The Upside Down UFO

reply to post by free_spirit


What i said was.

Mostly im rude because im a big Jerk, im not smarter than everyone just some people. Im not posting anything non related, i have posted pics of the CGI errors.And this is lol fake. Would anyone here be able to identify the two black dots as jets if it was not for the added in sound?

I never said anything about me being dumb. The only person who has mentioned being dumb and idiots in this thread has been you. If you have such a big problem with me posting evidence that this UFO video is a hoax then take it up with a mod.
Your ad hominem attacks only show your lack of evidence to support your claims. A Good refutation would be you attacking my claims or the accuracy of what i have posted or reasons i have given to support my stance of this being a hoax. A tactic used by the weak is attacking the person in an attempt to distract people from the topic at hand. Instead of criticizing my reasoning you have done nothing but insult my character. Not one of your posts on this thread has been in any way related to the upside down UFO, they have all been about me. Not only that you have posted nothing to support any of your claims besides your declaritive statements which could be summed up as saying "you are wrong".
I have posted links and reasons why i think this is hoax, please note that everyone who has attempted to shoot down my claims have not been able to provide anything to support any of their claims. The closest anyone has come was saying that the solar lamp is not the EXACT same model as the one used to make the video.

back on topic:


Now here look at the fence in the interview and the fence in the UFO video. In the UFO video he is sitting down on the ground for some reason.
You can see the thing about the "distortion caused by the craft" on this video. That is why some of these Alvin texas UFO videos say original on them, the distortion was added in to go with this guy's story, oddly enough the video that the OP posted was the original,not the one with distortion.


[edit on 13-10-2009 by zaiger]

reply to post by Heliocentric


they don't seem particularly large, do they? I am getting so frustrated with these UFOs, I just might decide to shoot them if I see one of those...

reply to post by Heliocentric


Thanks for posting these and allowing the reasonable discussion that has followed, Helio. I certainly don't fault you for the negativity that resulted or ascribe to the notion that you should be chastised.

When watching the first video, there was something really weird with the perspective. I certainly don't think that CGI is going to be the only way to perpetrate hoax, by any means, but I couldn't see any strings...there was a very small protrusion viewable on the 'top' side of the craft a couple times that looked to be about center of gravity...don't know if it's pertinent or not...what made me feel weird were the two times that birds flew through the scene. The perspective just seemed wrong. I can't prove anything, but maybe someone else could look at that....just a feeling.

It seems as though the first bird is very close to the craft, but it's almost the same size, not that would be easily explainable, but the confusing part for me in that shot is that the focus does not seem to be too much different between the two...they were both reasonably clear, but not too detailed.

If the bird were closer than the craft, or vice versa, it would seem that one would have been out of focus. If the camera was an autofocus model, you would think that two objects, taking the same amount of the field of view would have an effect on the focus mechanism, but it seemed to remain pretty steady.

The second video, though I didn't see a craft in it until the end, and that was stationary, seemed believable to me. The guy didn't seem like a freak or anything, but again, I have nothing but feeling to base any of my assertions on. I know that probably doesn't help, but I DO appreciate you taking the time and going through the trouble to allow a discussion on these.

reply to post by KSPigpen


When the UFO videos do not feel right it is normally lighting. In the case of the alvin texas video you can see the trees in the backround are a lighter due to aerial haze. The objext is matching the brightness of the closer objects like the house and fence. So you are right it is a small object that is filmed, notice the high roof on the left. It is also good to point out that the object does not really move that much in this video.

First Frame:




Last Frame:




For all that moving and shaking the guy did trying to keep the UFO in frame, it didn't seem to move at all. In fact, just clicking my mouse once on one of Zaiger's links (This one to be exact) brings up plenty of the same kind of motion evidence that I was prepared to make myself.

And I might need to look in a catalog or two, but I'm pretty sure there are different styles of solar lamps. In fact, a quick google image search revealed that yes, there are more than one type of solar lamp. Quite a few, actually, with many different looks and styles.

So, it looks to me like this thread has shown that these are hoaxes. I suppose with all the fervor and personal attacks against Zaiger that there must be some pretty stellar proof showing that they are, in fact, very real. I hope someone posts some of that soon. I would like to be proven wrong, please.

Originally posted by synchro
Not that I believe the "luckymauro" video is genuine, but…

The shape of the solar lamp (from YouTube user km3friend's video) does not completely match the shape of the purported UFO in the April 2008 video. I don't see how the comparison can prove it to be a hoax (even though my guess is that it's CGI anyway).

Agreed,

Originally posted by synchro
Perhaps the distortion on the tape was not caused by the UFO, but rather from dirty tape heads while playing back the original copy of the camcorder tape (assuming it was a tape based camcorder).

Yes, possibly.

Originally posted by synchro
I do agree that by not allowing more video experts (other than Maussan's) to examine the original tape, luckymauro and Maussan have not bolstered their credibility regarding this case.

