ATS Exclusive - Turkey UFO Incident - New Details - A Fresh Look At The Kumburgaz Case 2007 to 2009

CigaretteMan
I am not longer going to read or responde to Zetarediculan (mispelled BTW) or Freelance Zanarchist

The reason why is because they are not contributing any data to the thread and are not interested in having a serious conversation.

Unfortunately, I will continue to make my points. People are not as dumb as you think, they can read the last few posts and see who's contributing and wanting a serious conversation. The only thing you are contributing is the perpetuation of a hoax. I laid out a hoax scenario that fits rather well and could be easily accomplished by just about anyone. Thats a pretty good contribution and I haven't seen your response to that.

Whenever their points are shot down they simply change topic and try again with something else.

That is not so. People can read and are not susceptible to your Jedi mind tricks. At no time have I changed the topic.

I get the feeling that I am making you nervous because I do want to stay on topic with these 2 points:

1. The 21 minute gap in the footage going from what looks like a model shot inside to the outside shot of the lights. Why is there such a big gap in the footage? Since the night time shots have been easily recreated with a small model, it fits with the hoax scenario that there would be a gap precisely at that point which would allow for the transition to the outside day light shots.

You have not responded to or even "shot down" this point except to say that lights are not a model. That is a diversionary tactic as is your suggestion that I am not staying on topic, being serious and that my points are being shot down.

Diversionary tactics

2. Please provide your sources to your claim that Maccabee said this was not hoax. Please provide some evidence that Jeff Ritzman said this wasn't a hoax. If you can't, can you elaborate on what they said? This is very important.

You have not responded to this serious request.

Here is your post:

CigaretteMan
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

I agree with Dr. Bruce Maccabee that this is not a hoax.

It may be something else of course because 90% of ufos can be identified, but not a hoax.

And BTW Jeff Ritzmann who is ATS image analyst also thinks it is NOT A HOAX and he talked about this on his weekly radio show. Now Jeff feels it needs more investigation but he again he says he thinks its not a hoax.

Both of these comments are easily checked but I would like your response first.

3. What night time footage clearly shows that it is over the sea? It just doesn't add up that there is 26 days of footage but no clear evidence of the night shots being over the sea or even flying. Of the 26 days, What footage is the best footage to show movement and that its flying?

You have never responded to this question.

CigaretteMan
I am not longer going to read or responde to Zetarediculan (mispelled BTW)

I'm fairly certain it is spelled as intended... humouriously.

"Responde", on the other hand...

CigaretteMan
I am not longer going to read or responde to Zetarediculan (mispelled BTW) or Freelance Zanarchist

The reason why is because they are not contributing any data to the thread and are not interested in having a serious conversation.

Whenever their points are shot down they simply change topic and try again with something else.

So from now on I only am talking to serious individuals who are interested in actually being productive.

So you refuse to respond to anyone who disagrees with you and can explain, in detail, precisely why they disagree? Interesting.

The light source in the above video is coming from the moon.

There is no other way to explain the shifting of light and shadow across the object other than some kind of movement.

Now of course it may not be just horizontal but it could be vertical or at an angle.

The moon would not move this fast which leaves only one option.

The object in question is moving.



I also noticed that in previous posts the video of Haktan and witness Murat explaining the videos was removed by the Youtube user.

I will replace the video here

Thanks for re-posting the same old reheated hash.

I do not like green eggs and ham

I do not like them, Cigaretteman.

reply to post by draknoir2


Someone made the argument that I never posted anything showing it moving.

So I posted something that might show it moving.

Apparently they missed it the first time.

My guess is they once again will make the claim that I never posted something having to do with the object moving.

You see why I put them on ignore now?

There was some boy scouts out on an expedition doing some weather experiments, pretty sure

reply to post by CigaretteMan


Hi CigaretteMan!

You still haven't posted anything showing that the object is moving.

What you posted shows a shadow moving across the surface of the object. The shadow is from a cloud moving across the sky. The object is still stationary.

reply to post by CigaretteMan

The light source in the above video is coming from the moon.

There is no other way to explain the shifting of light and shadow across the object other than some kind of movement.

I'm going to have to disagree. Assuming this is a model, the light source could be from anything and the shadow could be from anything.

Since there is no way to determine if this was outside, it has to be assumed to be a model. This is because the best Match had been recreated with a model and nothing can show it being outside.

But thanks for taking the time to repost this but I don't recall you posting it before.

My guess is they once again will make the claim that I never posted something having to do with the object moving.

Unfortunately I am very predicable. If that was the best evidence for movement, we can safely assume that this object did not move at any time. This is also supports that this is a stationary model.

I'm glad we are back on track with having an intelligent discussion.

Do you have any sources to the Maccabee or the Ritzman quotes you claim they made?

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


I used to think that clip was a model, mostly because of the way it's always cropped off on the bottom. But then mr. cigs posted that clip showing the shadow move across it and that made me believe it was shot outside. Like you said it could be a shadow of anything, like a person moving around the room it was filmed in, but there's a shot of the object and the moon in the same frame and it's a very long zoom so he would need alot of room indoors.

I don't think a hoaxer would go to such elaborate ends as to film a model indoors, with the moon in the frame and then make the video look completely obscured and unidentifiable. It's too much work for something easily achieved by just going outside and filming something off in the distance that you can't quite make out.

I think Yalmin was just strolling on the beach and whatever he was looking at was obstructed enough to give it a mysterious appearance.

