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.

 

UFO's Flying Over Puma Punku (4-28-12)

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   


One is caught moving at high speed (which is shown again in slow-motion) The others seem to be moving rather slowly...
edit on 29-4-2012 by Nurelic because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Hard to say for 100% certainty what they are, so "UFOs" are accurate.

Puma Punku is a good hot spot.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
lol crappy cgi.

Its an effect in many editing programs....glow or glint or something its called. Seen it hundreds of times, in hundreds of fake ufo vids.

Most likely a video of balloons...with the glint/glow effect added to make them look more....UFO like.

Probably not even filmed where the video title suggests.

I think videos like this should be removed from the site, its quite obvious many of you hoaxers are now on here promoting your vids. If you want views, this is the place to come.

edit on 29-4-2012 by loves a conspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
 


it might be fake, only the sky was filmed.

the camera never went down, so the sky might be fake.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoymilkAlaska
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
 


it might be fake, only the sky was filmed.

the camera never went down, so the sky might be fake.


Might be....im certain it is.

Anyone can claim they are anywhere when there is no reference points.
Im pretty sure ive even seen the balloon video that has been used to make this lol



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Nurelic
 


I'm sorry, but there's no data to suggest anything, really in this video.
This could have been filmed anywhere since we're lacking reference points, plus, the sound in the background seems more consistent with someone filming from their house with domestic noises as opposed to being onsite at Puma Punku.

These ambiguous spots could also be anything. A number of them appear to be insects dashing across the frame.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
If this is "IT", how will we really know ?


Problem is that no one can dismiss cgi, from the "real" thing today...
edit on 29/4/2012 by kloejen because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Not sure what that is but I didn't see Puma Punku
anywhere.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
interesting but will never be taken seriously as evidence.. that kind of video right there is the EASIEST kind to fake with visual effects because it takes zero skill to add some points of light, animate them and use some stabilizing to make it look better with a shaky camera.. it takes a bit more skill to model an object and place it in.. these are simply specs of light.. no effort at all to create.

You could do all this in adobe after effects in a matter of minutes..I'm not saying that's what it is.. but it's too easy for it TO be that..

Sad thing is that with the nature of Youtube.. you get paid if you have a popular video.. there's actual motive to fake things now beyond just getting hits.
edit on 4/29/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/29/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by kloejen
If this is "IT", how will we really know ?


Problem is that no one can dismiss cgi, from the "real" thing today...
edit on 29/4/2012 by kloejen because: (no reason given)


I disagree.

Many people use this software daily...to make other videos. So when you see an effect you have used, you know the video is fake. There are lots of tale tale signs...length of the video is a major pointer its fake. Rendering times are enormous if you were to make a 10 minute video in HD, hence they are only seconds long.
Another is when reference points are avoided....

This is fake like all the other videos on Youtube. People begging for subscribers and likes, is another big giveaway,



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by orbitbaby
Not sure what that is but I didn't see Puma Punku
anywhere.


Exactly.. They could have just thrown that in to get traffic because of the ancient aliens show.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 



100% correct. Lots of hoaxers are on here, because they know they will get tons of views....tons of views = revenue from adsense.

I have 3 adsense accounts, i know how to get the biggest audience. If i were to make hoax vids, this is one of the places id sign up to.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by kloejen
If this is "IT", how will we really know ?


Problem is that no one can dismiss cgi, from the "real" thing today...
edit on 29/4/2012 by kloejen because: (no reason given)


This is the problem today with all videos. What is as important as the video itself is the before and after events and what is effected in the video outside the operators control of the video, and these are things that seem to always lack.

Questions to ask are why were they there with a camera, what was being recorded before the event, what happened after the event, how many others saw the event that are not part of the video group, what other events were triggered by this event, (like dogs barking/howling, many people screaming or talking excitedly etc)did others record/take pictures too that had no relationship with the original party.

This is a start to maybe the validity of a video, but then it still just proves it is a UFO and not what it actually is...



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Video title is now changed.....someone on here is promoting hoaxes...who?????

"UFO Sighting - Tiwanaku, Bolivia"


LOL

100% fake hoax....MODS PLEASE MOVE TO HOAX BIN TO STOP THE DOUCHEBAG GETTING VIEWS!!!!!



