Ufos above a burning ship???

wmd_2008

tracehd1

AmberLeaf
LookNow = xxxDonutzxxx

All his content is banned from being posted here as far as i remember???

CGI bs, i dont even have to watch the video to know its going to be fake!! Mods alerted to posting known hoaxers material.

It would seem you would have to "prove " it to be a hoax... Seen none of that from you!!! tt

Add: well since you can't be bothered as many people couldn't be bothered when they were told the earth was not flat... Does not in any way prove this to be a hoax... Concrete evidence is what we need and not someone that just does lip service.

edit on 23-9-2013 by tracehd1 because: (no reason given)

Looks like there is plenty of proof dodgy youtube channel, now obvious evidence of the ship when it happened etc more things make it look FAKE than true.

That should say NO obvious evidence etc.

MarsSentinel
The days when pictures or videos of something can be taken as "evidence" are over.

Digital processing has rendered images moot.

By themselves they simply mean nothing.

Manipulation is too easy and detection is too hard for us to trust images any more.

What happens now is that we are back to taking someone's word for something.

The images and videos are irrelevant, and we are left with testimony as the sole evidence in these cases because the visuals are simply too easy to fake these days.

I have to agree. Video and images are basically worthless as evidence for anything, especially when its just simple lights, like here.

I'd go further. I think that it is absolutely worthless to compile simple, "lights in the sky" as being UFOs worthy of study. Nothing can be learned from them. Fifty years of UFO study has been wasted on investigating far too many simple "lights in the night sky" which 90 to 99% of the time, are probably simply confused observers witnessing the most mundane phenomena.

If the desire is to determine if some UFOs are ET craft, or some technology beyond our earthly civilization, then there has to be some focus and culling of useless noise.

But all this posting of CGI video from YouTube does nothing but make the whole field out to be a total joke.

1. Pointless title screen? Check
2. Pointless outro advertising of channel or similar screen? Check
3. That really outdated "lens flare" style orb effect? Check
4. Footage of something mildly interesting/uninteresting that would be fun to lay UFO's over? Check
5. Computer imagery movements of craft? Check
6. UFO's fading out despite no-one EVER reporting that occuring with real UFO's? Check
7. Zero commentary or un-awed witness? Check
8. Lack of other witnesses? Check
9. Frame rate of orbs not matching frame rate of background footage? Check
10. Hoax? Check

Still, it was fun to write this list

PS. Kind of funny isn't it how the videos that start with title cards saying "The best UFO videos on the net!" etc are the ones usually fake or rubbish. It's a good way to spot a hoax, someone trying to tell you it's the best you've ever seen before you've even seen it, or that the source is "Worlds No.1 UFO source". Outrageous claims. No video has ever been as 'good' as any of my personal sightings, so when I see those title cards it's an instant "Hrmmmmm" in my brain.. Applying marketing tactics to UFOlogy just falls flat on its face every single time. These two things don't seem to mix. At least, when they try to, one comes off as rubber the other as glue. They don't gel put it that way.