It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is this Alien Technology digital camouflage .

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 10:33 AM
If you look at 3.00 on the video timer you will see a soldier run from right to left he blends in with the wall . Are they now using this in Iraq

Video click here

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 10:52 AM
reply to post by cal981

Thanks! Now this is actually an interesting theory. The video does seem to suggest that there's some sort of cloaking going on, but it could easily be edited.

Jury's out on this one for me. I've not heard of anything like this before (outside of those clunky camera/screen ones) and I can think of a hell of a lot of technical hurdles to get over, but I'll keep watching this thread for more info. =)

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 11:07 AM
hhhmmm, not sure about this one, on the one hand after you see the "invisible" person running, there are some other non invisible people walking in the same place, they too seem to be some what blurry, and they were walking not running, so it could just have been a focus problem with the camera or some sort of reaction to certain light and angles etc?

on the other hand, it would not surprise me in the slightest if there were some sort of suit that the government had manufactured that gave the illusion of invisibility, i mean, i'm no scientist, but invisible technologies have been talked about for a while now, and isn't the military supposed to have control over most technology before the GP know anything about it?

so i guess i'm not sure, could be a camera trick, could be the latest in military couture!! either one would not shock me!

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 11:12 AM
What would really help is if somehow more footage was found from different angles.

If we had a few shots of this 'invisible' guy running up and they were accurate from 2-3 angles perhaps this would almost be confirmed for me.

I'm always going to be skeptical, but this is far more interesting than most of the stuff I've seen today.

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 11:27 AM
I would really like to see this without the red circle around the guy, preferbly in a much better resolution. Did anyone find the original video?

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 11:27 AM
uhm no its just the pixelation of the video as it attempts to catch up with a dude whos color "almost" matches the background..the bit depth of the video however has to find a color and it picks one close to that of the wall by chance.
Do you really think they would waste cloaking technology on grunts in Iraq..NO.

They have the best they can wish for which is plain old CAMOFLAGE!

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 11:49 AM
Metamaterials! You all know that the private sector, for every year they advance, the military is about 48 years ahead in development...And this is compounding. Here's a couple of things on it.

Edit to add:
This isn't digital camo. This is bending light around the surface of the material and allowing it to continue out of the other side. Pretty simple stuff really. The only hard part is materials that bend the visible spectrum and reflect in the visible spectrum. I think the military has long since been doing this. All the material needs is a small charge and viola! you're "invisible".

[edit on 30-3-2008 by projectvxn]

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 01:16 PM
As projectvxn correctly reported, there are some advanced studies in cloacking techniques.

Engineers Create 'Optical Cloaking' Design For Invisibility
ScienceDaily (Apr. 2, 2007) — Researchers using nanotechnology have taken a step toward creating an "optical cloaking" device that could render objects invisible by guiding light around anything placed inside this "cloak."

The Purdue University engineers, following mathematical guidelines devised in 2006 by physicists in the United Kingdom, have created a theoretical design that uses an array of tiny needles radiating outward from a central spoke. The design, which resembles a round hairbrush, would bend light around the object being cloaked. Background
objects would be visible but not the object surrounded by the cylindrical array of nano-needles, said Vladimir Shalaev, Purdue's Robert and Anne Burnett Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering.

The design does, however, have a major limitation: It works only for any single wavelength, and not for the entire frequency range of the visible spectrum, Shalaev said.

BUT i don't think that this technology has something to do with this specific video, (here can be downloaded a converted AVI format version)

This video has been released by "Al-Furqan Media," the production company of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), which was founded by Al-Qaeda.

(Its blog was here but is no longer online)

Image source:

Image source:

Coalition and Iraqi special operations forces continue to target al Qaeda's propaganda capabilities. Over the summer, US forces scored a major victory with the capture of Khalid Abdul Fatah Da’ud Mahmud al Mashadani, also known as Abu Shahed. Mashadani was al Qaeda's minister of information and served as the go between for al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Ayyub al Masri and Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri. The capture of Mashadani has shed light on al Qaeda's media operations, and has allowed Multinational Forces Iraq to roll up al Qaeda's media cells throughout Iraq.

