Originally posted by zarp3333
The irony is the people who cry hoax, CGI and photoshop have no more proof than any tin foil hat fanatics.
Linda Howe has published numerous books, runs a website with millions of hits and has been on Coast2Coast many times.
Oh thanks for adding me to your respected foes list because I don't believe anything that comes from Linda Howe.
I have proof that Linda Howe is a FRUAD. She has been caught supporting HOAX's even after they have been proven to be a HOAX. She has been caught
making up false stories just to add content to her website, and sell it to gullible people.... Oh yes I have proof too..
Credentials?! Linda Howe doesn't have any, she lost all credibility LONG AGO. Uninformed people like yourself just haven't been around long enough
to know.
---
Anyway... so you want proof it is a HOAX? I said earlier that all it will take is time. I was busy studying the images last night. Also, the
interview words. All I have right now is some really suspicious stories.
You know how police officers question all the people to find any inconsistencies with their story and the evidence? That's kind of what I did.
Ok lets start with logic first.
1: If you have film of a guy touching a UFO, would you release the video right away in excitement, or would you only release a few key frames, and
then try to profit off the video?
Most people would rush to the computer and upload the entire video A.S.A.P. to tell the world of this once in a lifetime event the world has never
seen... But, that didn't happen.
They have a
MOTIVE already... (suspicious) They are trying to
profit off of the video, by not releasing it. They release a few pictures
for advertisement, then get gullible people to pay to see the video, or get tv studios to buy rights to the video.. It sounds like a crappy business
plan, created by money hungry HOAX profiteers.
2: The story goes like this: """"Andrew seemed to be walking around looking as if he could not see it! So, I called him on my cell phone and
asked him, 'Can't you see the silver craft in front of you?' But Andrew could still not see it!""""
So, Paul was able to see it, and his camera was able to see it, this means it is "visible light". However, Andrew couldn't see it, and neither
could the camera that
he was holding. This is suspicious too...
This most likely means there was nothing next to him, or around him. The object Paul supposedly filmed could easily be off in the distance, further
away from the horizon. Only Paul could see it because he is on a different altitude of land, with a different perspective. Andrew was further away
and could see down the hill more , and just wasn't looking in the same spot because he was on a different altitude land too, and could see down the
hill further than Paul (they had different horizons).
The fact that one could see it, and the camera could see it, but another person closer to it couldn't see it is very suspicious, and is a clue.
What makes me sick is that people will automatically say that it is a "UFO" from "out of this world", and that will automatically give them the
right to make up any pseudo-science they could think of to explain it away. They can make up any excuse in the world with no scientific backing,
because it's "out of this world" and they "probably operate outside of known physics".. It's just a lame excuse really..
3: Then they say this: """"So, Paul began trying to guide Andrew by phone closer and closer to the silver craft above him. At one point, Paul
yells in the phone, "Andrew, you're so close, put your arm up and see if you can feel anything.""""
So if you look at the pictures, what do you think that Andrew is doing with both his hands at first?? They look like they are both in front of him,
like he is holding some type of remote control with both hands. Then look at the picture with his arm in the air. His other arm is still down
further.
It does not look like he is on the phone. Of course he could be using a blue tooth headset, but still, it's a bit suspicious that his
hands appear to be in front of him, doing something. It does not look like he is on the phone. Just another clue to take note of.
4: Then the lie, """"Andrew Pyrka lifted his left arm straight up toward the sky. "Instantly, when I put my arm up, there was a huge jolt of
electrical current that went down my raised arm. I don't think I touched anything solid," he told me, "but I definitely interacted with some kind
of strong field the UFO must have been giving off. But why couldn't I see it where I was, while Paul could not only see it, he videotaped it for
another fifteen minutes?""""
I think this entire quote is a complete fabrication. He says
"I don't think I touched anything solid"... It should read, "I dont think I
TOUCHED anything." Because he didn't touch anything... he just raised is arm and supposedly felt a jolt down his arm. He didn't "touch" with his
fingers. He didn't touch with his "hand".
It's just another exaggerate HOAX with false claims
that even Andrew himself can not prove, not even if he shows a video.
Once again, one can see it, and their camera can see it, but another can't.... VERY GOOD CLUE TO TAKE NOTE OF.
5: Then the fraud Linda Howe says this, """"Back in the mid-1980s after I had produced the TV documentary A Strange Harvest, a man who had worked
for an American intelligence agency told me the U. S. government was well aware that UFOs were of extraterrestrial origin and had a technology that
could deflect photons. He said, "You can have 100 people in a park and this technology can control photons to such a point that only one person out
of the hundred might see a craft right above their heads. That also could explain the cases of people driving cars on a busy freeway and are confused
after stopping to stare at a UFO in the sky that all the other cars keep rushing by."""""
The above quote is most likely the basis of this entire HOAX. Some guy told Linda Howe something, being as gullible as she is, she took it as 100%
truth, and is using it to give some type of false support to this HOAX. This tactic is used by all HOAXers, find anything you can, provable or not,
to support their HOAX.
If you have seen as many HOAXs as myself, you would know the importance of her adding this above quote into the story.
Source:
www.earthfiles.com...
So let's look that first object:
To me it looks like an aircraft (maybe a crop duster) disappearing behind the horizon. Meaning, it is a LOT further away than the horizon. This leads
me to believe that the other object is also a LOT further away than the horizon.
This image above looks more like a "forced perspective". Meaning that Andrew didn't have a clue where the object was in relation to his hand, so
Paul was guiding his hand in the direction,
just so they could get this shot, and make it look like he is touching a "UFO".
Here look at this wikipedia link about
forced perspective.
en.wikipedia.org...
Here is a good example:
I know with out a doubt that this is a HOAX. It is either;
A: CGI
B: Forced perspective of a cloud, or aircraft in the distance.
I'm leaning more towards B.
[edit on 3-8-2009 by ALLis0NE]
...In my opinion if its something that would be
extraordinary such as proof of UFO's or whatever, lets just put the footage out there. Worry about accolades later, this is supposed to be important
stuff. Thanks for the info tho 
