It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Rod Type UFO, Edgware, Middlesex, Easter Sunday 2010

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by crowdedskies

Originally posted by Superiorraw

I am not surprised you've entrusted your help with C.H.U.D 0 however considering I was the original poster of your video via youtube it seems strange that i've given this alot of my time I wont get to see the original.



I know you have put a lot of time and effort and my original intention was to provide you with the better footage.

However I could see that you were quite preoccupied at the time with other comments both in this thread and your other thread about equipment. I thought to myself that when you do eventually acknowledge my posts, I will discuss with you.

I have now decided to pass a footage to you. It will be an extract which I have just taken from the tape running in slow-motion. I will be adding an extra bit which is not on youtube showing me setting up the equipment. This is to prove that I am really the photographer.

Thanks










posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Can you see where the confusion lies though


I've posted up a video from Youtube by member inexplicata and you laid claim to the video being your video. Whilst that might be the case and your claiming it to be yours, its easy to assume that both you and inexplicata are the same person, as Inexplicata doesn't post up the video saying he is from an organization that investigates uFOs. Instead inexplicata posts saying its his video and because you have laid claim to the video you would then assume that both ATS member Crowdedskies + Inexplicata are the same member?

Inexplicata has defended stubbornly the opinions on youtube of the footage.

I wont go into that here, as from my own personal experience Youtube commenters/users aren't the most reliable people to gain experience from.

The majority only seem interested in boosting their egos than look at the facts.

And as for looking at the footage myself, I'd definately be interested in that, I am currently investigating the Tremiti Islands UFO photograph as well as looking at this particular video offered by yourself for analysis.

From the Youtube footage to me, it doesnt look like the object is spinning, but hey thats quite a distance to be fair, and if you have the same footage in higher quality that shows it i'd be more than willing to take a look at it.

Can I also just say that ever since i first saw this on Youtube i've been quite amazed at the speed at which it crosses the sky. Regarding Member CHUD, have you got his email address and have you tried PM'ing him?



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Superiorraw
Can you see where the confusion lies though


I've posted up a video from Youtube by member inexplicata and you laid claim to the video being your video. Whilst that might be the case and your claiming it to be yours, its easy to assume that both you and inexplicata are the same person, as Inexplicata doesn't post up the video saying he is from an organization that investigates uFOs. Instead inexplicata posts saying its his video and because you have laid claim to the video you would then assume that both ATS member Crowdedskies + Inexplicata are the same member?



I am sorry but I don't think you are paying attention. I offered my footage to BEAM . Their website is :

www.beamsinvestigations.org.uk/ufo-reports.html

look up the date 4th April 2010 and you will see my footage. BEAMS take footage from members of the public and post a link on their website. The link is their own youtube posting. Inexplicata manages the youtube posting and is entitled to defend it. He is also entitled to do what he wants with it as he has my permission.

Please do not question either myself or inexplicata. I have the original footage which include what happens before and after. My face is all over it before and after.

I don't understand why you are turning it into a whodunit scenario.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by crowdedskies

Originally posted by Superiorraw
Can you see where the confusion lies though


I've posted up a video from Youtube by member inexplicata and you laid claim to the video being your video. Whilst that might be the case and your claiming it to be yours, its easy to assume that both you and inexplicata are the same person, as Inexplicata doesn't post up the video saying he is from an organization that investigates uFOs. Instead inexplicata posts saying its his video and because you have laid claim to the video you would then assume that both ATS member Crowdedskies + Inexplicata are the same member?



I am sorry but I don't think you are paying attention. I offered my footage to BEAM . Their website is :

www.beamsinvestigations.org.uk/ufo-reports.html

look up the date 4th April 2010 and you will see my footage. BEAMS take footage from members of the public and post a link on their website. The link is their own youtube posting. Inexplicata manages the youtube posting and is entitled to defend it. He is also entitled to do what he wants with it as he has my permission.

Please do not question either myself or inexplicata. I have the original footage which include what happens before and after. My face is all over it before and after.

I don't understand why you are turning it into a whodunit scenario.



I am paying direct attention to it. The fact that Inexplicata implies on his channel 'it is his video' and the fact you came on ATS claiming it to be yours would lead most people to believe that you are the same person holding the same account. Now that you have cleared that up I am certain any confusion I had or anyone else had is now cleared.

As for me questioning you or inexplicata? I dont see why this is such an Issue for you, in order for someone with any degree of common sense to come to an honest and correct conclusion and summary they should be entitled to question both the submitter of the evidence as well as the testimony, if you arent aware of these basic facts then you should be, this field is riddled with hoaxers and charlatans and basic questioning can sometimes catch them out its also worth while that whilst trying to get an honest assessment its my practice or procedure to find out who the video belongs to and any other information about that witness.

