UFO in Spain

And the landing gear or whatever those things are called.



But that is easily changed after, they just have to paint it over, much easier than creating a whole helicopter.

Many of the things you say may have been as we saw in the original video in a different take, you shouldn't expect that they went to all that trouble and made just one take, right?

I think the splash is also fake, there are several things that do not look right with it.

Didn't you saw this part of the video, near the end?

Hasty cover up are my thoughts exactly.
After reading some things about aliens, Dulce NM, and the like, I don't want anyone to beam me up. I'm going to the islands, get me a job and watch the boob tube as it all comes apart. This thing (the entire conspiracy realm) has layers and layers and layers of crud both true, half true and flat out "WTF?' - too many for me anyway. I, to be honest, never wanted to believe the aliens are out to get us, nor do I wish to believe the government is out to get us too.
But then why are we on ATS anyway? Please tell me.

reply to post by zaiger

---

Then I guess I misinterpreted what you meant with your post.

Correct me if I'm wrong but where were there trees on the water? Are you paying attention? Really..

Oh wow, well done in debunking this one guys

Dissapointing that it was a hoax, but its good to see that we are actually doing the real UFO community a service

reply to post by DaWhiz

---

I am paying attention and I know that there are no trees in the Atlantic ocean, at least in that condition, but I know that it's easy (for those that know how to use the right tools) to take the jets from a scene like that and add them to another, so there is no need to "scramble" any jets.

PS: there is no need to quote the entire post, you should delete the part that does not directly apply and leave only the part that you are replying to, the thread is easier to read that way.

reply to post by DaWhiz

---

Again, view the original, so called 'FAKE' footage.

width="445" height="364"> "http://www.youtube.com/v/v2wauxK8RKA&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364">

Please show me trees!

reply to post by DaWhiz

---

I see I was not clear enough (again).

There are no trees on the original video because they were probably removed from that scene from which I posted an image.

In the same way they can add a fake UFO and (probably) a fake splash, they can add a real scene from somewhere else (in this case the two jets) in any way they want, with the two jets closer or farther away, higher or lower, etc.

But look at the footage of those jets and please try to fit them frame by frame into the tiny, not so well pix elated jets in the original 'fake' one.' There is only so much CGI is gonna do for you.
Oh and sorry, I was trying to re-post the thread video & I don't want to ruin peoples post. My apologies.

The "splash" is obviously fake as has been mentioned and proven by several posters already.

This video has clear amateur editing scars, clear amateur errors of water animation, clear errors in sound editing. Even more - it has been admitted as a hoax and even the making of has been made public!

What else do you need to realise that this is a hoax?

Blind belief leads nowhere.

Yes, but the "How it was done" video is a highly compressed version, and if the camera that filmed the jets had a higher resolution then, although we see them with the same size they had more data to work with, so they could make a good video.

The experiments I made with altering photos were done like that, getting a slightly better version to work with then reduce the quality of the whole image to make the better looking part look as bad as the rest.

And I could be wrong, I am interpreting the inclusion of that scene in the "how it was done" video as meaning that this was the one used, but I don't have any way of knowing it.

If we could get the people who did the video on ATS would be great, but very unlikely...

No problem.

reply to post by ArMaP

---

So there we have it, another fake that had most of us up in arms (including me) saying this is real! well thats the last time im going to believe any footage until proven otherwise. I know it seems the disinfo agents are working, but im just sick an tired of being dragged along by fakers.


Great work ArMap and congrats on becoming moderator.

And who would the "disinfo agents" be in this case? Everyone who suggested it was a hoax was correct.

reply to post by DelMarvel

---

the disinfo agents being the motherfu**ers that made it! get me now?
2nd line

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but what specifically about that video convinced you it was real?

I'm not saying you should have known it was a fake, either. There is a third alternative to "I'm convinced it's real" and "I'm convinced it's fake" -- and that alternative is "I don't know if it is real or if it is fake".

I just don't understand why you would be "up in arms" convinced that this video was real. I saw nothing in the video that would prove to me it was real, Granted, I also originally saw nothing that would prove it was fake, either -- that is, until I read the ATS member posts debunking it. Although I, too, thought some things looked "wrong" (such as the splash).

Videos such as this should not be originally considered "real until proven fake" or even "fake until proven real" -- their authenticity should be simply "unknown until evidence shows it to be either real or fake".

This is where the job of the good skeptic is shown to be crucial. They want to view all of the evidence and possible explanations before coming to a conclusion about a UFO report's authenticity.


[edit on 10/8/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

www.youtube.com...

How is this getting so much interest? It's fake.

reply to post by SolPower

---

Better yet... why are you bumping a thread no one has posted on for 16 days - especially if just to claim it is fake when it has already been moved to the HOAX! forum long ago?

Sorry master, just saw it had 32 pages