white ufo filmed in HD

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
So still unknown object.
I missed if umbrella was confirmed, guess not.

It is a confirmed umbrella. It was confirmed by finding pictures of the exact location of the area on the internet.

Read these posts:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

However, Maxxsee keeps trying to mislead people and make arguments out of thin air, trying to keep his p.o.s. video alive.

All this could be settled with a quick e-mail or phone call here:

Telefone: +46 522 291 84

www.ulvon.se...

Originally posted by ALLis0NE

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
So still unknown object.
I missed if umbrella was confirmed, guess not.

It is a confirmed umbrella. It was confirmed by finding pictures of the exact location of the area on the internet.

No it has not been confirmed at all. The shape doesn't even match the umbrellas on the porch and no pole is visible. No porch either.

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
However, Maxxsee keeps trying to mislead people and make arguments out of thin air, trying to keep his p.o.s. video alive.

Stop lying dude. It's not cool to give out false accusations.

The kartor.eniro.se does not show the porch and I don't know exactely when it was taken. Maybe it was taken before 2008 maybe not. Further investigation is needed. I have emailed lantmäteriet for this information.

Where did you find the date on the google image map with the porch?
All I see is 2009.

And even if it was built prior to 2008, which is a big if, the question still remains, how come the object seems to be clearly infront of the flagpole?
Why is no pole visible underneath it? Why are the edges of the umbrella angled inwards? Why are no chairs visible etc under the so called umbrella?
View my posts where I ask many questions what haven't been answered yet,
All the questions that haven't been answered:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
other good posts:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by unity:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
umbrella debunked:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
showing the difference between infront and behind:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Meaning even IF the porch would have been there at the time of the filming, although none of the videos shows the porch at all but actually green color all around the area underneath it (suggesting no porch at that spot), the object seems to be infront of the pole. Which would be strange since in 2009 the porch is behind the pole, one would therefore think that the porch would be visible from the angle of filming. Therefore the pole should have been behind the pole also and not infront like many screens shows it to be.
Like these do:
i46.tinypic.com...
i49.tinypic.com...
difference between an object infront and behind:


The questions remain unanswered still.

[edit on 25-11-2009 by maxxsee]

Originally posted by maxxsee
Where did you find the date on the google image map with the porch?
All I see is 2009.

Google Earth shows that information, that's why one of the images posted (and one that you used also) shows at the bottom left the date, 2006.

Edit: this image.



[edit on 25/11/2009 by ArMaP]

[edit on 25-11-2009 by alien]

[edit on 25-11-2009 by alien]

[edit on 25-11-2009 by alien]

reply to post by ArMaP

Where?


[edit on 25-11-2009 by maxxsee]

[edit on 25-11-2009 by alien]

reply to post by maxxsee


What other people do does not allow you to behave against the Terms & Conditions to which you agreed when you joined ATS.

Now, on topic, another thing I forgot to ask: did you made any more videos of that area this summer, or only this one?

reply to post by ArMaP

The footage is before last summer really.
Real summer in sweden is in july/august when the heat arrives.

No that is the only footage I have.
I will have to film the area for sure next time I get up there though!

Originally posted by maxxsee

You've been harrasing me throughout this thread so that comment seems kind of silly coming from you.

I've been harassing you?
Er....ok.

I've been telling you it's fake and an umbrella, if that's what you mean.


I have the excellent ability of smelling a rat....of spotting a BS'er when i see one... and I'm pretty much never wrong.

I've asked you countless times what YOU think the object is that you filmed, but to no avail.
I think it's an umbrella.... and funnily enough... the video analysis agreed with me.
So did ALLisONE, who busted you with his posts... showing the building and the umbrella.

If disagreeing and giving you a hard time for hoaxing, constitutes harassment in your book, then i don't know what to say?


I KNOW you are hoaxing.... absolutely KNOW it.

Just give up mate.

It's over... it's been shown to be an umbrella... get over it.

There is a roadway in FRONT of the house.
See the video as an object/car passes behind the craft/object and
bushes.
Busted.
The craft must be over the lake.
Based on saucer navigate with the best of control the
crew knows someone in the house.


Not a Richard Reich with a saucer hovering over his house harassment
situation but similar indeed. Reich got sick from the pressure waves
and managed to upset the waves. As the saucer fell, all ran off to
help the crew and the camera fell to the ground. All copies of that
footage must be collected up by agents by now.

Originally posted by blupblup
I think it's an umbrella.... and funnily enough... the video analysis agreed with me.

It's ok that you think it's an umbrealla.
The "video anlysist" has been out to bust me, you can tell pretty easily by his attitude (Allistone).
You still haven't answered any of the questions which must mean you are being ignorant. You just assume it is something without answering the questions.
The shape doesn't match.

