It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


UFO in Spain

page: 25
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 02:00 PM
Khan, I believe what you are saying, just one question though: On video cameras, is it possible that it can record sound in more than one way? I'm not very savvy on video equipment, and less so on the audio bits. So... could a video camera have noise canceling features, or anything else, that could produce sound that is both mono and stereo in the same clip?

I still don't believe this is a hoax. I think this a viral bit of marketing for something we've not heard about yet. Seems far, far too much work just for a few hits on youtube.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by fleabit

The problem is in part that....

This was claimed to be a clip due to be shown on TV. Therefore it would be perfectly acceptable and for that matter, common practice to have edited the audio track.

I noted that, the second link to the supposedly, original footage, that the sound is, indeed very different. it is horribly overloaded, as one would expect from a camcorders mics.

Anyway what would happen in the editing suite would be this...
They would have to, if it is to be broadcast in stereo, make the sound of the jets commensurate with their movement for showing. the dialogue has been rendered to what is called dual mono, this o done, more often than not, to tidy it up and make it far stable and audible on your typical tv set...

It would seem, what they have done is, produced a final audio file where the dual mono of the speech and the stereo of the jets and helicopter have been combined bounced to one track which is, impart stereo, in other parts dual mono..

The waters are futher muddied by what i pointed out before. Some camcorders sold as stereo, when using the inbuilt flush mounted mics are, effectively dual mono. That is, the mics themselves, are so poor there is virtually no stereo separation at all. The only time the exhibit any real *stereo* is when something extremely loud appears from the far left or right of the sound stage..

[edit on 1-10-2009 by FireMoon]

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by krystalice

we are working in the same compagny its a video game compagny
and this is what he does with his team he gave me an answer from a msn communicator software style and after we went out for a smoke

but he know what he does since he his doing that job editing all year long 60 hrs a week so if i have a video that i need to debunk he is the person i go see.. so i cannot provide any link for his reply sorry and im not sure he even know the ATS site maybe i will tell him to come on this site so he can debunk all the video that we have doubt on it

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 04:03 PM
That would be really good if the guy can do that...

Look, let's be clear about this. ATS is as much about explaining to people why fakes are fakes in language everyone can understand as it it is about trying to show why something is genuine.

What is pointless is saying things like..Oh its a fake, obviously CGI and not giving any reasoning.

It's worth remembering that, every day, people who might not know anything about how fakes are constructed, or what to look out for, join this forum, or read the forum. it is pure bad manners to make some pronouncement , from on high, without attempting to justify it.

The irony is that. Many of the people who are so quick to make such posts would be the first to charge in and demand evidence if people were to just post. It's obviously real and leave it at that..

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 04:09 PM
Does everyone know why people just start saying it's fake it's fake?
becasue there is nothing left to say we are on page 25 of a thread that was debunked before page 10. There were sound errors there were video errors this was bad CGI nothing more, so all i have to say is
It's fake
It's fake
It's fake

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 04:13 PM
According to Niburu, a Dutch conspiracy/ufo/2012 site the video was originally posted at the site of Terra, a Spanish newspaper and the newspaper claims that they had to removed it due to outside pressure.
Can someone verify that? I find not a very reliable source, but the video does have the logo of that newspaper. I hope someone who understands Spanish and has the time to search the site of the newspaper for more information.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 05:13 PM
I really was hoping this was real.

But you can tell they did a bad job on the jet noise as it does a quick cut as opposed to fading out.

The sound just stops pretty blatently

sad that makes me

[edit on 1-10-2009 by lozenge]

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by Erich Kemper

They (Terra) have that explanation on their site, saying that they took down the video but then decided to put it back, I think there's a post somewhere in the thread about it.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 05:56 PM
I just found a news-report. ATS needs a translator!

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 06:50 PM
reply to post by ArMaP
Hi ArMap,
I was elsewhere and just catching up on this thread, and there are a lot of repeat posts,(I suppose it comes with the territory) anyway I wanted to ask if the Audacity programme uses compression, and if so, is it predetermined or adjustable for the user?


posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 06:56 PM
For me this thread is INCREDIBLE.


Because its been a fast 25 pages of people who are hell bent on saying its FAke.

Hell even the boat and the guys are fake, because I AM AN EXPERT, I KNOW SPANISH I tambien me cago en la hostia And also I know my way around recording equipment.

Heck Why NOT?

Its Sad when people are not open to any other input, maybe even stupid remarks or out of the box thinking, but sadly I see that ATS its bullying and turning genuine questions into a joke or makin fun of other members.

Now I know spanish and to me the video is real. Because the news woman goes a looong way into trying to discredit the video and telling its fake, then uses a complete NOOB to "explain" everyday Joe and Jane why its fake and the guy even fails to notice the objects coming from the supposedly UFO, and also he fails to explain the overload on the camera.