Go ahead and take 15-20 minutes to look at various photographs and videos submitted. If we dont question and just randomly blert out 'fake' or 'hoax' or to the contrary 'it's real' without questioning any plausibles it leaves us with a same mentality of the youtube trolls (not everyone on yt is a troll but some are).

I wasnt turning this into a whodunnit per se. but as per my statement above i wanted to get the full facts and to be honest, I really couldnt see why Inexplicata had to post up the footage, I mean why not just post up the youtube footage yourself under a youtube account - crowdedskies


I have received your footage and i am taking my time in coming to my own conclusion regarding this case, as it was mentioned previously I am also reviewing a photograph taken in the Tremiti Islands case and as such it has taken me a few days to look through everything. I will gladly post my own thoughts about this in the next few days.

Thanks for your assistance.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
well im no scientist or anything, but that looks like a plane..



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Summary
It has been surmised from the evidence that the object itself that accelerates across the screen is a plane or aircraft of some type. It has also been suggested it could be a meteor. There has been the comment about this video that the object appears to be spinning in a frame by frame rate cut from the video. Having watched both supplied videos from Youtube (inexplicata) and the claimed content provider from ATS - (crowded skies). I can't see the object spinning in either the Youtube video or HD.

[QUOTES BY OTHER CONTRIBUTORS]

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
Posted by MMN
However, in my opinion the quality of the video excludes a definitive identification.



Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Posted by Arbitrageur
I tend to agree it's a little fast but I'm still not ready to rule out a learjet or something well below cruising altitude.



Originally posted by C.H.U.D
Posted by C.H.U.D 22/4
Just a quick update: The consensus from the meteor observing community (including some of the most experienced observes on the planet) is that this was almost certainly an aircraft. Initially, the community was divided, and a few did make arguments for it being a meteor, but eveyone seems to be in agreement now.



Originally posted by crowded skies
Posted by crowded skies 24/4
Being the person who actually took the footage I am justified in having a reaction to his comment. I passed the footage to a group of people I trust. In response to comments on youtube ,they have said that the object is not a plane and when viewed in original resolution, you can actually see the object is spinning and is definitely not a plane. They are very honorable people and have not released the original full resolution footage.



Ok so Having assessed both the video footage from Youtube and looked at the evidence in high definition sent to me by crowded skies. I was able to analyse (0:30) of footage from this clip as claimed by himself on this forum. I was able to identify the object as being an aircraft, possibly a low flying learjet as posted or suggested by Arbitrageur on this thread a few pages back. I would also like to ask that MMN, Arbitrageur and anyone else ask for the footage direct from the content provider to come to their own conclusions in an honest assessment.

The Youtube footage is compressed and therefore lacks detail, on the alternative footage I was given to analyse. I could clearly see the wings and tail of the aircraft, and couldn't identify this object as 'spinning' like some people have claimed. I can only offer my own viewpoint though from the evidence presented to me by the content provider, and in no way do I expect everyone to gauge their own opinions from my own summary.

However I would like to ask or put forward that if ATS member crowded skies has the documentary footage to prove the object spins in high definition and rules it out being an aircraft, I would publicly ask him to release the footage so that other people can view this object and decide for themselves and gauge their own honest opinion. I dont wish to disrespect BEAM or any other analysts in this field. It has been suggested by others that the object is an aircraft, but the content claimant is adament that the object is something more than a regular aircraft. I would of gladly uploaded obtained high definition footage or a screen capture but the rights are held by crowded skies and it is his decision not to release the evidence as per his request in an email dated to me 3rd July 2010.

With respect and In friendship I would ask that anyone with a differing viewpoint or differing conclusion accurately provide evidence to back up their claims and respect the opinions of others without insult.

Regards
Richard



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Superiorraw
[
I wasnt turning this into a whodunnit per se. but as per my statement above i wanted to get the full facts and to be honest, I really couldnt see why Inexplicata had to post up the footage, I mean why not just post up the youtube footage yourself under a youtube account - crowdedskies




Thanks for your assistance.

As I stated before I never intended to post the footage anywhere. Neither did I intend to have it discussed. The fact tha BEAM use youtube meant that the footage became widely available and ended up on ATS.

Despite my adding an additional bit of footage showing myself moving around at the beginning before sending to you and despite the fact that I sent you the uncompressed footaged there still seems to be some doubt hanging inthe air.

You are wrong about the wings. The object is surrounded by black protrusions which give a sense of thin thread-like wings. In any case I will not be discussing this clip as it was never up for discussion.






[edit on 8-7-2010 by crowdedskies]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join