Ufo shoots plane, with vid :)

You must be driving really fast, if you're keeping up with a "fighter jet" and and UFO.. Why didnt you pull over to video tape it? I mean, I saw a typical military helicopter propell a rope down over a farm t5he opther day, and I pulled over to witness that.. and it wasn't a ufo.. so why keep driving?

Originally posted by PENGUIN999
reply to post by angrydog

 

IM HERE WITH LIKE MINDED PEOPLE..GOT SICK OF TALKING TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT CARE TO DISSCUSS THINGS LIKE THIS AT WORK AND FRIENDS... AND THINK IM CRAZY...OOOOH BUT WHEN THE # GOES DOWN...OH WHAT WERE U SAYING BEFORE PENGUIN 999 WERE READY TO LISTEN NOW.... THEY CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH

Caps much? i didnt talk to you ..calm down..was for the romantic rebel

Yeah, this is a bad joke. Even as the car's rolling along passing trees and telegraph poles or whatever, the scene in the background doesn't change perspective at all.

Just a bad CGI job.

Maybe it's a trailer for Cloverfield 2? It's blatantly obvious it's CGI. Why would the cameraman purposefully go out of focus "coincidentally" just before the footage of the plane being "shot"?

Originally posted by masqua
Proper debunking rather than offhand dismissal is the ATS way.

If one is to accuse CGI, for instance, please find PROOF of it.

Civility and decorum goes a long way here and should not be forgotten.

Begin rant:

"Proper debunking" What the Hell do you consider people to be who argue with logic? Debunkers? Do you realise how dismissive and derogatory that term is?

I, and others, look at evidence and either decry it or pronounce it unexplainable.

Don't label us as "debunkers" or "proper debunkers" depending on your limited definition of what those terms mean!

I am really offended by your post.

Should I report it as being against the T&C of ATS?

End rant.

Slippery Jim.

reply to post by masqua


Hmm proof...

Obviously as it stands we can't prove it's a fake but we know it's a fake.

Common sense needs to kick in at some point methinks.

Ok. I am not expert in videos, but that video in my opinion is fake. The reasons to claim that is these :

1. Sound. The Surrounding Sound does not match to the scenery. It Sounds like the sounds were taken in a city. The plane which is flying by, has no sound.

2. Light. The Light of the video is stable but before that "UFO" attacks the plane with his Ray the light slowly but steady fades a way..

3. Reaction. There is no reaction from the people were filming the incident. A normal person would at least "Scream" and "Shouting".

So In my opinion that video is 100% HOAX

Peace

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by masqua

 

Hmm proof...

Obviously as it stands we can't prove it's a fake but we know it's a fake.

Common sense needs to kick in at some point methinks.

I have to agree, my Aussie friend; there are just too many things in this short clip that do not add up; unless of course the road warrior was filming this "phantom jet" from his super-charged hotrod

seeker

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
Don't label us as "debunkers" or "proper debunkers" depending on your limited definition of what those terms mean!

I am really offended by your post.

Should I report it as being against the T&C of ATS?

End rant.

Slippery Jim.

Go for it. I'm whole-heartedly encouraging you to do so, only to test the validity of both the T&C's AND the stress on civility and decorum which this website so diligently promotes.

Is it the intelligent way to dismiss 99% of the information presented (as this video is an example of) without carefully adding WHY one thinks it bogus? Some in these first two pages tried to do so, another few held back judgement, but then there were those who only watched and reacted with anger on gut instinct alone.

Is it in the interest of this website to be ill-tempered with whatever newer members might try bring to the table?

If all UFO sightings or reports brought to ATS were handled in the same discourteous manner as this one was, it shouldn't be too long before anyone would DARE post their experiences, no matter how interesting. I suppose we should all sit on collective hands and wait for the aliens to actually be openly walking the streets among us before we are deigned to be able to discuss it?



So, yes... PLEASE attack my stance. Put it in a Complaint. Let's see where that goes. But, in the meantime, try to post on topic in this thread or don't post at all.

Why does the guy recording the video stop when the plane gets hit?

Its shame if it is fake because it makes it harder to believe other people who post videos like this. One day we could get some real footage like this but because there as been that much fake crap posted everyone will scream CGI from the first reply.

By the way, did someone say you can hear it zap the plane? I didnt hear it zap the plane but if someone did, then could they work out if the sound hit the camera at the right time according to when the light flashed?

Thanks

Oh god lord, my eyes are bleeding...

