Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > The Universe / UFOs / IFOs / Crop Circles

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-01-2019, 08:54 PM   #1
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default Jaw Dropping New UFO Sighting at Area 51 Caught on Camera

I consider UFO videos pretty worthless nowadays due to CGI capabilities, so I don't even bother looking at them anymore.

But this one showed up in my youtube feed today, so I took a look...

It seems pretty impressive to me, given that the uploader has also released a second video of the raw footage from which the sighting was extracted.

Here is the clip of the UFO:



And here is the raw footage (UFO flashes by at 02:34) to provide the context that is often lacking in youtube-era CGI fakes:

Likes: (2)
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 10:02 PM   #2
andy1033
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 8,657
Likes: 1,537 (885 Posts)
Default

I would not personally watch any video, claiming to be ufos since the time, cgi, and photoshop came into being.

There are so many fraud type people, out there to con people.

Dishonest fraudsters have ruined ufology, or any credible nature to it, since the net came along.
__________________
"You put 10 tonnes of proof in front of people, if they are not ready to accept an idea, they will not accept the proof. No amount of evidence will suffice to prove anything, it is the jury that will decide, and you are the jury."
William Cooper - behold a pale horse video
^^
So true
andy1033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 10:15 PM   #3
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Yeah, it's the double-edged sword of technology.

Now everyone has a camera on them to record genuine UFOs sightings, and at the same time, everyone has access to effects software to fake them too.

So we're back to square one.

There's already an overwhelming weight of evidence that intelligently-controlled, anomalous craft are operating in the skies, so wasting time 'proving' or debunking this or that seems to me to be a redundant exercise best left to the most clueless people in both camps.

Having said that, check out the clips in the OP.

They're pretty cool, and in the top few percent of recent vids that I find persuasive.

Last edited by size_of_light; 13-01-2019 at 05:21 AM.
Likes: (2)
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 10:43 PM   #4
wingwang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 947
Likes: 371 (217 Posts)
Default

3.5 miles per second

So that's like, gee whizz, 3.5 miles per second multiplied by 60 seconds...

210 miles per minute... WOW!!!!!

Lets go mph

210 miles per minute multiplied by 60 minutes, EQUALS...

Twelve fcking faasand six feckin hungdred miles per hour... WOOPDEEWOO...

And that can'ts got a camera that shoots 60 frames per second?

Good luck with that one!
wingwang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 10:49 PM   #5
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingwang View Post
3.5 miles per second

So that's like, gee whizz, 3.5 miles per second multiplied by 60 seconds...

210 miles per minute... WOW!!!!!

Lets go mph

210 miles per minute multiplied by 60 minutes, EQUALS...

Twelve fcking faasand six feckin hungdred miles per hour... WOOPDEEWOO...

And that can'ts got a camera that shoots 60 frames per second?

Good luck with that one!
I'm not following you.

Are you saying that a 60fps camera couldn't catch an object traveling at 12,600 mph?
Likes: (1)
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 10:58 PM   #6
wingwang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 947
Likes: 371 (217 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post
I'm not following you.

Are you saying that a 60fps camera couldn't catch an object traveling at 12,600 mph?
Indeed.

Likes: (2)
wingwang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:05 PM   #7
elshaper
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pandæmonium
Posts: 25,965
Likes: 5,575 (3,762 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingwang View Post
3.5 miles per second

So that's like, gee whizz, 3.5 miles per second multiplied by 60 seconds...

210 miles per minute... WOW!!!!!

Lets go mph

210 miles per minute multiplied by 60 minutes, EQUALS...

Twelve fcking faasand six feckin hungdred miles per hour... WOOPDEEWOO...

And that can'ts got a camera that shoots 60 frames per second?

Good luck with that one!
You lost me.

EDIT: Oh, myth busted then.

Sorry, the end of the thread.

Last edited by elshaper; 12-01-2019 at 11:07 PM.
Likes: (1)
elshaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:10 PM   #8
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingwang View Post
Indeed.

He's estimating 3.5 miles away based on a google maps check of the distance between the camera position and the mountain range in the background below where it first appears, but there's nothing to conclusively establish it is directly above that hill at the outset. It could be significantly closer and this is just a bad guesstimate.

Any idea what the maximum traveling speed of an object a 60fps camera could capture?

I couldn't find the answer after a quick look, but working backwards from there would be a good starting point to figure out the maximum speed and initial distance limit of the object, if real.

Debunking it based on a cursory approximation by the uploader doesn't work.

Last edited by size_of_light; 12-01-2019 at 11:21 PM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:14 PM   #9
wingwang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 947
Likes: 371 (217 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by elshaper View Post
You lost me.

EDIT: Oh, myth busted then.

