Surveillance cam captures....

[Creepy Green Light]

Russian airliner crash in the middle of BFE Russia. But remember, nobody's surveillance camera's capture flying saucers because the cameras "are not pointed up".

RIP to the crew & passengers :/

 

[Randall]

Something Interesting Maybe ?

 

[Ron Away]

Something Interesting Maybe ?

I will be amazed if that’s not a mumuration of Starlings!,the birds not young star people!

 

[Ian]

The video in post #2 was part of an extensive (and rather clever) advertising campaign for The Eden Project from July 2017.

Jeez! These guys need learn how to do basic research. What other cr*p are they peddling on their site...?

 

[Randall]

The video in post #2 was part of an extensive (and rather clever) advertising campaign for The Eden Project from July 2017.

Jeez! These guys need learn how to do basic research. What other cr*p are they peddling on their site...?

Thanks for that Ian. I think you deserve at least stars for that Maybe see what else you can come up with that is interesting. This is a good thread for the real thing or even exposing the fakes. But then again are we sure it's fake? The report said there were people close to the thing who saw it, and the link you posted says "It’s almost certainly a publicity stunt." Notice the word almost. And the video associated with the claim of it being a hoax could not be played. Hmm, A ufo hoax or a reverse hoax on ufology? That Eden Project looks very cool though. It's probably something to do with that, but I'm looking for further verification.

Found It !

​

So what we're left to assume then is that somebody grabbed that bit from the Project Eden video and spliced it into a bunch of scenes in the UFO video I posted? Or maybe that it was actually made by the same people who made the Project Eden video? In which case it's a deliberate hoax and not simply part of the Eden marketing campaign. More on that here: Mystery UFO sightings in Cornwall have earthly explanation

 

[Randall]

BTW here's link to an old thread we started for this too: Faked or Too Good to be True

October 03 2013 - Night orb
FX or RC with light?

This could be a remote controlled model with a light on it. I've seen them
do this kind of thing at night right across from my house.
Or maybe it's more CGI FX.​

 

[Randall]

Here's some more.

This is why I just gave up on videos.
I can't always tell what is or isn't real and don't have the time for it.
Maybe flooding the subject with noise is part of the conspiracy ... ​

 

[Randall]

Mexico City - Balloon?
The photographer doesn't think so.

 

[Ian]

The problem is many videos are just made as click bait for various (well known!) sites. We know that if it's looks too good to be true, then it probably is.

That's why obtaining multiple recordings of the same object from different locations is important. But that's no guarantee of authenticity, as the Dome of The Rock, Jerusalem videos eventually demonstrated!

The Eden Project promo UFO videos looked like they had promise, as there were multiple videos. But not multiple sightings - although there were supposedly a few sightings reported in the press; they were just to support the campaign and not genuine sightings.

So unless we get a clear object captured at an outside event by multiple TV cameras as well as by the public, I doubt many videos deserve much study. Yes, there may be a few random video recordings worthy of study, but vanishingly few.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I will be amazed if that’s not a mumuration of Starlings!,the birds not young star people!

I've seen that before.

 

[withoutlimits09]

Mexico City - Balloon?
The photographer doesn't think so.

I don't know how anyone can see anything other than a birthday balloon...

 

[Randall]

I don't know how anyone can see anything other than a birthday balloon...

That's what it looks like to me too, but the photographer said it behaved in ways that didn't match a balloon. Unfortunately we don't see that in the stills. So do we call the photographer a hoaxer then? I dunno. I wouldn't go that far, but I also wouldn't go so far as to believe the photos are of a UFO.

 

[withoutlimits09]

That's what it looks like to me too, but the photographer said it behaved in ways that didn't match a balloon. Unfortunately we don't see that in the stills. So do we call the photographer a hoaxer then? I dunno. I wouldn't go that far, but I also wouldn't go so far as to believe the photos are of a UFO.

No one suggested the photographer was a hoaxer. However, I think it is pretty likely what he photographed or filmed was nothing more than a balloon with a string attached to it.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I don't know how anyone can see anything other than a birthday balloon...