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by loves a conspiricy
 


So, you are saying there is no software on the market today, that can create such an illusion, that will not convince you, because you "know", that it must be CGI?

Then we are in religious terms... do you "believe", or do you "know" it's CGI ?

Just saying that if one out of 1000 videos show the unexplained, how do you know if its CGI, or some "anomaly", that you cannot explain?
edit on 29/4/2012 by kloejen because: (no reason given)


Just out of curiosity...can someone show me a video of REAL swamp gas ? I have never seen it in RL, nor video documented

edit on 29/4/2012 by kloejen because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   
ATSers are so freakin' hostile. It's a wonder anyone posts anything.

What if... just what if, this is a UFO video in broad daylight?

What if all you pixel people who shout HOAX on every video are just WRONG? That possibility siimply does not exist for you folks, does it?

How terribly dogmatic of you.





posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by antoinemarionette
ATSers are so freakin' hostile. It's a wonder anyone posts anything.

What if... just what if, this is a UFO video in broad daylight?

What if all you pixel people who shout HOAX on every video are just WRONG? That possibility siimply does not exist for you folks, does it?

How terribly dogmatic of you.




Most of the videos are fairly obvious hoaxes.. and it's turned into a thing where it can be lucrative with advertising to do it.. I've had friends do it just as a joke.. it's rampant ..

You can't trust youtube.. it will never be really accepted as solid evidence, mostly just interesting.. The only type of video I would probably consider accepting ( consider is keyword ) would be that from a reputable news organization or something along those lines.. but Joe Blow posting a video on youtube with dancing lights and no frame of reference just won't cut it as viable evidence to me.. or most people as you can tell.. it would be something else entirely if the video were shot by multiple people, but even those can be faked if you remember the Jerusalem video a while back ( a year or two ago )

It's interesting in a way.. but even for what it is, it's not that impressive.. even if it's a hoax video, it's not exceptionally well done..
edit on 4/29/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


I'd say you are biased in that opinion.

Opening a thread on ATS, which have an embedded YT video, does'nt mean it's already a hoax. Somebody wanted to post something they don't understand, and we try to explain and understand the video. Ruling out the video because it's YT is wrong, considering it's the fastest way to upload video from a (smart)phone.

Btw, you can only embed YouTube and Google videos on ATS



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kloejen
reply to post by miniatus
 


I'd say you are biased in that opinion.

Opening a thread on ATS, which have an embedded YT video, does'nt mean it's already a hoax. Somebody wanted to post something they don't understand, and we try to explain and understand the video. Ruling out the video because it's YT is wrong, considering it's the fastest way to upload video from a (smart)phone.

Btw, you can only embed YouTube and Google videos on ATS


I never said it was instantly a hoax because it's youtube ( or any video sharing site for that matter ), or that they couldn't contain legitimate UFO videos.. I'm just saying I personally wouldn't be accepting it as evidence of UFO's when it comes from youtube, and I don't think most will ( which is evident by the responses most of the time.. ) .. community video sites have inherent issues..

1. Anyone can upload anything
2. CG software is readily available
3. It's not difficult to produce videos .. especially videos like this one
4. There's now motive to do it because youtube pays you when your video is popular ( ad revenue sharing )

I could probably think of even more reasons not to just rush to accept it .. In order for me to accept it as the real deal, we'd probably need the raw video footage.. un-processed.. then you KNOW it's not been tampered with.. you will never get that on youtube or google.. or any other video sharing site... I'm not just picking on youtube... I've been around here long enough to know you can only embed those..

But beyond that... many of the videos ( most ) .. just plain look faked.. this one especially... or there exists other rational, and more plausible explanations.
edit on 4/29/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
So, what do you consider the RAW feed? And how will you get it?

I am sure we agree that any video these days are some kind of digital video files. So if you got the video in raw format, whatever that might be, still how do you determine what is fake and what is "unexplainable" ?

ANY digital media can be tampered with to a degree that you would not believe! So do we need to go back to analog video or where do we go from here? No matter how convincing a internet-video will be, it can still be explained away as "fantastic CGI", right ?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join