reply to post by SkepticOverlord
I'm going to kick myself for actually making another comment on this after saying I wouldn't.
However, I just watched the two videos you've created with your 'expert' skills, and I have to say, I am stunningly UN-impressed. Despite all the
will in the world to believe that they could
portray real events (I am practiced at forcibly 'suspending disbelief' due to my professional
work as a writer for TV and film) - they were clearly, obviously and shamefully
fake, and I was "surprised x 10 to the power 15" that
so many people have been so quick to come and schmooze about how awesome they were and how much they prove the skeptic case.
at the herd-mentality...
Sorry SO, but as much as I was willing to be convinced, they were gosh-darn awful, and demonstrate several failings to recreate specific effects seen
in the actual videos. How anyone can say you've come up with an even adequate reproduction staggers me.
As I mentioned, I can forcibly 'suspend disbelief' at will... For those that don't understand the term - that is what we do naturally when
watching a (good) movie. Knowing that it's not real, knowing that the characters are played by actors etc - we 'suspend disbelief' and become
absorbed in the tale being told, convincing ourselves for the purpose of enjoying the film that in a general sense, the film is
who work in film will tell you that watching a movie becomes harder to enjoy as a natural process once you start actively learning about how they're
made, and especially if you help to make them. A bad movie is often bad because it doesn't allow us to suspend disbelief in any natural way; the
characters are too wooden, the plot is too shallow/ far-fetched, or the props/ budget aren't adequate to provide the level of quality needed to
support the story... For example - it's no use trying to convince us that the lead actor is walking around an air force base by standing a few 3/4
size cardboard cutouts of F16's here and there in a field.
So - with that as a background, my honest opinion about those films in the OP is that they do not come anywhere close to the level of believability
that the original 'Dome UFO' videos engendered (ignoring the 'back in Mississippi' hoax, released to muddy the waters and provide an easy debunk
that the media could latch onto).
The reason this entire event led to such a heated, extended and divisive debate in the UFOlogy community, is that the 'reality-feel' of the original
videos was so high - the intuitive reaction of the brain is that nothing is out-of-place in the images we see. Sure, if people are trying hard enough
to disbelieve, then they will convince themselves that faults can be found and recreated. The human brain is a powerful tool. I looked at the
originals and at the OP recreations, and the level of difference in what the brain automatically deduces is staggering. Sorry SkepticOverlord, but
you haven't proven a thing with those videos.
And this post really will be my final comment on the matter. If I cannot suspend disbelief, despite my talent for doing so, then these are totally
inadequate as any form of evidence to prove the original videos were hoaxed. Which imho they weren't. What really happened? The witnesses were
silenced, the majority of footage removed or replaced, the dogs were unleashed and a cover-story created - a media action-plan carefully spun to seem
I even started to wonder whether the 'kids in the car' video was a PTB-led red herring, spliced with some of the original footage. Etc, etc, etc.
The disinfo wheels keep on turning.
I saw someone comment the other day, saying that a certain group of ET's want disclosure to occur - and that our governments/ PTB are standing in the
way. But hey - who knows, right? A few nights after the Jerusalem UFO incident occurred, I saw a UFO of similar type and movement hovering very
close to where I live, making a clear attempt to prove its 'un-naturalness' to any ground-based observers. Since then, I've seen between ten and
twenty UFOs, where previously in the same time-frame (one week) I'd perhaps suspect
I'd seen one UFO... This most recent proliferation of
UFO activity has been characterised by actions, light displays, and changeable flight paths that show them to be 'something other-than' ordinary air
traffic (or indeed 'something other-than' ordinary aerial phenomena, stars and planets etc).
Something is changing on Earth, and in our skies, at this moment in time. The PTB don't want us to be looking up at the skies - because if we do,
our collective paradigm might shift in ways that undermine and encourage subversion of the FatCat agenda.