I recall the that luckymauro (the man who recorded the April 2008 UFO) initially answered some questions on this ATS forum at one time but abruptly ceased and to this day has never allowed an examination of even a copy of the tape from that day. Curious.

Can you direct me towards a source attesting or showing that either Jaime Maussan or the maker of the video refuses to have the video analyzed by an independent party?

Because, if he gets 300 different requests, he can't say yes to every one of them, and a refusal does not necessarily mean that he refuses to have the video tested,

How could he refuse anyone to analyze a copy of the video? Copies of the video are everywhere, anyone that have access to the internet can analyze the footage.

Originally posted by synchro
Regarding the 1994 Domingez case, other than the slight similarity of the shape (albeit inverted) of the two objects, I don't see a connection.

Here, I lined them up for you. I don't know about you, I see the same shape, proportions, the same (type of) craft.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f30eb8ea4233.png[/atsimg]

I posted the connection for everyone to see.

Both Dominguez and the man you call "luckymauro" (which I suppose is his ATS handle?) claim that the same part of the craft revolved.

There's the connection.

Originally posted by synchro
Overall, I find it quite baffling the variety and shapes of so many of the UFOs filmed, photographed and videotaped over the years. I'm not sure that by there being so many (different types) helps in coming to an overall consensus regarding their being genuine or not. By genuine, I mean true UFOs in that as far as we know, not man-made.

Perhaps a hypothetical visiting alien would find baffling the many different brands and types of cars and airplanes that we use. Just one make or type would be easier for it to analyze... but we're not here to make it easy for them, are we?

No, it probably does not help, but we will have to accept the phenomenon the way it manifest itself.

Originally posted by vance
Wow,
I can't believe the pounding being delivered to zaiger. He has me convinced on the back yard video of a "Flying saucer". He just posted an opposing view and bam, he is hammered, why?

First of all, the subject of this thread isn't zaiger (and if it becomes that, he has succeeded), so please stay on-topic,

Second, zaiger came into the thread with a half-assed video on how to make a UFO from a solar lamp, plus a second video that proves what?, it's a mystery to anyone

And with nothing more, he arrogantly demanded that the thread should be placed in the hoax section, like if he was convinced that he had done a wonderful job at demonstrating how the 4-11-2008 video is a hoax.

Third, the topic of this thread isn't whether the 4-11-2008 is a hoax or not, but whether the Dominguez photographs and the 4-11-2008 video show the same craft, and if that's the case for what reason the craft inverts itself, so he's off-topic.

You know, when I start a thread on a subject I feel is valid, criticism or objections are accepted if they're well-founded, but if not I react.

He took some thrashing, nothing serious, it'll only hurt his ego,

So he convinced you, wow, that's something.



[edit on 14-10-2009 by Heliocentric]

Originally posted by reject
reply to post by Heliocentric

 

I am getting so frustrated with these UFOs, I just might decide to shoot them if I see one of those...

You have to see this video before doing that:



[edit on 14-10-2009 by Heliocentric]

Second, zaiger came into the thread with a half-assed video on how to make a UFO from a solar lamp, plus a second video that proves what?, it's a mystery to anyone

The second video was a comparison of the Original footage and what was shown by Jamie Maussan. The original footage just shows the craft in his backyard with no magnetic interference. The video that was being aired was this

That claim was that a strong magnetic field was being produced by the craft and affected the film.
What i posted was a comparison of the original vs what jamie maussan had done to the video to go along with this guys story of the strong magnetic feild.


In this video the craft "moves" but it is cut out
another interesting thing
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/49741d28524c.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/49741d28524c.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/907b8e453708.jpg[/atsimg]
The cuts are blended together for aesthetic purposes but the time stamp does not fade in, it just switches.
I think that this was shot with a better camera,the ufo was hanging from a string CGI was used to make it a lower quality. I think the CGI was only used to change the quality,clean up the string and add the time stamp.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd4b55fc46b5.jpg[/atsimg]
Different time stamp.

For an object that did not move very much he sure did have a hard time centering the camera on it.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by zaiger]

Originally posted by free_spirit
And how dare you to complaint about insults, how about you insulting and difamating
the UFO witness from Alvin TX inventing non-existent situations, that's pure slandering.

It is unfortunately so, that when it comes to the subject of UFOs, a lot of arrogant people (I'm not particularly referring to zaiger here) crawls out of the woodwork and permit themselves to tell people that were there and saw what they saw - and have made sworn statements - that they are either idiots, mistaken or making it up.

Two cases comes to mind, the Rendlesham Forest incident and the Stephenville lights incident (If you're not familiar with these classic UFO cases and want complementary info, make a search and you'll find ample info).

