Fact or Faked-Paranormal files on Syfy

Originally posted by Paradigm2012
I wonder what RC plane can travel mach5 and do a 180 turn in 1 sec.

maybe someone can dream up another explanation other than an RC.

www.space.com...

"Each sighting requires a great deal of analysis. A witness's perceptions of speed, acceleration, and size are likely of very little value," Miller said. "I have taken an approach of first identifying needs -- or mission requirements -- and technology availability. Then I compare those with the cold raw, simple facts of a sighting, not the conjecture or guess work of a witness," he said.

The problem with calculating a speed is we have to assume we know how far away the object is, and we don't know the distance, therefore we don't know the speed. That's why "a witness's perceptions of speed, acceleration, and size are likely of very little value".

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Discussion while show was airing:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Discussion while show was airing:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I ran a search on "fact or faked" and nothing came up as a match for that title. Is there some reason for not including the title of the show "fact or faked" in the thread about the show "fact or faked"?

What am I supposed to do, run a search on "show"???

People should put a little more thought into their thread titles. Especially when people like me are running searches for those titles to make sure I'm not posting a duplicate thread.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Hey don't give yourself a stroke. All I did was post a link, that's all.
Try chilling out a bit.

[edit on 16/7/2010 by Chamberf=6]

The Eckhart Abduction case is fully described here - The Eckhart Encounters. This was the alien case described on the show and of which the producers and team are now working on.

There is a very good possibility that NBC Universal will produce a full presentation of David's experiences sometime in the future. I can't go into this any further until details are worked out. For those not familiar with the case, I have posted the links to the case information and investigation by our team. BTW, we are still working on this case and expect more evidence to surface as time goes on...Lon (that's me, Medieval1028)

NOTE: If you have further questions, I'll try to come back here and answer as man as possible or it can be forwarded from the blog. BTW, David and some of his family members will be giving a 2nd interview this week to Mysterious Universe. Thanks....

[edit on 16-7-2010 by Medieval1028]

[edit on 16-7-2010 by Medieval1028]

similar to this...Animal Planet had some shows called 'Lost Tapes', purportedly Blair Witch-type recordings of cops or scientists tracking various things going bump in the night (killer octo in Monterey Bay, some Lizard Man). supposedly based on some true stories but 100% fake as far as I can tell.
cryptozoology related

animal.discovery.com...

fairly entertaining anyway

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Investigating the fence at the ghost car site would have been pointless. They clearly stated that the entire length of fence had been replaced since the incident happened. Why would they investigate an unrelated fence?

I'm just watching now, this show is like ATS in a television format.

Someone shows a really bad quality YouTube video and a bunch of people sit around and say "well it could be real" or "I think it could be CGI". I'd watch more episodes if they don't rely on YouTube for footage.



Last night's episode of Penn & Teller's Bull#! was about Area 51, did anyone catch it? It was pretty funny, they interviewed John Lear in his underground command center and he showed a giant photo of people living on the moon.






[edit on 17-7-2010 by freelance_zenarchist]

Originally posted by BriggsBU
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Investigating the fence at the ghost car site would have been pointless. They clearly stated that the entire length of fence had been replaced since the incident happened. Why would they investigate an unrelated fence?

You're right, I missed that the first time I watched it!

I must have been distracted posting to this thread and trying to watch it at the same time and missed that. But the officer remembered the post connectors were missing on the original fence so that was a valuable clue about how the fence could have lifted up.

One more reason why these incidents need to be investigated ASAP. Once time passes, the evidence may no longer be intact.

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
I'm just watching now, this show is like ATS in a television format.

Someone shows a really bad quality YouTube video and a bunch of people sit around and say "well it could be real" or "I think it could be CGI". I'd watch more episodes if they don't rely on YouTube for footage.

I was thinking the same thing, but for better or for worse, I think that viral videos are their modus operandi, though the videos don't necessarily have to be on YouTube.

Last night's episode of Penn & Teller's Bull#! was about Area 51, did anyone catch it?

I missed that one.

It's clearly a HOAX..
It is alot of LED - Lights flying about..

cheers..

Originally posted by Ram
It's clearly a HOAX..

It is alot of LED - Lights flying about..

cheers..

Like this one?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b6a609094dac.jpg[/atsimg]
The thought crossed my mind, but it doesn't even have to be a hoax craft like this one, it could just be a regular RC plane with some LEDs. (What the crew captured on film, not the Willis video).

I know only two episodes of Fact or Faked have aired as I type this, but I already see a pattern. The investigators pick two cases, debunk one, and declare the other to be unexplained after experiencing something weird themselves.

What I think is suspect is that the investigators seem to easily come across strange phenomenon themselves - They investigate UFOs in the Arizona skies; they spot one. They look into a strange video of unknown creatures (Nightcrawlers) in a guy's yard and of course seem to spot them on night vision in a nearby park after their equipment mysteriously goes haywire.

If the investigators didn't experience any strange phenomenon, the show would be a lot less interesting. So, either they're very lucky, or the events are staged to make for more exciting viewing. (I have similar suspicions about Ghost Hunters.)

I will admit that the UFO the Fact or Faked team filmed in Arizona looked impressive, but the events surrounding the Nightcrawlers could have easily been faked. For one thing, it was funny how the camera filming the investigators never went haywire, even when supposedly near the creatures.

