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.

 

Wikileaks Video Of Grey Alien?

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2017 @ 02:34 AM
link   
maybe not CGI but a kid in an alien suit, could it be that?




posted on May, 9 2017 @ 02:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Destinyone
I'll ask the same question I asked, the first time I saw this video....how did he get his head through that itty bitty turtleneck sweater...


Aliens grow into their clothes and wear them for life.



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Davg80

Not sure about that, though you can never discount what you can't prove otherwise.

I read in this thread (I'm a poet and I didn't know it), that the object of our attention's neck is too slender to support such a big head....well, I could show you how I could balance a football on a drainpipe, a marble on a straw, and so on.. Do we know that "aliens", if they exist, have the same bone density as humans? Are they as dense (structurally, rather than intellectually), as us?

Too many assumptions and assertions that are firmly rooted in what we know, rather what what is possible.

Think about a world that was absolutely nothing more than what we saw in front of our own eyes. Intelligence Services would be redundant, strategy would be irrelevant, and progression would be pointless.

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. Arthur Conan Doyle

edit on 10-5-2017 by Sunraged because: typo

edit on 10-5-2017 by Sunraged because: Additions....

edit on 10-5-2017 by Sunraged because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Sunraged

Its gotta be CGI, there's zero choppy movement. There's more frames of him moving that what the flickering overtop of it would suggest.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 04:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: WhyDidIJoin
a reply to: Sunraged

Its gotta be CGI, there's zero choppy movement. There's more frames of him moving that what the flickering overtop of it would suggest.


It may well be. Could you give me some examples of CGI that are as realistic as that?



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: xconvoyx




Care to look again? Maybe you'll see something.. something hidden in plain sight.


The only thing that still interests me about skinny Bob is who made it and why , as far as I'm concerned it is a Animatronic puppet.
What is it you feel may be hidden in plain sight ?

edit on 11-5-2017 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified
We wouldn't know a real video of an alien if it bit us on the... We'd be too busy debunking it.

One quick way to test this unoriginal hypothesis is to actually present a real video of an alien and see how we react to it.

Go ahead.



posted on Oct, 5 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   
ivan0135 lifted this clip from an old Sci-fi channel UFO documentary, cant remember the exact name but I have it on an external HD somewhere.



posted on Oct, 5 2019 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: kobalt7
correction:
ivan0135 lifted it from 351NOVA who lifted it from the tv show, which 351NOVA has admitted.
forum.davidicke.com...

Sad that nobody here of all places has cited the tv show and linked the imdb.



posted on Oct, 5 2019 @ 05:48 PM
link   
The clip was originally shown in a TV documentary about Russian involvement in UFOs that had Roger Moore as the investigator. The documentary claimed that the KGB filmed the "Skinny Bob" footage. Most of the claims made here about it being CGI are total nonsense/unconvincing/mere unproven assertions.

The correct attitude to take towards this film is "unproven" through lack of information.



posted on Oct, 5 2019 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: micpsi
Thanks for the info the Roger Moore part should help me find the OG source.

k ill repost what i put in the other thread, the correct attitude is its CGI but feel free to believe what you want.

I'll waste a bit of my time and critique it, I am an expert who has worked with 3D CGI and video since 1995, professionally since 1999. Even without knowing the source I could tell you despite it being well done by a paid professional, there are multiple clues that identify it as a 3D render that was brought into after effects for processing based on the date of production.Other software can do it now but based on when i saw it the industry standards at the time were Autodesk 3DSMAX and Adobe After Effects.

1. Timecode font(cited by other people already)
2. 50s style grain pattern loops (35 millimeter camera plugins and stock overlays available in after effects)
3. short clips(3D renders can take hours per frame more cost effective, longer clips would have shown more telltale signs thus easier to debunk)
4. stretching above eyes while blinking characteristic of 3d low polygonal modeling (less polygons means textures stretch farther when the polygons are moved)
5. head motion between start and stop points shows typical easing characteristic of basic tweening between keyframes.
6. Framerate, grain, contrast and film degradation do not match any one camera from the time period rather multiple.

And this is just after watching it a couple times. I'm sure I could cite far more but as i said before, your free to continue to believe what you want.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I do quite like the paradoxical mindsets of "UFO footage is always blurry to disguise the fact that it's fake", and "it's far too realistic to be real".

I'd love to know how people would measure authenticity based on aesthetics alone.
edit on 6/10/2019 by Sunraged because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join