In the Rendlesham incident, several USAF personnel spotted and approached a landed craft of some sort, they came so close that one of them even touched the craft (!), they took memos on shape, look and even noted symbols on it. The craft left indentations on the ground and a radioactive signature,

Still, debunkers claim they simply saw a nearby lighthouse (even though all witnesses concord, and claimed to have seen the lighthouse as well as the UFO), and whiff away the indentations as rabbit holes (!), even though the indentations match a perfect triangle (crafty little buggers, them Rendlesham rabbits).

In the Stephenville lights case, hundreds of witnesses observed a gigantic boomerang shaped craft slowly fly over the area.

This very arrogant astronomer (James McGehee) on the Larry King Show sits there and says they were all mistaken, he wasn't there but he knows they surely couldn't have seen what they claim to have seen, because he has looked at the sky so many times without ever having seen a UFO, so that settles it for him. And what more is, none of these people were qualified observers, according to him. When it turns out that several of the witnesses were police officers, militaries and even pilots, he still discards them as not qualified observers. In fact, there are no qualified observers except him, or they become qualified observers if they take the same stance as him.

The bottom line for these people is always the same. In their paradigm they cannot incorporate even the possibility of visitation of an otherworldly intelligence.

Therefore, any statement indicating so is automatically wrong, it's just a question of finding out how.

The only thing I wish for these people is that a giant boomerang craft flies over their house, hover there long enough for them to crap their pants, and then let them suffer the arrogance from debunkers that weren't there but know that they surely didn't see what they claim to have seen.




Now please return to the topic of the thread.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Heliocentric]

Just because i debunk UFOs does not mean i do not believe. I try to contribute to UFOlogy by weeding out the fake crap. What good is anyone doing for ufology just by saying "wow,amazing UFO".
If people are in a mental state where they get upset by someone saying that a video is fake then maybe they are not mentally equiped to deal with a subject like UFOlogy

But the saga continues. This BS sighting story goes on all the way from april 11th to october 7th. There was a "mystery hole which he probably dug himself and killed the grass off which he compares to crop circles. Then "unmarked trucks", which are clearly marked, with an ATV entering the forest near his house
What forest?


[edit on 14-10-2009 by zaiger]

Originally posted by HeliocentricThe only thing I wish for these people is that a giant boomerang craft flies over their house, hover there long enough for them to crap their pants, and then let them suffer the arrogance from debunkers that weren't there but know that they surely didn't see what they claim to have seen.[edit on 14-10-2009 by Heliocentric]

Keep something in mind though. A lot of those types of people, the seriously hardcore skeptics, will NEVER believe anything other than what they've been told to believe. I usually call them "people who can't think for themselves".

They can have a craft land on their lawn, be taken into that craft and taken to another planet on the other side of the universe. Spend time on that planet and come back to Earth at some point to say it never happened. It was all just an hallucination. They must have slipped into a coma or something.

One reason I want disclosure to happen, it's actually a big reason, is to see how these hardcore skeptics are going to react to it. If it were to happen and aliens really do exist, will they admit they've been wrong or still go on to doubt their existence?

Originally posted by zaiger
Just because i debunk UFOs does not mean i do not believe. I try to contribute to UFOlogy by weeding out the fake crap. What good is anyone doing for ufology just by saying "wow,amazing UFO".
If people are in a mental state where they get upset by someone saying that a video is fake then maybe they are not mentally equiped to deal with a subject like UFOlogy

Nice post.

I'm not so sure going after 'fake videos' is the best way to go about things, but that's your decision not mine.
Personally, I rather focus on the cases that can possibly teach us something about this phenomenon. That's the reason why I started this thread, I was intrigued by the similarity between the craft in the Raul Dominguez photos and the one in the 4-11-2008 video, and perplexed as to why it was reversed in the video.

I can respect someone having opposite opinions if he can intellectually motivate them,
meaning that anyone who thinks a certain UFO video is fake and thinks he knows how it was done have a right to say so and should do so,

Although, there is already a thread about this video, and whether it's real or not.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

That's where you should post your videos,

I've looked over your stuff, and I think I'm still more convinced by the investigation performed by UNAM science lab, concerning the authenticity of the video. You can find it online, and here's a video that goes over it briefly:

winkkk.com...

So based on this, I venture to say that the video has been authenticated, and would like to continue the thread on that premise, still leaving the door ajar for alternative POWs.

Now, the thread topic was...

reply to post by Heliocentric


They were not testing the filme to see if it was a UFO or testing for the presence of CGI all they were testing was the magnetic damage done to the film which was there.

I believe the UFO is not upside down as it seems to emit some form of blue light at the bottom.

Originally posted by krystalice
I believe the UFO is not upside down as it seems to emit some form of blue light at the bottom.

Could be,

The bottom with the blue light could also be the skyroof over the jacuzzi, instead of clouds and pigeons they prefer watching suburban Mexicans.

[edit on 15-10-2009 by Heliocentric]