[HOAX]Found New Video- large Space Objects-F.A.S.T. [HOAX]

I knew 'Gridkeeper' was a fraud when I asked him a question on youtube and he banned me from posting on his vids. I encourage everyone to ask questions there, as that is where he is ALL the time. Jeff Rense is getting pounded with FACTS, and will be posting a retraction soon about Mr. Walson (same person) This guy is a total fraud. What he doesnt realize is that his participation in this field is OVER. He is in the same boat as Escamilla and all the rest. Never to be heard from again. Good Riddance!

Originally posted by Essan
If you photograph a UFO and want to know what it might be, then post it on ATS. You may not know what it is you've seen, but chances are, someone on ATS will. It's what we do well: find explanations for the seemingly inexplicable.
Thus, a mystery is solved. Ignorance denied

Really? Can you point me to one post where the 'experts' here at ATS have concluded that the photo is a GENUINE UFO?

All I see is 'photoshopped', "hoax', etc... and a lot of ridicule for anyone who dares to think they have captured one

Deny Ignorance is a two edged sword... we must also deny the ignorance of skeptics who are blinded by their version of reality and will do everything possible to discredit someone

Originally posted by zorgon
Really? Can you point me to one post where the 'experts' here at ATS have concluded that the photo is a GENUINE UFO?

This one
While some questions were raised about the photo, not all of them added up, and every eyewitness who has seen the photo confirmed both the object and weather conditions shown in the shot.

There's also another thread with Chicago-vicinity cell phone shots that have not been debunked... despite an intensive effort.

Found it... Here's the other thread

[edit on 12-2-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

Has anyone duplicated the FAST videos yet? How were they made? This has never been answered to my satisfaction. Maybe I missed it among the myriad of UFO threads at ATS. I have seen the allegations (proved at this point?) of theft of previous UFO pics

but I have never seen anyone describe what we are looking at in the FAST videos.

Whenever I have asked in the past it's always met with a diversion to some other part of the story.

WHAT is in the FAST videos?

Ah yes the Chicago O'Hare incident...

Well this one actually fits my criteria for ' a real UFO' as it is 'fuzzy' (do to the force field generated by the drive and hence the reason you will NEVER get a clear 'Hollywood style' image of a saucer... and this is truly one of the best so far

But here on page 106 of the first thread you linked...

Originally posted by jritzmann

Originally posted by AFRLPT
reply to post by jritzmann

 

1) What was the final (best) judgement of the 'cell phone' photo?

That it was very likely legitimate however tampered with. Done so in such a manner as to not damage or call into question the UO, but rather anyone who would come out and call it a real unfettered photo of the event. As the case remains unsolved, and more photos / video may be forthcoming, I wont reveal anything more then that. Those of us who worked extensively need an edge over whomever might be trying to soil or coverup the event.

Originally posted by AFRLPT
2) Did anyone ever interview Eyewitness's friend who was in her car as they entered the parking lot and then stood there watching the object? If no, why not? If yes, is her testimony available anywhere?

Not that I know of. At the time I spoke to her it was related that they didnt wish to comment. The other friend was a pilot and we all know why they dont talk much.

So while this incident has indeed been extensively discussed here, by page 106 of the thread, a year later, the expert opinion seems to be..

The witness did not wish to comment and the cell phone image was 'tampered' with (unless I read this wrong?)

Now its quite possible that we will never reach a conclusion until one lands in our backyard.... and even then I bet most would say 'fake'

signed... disillusioned

Originally posted by zorgon
The witness did not wish to comment and the cell phone image was 'tampered' with (unless I read this wrong?)

The tampering is but one explanation for some oddities in the image.

Where the credibility of this image stands up is where Mark (Springer) set the image to the Chicago Tribune reporter who broke the story. He then got back to us that he showed it to every eyewitness he interviewed for his story, and everyone confirmed the craft, general location, and weather conditions. A photo with genuine witness corroboration, from multiple witnesses, is indeed rare.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Where the credibility of this image stands up is where Mark (Springer) set the image to the Chicago Tribune reporter who broke the story.

