New alien footage. Real or fake? Experts, have yourself a look & discuss

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Just Chris
Just beat me to posting this!

It's hard to tell. I believe it's legit, and eagerly await the debunkers on this one...

But why do you believe it's legit?
We know that CGI exists.
We know that it's entirely possible to fake this kind of video.
We know that there are plenty of people out there willing to do so.

There is no rational reason to believe this is not CGI. Unless you can find something in this video to prove otherwise, all intelligent people would have to go with the more plausible explanation, and no matter how much people might protest against it, the most plausible suggestion is that this is a fictional video created using CGI.

It looks like it was shot in the 1950's, though we have no proof of that, and no CGI before the mid-90's could achieve that life-like of an effect.

The pulsating blood vessels in the head and neck would be extremely hard if not impossible to achieve in decades past, maybe today it is possible.

In the video, watch the blood vessels in the neck and head areas I have circled below:

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Just Chris
Just beat me to posting this!

It's hard to tell. I believe it's legit, and eagerly await the debunkers on this one...

But why do you believe it's legit?
We know that CGI exists.
We know that it's entirely possible to fake this kind of video.
We know that there are plenty of people out there willing to do so.

There is no rational reason to believe this is not CGI. Unless you can find something in this video to prove otherwise, all intelligent people would have to go with the more plausible explanation, and no matter how much people might protest against it, the most plausible suggestion is that this is a fictional video created using CGI.

It looks like it was shot in the 1950's, though we have no proof of that, and no CGI before the mid-90's could achieve that life-life of an effect.

The pulsating blood vessels in the head and neck would be extremely hard if not impossible to achieve in decades past, maybe today it is possible.

So you claim that because it looks like it was shot in the 50's then it must have been shot in the 50's?

Why do you think this? We know that any video can be made to look aged. This is just another CGI effect and lends absolutely no credibility to the video.

You can create a video now which looks like it was filmed in the 1940's, it's no different to using CGI to create the "alien".

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Just Chris
Just beat me to posting this!

It's hard to tell. I believe it's legit, and eagerly await the debunkers on this one...

But why do you believe it's legit?
We know that CGI exists.
We know that it's entirely possible to fake this kind of video.
We know that there are plenty of people out there willing to do so.

There is no rational reason to believe this is not CGI. Unless you can find something in this video to prove otherwise, all intelligent people would have to go with the more plausible explanation, and no matter how much people might protest against it, the most plausible suggestion is that this is a fictional video created using CGI.

It looks like it was shot in the 1950's, though we have no proof of that, and no CGI before the mid-90's could achieve that life-life of an effect.

The pulsating blood vessels in the head and neck would be extremely hard if not impossible to achieve in decades past, maybe today it is possible.

So you claim that because it looks like it was shot in the 50's then it must have been shot in the 50's?

Why do you think this? We know that any video can be made to look aged. This is just another CGI effect and lends absolutely no credibility to the video.

You can create a video now which looks like it was filmed in the 1940's, it's no different to using CGI to create the "alien".

I did say above we had no proof it was shot in the 1950's, I guess you missed that.

EVEN IF it is CGI, it is very good CGI, very professional. If it were so easy, why don't we have amateurs making videos like this all the time? They do with UFO's....many hoaxes I agree, but occasionally there are verified UFO's.

Why has no one taken claim? Done more? Why don't more people do similar videos of aliens if it is so easy?

Has the doll maker that produced this hoax been found yet? If not it still remains a mystery to 1...

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
I did say above we had no proof it was shot in the 1950's, I guess you missed that.

But even though you know it would be just as easy to fake the age of a video as it would be to do almost anything else, you then seemed to try to use this as "evidence" of it being genuine.

That makes no sense. If you know that the age of a video can be faked, then you can't claim that the appearance of it being old in any way increases the credibility of it.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
EVEN IF it is CGI, it is very good CGI, very professional. If it were so easy, why don't we have amateurs making videos like this all the time? They do with UFO's....many hoaxes I agree, but occasionally there are verified UFO's.

Why has no one taken claim? Done more? Why don't more people do similar videos of aliens if it is so easy?

Maybe they are making videos like this all the time?
Maybe there is just a small group of people who do spend all their waking hours making non-stop hoax videos?
Maybe the rest of us don't waste our time making them because we have no interest in doing so? Maybe we don't run a CGI company and want to make a video for publicity of our skills?
Maybe I'm not a student hoping to make it into a job like this and taking such time to make a video I can later prove was mine when I go for a job at Industrial Light and Magic?

