It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Capturing the Light, The Story Of Dorothy Izatt (2007)

page: 12
108
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
UFO Radio interview with Frank Longo (Director of Capturing the light) / 2 hours

The Big Show interview with Frank Longo

Paracast Radio show interview w/ Frank Longo






[edit on 20-7-2009 by ThInGS Ar3 NoT WHaT Th3y ]




posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by anyone
reply to post by TurkeyBurgers
 


As I said in an earlier post I own the book and the DVD.

There are also many posts of evidence within this thread and the the three other threads that already exist on ATS that show more pieces to Dorothy's puzzle.

One poster a few pages back posted many of the single frames from her footage.

Also someone posted the youtube clip that is extracted from the Unsolved Mysteries show.

There is also another thread on ATS inquiring about why the episode on Dorothy Izatt that UFO Hunters advertised that was already to have aired never actually aired.

Also Johnny Anonymous interviewed her and Frank Longo.

There is also a podcast with both Peter Guttilla (author of the book) and Frank Longo (director of the doc.).

Am I missing anything?

All of this is found here on ATS.


Can you tell us anything else she might have indicated about the beings or the craft or anything at all that was in the book that was not mentioned in this thread? I am interested in trying to find some kind of evidence besides a weird looking film from SOMETHING that is very far up in the sky.

Also if you could post a link to the interview of her by Johnny Anonymous I would appreciate it.

And yes apparently you did miss the part in my thread where I mentioned "interviews with Dorothy". Interviews with the movie producer are not what we need here. We need to find some evidence that Dorothy has to substantiate her claim besides this footage of something very high up in the sky.

Single frames from her film are still from her film of something very high up in the sky!

That is AGAIN trying to say that EVERYTHING she says is true BECAUSE WE HAVE STRANGE SQUIGGLES ON FILM!

You MISSED THE RUB my friend!

You made the giant leap over the grand canyon from Something strange very high up in the sky on film to intergalactic telepathic existing since the beginning of time inter dimensional light beings bearing the message of God.

There exists a pretty large gap that you seem to be skipping right past.

Slow down a little bit. Getting excited over a very unique film does NOT present evidence of Intergalactic inter dimensional light beings bearing the message of God.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Seems the original link to the video is gone..

I just found a free version though, although obviously illegal for me to post it here.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TurkeyBurgers
 


The entire affair is a hoax. None of this footage is by any means 'unexplainable'....rather somewhat convincing special effects. After all the documentary is a well-made commercial film and obviously the family needs to act in a 'highly credible convincing manner' to sell the sordid affair.

In this day and age nothing on film should be trusted. its like saying the final scene in 'Knowing[' is convincing. What needs to be looked at is the credibility of wintesses. If they are all from one family plus associates they have a vested joint interest. Random groups of regular people are what should always be looked for.

A credible UFO story in my view would be the School in South Africa or JAL 1986....not Dorothy Izzat,

Years of my own UFO research have shown that multiple contactees are a notion that is absolute rubbish. They are just people who are trying to imply they are special because aliens take an interest in them. Nothing more and nothing less. Its a very sad delusion.



[edit on 20-7-2009 by --1]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by CUBD1
 


I agree %100....but many non-skeptics tend to by conned and overlook the very large clues that suggest say Izzat is a fraud.

Impled credibibily means nothing at all. Obviously those that spend considerable dollars producing such hoaxes give ample thought to how to present the affair in the most believable credible manner...don't you get that?

You fail to see that it is you that can't think outside the box. This nonsense delusion that certain people notable for nothing in particular are infact special has been around for a while...it is unlikely that advanced beings would pander and encourage such tragic cr-p.




[edit on 20-7-2009 by --1]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
DOROTHY IZATT by Graham Conway
I believe Graham Conway was one of the 1st people to investigate her claims, not sure though...



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Well Let's See........
~We have astonishing visuals.
~We have multiple witnesses.
~Witnesses seem to be viable, and credible.
~photographer herself in no way appears incapacitated.
~She does not seem to invite publicity.
~Material is not debunked by professionals.
~Photographer's reputation is vouched for by those who
know her well.

Folks, it looks like we have a winner.

What is the grand prize? who knows? The assessments of what they are are purely her own, so that introduces maybe too much subjectivity into that aspect of the evaluation. But nonetheless, there are entities there, I do believe, and they certainly don't appear to be of this earth.

That's my two.


[edit on 7/20/0909 by ladyinwaiting]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Bunk/Debunk


Originally posted by --1
The entire affair is a hoax. None of this footage is by any means 'unexplainable'....rather somewhat convincing special effects. After all the documentary is a well-made commercial film and obviously the family needs to act in a 'highly credible convincing manner' to sell the sordid affair.

Am I a prophet for predicting the nature and logical foundation of your argument and many others in this thread?