"Since the surge began, we’ve uncovered eight separate al Qaeda media offices and cells, have captured or killed 24 al Qaeda propaganda cell members and have discovered 23 terabytes of information," said Rear Admiral Gregory Smith, the chief Public Affairs Officer for Multinational Forces Iraq in a press briefing. Most recently, four members of al Qaeda's al Furqan media cell in Mosul were captured, "including the media emir of Mosul, the former head of Mosul’s media cell who had established the al Qaeda communications hub in Baghdad, a foreign terrorist from Saudi Arabia who is proficient in video editing and special effects, and a computer graphics specialist," the Armed Forces Press Service reported. Cells have also been broken up in Baghdad, Diyala, Tarmiyah, Samarra, and Karma.

The video editor and graphics technician are the lowest ranking and most easily replaceable members of the media cells, according to Nick Grace, the host of Global Crisis Watch and an expert on al Qaeda's media operations, in an interview with The Long War Journal. "The cell members are entry-level positions in al Qaeda's media wing, and start off in the field with al Furqan or al Fajr," said Grace. "If they show skills they may then graduate to work for As Sahab, al Qaeda's parent media organization, and work in Pakistan." Grace also noted the effort al Qaeda put into its propaganda programs and likened the city cells to local television news stations subordinate to US television networks.

I think it's a hoax, (and it would not be the first time):
The soldier never leaves the tank: the tank in which the "invisible man" allegedly enters, is NOT the one hit by the IED: so he supposedly enters an "inhabited" tank, unless i'm missing something here. Yes, he could have killed the soldier/s inside the tank before entering it,
but there's still a couple of problems with this video.
The running transparent person, shows a strange effect: like a motion blur, but on the contrary of the expected one (the motion blur always appears BEFORE the movement rather than after): in some frames he even splits in two figures.

Here it's even visible his left leg movement some frames before the actual movement happens (these are three merged frames).

And how does it come that we (even barely) see him, but the soldier in this frame, who is at not more than some feets from him, does NOT?

And, last but not least, how does it come that they have cutted the footage in the most "interesting" (for them) part? I mean, now the tank is supposedly controlled by one of them, hence, this would be the most "interesting" (for them) part of the footage:
an insurgent who controls an US tank: that would be a great propaganda for them.
NOTE: this is just my opinion and i may be totally wrong: so if i'm wrong, then i apologize in advance.

[edit on 30/3/2008 by internos]

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 03:09 PM
that cloaking experiment ONLY works for the guy looking at it THRU a camera..not the naked eye. Its far from in the field..

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 03:27 PM
Is it possible that the potentially advanced cloak suit is producing some sort of refraction? Like I said, the private sector is just barely catching on to this. But the military probably has a working model in the visible range.

I'm not disputing the results of the analysis you've done on the video. I just wanted to provide a possibility that would most certainly help explain this. Provided the suit is real of course.

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 04:36 PM
reply to post by projectvxn


my initial take was actually that it was some kind of cloacking suite, indeed:
and of course i can't rule out that the "splitting" effect is some kind of refraction.
But this would explain only the frames in which the figure is splitted and of course it should be a "copy" or a "distorted copy"of the source: but in this case the refraction sometimes looks totally different, i mean the figure has two different shapes in the same frame; besides, a refraction cannot anticipate a movement like the one of the left leg (how can a refraction to predict a movement?):

often in the footage, there's a total absence of synchronization in the shapes, and the effect happens just in some frames, not in the whole footage: that's a fingerprint of post-processing.
And besides, Al-Furqan Media, the group which produced THIS specific video, has been assested that have produced other faked videos of this kind: they've played a key role in Al Qaeda's propaganda:
now, we are used to watch faked videos of UFOs, but their target are often people not so used like we are,
and in many cases this kind of videos works very well.
If we weren't aware of what is possible to do with CGI, of course it would have worked with us too.
And there's the issue of the soldier who doesn't notice him, the the issue that he entered in a tank with people inside, the issue that the video stops in the most important moment, the issue that the suit shouldn't be easy so easy to find (give that it exists, and given that it works so well:

i mean if we simply look at this video by itselfs, then yes, it could actually have happened that an insurgent with a camo suite has stolen a tank to US:

but if we look at it as if it was a puzzle, then the whole story is far fetched to say the least:
all suggests that it's a hoax: the authors, what we see and what we dont see: but of course this is just my opinion