Well I will concede that you have pointed me to one incidence where this has been concluded to be a true UFO as in Unidentified Flying Object

Originally posted by stikkinikki
Has anyone duplicated the FAST videos yet? How were they made? This has never been answered to my satisfaction. Maybe I missed it among the myriad of UFO threads at ATS. I have seen the allegations (proved at this point?) of theft of previous UFO pics but I have never seen anyone describe what we are looking at in the FAST videos.
Whenever I have asked in the past it's always met with a diversion to some other part of the story. WHAT is in the FAST videos?

It's the FAST videos that got me into ATS. I'm a super sceptic when it comes to astronomical revelation and telescopic phenomena on YouTube. As an amateur astronomer with plenty of high tech kit, I asked Gridkeeper a lot of questions about the objects that John Walson was supposedly filming. All I got back was flim flam and side stepping. Subsequent videos showing Walson in discussion with a well respected astronomer convinced me of the hoax.

It was pretty clear to me that the objects shown are not located at great distances, but are fairly close to the telescope. It's related to depth of field effects and factors involving focus changes in some of the videos. Anyway, after a bit of experimentation, I believed I could reproduce, at least to my own satisfaction, what is actually going on. I believe Walson's technique involves taking videos of UFO models located maybe a hundred metres or so from his 'scope. The objects are viewed using a reflective or refractive panel, possibly a double-glazed window. There is no fancy high resolution/zoom camera. All it requires is a simple webcam. Webcams are very popular in amateur astronomy and produce surprising good astrophotographs and videos. They are easy to attach to popular 'scopes like Walson's Meade using commercially made adapters.

Anyway I set up the scope/webcam and used 'UFOs' made from paperclips and tinfoil. These models were only an inch long, because the scope/webcam combination produces very high magnifications. Walson's models are more complex and probably larger. People have said some of Walson's UFOs look like an old fashioned hand turned kitchen whisk. That maybe closer to the truth than realised! He must also be able to locate the models well away from his scope, possibly 100 meters or so. Because my back yard is quite small, I used an old mirror to provide more separation and to create the double image effect noted in the FAST videos. Viewing them through a double-glazed window would create a similar effect. The models were set up in daylight, then video'd after sunset using a flashlight for illumination. The video files were then edited and compiled with some simple specialFX and spooky music using an amateur video editing package.

You can see my results by searching on YouTube for 'CyranoAcrylate' - that's my YouTube handle. I added the SLOW logo for additional effect ('Shedding Light On Walson' perhaps). Bear in mind that these videos are my very first and possibly my only attempts at the technique. FAST have been doing this a lot longer and have access to more sophisticated editing gear than mine, but this simple experiment shows how easily you could make something unusual. I'm not claiming identical results, merely showing the principles used by FAST to generate their hoaxes. Note that the first video in my series states that it is indeed a hoax. This very fact seems to have kept its public rating low. The subsequent ones were left more or less unacknowledged and the response is different. An interesting result in itself.

WG3

reply to post by waveguide3


I'm going to have to give you a star for that. Very good!!! That is what I needed to jump on the hoax wagon. EXCELLENT!!! I've been trying to figure it out for months.

You deserve applause IMO.

reply to post by waveguide3

Ok, it's needed very demonstrative but the FAST movies are clearly showng that objects are moving in the sky, like in orbit. He also posted highly magnified movies of the moon. How do you explain? Thank you.

Originally posted by Dahut
reply to post by waveguide3

 

Ok, it's needed very demonstrative but the FAST movies are clearly showng that objects are moving in the sky, like in orbit. He also posted highly magnified movies of the moon. How do you explain? Thank you.

Turn on the telescope's drive and anything you film on the ground will appear to move as if in "orbit." No one's doubting that he used a real telescope, so slewing it to the moon would not be expected to be a problem. Waveguide seems to have nailed his technique perfectly though, if you compare the images they're identical in form to JLWs unusual looking "spaceships." Had JLW actually been filming objects in orbit, the video should have been much harder to obtain.

I use a nearly identical telescope and although I can get pictures of the ISS and shuttle, keeping it steady in the frame isn't possible at the high magnifications seen in the JLW videos. It shouldn't just move, it should be shaky due to vibrations induced by the fast-spinning motors. It should also be fairly jerky as he should have to constantly refine the tracking on these objects, especially if he's calculating their orbits himself using just his own observations. If he were to do it by hand the objects should only appear in the video occasionally as it just isn't possible to keep it in the frame for more than a second or two at a time.

reply to post by waveguide3


Great job waveguide3!
Gridkeeper and JLW are doomed once and for all for me now.

