Video footage of UFO over New York

[jindivik]

the aliens are here <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />link

 

[skyeagle409]

jindivik---the aliens are here <br /><br />Curses!!! My cover has been blown!<br /><br /> Down with those dadburn spy cameras and 'tabloid' jockeys! Can't an ordinary alien have some have fun once in a while?!<br />

 

[ownage]

Seen that before 100% FAKE!!!!!

 

[imrippinit]

Good questions to ask: Why would a powerful entity want to cover up a UFO sighting? Which powerful entity would do that? <br /><br />Jerri DeAngelo - Lead Special Effects Creator Adoni Films <br />Video Analysis of WTC UFO for Real UFOS .com <br />May 29th 2002 <br />Opinion on authenticity of video file known as WTC UFO. <br />I am the lead special effects creator for Adoni Productions and Adoni Films. <br />I have viewed over 600 frames of the video file known as THE WTC UFO. I viewed it many times frame by frame, the file is approximately 20 seconds in length in .mov format rendered at approximately 30 FPS (frames per second) <br />The video was clearly shot in one take where a 180-degree view of the Manhattan skyline was shot from inside a helicopter. <br />At various times throughout the video, the helicopter rolls from side to side, the skyline is observed in a manner consistent with a live shot. <br />As the camera moves or zooms in on an object there is no clear manipulation of the video through a digital effect. <br />Objects remain consistent with a live panoramic sweep outside and inside the helicopter. <br />There is no evidence of editing this shot, as to splicing together multiple takes or digital creations. <br />The sound is synched perfectly to the video. <br />Certain anomalies appear in the frames that are consistent with an auto focus home use video camera. <br />The camera used was not a professional level video camera in my opinion, although it did work out very well for this shot. <br />The shot starts off with a north westerly view of the Manhattan Skyline in which the World Trade Center is clearly visible. <br />A small object is viewable near the North Tower at the approximate height where the second plane crashed into the WTC on 911. <br />Once the small object appears on the screen, the female in the video asks what is that while pointing to the small image near the WTC. <br />The cameraman zooms in and a UFO is seen hovering near the WTC. <br />Normal au

 

[imrippinit]

Date: 07/26/2001 <br />From: DBraun <br /><br /><br />I have been employed by a major defense contractor in the aerospace industry for almost 20 years. I work on a classified government project and am around military high-performance aircraft quite a bit, and I believe the NY UFO video is authentic. <br /><br />I would like to initially offer some commentary on the criticisms presented (w/numbered still photos) available at: <br />http://www.geocities.com/tsakali77/HTMLs/UFO.htm <br /><br />Critic: Frame 527 top of object is sunlit, but not in Frame 528. <br />Rebut: In 528 object is beginning to bank upward exposing it's underside - top not visible. <br /><br />The definition of the craft's image is also not distinct in 528; possibly due to a unique combination of speed, (focus) and angular transition at that specific distance from the camera. <br /><br /><br />Critic: Frame 529 top is visible again. <br />Rebut: This is actually the sunlit edge, not the top. <br /><br />Critic: Frame 535 horizon mis-match between two adjoining windows. <br />Rebut: The windows in the helicopter are not flat, but contoured slightly. This in itself can cause some distortion around the edges. Also the two windows are not on the exact same geometric plane as each other, which can further exacerbate any distortion. Notice that the left-to-right horizons in frames 527/528 DO tend to transition to the fuzzy quality of 535. <br /><br />Critic: Frame 536 different sky-tones between two windows. <br />Rebut: This is not unusual at all, particularly because of the different planar and reflective qualities as mentioned before. I've used Adobe Photoshop quite a bit, and anyone who has done any retouch work knows that even in an ordinary picture, where the sky appears to have a uniform appearance, you find it just isn't so when you try to clone an area into another area even closely adjacent. At 30 frames/second (each being 1/60 sec.) a vid

 

[imrippinit]

This image appeared exactly where the 2nd plane crashed into the 2nd tower. And exactly where the the pre 911 UFO stopped next to the 2nd tower 1 year and a month prior. Something is going on that we don't completely understand. To me, it looks like Chariots of Fire of either the good or bad sort.

 

[chew_on_this]

Looking at that pic, just above the devilish character, I see what appears to be the cowardly lion from the wizard of oz.

 

[mechagodzilla]

you must be joking.....

 

[trofast]

I think I'll go get my spoon.

 

[odysseus145]

There's more of them! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[votefornimitz]

Like a pheonix i rise from the ashes, but the point is this, what you are doing is looking at clouds and making out objects, just like toddlers <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <span style="color:#993366">In the event of a full scale nuclear war or NEO impact event, there are two categories of underground shelters available to the public, distinguished by depth underground: bunkers and graves...</span> </div>

 

[wiggle]

Hi there,<br /><br />This is my first post here!<br /><br />I have decided to do something more constructive with my filesharing activities. So I typed in ufo in the search box, and I have got lots of clips now.<br /><br />This WTC helicopter is one of them. When I first saw it I decided I had just watched a commercial for the scifi channel. And I am still convinced this is what it actually is.<br /><br />I decided to do a search on google for this clip to see what people thought and that's why I'm here.<br /><br />For starters, the girl is obvously sight seeing, <br />"are you getting all this?"<br />"world trade centre...?" <br />then she says "what is that?" like this is the first time she's seen it.<br /><br />When it goes past the copter, she calmly says, <br />"it's over there"<br /><br />When they were making this she was told to look at the wtc say "what's that" and then turn and point saying "it's over there"<br /><br />If this was real, she would have screamed when it went across in front of them, so would the camera man and pilot. but everyone remains really calm. Her reaction at this point shows me it is a commercial.<br /><br />Other pointers are that this woman/couple/heli pilot/ have all not come forward with their claim they saw a ufo, (if it was real) it would have been the best UFO shot in history, but all three remain quiet, even though they have video evidence, yeah right!<br /><br />The few thousand people who worked in the wtc? What of them? None of them reported a ufo cleaning their windows one day.<br /><br />I'd also like to hear people interpretations of what the cameraman says after she says<br />"the world trade centre?"<br /><br />something like<br /><br />"the world ......... ....... the same thing"<br /><br />In my opinion this is 100% fake. I can't believe the scifi channel are being so mean to their customers either making them think it could be real.<br /><br />Hope I can find plenty of other stuff to talk about here<br /><br />cheers.<br /><br />