"If the shoe fits..."

But it doesn't due to the inwards angle.
I have yet to see an umbrella with this shape.

Originally posted by maxxsee
But it doesn't due to the inwards angle.
I have yet to see an umbrella with this shape.

I have yet to see an extraterrestrial craft looking like that, does it mean that it's not a possible explanation for what we see on the video?

And when I say "Google Earth" I mean Google Earth, not Google Maps.

(click for full size)

Originally posted by maxxsee
No it has not been confirmed at all. The shape doesn't even match the umbrellas on the porch and no pole is visible. No porch either.

You should be banned for posting knowingly false information. Your ignorance is off the charts.

1) The shape DOES match! How anyone can say the shape doesn't match is beyond all logic. It's really obvious you are playing dumb....

The only difference is a very slight change of angle. Other than that it is the EXACT proportions! Same height and width! All I had to do is copy the umbrella from the website, and scale it down to size. I didn't have to change width or length independently, I only changed overall scale and it fits nearly perfect. The only thing is the umbrella in your video is slightly rotated and tilted.

The EXACT proportions as the website image is another nail in your coffin.

2) The pole isn't visible because it is WOOD, and DARK BROWN. It is camouflaged into the background! Do you know what camouflage means? You can clearly see in the website images that the pole is dark brown.

Also the pole of the umbrella is so thin, that it doesn't even take up one pixel at the distance you are filming it!

Compare the pole of the umbrella with the pole of the flagpole in the website image and then look at how thin the flagpole is on your video. There is no way the thin umbrella pole would show up!

Do you know anything about digital imaging!?

3) The porch is THERE! I already proved multiple times that the porch was there during the time you shot your video. The porch has been there since 2006! So you are lying again, and posting knowingly false information. You should be banned for such ignorance.

You can't see it in your video because it too is camouflage, and hidden behind bushes, and your video contrast is way too low, it blends with the background.

Get a clue!

Originally posted by maxxsee
Stop lying dude. It's not cool to give out false accusations.

Ive already proven that you have been misleading everyone. I will prove it again too...

Originally posted by maxxsee
The kartor.eniro.se does not show the porch and I don't know exactely when it was taken. Maybe it was taken before 2008 maybe not. Further investigation is needed. I have emailed lantmäteriet for this information.

The porch was there in 2006. Already proved that with dated satellite images. I even showed you video taken in 2008 with the porch! What more do you need?? I proved it multiple times... I investigated as far as you need.... You are just playing dumb now...

Why don't you try e-mailing Ulvon and ask them? Oh I know why, because you will be proven wrong and humiliated, again.

Originally posted by maxxseeWhere did you find the date on the google image map with the porch?
All I see is 2009.

That's because you are using Google Maps... I was using Google Earth. There is a large difference, which I already explained to you a few posts ago but you don't read English I guess.

You click the clock on top, and you select the date you want to view. I select 2006, and it shows a porch. When you set to 2009, it stays on 2006 because they haven't even updated the image since 2006. Google Earth only has an image from 2006 for that area.

Originally posted by maxxsee
And even if it was built prior to 2008, which is a big if, the question still remains, how come the object seems to be clearly infront of the flagpole?

I already proved that the porch was there in 2006, and showed you a video of it in 2008. The porch is there.

The object is not "clearly" in front of the flagpole. It is BEHIND the flagpole, but your lack of knowledge in digital imagery is hurting your ability to see it. YOUR images are not resize correctly so you are being fooled into thinking it is in front. You are misleading people with your incorrectly re sized and digitally altered images.

Also, the flagpole is so thin, and your camera so far away that the flagpole blends into the umbrella. The flagpole is hardly more than 1 pixel wide, causing it to blend into the umbrella. I already explained all this, which you totally ignored AGAIN.

The umbrella is behind the flagpole. I can prove that with RBG color samples.

Originally posted by maxxsee
Why is no pole visible underneath it?

Once again, BECAUSE IT IS DARK WOOD AND THIN, AND YOUR VIDEO IS CRAP QUALITY! You are filming something in a shadow, with horrible lighting, and no zoom, and it is dark brown and thin, and the background is dark too... Did you even look at the images from the website I showed you? The pole of the umbrellas are dark colored, and thin.

Stop playing dumb!

Originally posted by maxxsee
Why are the edges of the umbrella angled inwards?

They aren't. The umbrella is just not in a picture perfect angle that defines the edges perfectly. It is slightly rotated, slightly tilted, and plus the horrible quality of the umbrella at that distance makes the edges blurry!

the quality of the video is CRAP because you didn't zoom in on it. I believe you did that for a reason.