Thanks.

Originally posted by Dahut
Ok, it's needed very demonstrative but the FAST movies are clearly showing that objects are moving in the sky, like in orbit.

They appear to show something in orbit, but it's an illusion. You think they show a space object because you've been told they are in space. Compare my videos and they also appear to be in space, but I assure you they were not.

UFO Hoax Video 1
UFO Hoax Video 2
UFO Hoax Video 3

He also posted highly magnified movies of the moon. How do you explain?

Like this?


This is a composite still from a 500mb movie I made of the moon in a summer evening sky. The image is blurred because the moon was shimmering about due to heat rising from the ground. I haven't uploaded the movie 'cos it takes hours. (I will upload if anyone wants to see it.)

WG3

Originally posted by ngchunter
I use a nearly identical telescope and although I can get pictures of the ISS and shuttle, keeping it steady in the frame isn't possible at the high magnifications seen in the JLW videos. It shouldn't just move, it should be shaky due to vibrations induced by the fast-spinning motors. It should also be fairly jerky as he should have to constantly refine the tracking on these objects, especially if he's calculating their orbits himself using just his own observations. If he were to do it by hand the objects should only appear in the video occasionally as it just isn't possible to keep it in the frame for more than a second or two at a time.

How right you are! I've only had one shot at capturing the ISS and it's VERY difficult, especially using a portable scope rather than a permanently aligned system. Here's my grossly overexposed video of a typical flyby. This video was taken last summer using a webcam attached to a 10" Meade on an AltAz mount. The tracking was done automatically using the NORAD 2-line orbital elements running with Brent Boshart's Satellite Tracker software. I had to keep adjusting it manually 'cos the scope's default alignment was slightly out. If you can't orientate the ISS, the long solar panels are set near vertical in this video.
The FAST/Walson/YouTube videos showing the 'ISS' are as phoney as the rest of their stuff. The object doesn't even look like the ISS and is another of their chickenwire creations.

Here's my first attempt.

WG3

reply to post by waveguide3


Great job waveguide3!

I guess Jose Escamilla will be glad to hear all of this.(Sarcasm) He (Jose) came here looking for JLW to prove to "Interstellar" starships were real.

Jose said himself that he would refund everyone who purchased "Interstellar" when and if they turned out to be a fraud.

[edit on 19-2-2008 by gauncents]

Originally posted by gauncents
reply to post by waveguide3

 

Jose said himself that he would refund everyone who purchased "Interstellar" when and if they turned out to be a fraud.

He subscribed to the CyranoAcrylate video postings so he knows how the FAST hoax can be duplicated. Compiling an 'Interstellar' type movie using my own clips would be quite easy if you've access to a good editor, a spooky music library and a talented director. Whoever puts the FAST stuff together is quite clever, that's clear.

WG3

Episode 63 - Far Above Space and Time - Satellite? ZOOM
blip.tv...

Episode 60 - Far Above Space and Time - John & Mr D ON THE MOON Feb 11 2008
Moon, telescope and cameras:
blip.tv...

Griddy.

Originally posted by Griddy
Episode 63 - Far Above Space and Time - Satellite? ZOOM
blip.tv...

Episode 60 - Far Above Space and Time - John & Mr D ON THE MOON Feb 11 2008
Moon, telescope and cameras:
blip.tv...

Griddy.

Welcome n00b. Was 63 supposed to be Orions Belt? Is the object always there? Should I be able to pull that up in my Meade?

I like the moon vid. It's painful how close it is to focused yet just remains out of focus. Show us how to replicate. Show me?

And now Gridkeeper returns under a different name (Griddy) to continue to try to sell this crap.

Notice how he doesn't even mention his ban, just posts like nothing has happened.

I think the mods need top close this pile of thread before he returns to keep doing it.

Originally posted by Griddy
Episode 63 - Far Above Space and Time - Satellite? ZOOM
blip.tv...

Episode 60 - Far Above Space and Time - John & Mr D ON THE MOON Feb 11 2008
Moon, telescope and cameras:
blip.tv...

Griddy.

You have no idea how many names I want to call you right now. I cannot believe you have the balls to re-register here after being banned and continue to post this fake crap after it's been clearly debunked.

I hope to god they ban your IP address this time and at least close this thread.