Canadian Spiral

page: 5
52
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrphenFire

-sniff- ... Smells like nasty "word removed by Maybe...maybe not for the sake of decorum" in here.



OrphenFire....

I've just sent that utterly appalling & disgusting comment off to the mods & the owners.



[edit on 22-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]




posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheMadHatter
I'm sorry but this is sad, a poorly made CGI. This is a joint hoax between a few people inspired by the norway spiral. the vid and the pictures dont even match.

Heres mine:







[edit on 5/22/10 by TheMadHatter]


Oh my GOD you caught a spiral ! This is real guys, amazing. I canot wait to hear the fakers com and sh0ot yor picture down. These things are geting too common, when will the PTB just admit it!!

Oh and why did you claim you made it up? Sound like a shill tactic to me. How much are they paying you?

Discolsure is soon everyone, these things prove it ! They cant keep pretending its all a missile, or a fake. Dont listen to the shills!!



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by jolois
 


That is called Particle Illusion. It's a simple 2D OGL based software particle system application. It's easily recognizable because the set of emitters used in that video are pretty much standard on the package and haven't been customized that much.

For more info and exampled on Particle Illusion visit:
www.wondertouch.com...



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by JakiusFogg
 


You have answered my questions satisfactorily.


When can we all expect to see this moved to the HOAX section?



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Show it too a hundred qualified people and they will say hoax. Why not just move it where it belongs.

Watch it in 720p on YouTube. There is no doubt. Particle Illusion is a good guess, I have a copy I use myself, but lots of programs could do that effect.

Either way, its fake. The wing looks fake as well. I think its a pan across a still photo with layers added.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Prepare for more of these.

Remember Obama's pledge to spread disinformation?

We must proceed full steam ahead.

[edit on 2010-5-22 by sandwiches]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by sandwiches

Prepare for more of these.



Sandwiches.....

Prepare for what.....more hoaxes?

Well yes.....I agree entirely!

Well said!

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Remember Obama's pledge to spread disinformation?

We must proceed full steam ahead.


Damn, Obama really sucks at video editing then



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


Wow that is so fake! it would have even lit the wing of the plane some what but it still stayed dark. That was soooo CGI!



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 





Tell you what, why doesn't someone add their own Photoshopped image to it to really us us idiots how easy it is


Hmmm. Sounds like a challenge to me.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
what is curious is the fact that the person in the article - Murray - says he did hear a very loud boum after a while .... but his camera number 3 that is filming and taking the outside sound of the crickets does not record that boum ??? does it stop filming or what ? why doesn't he post the totallity of the film WITH the boum recorded ?
Anyway, it gets more difficult to say it is CGI when you see the film from the plane ..... that should be more difficult to make by CGI no ???
Very intersting - I think it's real, very fascinating because one fake is easy to do but make 2 of them ( the plane film ) from a totally different perspective is way more difficult and the two even match together ....
Should be interesting to have the boum recorded, to see how much time between the flash and the boum, then we can calculate how far it was ....



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Hey isnt the last Hopi prophecy a big blue star kind of just like in the video?



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


This reminds me of a tale called the "Spain UFO" where a user named FlySolo wrote long winded posts, and argued left and right about the videos authenticity, dismissing CGI claims from knowledgeable ATS members, only later to find out that the video was CGI, and a professional production.

It's like deja vu!

Spain UFO posts.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by ALLis0NE]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
i truly want this to be real. i want this to be aliens opening dimensional wormholes. but it does look very cgi. also no reflection of light on the ground, lack of other witnesses, its too perfect, sorry but i still "want to believe".



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 


Remember the tale called "UFO in Sydney Australia" also in the [hoax] section?



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


You're deluded if you can't see that this is nothing more than a hoax.

Let's have a closer look...

First this video:



* The object takes approximately 36 seconds to appear and disappear

* The spirals and circles are also perfectly formed

* The video was filmed looking west with a bank of clouds way off on the horizon, besides those clouds, the sky is clear

Now look at these two images:



Edit to add an quick animated gif:


(If someone can do a better job, it would be appreciated)

*Besides the 'spiral', they are identical, not even the waves have moved, which is impossible given the time frame calculated above, it's even impossible if we are generous and state the the time difference between these is less than 2 second, the waves should still have moved.

*The clouds in the sky are completely different than what is seen in the video, despite being seen in the same direction at the same time in roughly the same place.

*The spiral is completely different to what is seen in the video, it's a wobbly blob.

The airplane footage:



*Filmed over complete cloud cover, granted the clouds may be clear past the field of view, but the angle and trajectory is similar to the other video, suggesting the plane would have to be closer to where the first video was taken.

Do I need to go on?

Just accept it, it's a hoax!

[edit on 23/5/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Looks like a shoop.

I can tell by the pixels and having seen many shoops in my day.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by wylekat
 





Tell you what, why doesn't someone add their own Photoshopped image to it to really us us idiots how easy it is


Somewhat over an hour later-



Here's how easy it is.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
reply to post by FireMoon
 


This reminds me of a tale called the "Spain UFO" where a user named FlySolo wrote long winded posts, and argued left and right about the videos authenticity, dismissing CGI claims from knowledgeable ATS members, only later to find out that the video was CGI, and a professional production.

It's like deja vu!

Spain UFO posts.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by ALLis0NE]


Apart from the fact i said it looks wholly fake and the first thing that sprung to my mind was "Here we go again, another viral marketing ploy"...Yeah just the same, try t reading what people actually say, rather than, reading what you think people said.

The point i was making was fairly simple. if we are truly seeing something * unknown*, you can't actually judge it by the already established parameters, The Platypus looks fake, even today,, but it exists. I'm willing to bet had their not been photo's and film of the Thylacine taken before their extinction, there would be people today insisting they never existed and that the skeletal remains were all fakes.

Those with any real grasp of Ufology, and not just know it all dilettantes who seem to be determined to show the world how smart they are will tell you that. There are many sightings where people simply could not believe what they saw. In short, the evidence of their own eyes seemed to totally contradict much of what they thought they knew about science and our creation.

There lies the rub with the whole of Ufology. No photograph or video is ever going to constitute absolute proof. Wat's more of there "craft" are nothing more than the materialization of a mental projection by an, as yet understood technique. You are never likely to ever hold the physical proof either,.

From my perspective CGI simply makes the real Ufonauts jobs that much easier. They know full well, no matter how good a footage anyone takes, it is likely that, At least 50% of people are simply going to say. "It's a hoax". We are, in effect, doing their stealth work for them. Again , if you study Ufology in depth, that much would be obvious.

The truth is, those who nail their colours to the mast of, we have to have proof of a physical and tangible sort, are likely to be forever disappointed, whether they believe or not.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


Brilliant that, a static picture not a video and to be brutally honest, me with my total lack of photshop skills could, probably, have knocked that out in minutes. . Now show us what was actually asked, a recreation, exactly, of the videos. I don't doubt it can be done, only a fool would, but umpteen posts simply saying that, are just a total waste of bandwidth telling people what they already know.

Then, i guess, the world is full of people who, for some reason, feel the need to point out to a person. "Did you know you have a huge pustular zit on your nose?", as if they didn't already know.





new topics
top topics
 
52
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join