A Flying Saucer during a Spaghetti Western directed by Sergio Corbucci

reply to post by zorgon


And he just happened to catch the actor (stunt man) galloping dramatically across the skyline waving his rifle, perfectly framed, at the same time. I kind of doubt that for some reason.

[edit on 7/11/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage I kind of doubt that for some reason.

Its your job to doubt... But I still want to here what he has to say first and it may not be the same 'object' he is talking about

BTW missed your presence in that new spheres video from Mexico. I guess you missed that one I know how busy you are

reply to post by zorgon

If I have something to say, I say it. If I don't have anything to say, I don't. Unlike some around here.

reply to post by zorgon


i want to make a summary, there are four videos:

1) interview of the actor Cristian De Sica that talks about the intentional filming af the flying saucer by the crew

2) an unintentional UFO catching of a flying saucer in the same movie ......I believe that the the object of unintetional catching video is the same of the one represented in the other intentional filming described by the actor Cristian De Sica.

3) the intenional filming made by the crew during the realization of the movie. There are two copies of this filming one hold by NASA and one hold by an italian TV channel that is the RAI. The copy of NASA is "Top Secret" while the copy of RAI is not be found........the copy of the RAI was broadcasted much time ago and it was seen by many people.



so I have posted in this thread only the "1)" video (interview video of the actor Cristian De Sica) and the "2)" video (unintentional UFO catching of a flying saucer in the same movie).

I don't have the "3)" video (the intenional filming made by the crew during the realization of the movie).



[edit on 11-7-2009 by Mario Maisto]

reply to post by Phage


i give you another star!.....thanks so much!

[edit on 11-7-2009 by Mario Maisto]

Originally posted by Phage
If I have something to say, I say it. If I don't have anything to say, I don't. Unlike some around here.

NASA uses that same policy... rather than explain what they cannot explain they use silence. Sometimes silence speaks volumes

Just saying

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Mario Maisto

 

Soaring birds do not have to fly in circles to glide or soar. They can glide in straight paths without flapping their wings. If they want to gain altitude they will circle in a thermal. Thermals can be very wide, hundreds of feet wide. The birds do not have to fly in small circles to stay in a wide thermal.

If they want to go somewhere the will glide in a straight path.


[edit on 7/11/2009 by Phage]

Heck, on a windy day a bird like a hawk could stay virtually in one spot -- seeming to hover nearly motionless.

www.youtube.com...

...and I've even seen them more motionless than on this video.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

Yeah, but that has to be in front of a hill, using ridge lift. If it's windy enough it's even possible to move backward over the ground. I've done it many times while hang gliding.

I've always been under the impression that UFO stood for Unidentified Flying Object... meaning that any aerial object that could not be properly identified could be considered a UFO. Where does it say that a UFO has to involve aliens or extra dimensional beings?

In my opinion, there seems to be two distinct groups that flock to these threads... those who absolutely believe that any Youtube posting shows an alien craft, and those who know that it isn't alien and thus couldn't be a UFO.

Just because it's a UFO does not make it alien!

... and that's all I have to say about that. Feel free to copy and paste this on the other various UFO threads.

reply to post by The Soothsayer


Very true i couldn't agree more. Yet no matter how many times its said i don't think the message will ever get through to most.

Originally posted by Mario Maisto
reply to post by zorgon

 

i want to make a summary, there are four videos:

revision:
".........there are three videos:"
1)......
2)......
3)......

reply to post by refuse_orders


i want to report these two videos about hawks:

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

we can note that:

1- it needs to much time to do a circular path.
2- the hawk shape is always defined also when hawk stay far off video shooting.
3- during turnig around the shape projection of the hawk changes.

reply to post by Mario Maisto


Just because you show two video's of birds flying a certain path does not mean they do that all the time. For example i could show you a couple of videos of a magpie standing on the fence at the end of my garden, it does not prove they always stand on the fence.

You need to think about the angle the movie scene was shot from, the fact that its panning right to left also. You only see the object for a few seconds. The object if a bird could be on a huge circular path, to big to be observed from the the angle the shot was taken, or it could be flying in a straight horizontal path. What Phage said previously is correct.

Soaring birds do not have to fly in circles to glide or soar. They can glide in straight paths without flapping their wings. If they want to gain altitude they will circle in a thermal. Thermals can be very wide, hundreds of feet wide. The birds do not have to fly in small circles to stay in a wide thermal. If they want to go somewhere the will glide in a straight path.

reply to post by refuse_orders


I am looking for find the other video that is hold by the NASA and the RAI so we can make a comparison.

reply to post by Mario Maisto


The original video, owned by RAI, was broadcast publicly in 1984, in a TV Talk Show called "Italiasera" (conducted by Mino Damato and Enrica Bonaccorti). The video is not available (easily) on internet. It's interesting if some italian have videotaped the transmission. I try some research about it.

[edit on 12-7-2009 by ImShrike]

reply to post by ImShrike


wow.....very very very interesting informations......thanks so much for your post it is a very precious post.....but how do you know these informations? are you italian? are you able to get the record of that transmission?

Originally posted by Mario Maisto
reply to post by ImShrike

 

wow.....very very very interesting informations......thanks so much for your post it is a very precious post.....but how do you know these informations? are you italian? are you able to get the record of that transmission?

Yes i'm italian and, sadly, i dont have the record of that transmission.
But i have some little information about the movie:

The title was : VAMOS A MATAR COMPANEROS (1970), with Tomas Millian and Franco Nero - Location: Almeria (Spain)

imdb

From various source from italian forum's seems confirmed that in the 1984 the transmission "Italiasera" talk about this case: but it's not clear if there was only an interview to director Corbucci or they show the original UFO record also. Surely the trasmission is available from RAI Archive.

Source: www.ufoskywatchers.it...

Alll of these recurring posts about UFOs appearing in movies, etc., kind of get on my nerves for some reason. Maybe because to me it seems to smack of effort, even desperation. I agree with a previous post - somebody definitely has too much time on their hands.

Originally posted by longfade


Alll of these recurring posts about UFOs appearing in movies, etc., kind of get on my nerves for some reason. Maybe because to me it seems to smack of effort, even desperation. I agree with a previous post - somebody definitely has too much time on their hands.

You are wrong, this case isn't about a UFO appear during a movie. This case is about a director that record a ufo during a movie shot. The UFO doesnt appear in the movie and the director has a lot of credibility because it was always completely out from this kind of thing, it was a famous skeptic here in Italy.

Originally posted by ImShrike

Originally posted by longfade


Alll of these recurring posts about UFOs appearing in movies, etc., kind of get on my nerves for some reason. Maybe because to me it seems to smack of effort, even desperation. I agree with a previous post - somebody definitely has too much time on their hands.

You are wrong, this case isn't about a UFO appear during a movie. This case is about a director that record a ufo during a movie shot. The UFO doesnt appear in the movie and the director has a lot of credibility because it was always completely out from this kind of thing, it was a famous skeptic here in Italy.

Point taken. I was referring more in general than to this specific case but you're right; I did jump the gun w/that comment, I suppose.