[edit on 30/3/2008 by internos]

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 05:30 PM
If this technology is just now public domain then they'll have been using it for years allready.
I do think they've got this technology from sources we don't know exist.

[edit on 30-3-2008 by The Wizard]

posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 05:36 PM
it doesn't seem likely they would use it in such a "non event" like Iraq where the need for optical camouflage seems non existent. If they had it, it'd be used in special ops behind the scenes affairs..they definitely wouldn't flaunt it where the possibility of the solider being so easily killed and thus losing the technology to terrorists. Its absolutely ABSURD.
This video is either a hoax or just badly pixelated its looking like that..either way shut this thing down!

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 04:57 AM

Originally posted by atsguy_106
This video is either a hoax or just badly pixelated its looking like that..either way shut this thing down!

Agreed: of course is NOT the real deal.
There's a modern ongoing war: this war is based more on communication than on facts.
Now, when i wasn't aware of the existance of CGI as tactical device, i was always impressed by these videos of tanks destroyed by bombs, but the most impressive details were the people flying everywhere at the explosion: this is a psychological war. They use these videos in order to recruit more kamikaze, in order to say to the people "hey look at what happens to the americans in Iraq". All the material coming from this source is unreliable, is propaganda, is CRAP.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 06:15 AM
There should be a thread about obvious effects of badly compressed video and photos. If there was, maybe rubbish like this wouldn't clog up the boards. And don't even get me started on electric aliens :-P

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 08:55 AM
If you took a decent still image, (easy to do as the camera is stationary), you could use that as a reference image. Then mask the person running in each frame so that the reference image (behind the mask) takes on his shape.

Sure it's a little bit of work (repetitive as opposed to hard to do). You'd then just add a distortion or blur and render the image sequence back over the top in Premier. Not the most hi-tech way but the simplest. It's how I would do that with limited resources.

However, it seems as though that guy is jumping onto the tank. Nice work really.

Just off topic, I love the singers multi-tracked vocals! Nice warm delay/reverb too! LOL!

There is a post on compression that Internos made in a Reptilian thread recently.

He points to an article on lossy compression at Wikipedia:

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 12:46 PM
Great work. We need more analysis done like this more often. I didn't notice the "preemptive" refraction...(For lack of a better term). Had it not been for the differentiating shapes of the subject, this would have been a pretty damned good find.

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 06:08 PM
i dont think a soldier would just carry nothing more than just his outfit...

posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 10:04 PM
The US government and armed forces have neither confirmed or denied the existance of such technology and if it's currently fielded.

I doubt it's ET technology if this is indeed the case.

Why would ISI hoax invisible soldiers? what is the reason for that exactly in your theory? it would only make the 'enemy' look stronger right?

Man that video irked me though hearing all that Allah Akbar crap...

posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 10:29 PM

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo

Man that video irked me though hearing all that Allah Akbar crap...

Just look at the enemy like at someone able to do anything in order to pass himself stronger than he actually is.
Try this: look at 50/60 videos like this one on nothingtoxic and let me know hou do you feel after doin' it.
If you feel bad, then try to imagine what could be the effect on a potential insurgent's allied, a 15 Y.O, for example. This is propaganda at its best

They want also pass the americans as a bunch of racists always ready to shot who's in disagreement with them: they make no distinction between president and citizen: in their mind America deserves a 9/11 everyday mate. They are the enemies, not talking about the people without water in many towns o iraq: i'm talking about the people who is using this war in order to convince the world that America is evil, without focusing on the faults of america's government: get this difference and their efforts will be useless.

[edit on 22/4/2008 by internos]

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in