I know a lot of cameras and we sell alot on my store and alot of them have overload limit, other not, other use a simple compresion of the bandwidth, also we dont know what brand of camera it is maybe it one of those pesky Canon DV that have the stereo mics in front and very close to each other and they tend to cancel out a lot of info.
They even show a UFO that the declare its real and how it looks like in the same area!!! WTF.

In my case the jury is still out, I know if somebody gave me this video Id inmediatelly put it in Final Cut Pro and proceeed to clean it up and make the sound better in case of overload or saturation.

But hey I am only a person open to questioning all, if I had all the answers I would not be here, since what would I care.

My 2 pesos

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:19 PM
reply to post by Erich Kemper

That's the same video that was posted on the previous page by Concept X, and there was also a translation made by Spinotoror.

And ATS has several voluntary translators, you can see the list on the UFO-Alien Applied Linguistics Registry.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:25 PM
reply to post by kix

This video IS incredible.
It's not everyday we see a UFO being chased by military jets.
The complete translation on an earlier page makes it even more
credible. I think it's real.
Others on this thread are sure it's 100% fake and demanding
it be labeled a fake.
That sounds like a red flag to me.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:27 PM
I am sorry, but the attempts to "debunk" this have been circumstancial at best. Much like many others posted on here over the years. Posting a ufo video on this site is like dropping a side of beef in shark infested waters.

Kill kill kill!!!!!

Kill this video right away.

The vid looks authentic to me. Despite the sounds and blurs and other possible imperfections. A fisherman on a boat, with a run of the mill camera. Well this can produce all kinds of anomolies.

I was in Portugal/Azores last year out on the water taking some vids myself with a canon powershot and with all the birds and planes and boats etc. The audio was like a car wreck.

Anyway, one thing about the vid I found interesting is the way the guy filming seems to put the cam down(but not off) when the chopper appears, almost like he doesn't want to be seen filming.

If this vid is fake it is a very high end fake.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:37 PM
reply to post by PowerSlave

Using your logic, the movie "SpeedRacer" is a accurate representation of real car handling.

If I say that the cars in the movie/cartoon don't represent the real handling of a would say that's circunstancial?

With all due respect, but anyone that believes those fighters in the movie are real, doesn't know anything about aviation.

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:41 PM
reply to post by kix
Hi Kix,
(sorry about the greeting)
anyway that is why I was asking ArMap about that Audacity programme, I think it may use compression, maybe imputable. Most if not all video cameras also will use compression for both picture and audio, but it is the audio that strangely enough that is the biggest issue in this thread.The jets' engine sound could well have been clipped by the in-processor on the camera at the jets' engine sounds near their lowest point. ArMaps programme may have added to that effect, Just a thought.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by smurfy]

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:44 PM
I'd be cautious there... There's a classic incident from a training exercise that involved the Brits acting as the "Bogeys" versus an American surface fleet plus air support...

The Americans lost every single ship without firing a shot because the totally and utterly outdated British Buccaneers flew in at wave top level from several directions and *blew them out of the water* before they even had a weapons lock on the Brit aircraft. The Americans complained after that it *wasn't fair* as the Brits cheated by flying like that as it was not their accepted practice..

Just because the American air force doesn't do it, doesn't mean others don't..

[edit on 1-10-2009 by FireMoon]

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:52 PM
reply to post by smurfy

As far as I know, no program uses compression when working with the audio, if the file had the audio compressed then the audio is decompressed first, so what we ear and see is the decompressed audio, but this decompression does not compensate for the loss of data from the compression (unless it was a lossless compression method, but I don't know if there is any).

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 08:02 PM
reply to post by PowerSlave

One thing to keep in mind.
The aliens have the technology to cloak their spacecraft
by bending light around them with gravity waves.
That means they are seen only when they want to be seen.
What we are seeing is an alien airshow.
The message is "We are here."

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 08:03 PM
reply to post by FireMoon

Your scenario:

An exercise, without using live ammunation, with only lock-on signals, against a known and allied practice-enemy, against known technology, avoiding using "classic" tactics, because the practice-enemy knows them, and ending all in a funny dinner.

The scenario on the video (what it seems):

Two jets, that look like F-18's, fly in a kamikaze way against a target that they don't know, or at least, are not that familiar with. They can't fire missiles because they are too close and too fast to make a lock-on, and even the angle of attack isn't that great.

If they fire missiles, by some lucky chance, they are going so close and fast to the "target" that they couldn't avoid the explosion, meaning, that day you could have 3 air targets down, instead of just the UFO.

If they fire the gun, the debris jumping from the target could get in the engines, or the fuselage, and bring the fighters down.

Even when attacking ships they are carefull and don't get too close.

And if they were observing... Well... that's not a very effictive way of observing, isn't it?

new topics

top topics

<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in