Originally posted by maxxsee
Why are no chairs visible etc under the so called umbrella?

Because they are all dark colored, and camouflage. Did you even look at the images?!?!

Here I'll post it again:

See how hard the chairs are to find? They blend into the background. With a slight change of angle, the whole patio would blend into the background.

Look at the poles of the umbrellas too... see how thin they are? Now imagine the camera was the same distance as your video, they wouldn't even be able to show up on the camera because they are smaller than 1 pixel. Plus they are dark colored.

If you don't understand any of this, you are a lost cause. I also think you should be removed from this forum.

Originally posted by maxxsee
View my posts where I ask many questions what haven't been answered yet,

Ive answered all your questions, you just keep ignoring them. You are playing dumb, and or don't know how to read, and I keep repeating myself.

Originally posted by maxxsee
Meaning even IF the porch would have been there at the time of the filming, although none of the videos shows the porch at all but actually green color all around the area underneath it (suggesting no porch at that spot), the object seems to be infront of the pole. Which would be strange since in 2009 the porch is behind the pole, one would therefore think that the porch would be visible from the angle of filming. Therefore the pole should have been behind the pole also and not infront like many screens shows it to be.

I already proved the porch was there in 2006, 2007, and 2008. So that proves your video is such sucky quality that the entire porch is hidden.

The angle you took the video also hides most of the porch behind a huge bush. The porch is partially sunken into the ground, and dark colored wood that blends with the dark background. Your video has bad lighting, and no zoom, and all the detail is lost because of pixelation.

The umbrella is BEHIND the flagpole, but you have fooled yourself thinking it is in front because of your crappy resizing and zooming skills.

None of that should even be an issue because we have proven the existence of umbrellas near the flagpole at the exact location that you took a picture of something that looks like an umbrella next to a flagpole. Do you even understand how absurd your arguments are because of that??

I can't help but think you are pretending to be clueless.


[edit on 25-11-2009 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by ArMaP

There is a first for everything..
mathildasweirdworldweblog.files.wordpress.com...

Ok if that is correct then the porch was there 2006. I have emailed lantmäteriet about this so they should reply with a similar answer.

I still can't believe how that wasn't visible though on neither of the 2 videos. That is beyond me. It will be interesting to see when I film the place next year. I will post the new video then.

reply to post by ALLis0NE

I disagree. See my post above, the difference between infront and behind are very clear in my comparison screen.
In many screens the object is infront of pole no matter what you say. You are out on a personal mission to try to bust me so I don't care what you type, it is so noneobjective anyways.

No need to use bold text either. Do you think you are better than everyone else?
Oh you changed the bold text. Good for you. Now it is underlined instead...

edit: And NO it definately doesn't match, LoL
You are entitled to your oppinion though.
Watch this:

i49.tinypic.com...
See how the shape doesn't match the inwards angle AT ALL ?

www.hauserrentalservice.com...

You are being ignorant if you are trying to suggest they look the same.

And no, you haven't answered all my questions. See the link to my previous post with the 8 questions. The "why chairs not visible" answer I might accept though. Not the others, atleast not yet.

edit:
Took some new screens in .png format and NO visual enhancement effects. This is the raw screen taken from the original:
i47.tinypic.com...
just zoom added:
i45.tinypic.com...
Conclusions:
i45.tinypic.com...
[edit on 25-11-2009 by maxxsee]

[edit on 25-11-2009 by maxxsee]

reply to post by maxxsee


The photo you believe shows the flag pole behind the umbrella only looks that way because you resized the image incorrectly, thereby blurring the image and removing fidelity. The colors of the flagpole and umbrella are too similar and they blended together when you (incorrectly) resized the image.

Not sure how many other ways someone can say it.

Reading comprehension = success.

Ok, I didn't read all 30 pages of this thread, but I think Allistone has got the explanation. I have a question for you though, you say you've filmed small whit objects doing coplete 180 turns, yet you say THIS is your best video? A video of an inanimate white object that doesn't even flinch once. How long did you film it for? Can I see the original, un-edited clip (The one without the added zoom-ins and sounds)? Also, how are you so god damn sure that the object's angle is going inwards? It is wayy too far and blurry to tell, no matter how close you zoom in. By the way, where can I find your other 'UFO' videos? I'd love to see and compare them to this one. Oh and another question, if it is front of the flagpole, what difference does it make? Couldn't the flagpole be located behind the porch anyways? (Sorry if this one has already been answered, like I said, I didn't read all 30 pages).

Thank you for any kind of response.

-Jimmy-

They say this umbrella's pole was crafted.... by Jesus himself. We know he was a carpernter and just before his death/Crucifiction, he crafted this pole and and used some of his holy blood in the process.

Why, it's the umbrella of destiny!