHoaxer

There are many instances where studios and CGI experts have been asked to duplicate actual UFO footage or photos. No one has been successful. The reasons are technical, but it is way harder than they think at first. Some things you can't fake or mask. Even in conversion to reduced quality YouTube formats.

May I ask which cases you are referring to. I have never heard that anybody tried to duplicate “actual footage”.
Besides the problem of duplicating/ recreating has already been addressed by ignorethefacts some pages back in this thread.

reply to post by ArMaP


Going by the second photo it looks as if this thing is very close to mountainous regions so it is possibly a testing of some weapon... I say 'POSSIBLY' because i too am a skeptic and did believe that this video is genuine UFO sighting until i read that exert on the new scientist!!

And i wasn't saying that this video was taken in 2008.... i was saying that the article in the new scientist was wrote in 2008 and it's now a year later where the technology could have improved 50% so please read carefully before bringing an argument forward


[edit on 8-7-2009 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]

reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

..Free Spirit does have the original..or at least a dvd someone (contacts of his) sent him..if I can assume that right. He does know..He has posted here...He has said..its NOT CGI OR BALLOONS>...in his opinion...hopefully..I'm stating this correct. Even Springer, the owner here, has a hard time believing anything from Jaime, BUT..you pursue long enough..you will get the golden egg...and maybe Mr Hernandez and Jaime FINALLY got one!

Well, Yummy you will be disappointed, I'm afraid. I also wished that this was the real thing but I think that almost all clues indicate that it isn't.
I have almost no hope that we will have uploads of origingal footage to one of those free file hosters but many tedious discussions like this in the future instead.
However, what would happen if ATS would ban Youtube videos? I would be very curious to see how much would remain to argue about