See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Airplane Abducted By UFO: Caught On Tape
Source:
YouTube
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9cZ8F1KTTM
Published: Aug 11, 2009
Author: jmart714
Post Date: 2010-01-14 20:29:53 by FormerLurker
Keywords: UFO, Abduction
Views: 1290
Comments: 59
Author's Description of Video: The airplane was approaching Davis Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson Arizona at approximately 4:15PM MST on August 8th, 2009. We first witnessed the object hovering in a locked position, southwest of the base. You can hear my neighbors if you turn the volume up. We thought it was a balloon, until it dropped in elevation a few thousand feet in less then a second. At that point I ran inside and grabbed my digital camera and rushed outside in time to catch the object approaching the airplane from behind. Unfortunately the microphone barely works on the camera, from being dropped so many times, so you can't hear much. But at least there is a little. The object made no sound, completely silent. There was an attempt to take the video to the media, unfortunately, every affiliate rejected the video due to lack of evidence. There was no report in the city of a missing airplane, nor did the Air Force Base report anything missing. Many of the news affiliates did confirm that they had received calls on August 8th from various sources, claiming they had seen a UFO. They said that they receive calls on a regular basis dealing with UFOs all the time, as well as many hoax videos, and there was no reason to believe my video was anything different. They refused to believe that the Air Force base would withhold information about a missing airplane.
Poster Comment: Well here's something you don't see everyday...
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 22.
#4. To: FormerLurker (#0)
(Edited)
Oh, and the other REALLY big tell, is that the UFO and "Abducted Plane" move up, AFTER the camera starts to pan up after it. This video, like many others is why hoaxers get over.
Bullshit. Watch again. The camera doesn't pan up until the object and the airplane have already shot upwards out of frame.
No retard, you need to take a look at it. When the supposed abduction takes place, the camera pans up before the actual ship goes up. The untrained retarded eye might miss it, but those of us who actually KNOW what to look for don't. No camera man should be able to predict where an object that is flying AWAY from him supposedly should be going, especially if it was shot in the backyard by some idiot. I assure you, that this video was made with After Effects, as the After Effects CODEX is embedded through out the video.
Oh, and the biggest tell of all, is that the objects pass through the wires, not behind them. Ghost imaging and errant pixelization from a composited image are ALSO the big tell. Post your stupefyingly retarded videos of UFO's on a site where there isn't someone who actually knows special effects and how they work.
If you're dumb enough to believe that the video is legit, that's your problem. When one object is rendered at 24 frames a second, and the other is rendered at 30 frames a second, there's a problem. Of course, you, and other chumps wouldn't know the difference.
Do provide the video data which indicates that. BTW, how do you propose this was done? Because you see, when you import 24 frames per second progressive scan, it's usually enveloped in 60 frame per second interlaced. Thus, you need something like After Effects to strip the 24 FPS out of the 60 FPS envelope. THEN, if you REALLY wanted to try to overlay that 24 FPS video with a video shot at 30 FPS progressive, then you'd have to convert that 30 FPS to 24 FPS, else the frames would jitter and go out of sync. And IF you converted that 30 FPS to 24 FPS (not that easy a task actually), and to somehow produce a vid that showed two objects in flight as in the video we are discussing, and for one to converge upon the other and zoom away, well, that's more or less something a Hollywood studio might be able to pull off, but not the average do it yourself videographer. BUT, there would be NO indication of a disparity in video frame rates if the above process were followed, and since there are no jittery or out of sync frames, you are full of shit.
Tommy won't revisit your arguments. As I come to think about the same he won't revisit any of mine either.
Tommy is blowing smoke out of his ass here. For what reason I'm not sure, but I AM sure he has no idea of what he's talking about.
There are no replies to Comment # 22. End Trace Mode for Comment # 22.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#6. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#4)
Oh, and the other REALLY big tell, is that the UFO and "Abducted Plane" move up, AFTER the camera starts to pan up after it
#12. To: FormerLurker (#6)
#13. To: All (#12)
#14. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#13)
Ghost imaging and errant pixelization from a composited image are ALSO the big tell.
#15. To: buckeroo (#14)
#19. To: TommyTheMadArtist, buckeroo (#15)
(Edited)
When one object is rendered at 24 frames a second, and the other is rendered at 30 frames a second, there's a problem.
#20. To: FormerLurker, TommyTheMadArtist (#19)
#22. To: buckeroo (#20)
Tommy won't revisit your arguments. As I come to think about the same he won't revisit any of mine either.
Replies to Comment # 22.