Sorry, the end of the thread.
go onto the hard drive shows us the clip
01:22
and it's just like you know we're
01:24
shooting 60 frames a second tried to
01:26
slow it down as much as possible
01:28
literally like frame by frame by frame
01:30
yeah there was no way that he had like
01:32
messed around with okay I was gonna I
01:35
was gonna it was on the it was on the
01:38
rock clip and this was in 2016 so this
01:42
was a few years ago and like literally
01:46
we're standing in the field like four or
01:48
five hundred feet away from this drone
01:50
and don't be here and don't see anything
01:53
like something traveling that fast
01:54
would make a sonic when we first saw we
01:57
like broke every single second of that
01:59
clip down and you zoom in right at the
02:02
beginning of that clip you can see this
02:04
thing comes down over the map through
02:06
the valley and then in the valley and
02:09
then it turns and it turns and it comes
02:11
straight so something traveling that
02:13
fast yeah
02:15
it's just insane like we looked on
02:18
Google Maps and the mountain range where
02:21
it comes where it you first see it was
02:24
three and a half miles away from where
02:26
we were and the drone gets from the
02:30
mountain range and it passes through
02:32
screen in a second and so you do that
02:35
math it's traveling three and a half
02:37
miles in a second like nothing travels
02:39
that fast that we catch like you see the
02:43
all over like CNN about the fighter
Likes: (1)
wingwang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:22 PM   #10
wingwang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 947
Likes: 371 (217 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post
Any idea what the maximum traveling speed of an object a 60fps camera could capture?

I couldn't find the answer after a quick look.

You have to keep it in context with the 3.5 miles per second claim.

A 60 fps camera could capture all manner of speeds.
wingwang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:25 PM   #11
wingwang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 947
Likes: 371 (217 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post

Debunking it based on a cursory approximation by the uploader doesn't work.
We'll just fack it off then. Agreed?!
wingwang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:25 PM   #12
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingwang View Post
You have to keep it in context with the 3.5 miles per second claim.

A 60 fps camera could capture all manner of speeds.
Claim, guesstimate, there's nothing to say he's right, or even in the ballpark when it comes to its initial position.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:26 PM   #13
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wingwang View Post
We'll just fack it off then. Agreed?!
lol. I've got no problem with you doing that.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2019, 11:30 PM   #14
elshaper
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pandæmonium
Posts: 25,965
Likes: 5,575 (3,762 Posts)
Default

So ordinary iphone can catch a UFO footage...only if from afar?
How do you define afar? i.e. distance
I take it UFO can fly very fast? What is their speed?
Is it all in the details and depending on the context?
Many many questions...
elshaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2019, 12:38 AM   #15
JumpRogue
Moderator
 
JumpRogue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: EU
Posts: 491
Likes: 189 (136 Posts)
Default

2016 isn’t new
__________________
"That's all it is: information. Even a simulated experience or a dream; simultaneous reality and fantasy. Any way you look at it, all the information that a person accumulates in a lifetime is just a drop in the bucket."
JumpRogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2019, 01:51 AM   #16
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpRogue View Post
2016 isn’t new
Right.

But it is never before seen by the public and newly-released on Jan. 9, 2019.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2019, 05:38 AM   #17
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Videographer interviewed by Clyde Lewis on his radio show, Ground Zero:



Last edited by size_of_light; 13-01-2019 at 05:52 AM.
Likes: (1)
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2019, 09:20 AM   #18
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by size_of_light View Post
He's estimating 3.5 miles away based on a google maps check of the distance between the camera position and the mountain range in the background below where it first appears, but there's nothing to conclusively establish it is directly above that hill at the outset. It could be significantly closer and this is just a bad guesstimate.
Perspective in more ways than one. It looks like a drone for starters. They travel commercially at 150mph.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6sz8bquB50

Look at the size as it flies above and how quick it disappears.

Quote:
Any idea what the maximum traveling speed of an object a 60fps camera could capture?
Depends how big. From that footage, it crosses over some trees and is not very big.

Quote:
I couldn't find the answer after a quick look, but working backwards from there would be a good starting point to figure out the maximum speed and initial distance limit of the object, if real.

Debunking it based on a cursory approximation by the uploader doesn't work.
I think the capture speed is a red herring. You CAN capture something coming at you at astonishing speed, because they are in your view for maybe a second - that footage in such a case should have captured 60 frames - did it?? Going across your field of view at great height, the same, so long as the lens is wide enough angle.

What it looks like is a very small object travelling very fast, perspective makes it disappear after a short distance(see video example above). That isn't 3.5 miles away, just because it appears with the mountain behind it.

https://gizmodo.com/watch-this-insan...eds-1701006766

Last edited by truegroup; 13-01-2019 at 09:22 AM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2019, 11:08 AM   #19
grimstock
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 1,048 (637 Posts)
Default

"Disappears against the mountains"TG ?????

No- not at all.

It comes flying past the camera at rocket speed, from half mile away I would speculate.

Last edited by grimstock; 13-01-2019 at 11:09 AM.
grimstock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2019, 06:40 PM   #20
size_of_light
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,627
Likes: 595 (370 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
It looks like a drone for starters. They travel commercially at 150mph.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6sz8bquB50
You might be right.

I didn't know little drones could be that zippy.

EDIT: One thing I'll add - if this object had been captured before the advent (or, at least, the public knowledge of) drones, I GUARANTEE everyone who didn't want to entertain the possibility that this was anything anomalous, would have solely adopted the 'it's CGI' defense.

Suddenly, half the skeptics have no problem accepting that it is a genuine physical object, because they have another 'out' to dismiss it.

Interesting psychology.

Last edited by size_of_light; 13-01-2019 at 08:06 PM.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:17 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.