[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Consequences of Mild, Moderate & Severe Plagiarism Plagiarism: 5 Potential Legal Consequences When Philadelphia’s Foul-Mouthed Cop-Turned-Mayor Invented White Identity Politics Trump Wanted to Pardon Assange and Snowden. Blocked by RINOs. What The Pentagon Is Planning Against Trump Will Make Your Blood Run Cold Once Revealed How Trump won the Amish vote in Pennsylvania FEC Filings Show Kamala Harris Team Blew Funds On Hollywood Stars, Private Jets Israel’s Third Lebanon War is underway: What you need to know LEAK: First Behind-The-Scenes Photos Of Kamala After Getting DESTROYED By Trump | Guzzling Wine!🍷 Scott Ritter Says: Netanyahu's PAINFUL Stumble Pushes Tel Aviv Into Its WORST NIGHTMARE These Are Trump's X-Men | Dr. Jordan B. Peterson Houthis (Yemen) Breached THAAD. Israel Given a Dud Defense!! Yuma County Arizona Doubles Its Outstanding Votes Overnight They're Stealing the Race from Kari Lake Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria Trump and RFK created websites for the people to voice their opinion on people the government is hiring Woke Georgia DA Deborah Gonzalez pummeled in re-election bid after refusing Laken Riley murder case Trump has a choice: Obliterate Palestine or end the war Rod Blagojevich: Kamala’s Corruption, & the Real Cause of the Democrat Party’s Spiral Into Insanity Israel's Defense Shattered by Hezbollah's New Iranian Super Missiles | Prof. Mohammad Marandi Trump Wins Arizona in Clean Sweep of Swing States in US Election TikTok Harlots Pledge in Droves: No More Pussy For MAGA Fascists! Colonel Douglas Macgregor:: Honoring Veteran's Day Low-Wage Nations? Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement NYT Pixar And Disney Animator Bolhem Bouchiba Sentenced To 25 Years In Prison Six C-17s, C-130s deploy US military assets to Northeastern Syria SNL cast members unveil new "hot jacked" Trump character in MAGA-friendly cold open Here's Why These Geopolitical And Financial Chokepoints Need Your Attention... Former Army Chief Moshe Ya'alon Calls for Civil Disobedience to Protest Netanyahu Government The Deep State against Trump

Science/Tech
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: 785
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  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 50.

#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.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2010-01-14   21:11:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

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

Bullshit. Watch again. The camera doesn't pan up until the object and the airplane have already shot upwards out of frame.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-14   21:53:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

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.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2010-01-14   22:56:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

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.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2010-01-14   22:59:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

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.

Oh, and you're full of shit about that as well.

Besides the fact you're outright wrong, the objects do NOT pass "through" the wires, they pass BEHIND them, have you ever heard of COMPRESSION ARTIFACTS?

The pixellation is a function of the compression utilized not just by the initial compression to MP4 or whatever other codec the guy used, but the YouTube compression as well. Just as in images, when you compress a raw bitmap image to JPG, artifacts are introduced, the severity of which depends on the image quality setting selected at compression.

There is no quality setting when you upload to YouTube, it just does whatever compression is set by default, thus there will always be some loss and possible artifacts, depending on the original resolution and video size.

There are other video hosting sites which do NOT do such heavy compression, which give MUCH better video quality. But they require more storage space for the files for such quality, and YouTube is just a place for the average person to upload whatever they want, so they need to minimize the file size otherwise they'd need more storage than economically feasable.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15   0:42:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I know what I'm talking about. PERIOD.

If you can get one of the high res copies of this video, I think you can get it at ATS.

When this video came out I was asked to analyze it by a third party.

You're mad because you're one of those brain dead true believer types.

Nearly every camcorder on EARTH records at 24 frames per second. Most HD cameras record at 24 to 32 frames per second.

When you take a video at 24 frames per second, then add secondary objects like this video has there's a codec created in file that tells you that the footage has been edited. The mathematics and the smoothness of the SECOND object in the frame should tell you that it was added in, not to mention its opacity compared to the first object. Of course then there's the winking out which just so happen to be an After Effects Add On.

Why don't you buy The Adobe Creative Suite like I did. That way you could be making your own Fraudulent Vids, instead of posting other people's.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2010-01-15   1:32:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The mathematics and the smoothness of the SECOND object in the frame should tell you that it was added in, not to mention its opacity compared to the first object

Have you ever taken the time to read REAL eyewitness reports, such as those mentioned in Project Bluebook? The sliding motion and abrupt movements are HIGHLY TYPICAL, and that is what makes this even MORE believable.

