OK, so the whole 'Reptilian' thing is a joke, but...

I've always been among the first to laugh off supposed evidence of reptilians, and I'm still more than skeptical, but for the first time I've stumbled across a video which actually seems to have some worth (that is unless it's been debunked). Has anyone seen this before?

[edit on 23/10/2008 by Cythraul]

Bad link man.
2
3
4
5
6 lines!

reply to post by Gamechanger

Sorry bud, first time I've used the youtube feature believe it or not. Should be good now.

You're right.

Very interesting.

oh god, not another youtube reptilian eye video

Please, can we have some common sense?

Wow, that is strange. I'm not a believer in the whole reptillian thing but that is really interesting....If you pay attention to the way he moves it seems entirely too jerky and forced. Like he's having a hard time controling movement.

Like I said, not a believer but wow.

Originally posted by Mr Headshot
Wow, that is strange. I'm not a believer in the whole reptillian thing but that is really interesting....If you pay attention to the way he moves it seems entirely too jerky and forced. Like he's having a hard time controling movement.

Like I said, not a believer but wow.

Yeah that's because they sped the film up, to fool people like you.

And it worked it seems......

Until a giant lizard jumps out in front of me I won't believe this.

Who ever decided reptiles would be a good conspiracy should seriously be sent to a mental institution.

I thought it looked sped up honestly.
I didn't ever say I thought he was a underground dwelling lizard man, so back off dude. I think Icke's as wacky as they come, it just looked strange at first glance.

Maybe he likes wearing wild eye contacts instead of the clear ones.? Like these here.
Wild Eyes

Reptilians don't exist and is a complete hoax in my opinion.

It's called Coloboma. I have it in both eyes, my eyes look like keyholes. Guess I must be a reptilian, cool.

Geesh, you people and your reptilian youtube garbage. YIKES!!

Originally posted by Chadwickus
Yeah that's because they sped the film up, to fool people like you.

And it worked it seems......

Whoah there! I don't think anyone in this thread has even said they believe in it as evidence. I'm usually in your shoes, mocking the pro-reptilians, and like I said from the get-go, I don't believe in it. I'd seen tonnes of supposed reptilian footage and was never able to understand how so many people manage to see something that isn't there. But with this video, for the first time ever I have to hold my hands up and say there's actually something to it. I'll honestly be glad when someone comes along and tells me it's a fake so I can go back to mocking reptilian-believers like you do .

Originally posted by jamstrat
It's called Coloboma. I have it in both eyes, my eyes look like keyholes. Guess I must be a reptilian, cool.

Geesh, you people and your reptilian youtube garbage. YIKES!!

Thank you! Guess I should have researched eye-abnormalities. This thread can drown now .

reply to post by Cythraul


I'm here, telling you right now it's a trick of the light.

When you're in front of a camera like he is there are a whole bunch of lights pointing directly at your head, that and dodgy Youtube compression make it appear that the eyes are slits.


Here's a question for the reptilian believers...Why is it always conveniently the eyes that change in front of television cameras and bright stage lights? why don't we see an ear turn green or a piece of their nose fall off?

Bro, I think it's even more simple than light-tricks. jamstrat, a couple of posts up explained the whole thing away. I'm on your side. After having this one solved, there remains not a single 'reptilian video' with any credit as far as I'm concerned. I just feel bad that I re-opened this whole can of worms by starting a new thread.

reply to post by Cythraul


Yeah i saw that, it could be that too, either way it just strengthens the argument against reptilians.

reply to post by Chadwickus


I appreciate your view, however, as in all of ATS threads, most anyways that I'm aware of, reply on controlled experiments to see weather or not they can be match to help debunk this theory.

To date, though I haven't delved to deeply in to this whole 'lighting' theory, I haven't see any experiment that concludes this is a 'lighting' anomoly.

Chad, have you read/see any references to data that would explain this? I know there are other ATS threads on this subject but, most that I've read do not come up with any hard data.

Here's what I've found as a basis..

Comparative anatomy In humans and many animals (but few fish), the size of the pupil is controlled by involuntary constriction and dilation of the iris in order to regulate the intensity of light entering the eye. This is known as the pupillary reflex. In normal room light, a healthy human pupil has a diameter of about 3–4 millimeters, in bright light, the pupil has a diameter of about 1.5 millimeters, and in dim light the diameter is enlarged to about 8 millimeters. The narrowing of the pupil results in a greater focal range. (see aperture for a more detailed explanation)

The shape of the pupil varies between species. Common shapes are circular or slit-shaped, although more convoluted shapes can be found in aquatic species. The reasons for the variation in shapes are complex; the shape is closely related to the optical characteristics of the lens, the shape and sensitivity of the retina, and the visual requirements of the species.

Slit-shaped pupils are found in species which are active in a wide range of light levels. In strong light, the pupil constricts and is small, but still allows light to be cast over a large part of the retina.

The orientation of the slit may be related to the direction of motions the eye is required to notice most sensitively (so a vertical pupil would increase the sensitivity of the eyes of a small cat to the horizontal scurrying of mice). The narrower the pupil, the more accurate the depth perception of peripheral vision is, so narrowing it in one direction would increase depth perception in that plane.[2] Animals like goats and sheep may have evolved horizontal pupils because better vision in the vertical plane may be beneficial in mountainous environments.[3]

Many snakes, such as boas, pythons and vipers, have vertical, slit-shaped pupils that help them to hunt prey under a wide range of light conditions. Small cats and foxes also have slit shaped pupils while lions and wolves have round pupils even though they are in the same respective families. Some hypothesize that this is because slit pupils are more beneficial for animals that hunt small prey rather than large prey.[4]

In humans the hyaloid artery or hyaloid canal regresses during the tenth week of development. It is no longer anatomically present in the eye as a single structure but may remain suspended in the vitreous humour as floaters. When an eye is photographed with a flash, the iris cannot close the pupil fast enough and the blood-rich retina is illuminated, resulting in the red-eye effect.

source

Logic would state that since the pupil constricts to more or brighter light we should be seeing a smaller (circular) pupil naturally.

anyways.. can anyone link the posts again specifically on the lighting tricks against the pupil. ??

I saw a documentary when I was a kid... I think it was called "V".

Its true !!!!!!

reply to post by Komodo


I can't think of seeing any specific test showing the effect, I am going by what others have said in other threads, I do believe someone has given examples in another thread, which is why I say it is because of the lights, but like I said, it isn't a specific, purposeful test.


As already mentioned as well, it could be a condition called Coloboma, making a persons pupils turn to slits, I haven't actually heard of that before so it is true that you learn something new every day.

I appreciate the effort you have put into your reply, though unfortunately I feel it's a waste of talent in such a thread.

Starred none the less.


Cheers

reply to post by Komodo


Ok, so let me get this right, you are questioning how lighting can be a valid and plausible way of explaining the reptile phenomena???

So if I'm too understand this correctly, this means that if no-one can explain how refraction and Youtube compression can create this effect, then that is proof that reptilians exist?

And furthermore, these videos are a means to test us, to see wether we deem them as bunk?

C'mon buddy, have you ever told anyone in real life that you beleive in the existence of a reptilian race, other than those from your Star-Trek fan club?

I bet that you haven't, but then again if you have, what was their reaction?

I think that they would have taken a few cautious steps back from you, but I suppose all of the "valid" and "undeniable" proof that you showed them would definately have swayed their opinion hey?

When will this tripe ever end??

Fox.