In Mexico, you can drop an opened ream of paper from an airplane and it will magically turn into "MASSIVE FLEET OF UFO's SEEN OVER MEXICO CITY BY MILLIONS!" And Jaime Mussaun will verify it.

Seriously though, did you see that short lived UFO show where James Carrion & his crew went to Mexico to investigate what's going on there and to sit with Jaime and interview him? It was pretty disturbing. Jaime thinks everything is a flying saucer. So as an experiment, they bought a fist full of mylar balloons and launched them a location downtown. Sure enough, the skywatchers later started getting excited because they saw the "ufo's" and filmed them. Then Jaime backed up the UFO story. Where meanwhile James had to divulge to him "Ummm, yeah, those are balloons that we launched on purpose to see what your crack squad of skywatchers came up with."

 

[withoutlimits09]

In Mexico, you can drop an opened ream of paper from an airplane and it will magically turn into "MASSIVE FLEET OF UFO's SEEN OVER MEXICO CITY BY MILLIONS!" And Jaime Mussaun will verify it.

Seriously though, did you see that short lived UFO show where James Carrion & his crew went to Mexico to investigate what's going on there and to sit with Jaime and interview him? It was pretty disturbing. Jaime thinks everything is a flying saucer. So as an experiment, they bought a fist full of mylar balloons and launched them a location downtown. Sure enough, the skywatchers later started getting excited because they saw the "ufo's" and filmed them. Then Jaime backed up the UFO story. Where meanwhile James had to divulge to him "Ummm, yeah, those are balloons that we launched on purpose to see what your crack squad of skywatchers came up with."

Sounds about right.

 

[Randall]

Common sense says another CGI - Anyone got info?
How do we tell - technically speaking ?

 

[withoutlimits09]

Common sense says another CGI - Anyone got info?
How do we tell - technically speaking ?

Totally CGI. You just have to work in 3D and in video to understand how easy it is to create something like that. However, explaining it is a bit tougher. Sort of like me asking you to explain the difference in taste between one fish or another, to someone who has never had fish. Of course you know which fish is which, but describing it, in words is tough.

First off an object that big, in such a clear and open public space would generate a hell of a lot more attention than one video. The fact it is set against an open sky and water, makes dropping it into the scene very easy, there doesn't even have to be any masking, it is perfect for something like this.

Also, there is a common simulation of the camera dropping focus and panning, again, if you have worked in video you can immediately recognize the cheesy effect. Real cameras don't drop focus like that, but these hoaxers like to do it, because it makes the video seem more lifelike. In 2018, any modern camera with auto focus would be dead locked on an object that big, the focus would not be hunting and jumping between in focus and out of focus.

Finally, who films something this fantastic, then rushes home and adds a music track to it and uploads it to youtube before calling CNN.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

So as usual, anything ultra sharp & clear that shows structure & detail = fake (all these CGI crafts/videos, Billy Meier, Ed Walters, Adamski etc.) So what we are left with are the blurs, smudges, points of light, etc. to try and figure out what they are.

 

[withoutlimits09]

So as usual, anything ultra sharp & clear that shows structure & detail = fake (all these CGI crafts/videos, Billy Meier, Ed Walters, Adamski etc.) So what we are left with are the blurs, smudges, points of light, etc. to try and figure out what they are.

I wouldn't say anything ultra sharp and clear is fake. I will say the video that the person posted and asked about is fake. But yes, this phenomena, perhaps by nature, is very elusive.

 

[Randall]

I wouldn't say anything ultra sharp and clear is fake. I will say the video that the person posted and asked about is fake. But yes, this phenomena, perhaps by nature, is very elusive.

Yes, everything about the video smacks of CGI fakery. But apart from our assumptions based on the behavior of the person who created it. How do we objectively know? What information is in the pixels that could tell us the original video has been doctored. That sort of thing. If we simply go on our gut feeling and opinion, that's not really debunking anything. At best it's just an informed opinion. There was at one time a website you could upload a photo to and it would do a detection based on digital photographic signatures between the object and the background and give you a really objective analysis as to why it's fake. I've never seen anything like that for video. It would be really handy if someone could come up with an online app for detecting fake YouTube videos using an objective technical analysis.