Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

white ufo filmed in HD

page: 31
12
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by maxxsee
 


Every time I leave this thread, I get pulled back in.

Max, you ignored everything AllisOne said. You have nothing left. You're asking questions that have been answered again and again, and while normally I'd be very gracious in knowing it takes someone with English as a second language (Swedes more than others, you guys are amazingly bad at it), if you'd actually taken the time to think about what was said rather than how to "beat" it, you'd realize what they were saying.

Here's a recap:
- The flagpole is in front, AllisOne has proven that in his analysis through proper resize techniques (which you are not using) and RGB testing (which you've also not used).
- The flagpole is only slightly wider than 1 pixel wide, which means the umbrella pole would be less than 1 pixel. Less than 1 pixel + dark coloring means it will not show up. Ever. No matter how much you zoom improperly.
- The porch is both behind plants, dark colored, and in shadow. It is also small enough to be considered likely less than 1 pixel. It will never show up on your video, even though it really is there.
- The exact establishment has been found, and proven to be where it is, with the accessories that were expected. That would include a flagpole, umbrellas, and a porch.
- You're not actually reading this, and will either ignore it, or ask exactly the same questions you've already asked, and were answered multiple times over many pages already.

You're taking this personally, and you shouldn't be. Nobody here is debunking you, just your umbrella. You've got other videos of things making 180 degree turns. Make a new thread and let's all enjoy those as well. They have to be better than this.

You've also not mentioned passing the raw video off to a media outlet yet. Why haven't you done that?




posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by EsSeeEye
 


Perfect recap..


You can add this to the reasons the flagpole is difficult to see on top of the umbrella:



It is out of focus, and out of focus objects tend to dilate and become transparent.

Pretend the stem of the plant image on the right is the flagpole.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
You were wrong by analysing the pictures, you should have tried the analyse the footage first.

By judging from the pics and with my lack of knowledge in images analysis I was convince that the "ufo" was in fact in front of the flagpole but when reading people saying it was behind it and we couldn't see it because of the bad manipulation I decided to watch the vid again and I've been surprised to, in fact, seen it BEHIND the flagpole, you have to watch closely because it is not clear but you can definitely see it, it is just a kind of optical illusion because of the pixels.

Also at the beginning of the video, around the 5 first second, we can see one person with a white shirt walking from that place to the house and another one just few meters behind with darker clothes, if it wasn't an umbrella that was there then they would have certainly see it.

Thanks to ALLisONE for his/her(dunno you personally
) investigation and maxxsee just face it, I can understand it annoy you very very much but it is not an alien space craft in your footage.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ufopunx
 


I think the video action should be looked at.
Max's craft and pole picture looks like the craft is in front and
possible over the lake.

Going for right to left was a speedy white object that is apparently
a white car on the roadway behind the craft.

If the UFO craft is an accepted fact or possibility then the mind
says different than those of opposing views.

That seems to be the situation.
Other than some one taking a photo or video and seeing something
unusual.

For a possible craft side the skies might be full of UFOs night and
day and not be surprised.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Max's craft and pole picture looks like the craft is in front and
possible over the lake.



Maxxsee's craft and pole picture is FAKE, and he doesn't realize it. When he enlarges the picture, his image editing software is adding pixels that were not originally there.

The original video is 1920 pixels wide, and 1080 pixels high. That is all the information the camera physically captured and created.



That means the "ufo" umbrella is only 27 pixels wide, and 10 pixels high.

27 x 10 = 270 pixels total




There is only ONE way to enlarge the above image and still keep the original data (27 x 10 pixels). They call it the "pixel re-size" method. This method will keep the original 27 x 10 pixels and just make them bigger.

Like this:


Count the squares in the image above....

There is 27 horizontal squares, and 10 vertical squares, which is 270 squares total. This is EXACTLY what the camera captured and created...

However, the image is now 512 pixels wide and 190 high, with a total of 97280 pixels. Now 19x19 pixels equals ONE original pixel from the camera.

That is the correct way to do it.

Maxxsee is doing it the incorrect way.

Maxxsee is not using "pixel re-size", and is instead using a type of "smart size" which ADDS computer generated pixels, that didn't come from the camera, in order to make it "smoother". It "blends" the squares together, and creates colors that were never there to begin with. This means his computer is altering the original data, making the image FAKE. The detail you see is FAKE.

He is doing it like this:



The above image is the same size as the image above it, 512 x 190.

However, you can no longer recognize the 27 x 10 original squares from the camera. It is now blended, and the color is altered. The image is technically a FAKE. It is computer generated and can NOT be used for analysis because the computer created it, not the camera.

Hope that makes sense...

Here it is again, enlarged the correct way:


To me, it is clearly BEHIND the flagpole.


[edit on 25-11-2009 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Max...once and for all....this is why it gets the shape with the angled sides you keep having as arguments.




[edit on 25-11-2009 by Akezzon]



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
This thread is a disinformation embarrassment, I'm amazed it's been allowed to go on this long. Can someone please move this to hoax?

Nothing like proving that those who follow UFOs can seriously discuss an umbrella to the point of over 30 pages of discussion, and an astounding array of satellite imagery, supporting photos, and detailed breakdown of a stupid flagpole and a stupid umbrella.

If the OP were an agent of some kind, he would have just earned a raise. Please stop feeding this nonsense folks.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
This thread is a disinformation embarrassment, I'm amazed it's been allowed to go on this long.


Well, it did unite skeptics and believers alike, so that's a good thing.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
reply to post by EsSeeEye
 


Perfect recap..


You can add this to the reasons the flagpole is difficult to see on top of the umbrella:



It is out of focus, and out of focus objects tend to dilate and become transparent

Wow, that is interesting. It does become transparent when out of focus.
You learn something new every day.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I think the video action should be looked at.
Max's craft and pole picture looks like the craft is in front and
possible over the lake.

