Has been labeled 'Video of the Decade" ???

reply to post by oldfattie


i believe this one was already posted and debunked... for much the same reasons... the lack of reaction of the person recording it is pretty astonishing.... for someone that just apparantly watched a plane get swallowed up by a UFO.

The other thing to note... the person who put the video up put NO information whatsoever about when/where/how the video was shot.... and has gone 'missing' when people ask him questions in his comments section.

reply to post by Total Package


i see, thanks for your response

Originally posted by dissembler
A fake? Probably. But ALL UFOs look fake because we have nothing to compare them to.
What does a "real" UFO look like?
How does a "real" UFO move?

It's not like looking at a picture of a CGI car, lets say. With that you would have a point of reference. You know what a real car looks and moves like, so your brain can draw a comparison.

When the day comes when I see a UFO hover about, then disappear in a ball of plasma, I'll come back and have a second look at this, then draw a conclusion

That's not the point, at all.

You don't need to know the object to know it's CGI. Computer graphics are limited (although in recent years they look amazing) and have a lot of thing that give them away immediatly.

You need a very good computer, a super-computer or a set of them to module and ilustrate an advanced effect like water or reflections. Those things you see in movies take years to make and perfection and only now you can see the results from that.

What I'm saying is that you can always spot imperfections... The shapes and angles are too good/bad, the focus around the object in contrast with the background, etc...

Like everything with UFO you need a trained eye for this, but I guess if you play a lot of videogames or if you see a lot of movies, you start to detect those differences.

Having a good cameraman experience also helps, since you would know if the camera is behaving correctly to the object.

Sadly, Youtube helps hoax, since it's lack of image quality actually helps hidding those imperfections... But if life gives you acid limons, make limonade.

[edit on 18/8/09 by Tifozi]

The camera movement appeared much to fluid to be handheld. I do alot of camera work. I am not saying I am an expert but from my experience that's how I see it. Also the ship seemed to be doing a "beauty pass" as they call it in the film industry, just for the camera.

reply to post by oldfattie


Was that an air plane or cloaked saucer that was in trouble
and needed an assist from the rescue saucer.

ED: A saucer in distress would have agents all over it and also
filming. Perhaps most of the UFO videos are not random but
from actual MIB operations.

ED+: Then let out and published with hordes of deniers backing
up the no Tesla craft UFO line of the Illuminati.


[edit on 8/18/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 8/18/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

This video was posted here in August 9, 2008 by Norio Hayakawa as a CGI creation
to ilustrate the TR-3B or Aurora craft.



Originally posted on Youtube by user 2008albert on August 2, 2008 under the title
Could This Be The TR-3B - Govt UFO ASTRA ? it was copied and posted later by many
under different titles as usual. Here is the YouTube original with audio.


Here you may find many of the subsequent copies in this collection.

Its so obviously CGI its not funny , time to move on not even worth discussing

The problem with these videos depicting alleged UFOs is that if the vid is of poor quality and shaky then it's not good enough and a poor fake, and if it's clear and near then it's too good to be true!
I'm a skeptic but I realise the problem genuine UFO researchers have.

reply to post by SwampBoat


They look like B-2 Bomber's.

Video of the decade?

More like hoax of the day.

The simple reason you can tell this is fake, the video camera wouldn't have such a hard time auto focusing on the ship if it was really there. The camera only comes back into focus when the city is in view. This means the original camera footage doesn't contain a flying object in the sky.

Done. Next!