Debunk this debunkers.

reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by yeti101

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that what it looks like to you?

That's what it looked like to me, too. Anyone who's spent a LOT of hours on airliners will see similar effects. WHEN you see them in person, with your eyes, you can brush them off as obvious reflections...it is in the camera that they start to look "eerie"...

The reflections are from various light sources, all attached to the airplane. A combination of interior light(s), as well as some fixed exterior lights.

In one zoom segment, the flashing effect became pronounced...that would indicate it was a strobe light being filmed (its reflection, actually).

Additionally, since the airplane was obviously low to the ground, and not in cruise, (departing or arriving the airport) the crew will have many OTHER exterior lights turned on. This is normal below 18,000 feet (some pilots wait until below 10,000) to increase visibility to other airplanes.

Without knowing A) The make and model of airliner, and B) The seat position, it is impossible to be any more specific.

But the videography technique, and manner of relative position in the airplane window remaining unchanged, points heavily to reflections. Reflections accentuated by the shaking of a handheld camera, and the zooming effects, and auto-focus attempts of the camera itself.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by wiredamerican

 

Shortest time to debunk. ever.

What is the virtue of quick debunking if it is not plausible? The notion that a commercial pilot would fly his plane a few hundred feet away from an unguided, hot air balloon is ludicrous!! Moreover, those lights look nothing like Chinese lanterns. One is far too brilliant.

You armchair debunkers need to get real first. Then your explanations may start to be taken seriously.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by wiredamerican

 

Shortest time to debunk. ever.

Chadwickus would have debunked it 20 minutes before it was written but he's taking a nap.

Originally posted by micpsi
What is the virtue of quick debunking if it is not plausible?

Its apparently a competition on ATS.

reply to post by weedwhacker

not you again! im strongly thinking of putting you on ignore

reply to post by DCDAVECLARKE


Sorry if the truth hurts.

Watch the video again...I just did, went to the YouTube channel.

Tell us: WHY does the guy using the camera pan down to the ground, then zoom, IN, and then OUT?

The whole thing looks (and sounds) like a guy playing with the camera, not realizing that it is in REC mode. (I have done that SO many times, with vid-cameras...)

You know? Looking through the viewfinder (or nowadays, on the screen) and just adjusting the settings, seeing what it looks like.

Doesn't anyone think IF he/she actually SAW this "UFO" they'd be making some verbal commentary??? All I hear is the cabin noise, and breathing.

Originally posted by Archirvion
Why is people trying to debunk Extra terrestrials? Dont everyone know they exist by now? Slow people

Who is debunking extraterrestrials. No one here.

reply to post by SquirrelNutz


You think so?

Hot air balloon. The oval circle on the bottom is the balloon opening, and the light upper right of it is the glare from the flame heating up the balloon. Somebody was doing some night floating.

Really?

After this recent very public and very international event, whatever it was, closed down a major airport and aircraft had to divert?

You think at a major airport, people are just going to be floating around the local airspace...meandering around the airspace on a gentle breeze eh?

Debunked you say?

Originally posted by Archirvion
Why is people trying to debunk Extra terrestrials? Dont everyone know they exist by now? Slow people

There is zero evidence, the only "evidence" we have are UFO video and pictures, which almost always show no aliens involved.
But we all know you're a super secret scientist who knows everything but won't give any evidence of anything.

[edit on 17-7-2010 by hippomchippo]

gosh i hate it when threads are titled 'debunk this debunkers'!! it really just takes away from your case and about 99 percent of the time it will be debunked! Atleast have some out of this world evidence if you're going to title a thread as such. honestly, your video could be anything and we dont even know for sure if the video is from china.

reply to post by hippomchippo

There is zero evidence, the only "evidence" we have are UFO video and pictures, which almost always show no aliens involved.

I got two problems with what you wrote there mate.
One is that it's wrong, and the other is that it's really wrong!

Millions of witness testimonies. Thousands of sworn testimonies. This is admissible evidence in a court of law. There's plenty of extremely 'otherwise credible' people on record, that have given sworn testimonies, regarding what they have seen, or what they know about ET craft, and associated phenomena. Evidence, isn't just a collection of pictures or videos, it takes many forms.

But for me, for you to say that "almost always show no aliens involved.", is where you really go skew-whiff..'almost' is akin to saying that sometimes they DO involve aliens...think about it..if just one, single video among the many hundreds of thousands of videos out there, did involve 'aliens', the rest would be irrelevant..the one, or the few proves the case.

reply to post by ziggyproductions05


Absolutely true mate.

2nd.

reply to post by spikey


Same old tired arguments about "evidence".
Ain't buying it. Nothing ever comes of any of this UFO nonsense. Just posters getting excited, then the whole thing fades away.
believe what you want, lot's of people believe silly things.

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

There is zero evidence, the only "evidence" we have are UFO video and pictures, which almost always show no aliens involved.