Thanks.

I actually think ppl are blind who claim it is behind after watching my screens. Watch my latest .png conclusion image. It can't get any more obvious than that.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TallWhites
Wow, that is interesting. It does become transparent when out of focus.
You learn something new every day.

Only the edges are sharp, not fuzzy.
Look at the sharp edge to the right, that says it too.

The comparison infront and behind:
i47.tinypic.com...
The conclusion (raw image, no enhancements):


Also note, it depends on WHERE you take the screen in the video. Later half of movie shows it always to be infront. This is odd in itself that it seems to vary.

The edges inwards rule out a normal umbrella too. Also see the sharp edge right over pole.

It looks to be infront of pole for sure.

[edit on 26-11-2009 by maxxsee]



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Look, you shoud say "thank you" to ALLis0NE just for trying to bring you back to reality. He has been even TOO NICE, of course way more helpful than i did, because while i KNEW that you were a troll, i didn't want to give you the satisfaction to waste my time to prove that you were, and it's plenty of analysis made by me here, including Apollo missions images, not crap like yours, that are meaningless and that no one will remember next month: after 30 pages, i have been proven MORE than right.
Anyway, regarding both the questions about the pole being in front/behind and the trees being in front/behind, here you go:

THIS has been extracted straight from your HD video, unaltered, just brightened, and it was done with a forensic tool (don't ask which one, it's time to SHUT UP for you [for the other fella the info is available,u2u me] ).
Your "enhancements" are pure GARBAGE, because the only way to enlarge anything caught indirectly by a charge-coupled device is the pixel resize, as also has been pointed out before, and the reasons are even more than the ones that ALLis0NE kindly and professionally pointed out to you. I swear, i would have stopped him, but i know that is plenty of people here so intelligent to LEARN from this thread: this is why i've decided to don't stop him. He has debunked your crock, devistated your claims, reduced you at the status of some troll whatsoever trying desperately to get some attention, which confirms what i've said at page # 2.
And you know what? We are prepared to you next attacks, our skin is ticker than you can ever imagine. Trolls are what we eat for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
Now, enjoy your semi-pseudo-life



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Yes it LOOKS LIKE in front but it is, for me, behind it, it is an optical illusion.

Can you tell when in the video we can see a car?
I've seen two object, one from the left to the right(0:28) and one from the right to the left(1:36), they both are obviously a bird and the second one is flying in front of it and not behind it, what rule out the possibility of it being a car, car doesn't fly(yet) and flap their wings.

Is there an third object I did not seen?




Originally posted by internos
Trolls are what we eat for breakfast, lunch and dinner.



uUUuMmmmhhhhhh yummy troll


[edit on 11/26/09 by ufopunx]



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
So, we've all come to the conclusion Max is either heavily drugged/delusional/or a Troll. Wouldn't it be best not to feed him anymore? If we don't reply, he might just go away.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 

I already told you. It depends on WHERE you take the screen.
My screen is UNDEDITED too and that shows the object clearly infront.

See my last post with the sharp edge photo.
The inwards angles STILL don't match an umbrella, I've posted images of this too.

You can be ignorant all you want, it doesn't change the fact the object is infront and that it doesn't look like an umbrella due to the inwards angles and no pole.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by maxxsee
 


Have fun in Camp Denial, Max. See ya'll next week!



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ufopunx
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Yes it LOOKS LIKE in front but it is, for me, behind it, it is an optical illusion.

Can you tell when in the video we can see a car?
I've seen two object, one from the left to the right(0:28) and one from the right to the left(1:36), they both are obviously a bird and the second one is flying in front of it and not behind it, what rule out the possibility of it being a car, car doesn't fly(yet) and flap their wings.

Is there an third object I did not seen?




Originally posted by internos
Trolls are what we eat for breakfast, lunch and dinner.



uUUuMmmmhhhhhh yummy troll


[edit on 11/26/09 by ufopunx]



Looking at the video I made these points:

0:03 bird goes left to right below the object.
0:51 first look as pole is seen in front of object and continues
in front of object
1:37 bird goes from right to left and at 1:37 is exactly to
the left of the pole opposite the object

So no saucer for you unless it shape shifted at the spot for the
patio umbrella.

Better off getting flashing lights or dark spots in the sky.
Sorry Max. Looks like I can't support and roadway activity.
It all went to the birds.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jimmy910130
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-

Original movie quality bitrate has been posted in the thread without zoom.

Yes I am completely postivie the angles go inwards. Not like this straight down:

(compare to conclusion image previous post)
Which would be the only model that could fit, with fabric hanging down.
Not like the umbrellas you see in the ulvön (ulv-island) photoes.

I posted some other material in this thread. In that an object that seems to be traveling behind a mountain a couple kilometers away, going at an extremely fast speed. The object is probably a couple meters wide, at least.

I also posted picture of a very strange looking object behind a tree some pages back:

An umbrella too?


Since the sharp angle is to the right it is most likely infront of the bush. Otherwise this sharp edge to right wouldn't have been there.
Also it seems to be infront of pole in most screens.
This means it couldn't have been behind the pole on some porch that has been debated and which some believe.
This in its turn means that the object is located somewhere in mid air between me and the place at the other side, just like I've thought all along.
Nothing has been concluded yet however.

Maybe they have a very strange object they put up with no visible (from my angle) supporting structure, maybe in an attempt to fake a ufo. As I said before I find this alternative explanation very hard to believe though..



[edit on 26-11-2009 by maxxsee]



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 

No I never thought it was a car at 1:37.
But it still looks to be infront of the bush and pole in most screens.



posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluemcgee
 

Thanks m8!

Sure!





new topics




 
12
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join