I think there's a very good reason this show is on SyFy. It probably is science fiction.

ALSO, anyone else notice team scientist Bill Murphy's resemblance to Bruce Springsteen? I can't watch Fact or Faked without expecting Bill to break into "Born To Run." :-D

reply to post by DetectiveFork


I watched the episode with the "night crawlwers", OMG what a crapfest that was.

I live in the city in question and am more than familiar with the, "expansive wooded area" they went to , its called Woodward Park and is surrounded by the city on three sides.
And they were in the frisbee golf/mtb free ride/bmx track section of the park. Hardly an expansive wooded area, ive spent untold hours out there at night there are no strange creatures or undiscoverd crytoids as they implied, just coyotes,rabbits, raccons,feral cats all sorts of water fowl and possums., and the occasional mtn lion.
The heat signatures they picked up were likely feral cats,. they are everywhere out there and very active at night.
And as to the video im calling BS on it.

I've seen a few of these shows and have to admit that I'm enjoying it. Sure it's theater – it is television after all.

Still, they show some interesting videos, some of which I haven’t seen before, and have debunked a couple interesting ones. I thought the ghost car video, and it’s eventually possibly explanation, interesting. I liked the fact that they solidly debunked the Arizona video (which I thought was a balloon anyway but it's nice to see a firm resolution).

I’ll continue watching. For one thing, it's the UFO show on right now...

reply to post by niv
I just watched the latest episode and they had at least one UFO case where a smaller light broke off from a larger light or group of lights, which was kind of interesting, but they didn't investigate that case.

They did solidly debunk the balloon saucer because they just happened to order a balloon that looked just like it.

They try about 2 or 3 different things to see if they can hoax the effect. But then the flaw in their logic is, if it wasn't one of those 2 or 3 things, then it wasn't hoaxed.

I have to strongly disagree with that. Just because they make 2 or 3 attempts to duplicate it and they fail, who is to say it wasn't hoaxed? How do they know that a 4th or 5th attempt to duplicate it might not be successful? So if they don't solve a case and leave it unexplained i don't think we can read too much into that, it's still not proof it wasn't hoaxed IMO.

But I guess the show is about entertainment, and not ultimate scientific truth, and it CAN be entertaining at times!

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by niv

 

They did solidly debunk the balloon saucer because they just happened to order a
balloon that looked just like it.

They try about 2 or 3 different things to see if they can hoax the effect. But then the
flaw in their logic is, if it wasn't one of those 2 or 3 things, then it wasn't hoaxed.

I have to strongly disagree with that. Just because they make 2 or 3 attempts to
duplicate it and they fail, who is to say it wasn't hoaxed?

Not exactly as you say. Tne Fact or Faked team debunked the Lake Havasu City
alleged UFO sighting footage recorded by Mike Preston and his family on July 3, 2009
because a supposed local ranger declared he saw the actual saucer balloon on the
ground before a tv commercial team released it to the sky on July 3, 2009.

The Fact or Faked balloon recreation was not a definitive evidence for them even that
looked similar but they found an “actual witness” this ranger who claimed it was just a
balloon. There was no evidence this ranger was telling the truth, maybe they decided
to get a witness just for the purposes of the show or maybe the ranger was telling the
truth.

On the other hand you are saying several times the word “hoaxed”, that is not the case
in this story. Hoaxed means to perpetrate a deliberate fake, hoax to deceive people.
This Lake Havasu July 3, 2009 was a confussion by Mike Preston and his family, they
were mistaken by a saucer shaped balloon. The family agreed to appear on camera
giving their testimonials, they agreed to the investigation by the FF team and accepted
any of the results after the research.

On JuLY 3, 2009 a saucer shaped balloon allegedly was released to the sky in Lake
Havasu, the Preston family witnessed the object at certain distance and they took
video, because the object had a saucer shape they thought this was or could be a real
UFO, they never hide their name and agreed to cooperate when the investigation came
to them. To say or imply the Preston family from Lake Havasu deliberately perpetrated
a hoax is a serious claim and has to be demonstrated with evidences and facts.

As a said, this was a confussion by the family, not a hoax that is if the ranger was
indeed telling the truth.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by free_spirit]

reply to post by free_spirit
I never said the Preston family that took the video was involved in launching the balloon.

And we can debate over semantics about the word "hoax" but why else does someone send up a balloon shaped like a flying saucer? Apparently the Prestons didn't know what it was so they were fooled by it.

So you don't believe what the ranger says? While it would be nice to have some additional witnesses to corroborate what he says, aren't most of the visitors there transient, like people on vacation or something? (Except for the folks like the Prestons who were too far away to see the launch).

New episode



Part 2


Part 3

reply to post by Komodo
Thanks.

I knew that UFO dripping material looked almost identical to another video I'd seen of a Chinese lantern so I suspected that's what it was right away.

I think the reason they didn't replicate it well enough is because their "floater" was too small. If they simply made it bigger, it would go higher and drip more material just like the one in the video.

They claim the police and the FBI couldn't figure out what it was, but if the "Fact or Faked" team can guess it was a Chinese lantern, I don't see why it would be that hard for the police or FBI to figure it out.

Also they said the police video was 3 minutes long. They didn't show 3 minutes of the stalled RC plane with the sparklers. They would have used up a good part of the sparklers just launching the plane and getting it into position.

The Chinese lantern seems more likely than the RC plane.