Bleeding annoyed that someone posted this video and then seems to have got a friend to agree with him in capitals.

Yes its fake, probably 5 mins work in after effects (if its more than 5 mins then the guy needs some lessons).

The lightning is AWFUL and you can see its layer quite clearly.

Reason its dark, so you can't see how horribly cheaply it was made, I doubt the plane is more than a black still.

Right first of all lets get something clearly pointed out . That video is terribly lit, you can barely tell whats happening at all toward the end . Therefore how ANYONE could say for sure that there is a plane in the video at all is beyond me, let alone being able to confirm enough of its shape and speed to ascertain that it is a military aircraft being struck by the lightning like blast from the *ahem* "UFO".
Even if we take on trust that the object with the bluey white glowing bottom is in fact a UFO rather than a graphical representation of one, we cannot confirm in all honesty what if anything it is firing at. Of course here at ATS I expect more scrutiny than even that, and would go as far as to say that we can really say not a lot about the authenticity of this video, other than the fact that the title is misleading, and that casts a doubt over the content as well as the heading.

Originally posted by masqua
Proper debunking rather than offhand dismissal is the ATS way.

Offhand dismissal is my way. It's called an opinion, and one we are free to express here.

I have no evidence of this being anything real. I appears to be a car driving, yet the sounds seem to added since they are constant and not passing (Doppler effect). I see no military plane. Do you? Does anyone? 0:23 seconds? C'mon.

This is civil compared to the evidence at hand.

Bogus CGI in my off hand dismissal and opinion.

I actually thought it was another manbird production at first, but even his work is better then that. I agree with whoever mentioned it, but I think if it were to be real, the people are might calm for seeing a supposed jet being shot at from a unknown craft.Then the abrupt ending. Sorry OP, I dont think this is the one but keep looking and watching, the money shot is bound to show up eventually!

Originally posted by masqua
Proper debunking rather than offhand dismissal is the ATS way.

If one is to accuse CGI, for instance, please find PROOF of it.

Civility and decorum goes a long way here and should not be forgotten.

Often the only way to prove CGI is to replicate it. And we all know there is always discrepancies in the 'art' we can produce that distinguishes it from others.

That will often lead to people dismissing the proof; proving cgi is not an easy task. "The resolution is not the same, the craft looks fake, the tracking is off, etc etc"

Let alone to create a cgi video in response may actually inflame the problem - I've seen people do this, and have those they wish to advise claim that their work is too real and that they are now covering it up. ? I'm serious.

Rather, it's better to assume that a lack of other detail should be entered into the equation. At least considered With the opinion.

This video lacks everything but a video. And it wreaks of cgi.

it's hard to provide proof of something that does not exist. I do believe however, the more that people provide cgi videos as proof and the more this evidence remains within the silent realm of non-event, among a world interconnected at a moments notice, Hopefully people will start to realise the difference between something real, and something produced to trick people.

I referenced Manbird20000 because he's open in his work and .. well, this looks like someone trying to pander to those who have fallen for manbirds work, only to discover that he does not hide the fact he openly admits to making cgi videos not to hoax but to create art.

Originally posted by atlasastro
Come on OP. That video wouldn't even make the people on Pandora laugh:"You call that CGI!"

Who video's a UFO shooting at a plane in silence. Really. They could of at least gasped. No tail or wing lights on the plane. No plane sound. Not to mention no reports of plane downed by UFO. not to mention no mass UFO sighting.
Also the OP for the video @youtube does not even try to present a witness report or even a narrative to the "video".

This is how it's done.
...
At least try and make it entertaining next time.

edit on 6/11/10 by atlasastro because: To add some "debunking" as per Mod post wiseness.

Now you're cooking with gas!!

I hope people become more aware of manbird's work. He deserves it imo!

I would suggest that, after seeing the Haiti UFO fakes from a year or so back, and the style of the "UFO" in this "film" - and the fact that the "plane" looks as if it is not moving at all, that this is a CGI Hoax, and a poor one at that.

I'd also like to thank the OP for helping ATS to expose yet another UFO Hoax, as - with all of these things - after the initial flurry about it the video will probably resurface in a couple of months time and we now have a thread with some critical thinking on it to refer to.

I wonder if the original footage was stolen from a storm chaser.

It looks as though that is what they were doing, bearing down on a nice cell.
Could be wrong though, the cloud looks a bit dodgy too.

It is totally fake, cgi, ect.

Lame and fake.

Fake and lame.