I got two problems with what you wrote there mate.
One is that it's wrong, and the other is that it's really wrong!

Millions of witness testimonies. Thousands of sworn testimonies. This is admissible evidence in a court of law. There's plenty of extremely 'otherwise credible' people on record, that have given sworn testimonies, regarding what they have seen, or what they know about ET craft, and associated phenomena. Evidence, isn't just a collection of pictures or videos, it takes many forms.

But for me, for you to say that "almost always show no aliens involved.", is where you really go skew-whiff..'almost' is akin to saying that sometimes they DO involve aliens...think about it..if just one, single video among the many hundreds of thousands of videos out there, did involve 'aliens', the rest would be irrelevant..the one, or the few proves the case.

Sorry, but that isn't proof of aliens.
I think aliens exist myself, mostly based on some of those factors you listed, but we have no actual evidence of their existance, just heresay.
What I would like to know about these witnesses is why didn't they actually grab something alien or something that we could actually test? All they have is their word.
Yes, there are UFO videos that supposedly show aliens in them, such as the turkey one that is a ongoing thread right now.

[edit on 17-7-2010 by hippomchippo]

reply to post by OldDragger


You're right of course..about the same old, same old. But as you know, that's a two way street. 'Same old tired arguments about "evidence"' is right, but then so is 'Same old tired arguments about "lack of evidence" right too'

I agree, it's probably useless to debate about it, as entrenchment usually afflicts both polar viewpoints equally. This inevitably leads to 'temporary blindness' on occasion, from both camps.

I suggest a 'pro' UFO/ET forum, and an 'anti' version too. The rules are simple; only 'pro' posts are accepted in the 'pro' forum, and the same arrangement for the 'anti' forum.

Keep the general forum for the folks that do enjoy an essentially stagnant and generally unproductive read of a thread, with the usual suspects and banter being thrown about.

At least both 'camps' would be in kindred company in a specific 'Pro or anti' forum, and may be able to bring originality back into the debate and possibly some progression, in either direction, depending on your view.

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by OldDragger

 

You're right of course..about the same old, same old. But as you know, that's a two way street. 'Same old tired arguments about "evidence"' is right, but then so is 'Same old tired arguments about "lack of evidence" right too'

I agree, it's probably useless to debate about it, as entrenchment usually afflicts both polar viewpoints equally. This inevitably leads to 'temporary blindness' on occasion, from both camps.

I suggest a 'pro' UFO/ET forum, and an 'anti' version too. The rules are simple; only 'pro' posts are accepted in the 'pro' forum, and the same arrangement for the 'anti' forum.

Keep the general forum for the folks that do enjoy an essentially stagnant and generally unproductive read of a thread, with the usual suspects and banter being thrown about.

At least both 'camps' would be in kindred company in a specific 'Pro or anti' forum, and may be able to bring originality back into the debate and possibly some progression, in either direction, depending on your view.

That sounds like a dictatorship, why not people just try not to get offended everytime a skeptic posts what he thinks a UFO or alien video is? And vice versa for the really crazy UFO people like GFL?

reply to post by hippomchippo


I don't equate giving members the choice of 3 forums instead of just the one, with a dictatorship, as you put it. I'd say they were getting three times the freedom of choice.

As to what i wrote, it was broadly in agreement in point, to what Olddagger was saying about the same old rhetoric being brought up in almost every UFO/ET thread, when i said this:

Keep the general forum for the folks that do enjoy an essentially stagnant and generally unproductive read of a thread, with the usual suspects and banter being thrown about.

So you see, there'd still be what we have now, and there'd be an additional two forum's for enthusiasts, of either persuasion, to constructively debate their particular interest or direction without necessarily having to interrupt the flow of potential constructive debate, in their respective areas.
A slanging match could still happen in the current UFO/ET forums as they do now, so nothing would be lost, only gained.

im 38 with more than 20 sightings/encounters behind me, that video is easy to debunk and i dont know what it is, its yet again poor quality evidence.
all i need to say about debunkers is they would believe if they saw one, and ufo crew havent yet given us the video evidences needed to convince sceptics, but we will get it when they are good and ready

easy....
seen it a million times

the big light is the moon,
the smaller lights are the reflection of the overhead lights, on the glass window

ATS should add a thumbs up or thumbs down rating next to each thread topic, like on Youtube...

[edit on 17-7-2010 by SupremeKnowledge]

Please read: Starting a New Thread?

Please read: Posting video links.


(This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page):
Please make sure every post matters.
Refrain from 1-line or very-minimal responses.
Edit-down your quoted posts to the important part.
Don't use "txting" shorthand in posts.
Use snippets and links for external content.
Provide meaningful comments for links, pictures, and videos.

Many many threads on the alleged UFO in China...

Closed.


From here on out - any thread started with just a video link and not much substance if any at all, will be closed and possibly trashed.

[edit on July 18th 2010 by greeneyedleo]