It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFOs Over London Friday 2011 ? (pretty damn spectacular)

page: 9
42
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by lifeform11
 


anyone with half a brain wouldnt just upload authentic ufo footage to youtube. They would be getting their video verified as genuine by an AV expert or someone like kodak then holding a press conference and raking in millions from media rights all around the world.


I personally believe 'normal' people with no particular interest in the UFO phenomenon, who one day happen to film or photograph an unidentified flying object, might very well just post the footage on Youtube.

They're not necessarily looking for expert authentication, they're just puzzled by what they saw and want other people's opinions.

If the footage is of interested and value, it will get picked up and spread by the minds at work on the internet, THEN it will be analyzed by 'experts'.




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by paprika


ufos at 1:05?
edit on 27-6-2011 by paprika because: (no reason given)


This throws an interesting spanner in the works, the same shining orbs, seen over the same 3-4 days in southern England, three various shots in London, and this one in Glastonbury.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


only analysis of the original data is of any use to validate authenticity. I dont see any youtube hoaxers handing over the original for obvious reasons ( they dont have it). lets look.

haiti ufo- no original footage provided = hoax
alien autopsy - no original footage provided = hoax
london ufo - no original footage provided = ????

whats worse is ufo believers dont even bother asking for it. says it all really
edit on 27-6-2011 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


I agree,

The internet is a viral environment, so let's track down the information to its original source and take a closer look at the data.

And let's do that without any preconceived agenda to debunk or authenticate, let's just look at the data and draw conclusions from there.

All I was saying was, mom and pop who take a video with funny lights dancing in the sky probably won't think that far, they just want to share something they thought was odd. So they source it on Youtube, and when odd people claim access to RAW data and their cam-recorder, they won't comply. It doesn't automatically make the footage fake, it simply means we can only take the investigation that far, and it's a minus.

Now, the video posted by paprika is interesting in this context, because the raw footage seems to come from The Telegraph, so if it's fake, it's made by a professional media institution.

Since it's edited, there could be more material available.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by paprika
 


I think those are birds, seagulls.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 



if you want to waste your time be my guest. I wouldnt give a youtube vid the time of day.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darce
The guy filming here [color=57E964]obviously has a better camera than the one on his cell phone. Those people don't seem to, most likely they weren't able to capture anything worth posting with their phones.


Originally posted by BrokenCircles
Obviously??

Is this conclusion based on the [color=57E964]better camera's ability to manipulate reality and bend buildings?





Originally posted by Draken
Really ? Lol.

He is holding the camera a little to the side, that's why things arnt straight.
3 things....

#1. That was in direct response to a statement that said this camera was better than.....
The quality of any other camera in the world, is not relevant. I was simply pointing out that this camera is not of a high-quality.

#2. Watch the first 20 seconds of the video. You can easily see what I have pointed out here.

#3. This is the reason that I did not only use the straight vertical lines, but also the rectangles. All of the lines that I added are at 0° and 90°. Look at the horizontal lines; The awning, The bars in the windows, The curb. They line up perfect. It is the vertical lines that are off.




Originally posted by Draken
No point in discussing UFO`s on this forum, the smart ppl know that. Every dick and harry thinks they some sort of super de-bunker and think you get points on this forum for debunking or something. If the video is real or not, it will be 'debunked' by ATS 'pros'.

And every other harry *#@* such as yourself, would rather whine about it than attempt to reach a conclusion on your own. I never said that anything was debunked.


P.S. If you wish to make an actual attempt to prove me wrong, then do it. If you can prove me wrong, then I will admit that I was wrong. Saying "Really? lol" only shows ignorance.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhiteHat
I have only one questions:

Was there ever an UFO video on ATS that people here agreed that is "the real thing", and not hoax, CGI, prank, fake and so on?


[color=3BB9FF]Your question lacks logic.

Unidentified objects remain unidentified, until after they have been identified.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by TheIrvy
 


CgI cost money, It would be a very expensive prank



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   
SEAGULLS

edit on 27-6-2011 by tarifa37 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I think I saw one of those dancing ufo's yesterday. It was pretty amazing.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I dont know if that vid is a fake or real could be ethier but this one i took is 100% real would be intresting to see what you think about this! www.youtube.com...



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loken68
reply to post by TheIrvy
 


CgI cost money, It would be a very expensive prank



No.... a student or professional can produce a few crappy looking orbs in the sky on their home computer for free in a few hours or less. Thats like saying photoshops cost money and would be an expensive prank. Anyways, someone posted a video showing its a cgi hoax and not a very good one in the page before this, check it out.
edit on 27-6-2011 by darkest4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by darkest4
 


why just a student or professional? if it can be done on a home computer then anybody can do it, and anything can be faked, it does not just have to be u.f.o. video's.

you would be able to fake anything to fit your views regardless of what it is. so the question is can any video claiming to show something be trusted? from either side of the fence on any subject?



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Hey, All.

I know I am late but I just wanted to say that I am really grateful for the time I have spent at ATS.

When I finally went to check it out (the hoaxed UFO) I could tell it was fake faster than ever. In fact, right away.

I feel so much healthier. Thanks, ATS.




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by darkest4
 


why just a student or professional? if it can be done on a home computer then anybody can do it, and anything can be faked, it does not just have to be u.f.o. video's.

you would be able to fake anything to fit your views regardless of what it is. so the question is can any video claiming to show something be trusted? from either side of the fence on any subject?


Dude did you look at the video on the page before this.. it clearly shows its a cgi hoax, unless you think one of those "ufos" can pass infront of a building for a bit by mistake then disappear (which would also make it like a 6inch long ufo lol)...
As for your other questions, no, probably no video with no source video to analyze, no independent non related witnesses, just posted on youtube, could probably be trusted. If someone presented a very convincing source video for experts to analyze, with independent witnesses, then itd be another story and something that starts to be admissable as actual evidence. Its the same as in a court of law, can you present a youtube video with no source video, no independent witnesses etc as proof? No. Welcome to the age of the internet and cgi folks, get over it.

www.youtube.com...
edit on 27-6-2011 by darkest4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by darkest4
 


i don't know why you are assuming things, my post clearly points out that anybody can do this, not just students etc.
it also points out that ANYTHING can be faked, then asks the question can we trust anything?

what was you reading?



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 


My apologies then, the phrasing threw me off and made me think you intended something other than what you did.
edit on 27-6-2011 by darkest4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by darkest4
 


not a problem, all i was trying to point out is anything could be faked, and not just on this subject, and not always just from one side of the fence. i am not saying it is the case here at all. i just just pointing out that if anybody can fake things they can fake anything to fit their view or their agenda wether they are a believer or a sceptic.

it makes it very hard to believe anything anybody says about anything. it kind off means subjects like these are dead regardless of how real the footage is.

i am admitting defeat, there is no point with these subjects anymore, and many others. the ability to fake things is just to great. the ability to lie is just to great. nothing can be trusted. visually or verbally.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
I didn't see this one posted. Apparently this was the same day.

I'm sure this is fake as well but it's worth a look.



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join