There are potentially thousands of reasons why someone might make a video like this. The fact is we know it can be done, and there are motivations for someone to do so.

The best explanation I can see is that someone wants a job in such a field and spends a couple of months creating something which successfully fools potentially millions of YouTube viewers - what better advertisement and example of their skills?

Whoever made his video could go to a studio tomorrow with prof that they made it and be in a highly paid career the very next day.

originally posted by: Rocker2013
The best explanation I can see is that someone wants a job in such a field and spends a couple of months creating something which successfully fools potentially millions of YouTube viewers - what better advertisement and example of their skills?

Whoever made his video could go to a studio tomorrow with prof that they made it and be in a highly paid career the very next day.

Great point. However, to use this to advertise your skills, one must take credit for it. Use it on one's website, or post it on an individuals facebook site. Kind of defeats the purpose if one were to make it to showcase one's skills, yet remain anonymous? Do you see a logical flaw in your premise?

And this was released almost four years ago, and nothing indicating a claim of ownership has ever been found.

So you flat out deny the possibility of this being real, given the fact that UFO's exist (and I mean truly unexplained aerial phenomenon)?

Anyway, as others have said, just because the footage is real, doesn't necessarily mean the being in the video is "alien".

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Great point. However, to use this to advertise your skills, one must take credit for it. Use it on one's website, or post it on an individuals facebook site. Kind of defeats the purpose if one were to make it to showcase one's skills, yet remain anonymous? Do you see a logical flaw in your premise?

And this was released almost four years ago, and nothing indicating a claim of ownership has ever been found.

There are now billions of pages of content out there, and millions of those are not publicly accessible.

If I were working at a CGI company and someone came to me with evidence they created this, directing me to their work on YouTube, I would hire them immediately and get them working on a project, possibly one involving the work hey have already done.

Why must there be an assumption that someone would own up to it? Why would they need to? Why would anyone end the fun and the endless debates about it?

If it can later be used to promote a project, why would anyone end that prematurely?

The mentality of someone who would choose to make this and deliberately attempt to fool people is in direct opposition to the notion that they would then own up to it. Clearly, they enjoy creating this mystery, so why would we expect that they would suddenly change such a core aspect of their personality and admit to faking it?

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
So you flat out deny the possibility of this being real, given the fact that UFO's exist (and I mean truly unexplained aerial phenomenon)?

No, I don't flat out deny that it could possibly be real, I flat out deny that we should believe the most unlikely and implausible explanation instead of the more obvious and plausible (and proven) one.

No one can say that Aliens have not visited this planet, anyone who does claim that is not a logical person. But, it's more logical to believe that this is CGI, given that we know this is possible, and given that there is little other evidence for Aliens having visited.

And, the existence of UFO's does not mean evidence of Alien visitation. No one knows where such phenomena come from, and again it's more plausible (given the available evidence we have) that UFO's are actually man made experimental or top secret aircraft.

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Anyway, as others have said, just because the footage is real, doesn't necessarily mean the being in the video is "alien".

Of course, but this is all about the credibility of the video and whether it actually shows what they are purporting to show. The assumption by most is that this is a genuine Alien life form filmed in some top secret environment and then leaked to the world. Nothing about that is credible in my opinion, not in comparison to the credibility and plausibility of someone having created the video to deliberately mislead.

Ultimately it comes down to the weight of evidence on either side of this.

We have no confirmed evidence that aliens have visited us.
We have no evidence that any government has had any contact with an alien race.
We have no evidence that any video of such a thing might exist.
We have no evidence of anyone having access to such a video ever releasing it to the public.

We do have evidence that CGI exists.
We do have evidence that plenty of people like to make hoax videos.
We do have evidence that companies and individuals have in the past created such videos for promotion, employment, monetary gain.
We do have evidence that what we can see is perfectly able to be hoaxed from nothing at all.

Given that there is so little to say that this is a genuine Alien in a genuine video, and given that there is so much able to support the belief that it's a manufactured video, any logical person would have to come to the conclusion that it's not real.

Believe me, I wish it were real. But, logic and reason would force me to say that it's not.

originally posted by: seattlerat
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

I haven't read this entire thread yet so I hope someone has not already provided this, but I found a 10 minute video posted Summer 2014 that provides some interesting information, that, if true, in my opinion, adds even more credibility to the footage being discussed.

Basically, a UFO researcher vouchers for the media leak's integrity, and shows a (redacted) email that gives some tantalizing tidbits that I had not heard before, such as it possibly having a KGB origin, and the existence of an unedited version.