You decide.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ladyinwaiting
 


There is nothing to debunk....the whole affair is contrived. Why would those promoting it provide any debunking and no one serious actually bothers looking at the event. Dont you get that...the whole offering is hoax....its not really a genuine documentary. Its fake from the word go.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
~Material is not debunked by professionals.

Keep in mind most of those professionals are involved with the dvd because they have written books about her and go on to interview her on other shows…

sounds like some sweet old lady captures some weird but probably explainable footage, then a bunch of "researchers" group together and cash in on it



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I am reading the Google Books preview and it says on page 24 I quote

"If only I had proof of all this, some way to share my experiences with others, some way that nobody can deny or say that I am dreaming or imagining things."

From elsewhere an answer came "We will give you proof."

Page 24 fro the link that ThInGS Ar3 NoT WHaT Th3y posted.

books.google.com... book_result&ct=result&resnum=11

Unfortunately the proof is in the pudding as they say. A big glob of Chocolate Light Squiggle WAY up in the sky.

Perhaps these light beings need to study the Optics involved with the human eye and how far our eye is capable of zooming?

But wait Dorothy could INDEED communicate with the light beings!

Couldn't Dorothy use her Mind to Communicate with the light beings and ask them to fly JUST A WEEEEEE bit closer?

After all she claims to have been able to do EXACTLY THAT where ask the beings to maneuver for her as is indicated on page 15 where she says and I quote...

"Could you please send them around again? That was wonderful! Will you do it one more time?".

But she could not say Could you please maneuver within a shorter distance for some close up footage?

"Any sufficiently badly-written science is indistinguishable from magic." -Aaron Allston



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


I am actually not a skeptic at all, I just happen to think this particular affair is a fraud.....thats all. I believe many many others are real.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I've never actually been really in on the UFO thing, and rarely visit these threads. But sometimes, it is possible, that what you see is what you get.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Acts Of Faith

reply to post by --1
 

I think you missed my point. You're entitled to ignore or believe whatever you want, of course, but I thought you might find it interesting that your argument has already been debunked on logical grounds.

Thus your own claim of "hoax" is itself shown to be a "hoax". Oh the irony.

If you want to ignore that too, you may do so, of course, but it is a rather curious strategy to choose.

Just sayin'



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Oh wow I am reading the blog that ThInGS Ar3 NoT WHaT Th3y posted and it talks about how Dorothy is a ...drum roll please......

-Psychic
-Palm Reader
-Is able to see human and plant auras
-Predict by touch alone what is on the underside surface of a marked card
-Can detect colors by the warmth that is released from their surface
-Astral traveler

"For instance, a few years ago her fame for accuracy at palm reading spread at her place of work to such an extent that associates, including management, were lined up at her desk for readings."

ufoexperiences.blogspot.com...

Ok I feel really ridiculous for having spent so much time researching this. I am completely convinced this woman is a Fraud and a scam artist.

I feel bad for anyone who lost money to her purchasing her Book or Movie.

Bon Voyage to this thread. I consider it to have officially been

MYTH BUSTED


[edit on 20-7-2009 by TurkeyBurgers]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers

We have NO footage of the communications between herself and the beings, we have NO footage of the beings themselves up close, we have NO footage of the "Crafts" up close.

Just lights at a distance.

This is where you dear reader come in. You and you alone must make the leap from Video Footage of strange lights far up in the sky to the Story that Mrs. Izatt tells without any footage validate her explanation of the lights. You dear reader are expected to take on good will her word of mouth account of what exactly these lights are and connect the two.

Strange lights in the sky recorded on film ------------Leaps to -------------
Everything that Dorothy Izatt explains that the lights are.



It is unfortunately ALWAYS the case with UFOs and ETs, just blurry lights in the sky or 2 red eyes in the bushes.

In my 30 years of following ufo cases i have never, i repeat, never ever found/see clear evidence whatsoever of a genuine spacecraft of alien origin. Even in the past 10 years where we have high quality cameras, numerous tv station's trucks wandering everywhere for the news etc. No one has ever come up with a clear , in a close distance of a ufo where we could see markings, edges, size colors, with point of references etc.

As with ET beings it's even worse there's no footage worthy of watching either.



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


Hold on.....this is a profit making documentary made by a company of dubious credentials. It has no reason to objectively portray the facts it can spin things anywhich way it likes. Nothing I said has been debunked in anyway. I have looked at the footage and think it is homemade special effects myself and highly unremarkable.

[edit on 20-7-2009 by --1]



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
The Myth Of Myth Busting


Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
MYTH BUSTED

O RLY? And how did anything you pointed out actually disprove anything?


Do your own prejudices regarding psychic phenomena actually constitute some form of proof? Can you point out the logical foundation for your conclusion?

I can point out at least one important fallacy in your line of reasoning that casts reasonable doubt on your claims.

Isn't that worth considering?

Again, just sayin'



posted on Jul, 20 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


I actually work as a psychic and my psychic feeling is that Izzat is a fraud, I am not questioning the truth of psychic phenomena.



new topics

top topics



 
108
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join