There's still nothing that shows this object is in the air or moving though. He filmed it 26 times and never once caught it arriving or leaving. That's very telling.

freelance_zenarchist
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

I used to think that clip was a model, mostly because of the way it's always cropped off on the bottom. But then mr. cigs posted that clip showing the shadow move across it and that made me believe it was shot outside. Like you said it could be a shadow of anything, like a person moving around the room it was filmed in, but there's a shot of the object and the moon in the same frame and it's a very long zoom so he would need alot of room indoors.

I don't think a hoaxer would go to such elaborate ends as to film a model indoors, with the moon in the frame and then make the video look completely obscured and unidentifiable. It's too much work for something easily achieved by just going outside and filming something off in the distance that you can't quite make out.

I think Yalmin was just strolling on the beach and whatever he was looking at was obstructed enough to give it a mysterious appearance.

There's still nothing that shows this object is in the air or moving though. He filmed it 26 times and never once caught it arriving or leaving. That's very telling.

edit on 18-9-2013 by freelance_zenarchist because: (no reason given)

Hi mr. Freelance,

I not 100% convinced that's a model. There just doesn't seem to be anything to say for sure that its outside or not. However, if I assume it to be a model, it does fit as does any number of things. However, I DO think the one frame that matches the boat is a boat as it is completely different then what I think might be a model. This recreation video is pretty convincing with the moon shots.

Not even close?! And if it was so..where's the rest of the ship in the video?!!? LOL funny how the light only hits 1 part and not the whole f****Ing 500ft ship! Failkure.

reply to post by wmd_2008

ATSZOMBIE
Not even close?! And if it was so..where's the rest of the ship in the video?!!? LOL funny how the light only hits 1 part and not the whole f****Ing 500ft ship! Failkure.

reply to post by wmd_2008

 

just out of curiosity, have you ever driven in the fog? All you can see sometimes is the car lights and not the car. This happens at night too. Do you then think that the lights are UFOs?



And then there is this

KIZZZY
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dc3d17cdf525.jpg[/atsimg]

LQQKS about right to me!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4997a282ec4b.jpg[/atsimg]

Mario Valdes from Chile carried out an image analysis in 2012 and his results definitely fall down on the side of cigaretteman. The following link can be found on the coast to coast web site

Take a look here Archivos Ovni - Video Analysis of the Kumburgaz UFO

StvUK
Mario Valdes from Chile carried out an image analysis in 2012 and his results definitely fall down on the side of cigaretteman. The following link can be found on the coast to coast web site

Take a look here Archivos Ovni - Video Analysis of the Kumburgaz UFO

You are talking about this



It speaks for itself...

So if the following is true, then we do we have a winner? When I have some time, I will download the raw footage and figure out how do this...

post by AllIsOne

AllIsOne
I can say with 100% certainty that the video was shot inside a room (if this is the original audio). While everybody concentrated on the visuals I analyzed the audio. Due to early reflections it is apparent, especially at 0:30, that the video was shot inside a rather small space.

If you'd like to learn more about early reflections:

www.tonmeister.ca...

Do they claim that the video was shot inside a room through a window? If it was shot "outside" then it's a fake ...

AllIsOne
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

Nah, little toy UFO's shouldn't shake your boots ...

In my opinion the videos are a clever combination of filming a model in a small room (the audio track confirms that), and then cutting to actual outdoor footage at a beach. I speculate that the object in the outdoor footage is a partially lit boat, or some other floating object that was there at the time.

For those who want to explore my "small room theory": download the original audio, then analyze the direct audio and the room information (early reflections) with a MS decoder. Don't take my word for it, but see for yourself.

Thanks for your time.

AllIsOne
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

My friend,

I cannot speak for others. I don't know what the good Dr. was thinking, but data doesn't lie. It's clear to me that the night time footage was not recorded in an open space. Open space doesn't give you early reflections.

I discovered this video which has not been posted yet on ATS or anywhere on the internet yet. This video shows a group of people attending a conference in Turkey standing outside. Murat Yalcin the same witness from the infamous videos is seen in the crowd. The orb moves from right to left. This was filmed on May 14, 2009 in Turkey around the same time as the 2009 segment of video was taken which spanned from May 13 to May 17, 2009 so the times see to be right.




The quality of this video is not as good as other other ones.

There is alot of yelling and screaming but overall it is something new to study.

Guys,
I am at this forum because I would love to see the evidence there is more out there... but this?

1. Look at the shots. At day we see panorama shots with lights.. at night we see structure(s). Why is that?
2. Look at the structure. It looks like a cheap CGI. sorry to say that.
3. Look at the evidence of the "aliens" ... come on from that distance? (not that we can measure it by the lack of any (really any) other point of reference. So, or the thing is real close or it is far away and the aliens are HUGE.
4. A bit suspicious that the filmer is right on the right spot immedeatly..?

5. Most important: have you ever filmed with a camera with mini-DV? Have you ever filmed at sea? No way there is NO background noise of the waves. And absolutely no way we dont hear any wind. Also the sounds we hear are like taken in a confined room.

Sorry guys...

PS excuse me I am dutch so my english grammar isnt top.

I must say that it puzzles me that an advance craft or alien civilization that is able to travel at or near speed of light and or utilize black holes with their silent anti gravity ships , still use lights at night?

I'm not saying its not possible but its puzzling.

Does anybody else have anymore comments about this case or wish to have a discussion about it? I have shown how this craft is most likely not yacht windows as some suggest and is not CGI.

Would someone like to add more to the discussion?