Also, I am still waiting for someone to replicate this! With the popularity of fake UFO footage being produced, I find it difficult to believe that there is nothing that I am aware of that depicts a creature purported to be an ET that comes close to the "realistic" style of the Skinny Bob film.

Okay, I watched this video, kind of interesting, but nothing really concrete. Basically the person in the video emailed the person who released it on youtube, Ivan0135? The person who released it on Youtube, Ivan0135 received the video from another person who wishes to remain anonymous? Did I get that right?

Sorry, but I don't think this does anything to further add or detract credibility from the video.

The only piece of really interesting news is that there is a total of 12 minutes of video, of which only a part was released. Maybe this further video could help shed some light on the situation.

There are four videos, the only one that really catches me is the one of the alien "Skinny Bob" first sitting at a table, then standing still. That looks extremely life-like, and if it was shot pre-2000 as it appears to be it is definitely not CGI.



Ivan0135, the owner of the youtube channel, answers a few questions:



Waiting to see if more video will be released.

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

You think that's a doll? If anything it's CGI. Jim Henson would be jealous if this were some puppet.

ZBrush...you could also "feel" the rigging on the movements. Nicely done.

It looks real. If it is CGI then its good GGI.

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
It looks real. If it is CGI then its good GGI.

Yes, as I mentioned above, even if it is CGI, it is incredible CGI - to have such random pulsating of blood vessels and movement of the eyelids. No way it is a mask/doll. And if it was taken in the 1950's, as appears to be the case, impossible to be CGI.

Pulsing blood vessels circled:

One thing that gets me about these alien greys with massive heads and tiny shoulders is could a frame that small support the weight of a head that large?.
I just can't see how it could walk and stuff without having the muscle to support its head.

Found a good analysis of the video and it mentions ATS and it's members.

(nolink)/analyzing-the-latest-alleged-et-video-675/9517

Had trouble with the link put www. before it.



Hhhm must be a banned site from ATS.

Anyhow it says it is a fake.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
One thing that gets me about these alien greys with massive heads and tiny shoulders is could a frame that small support the weight of a head that large?.
I just can't see how it could walk and stuff without having the muscle to support its head.

it would be easy for the shoulders and neck to support a large head if the head is filled with hot air.

a reply to: subfab

I think it would have to be lol.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
Found a good analysis of the video and it mentions ATS and it's members.

(nolink)/analyzing-the-latest-alleged-et-video-675/9517

Had trouble with the link put www. before it.


Hhhm must be a banned site from ATS.

Anyhow it says it is a fake.

It doesn't really appear to be an analysis at all, rather a series of speculative doubts raised regarding the authenticity of the tape.

Additionally, the very selectiveness that he accuses mainstream media of, he demonstrates in quoting Nick Pope, alleging that Nick Pope stated it was the best fake he'd ever seen, but then quoted him saying that the video is as real as it is fake, that it doesn't really prove anything either way, allowing skeptics and believers to retain their stance.

He then finishes the article with more speculation constructed as fact based on the assumption that he's successfully debunked the article in a kind of "because it's fake, let's talk about why this fake has been made....because it's fake".

For me, the movement of the "aliens" appears too natural to be purely artificial. If it really is a fake, then the CGI surely would only have been applied selectively?

Another thing about debunking is that it makes a fundamental assumption that if we don't know about it, then they can't, that the science we know about as members of the general public, is the only science that exists.

That said, it's that good, that nobody appears to be able to successfully debunk it, so the existence of more material from any source that is difficult to prove or disprove can only be good for the search for the truth behind all of the questions raised on here.

a reply to: Sunraged

Did you not see where the tape came from?.
A known hoaxer and liar.
I would love it to be true also but I will not let my hope for ET being real cloud my judgement when looking at the evidence.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Sunraged

Did you not see where the tape came from?.
A known hoaxer and liar.
I would love it to be true also but I will not let my hope for ET being real cloud my judgement when looking at the evidence.

Yeah I saw it mate:

Through his investigation, Cameron determined that this Judy Fältskog is the same Judy Fältskog who, in 2010, claimed to be an astronomer working for NASA, and announced that she had intercepted and deciphered an intelligent signal from a nearby star. As Cameron points out, Fältskog’s credentials and claims turned out to be false. And research into Fältskog revealed interesting results including a history of hoaxing, identity changes, and even a sex change.

Sounds like a lot of trouble to go to just for being outed as a lousy dirty fibber

a reply to: Sunraged

I know but who knows what goes on in the hoaxers mind...