I find no problem with the video at all, and you are SERIOUSLY making shit up and outright lying, for whatever purpose.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15   1:50:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Do you own Adobe After Effects? Do you own the Adobe Creative Suite? Have you ever bought any of the add-ons or created special effects? Is your job in the special effects industry?

If not, then I would suggest you get acquainted with the various products and software used to create videos just like this one.

If you look at plane, it has artifacts on it. The second object does not. The reason why, is because when you film something in real life, there's discrepancies in the lighting of that object that the CCD's inside the camera may or may not be able to register.

When you CREATE an object and add it to the footage, there are no artifacts, unless you create them, or have filter software that puts them in for you. The movement of the second object has a motion filter used on it. It's why the movement in every frame is consistent, while the movement of the first object is not.

Like I said before, unless you're stepped in this stuff, you won't see it. I myself could duplicate this with minimal effort. In fact, I could actually do a BETTER job making a fake than this.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2010-01-15   1:55:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I really don't know why you've resorted to lying, but I won't entertain a discussion with one who's already lied MANY times on this topic.

It's one thing if you say you don't know or aren't sure, but you stated as FACT that camcorders all use 24 FPS, which they DO NOT. The early camcorders ONLY could record at 60 FPS interlaced, and only recently has 24FPS and 30FPS been introduced.

24FPS is to give an independent filmmaker more of a "film" look to the video, and 30FPS is to give better quality when uploading to YouTube, since Adobe Flash delivers the video at 30FPS no matter what the original frame rate was.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15   2:13:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Again, stop reading crap on the internet you think is relevant to the topic, and unless you actually work with the software involved in creating this hoax, simply shut up.

You're calling me a liar, because you don't know anything about the means to perpetrate such a hoax.

I can point to a dozen videos that do not have all the earmarks of a fraud, one of which you posted, of the Russian Glowing Cloud. What floors me is how important this one is to you, and how important that it can't be a hoax. I assure you, It IS.

But hey, what do I know right?

If I was going to make this particular hoax, all I'd have to do is shoot some video. Not difficult. Then, open up 3D studio Max, or... Maya and create an object. That object can then be exported with a transparent background. Overlayed into the footage in After-Effects, and scaled to fit the scene. I's why it doesn't change angles or shape in the video. But hey... Again, I don't know what I'm talking about.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2010-01-15   2:22:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#52. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#50) (Edited)

Again, stop reading crap on the internet you think is relevant to the topic, and unless you actually work with the software involved in creating this hoax, simply shut up.

CRAP on the INTERNET? I'm an engineer bud, and knew video transmission and encoding theory while you still sucking your momma's tit more than likely.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15 02:29:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

You started in with saying there was an Adobe After Effects CODEX in the video. There IS NO SUCH THING. There are codecs such as; On2 VP6, Sorenson Spark, Screen video, Screen video 2, and H.264, which are compatable with Adobe Flash (as in YouTube videos).

There are others such as Lagarith, Indeo, DivX, and Cineform.

However, there is NO Adobe After Effects CODEC (not CODEX).

Hell, you didn't even appear to know what a codec IS, since you thought it was some sort of marker in the file that indicates modifications. You see modifications in the PROJECT FILES (yes, I HAVE used video editing software you jackass), not in the finished product, and NOT as a codec. A codec is the encoding scheme used to encode and decode the video data into binary format.

You then went on to say all camcorders generally record in 24FPS, which is untrue. All camcorders record in 60i, and SOME of the newer ones can record in 24p and 30p.

You claimed the video was a combination of 30FPS and 24FPS composites.

This would contradict your "observation" that the object moved in a highly smooth manner, where it would be jerky and shaky if it were recorded at 30 and converted to 24 to blend in with the original video filmed at 24, assuming that's what you meant. Conversely, the house and the plane would have jerky and jittery movement if it were the other way around.

Then you go on with all sort of video products you could find on the net, hoping to find one that might be able to create an animation that you could claim was added to the original video. You forget that both objects moved with the same camera shake, and both objects pass behind the house and the wires with no disparity between them.

You ARE full of shit, and I don't care how smart you think you are or claim you are.

End of conversation.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15 02:49:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

all the earmarks of a fraud

The only fraud here is you.

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15 02:55:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

One last thing Tommy. I never stated that I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that this video was authentic, I simply knew you were lying when you said the cameraman pulled the camera upwards before the objects shot upwards.

That was an obvious lie, and steered the rest of the "discussion", especially with some of the claims you made concerning frame rates and codecs.

I only have to wonder WHY you lied. Perhaps this IS 100% authentic, and it's part of your job to debunk it. Who knows...

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-01-15 03:49:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]