 

[votefornimitz]

Glad to have another member, but be warned, I decided back in April that i would come here, debunk a few posts about aliens and then forget all about it.... Look at me now.... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <span style="color:#993366">In the event of a full scale nuclear war or NEO impact event, there are two categories of underground shelters available to the public, distinguished by depth underground: bunkers and graves...</span> </div>

 

[wiggle]

Hi vfn,<br /><br />I'm not a 100% debunker, that means I do believe, but I don't believe blindly. Like when I see a commercial for Sci-fi.com I don't automatically think the footage must be real, I try to keep a clear and questioning mind.<br /><br />Take these black triangles, most likely they are a top secret new military plane, not alien at all. But lets keep that for the triangle thread. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />cheers

 

[votefornimitz]

Its too late, you have been sucked in..... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <span style="color:#993366">In the event of a full scale nuclear war or NEO impact event, there are two categories of underground shelters available to the public, distinguished by depth underground: bunkers and graves...</span> </div>

 

[lampblack]

I first posted on these forums a few times back in August -- when I had a week's vacation, and plenty of time to fool around. Somehow -- inexplicably -- I stuck with it, senselessly expending time that could more fruitfully be spent in other ways.<br /><br />All of which is to say (based on my own experience): You have been assimilated, friend. Resistance is futile.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>

 

[kauboi]

That is until The One comes and frees us all!!!!! ... if he gets away with it before we get to kill him of course <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" />

 

[tomnackid]

Jerri DeAngelo - Lead Special Effects Creator Adoni Films <br />Video Analysis of WTC UFO for Real UFOS .com <br />May 29th 2002<br />Opinion on authenticity of video file known as WTC UFO. <br />------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />OK, I did a quick search for Adoni Films and found that they do cheesy direct to video productions like "The Prophecies of Nostodamus" and "Sollog the New Nostrodamus" (do you see a theme here?). Not exactly cutting edge special effects or video production, at least if the graphic design on the covers of the boxes are any indication (I'm a graphic designer and scientific illustrator). And not exactly unbiased when it comes to supernatural phenomena either!<br /><br />There are lots of ways to fake something on film or video that DO NOT require digital imaging! Hollywood was faking aliens long before Photoshop and Lightwave! Was the original video digital or analog? If it was originally digital then a good artist can do almost anything to it and no one would ever know the difference, but again it doesn't even have to be digital. Ask any magician. The simplest tricks often fool the most people. My 7 and 10 year old kids have been having lots of fun freaking people out with David Blain's levitation trick! (Its so simple you'll want to smack Blain for having the gall to use it!)<br /><br />All in all, unless we know much more about the original video--who took it, what kind of camera was it recorded on, etc., this "expert" opinion is totally meaningless. Saying that it is authentic because there are no obvious signs of digital manipulation is just plain stupid. Do the shadows match the time of day/year it was supposedly recorded at? Has anyone checked this? <br /><br />And of course the simplest thing to do is just lie with a straight face! Do you even know if Jerri DeAngelo is real or if he is real that he really wrote that critique? Have you ever seen a magician do a trick where an object ends up in the poc

 

[arc2]

I spoke directly with Larry Landsmen, Director of Special Projects for Sci Fi Channel regarding this specific video. Indeed it did appear in a Sci Fi Channel commericial and is the product of cgi. <br /><br />I don't know why the "experts" in this thread were unable to find the clues that would lead to that conclusion on their own. I was first advised of this video through NARCAP in 2002 and managed to resolve it very quickly.<br /><br />Also, if your Spanish is good, you might check out the work of Alejandro Franz (google it) and his video analysis which uncovers the cgi in this footage very nicely.

 

[kmarinas86]

Closer to the original footage. Franz didn't touch on this. It defeats his motion blur argument (the fact that he only analyzed 24 frames per second when there are at least 54 of them). That means he was missing over half of the video.<br /><br />http://www.filecabi.net/u.php?file=1144276836.avi

 

[qso1]

tomnackid:<br />(Its so simple you'll want to smack Blain for having the gall to use it!) <br /><br />Me:<br />Or slap the ones who believe it to be real. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Actually, I pointed out the CGI angle in another thread before I knew it was a product of CGI. I'd managed to capture a frame where the UFO model appeared to be slightly in front of the building it should have been behind. This would be explained by something as simple as rotoscoping the building footage as a background image sequence in Lightwave 3D with the UFO model in front. There are other ways to CGI it. Planar mapping of the buildings to place them in front of the UFO model so it would properly appear even upon close inspection, to emerge from behind the building.<br /><br />I'm not an expert myself but those here who did not post probably simply got tired of explaining other possibilities.<br /><br />There was another tipoff to me that had nothing to do with CGI. The UFO zips towards the helicopter at what appears to be incredible maneuvers requiring anti-gravity or some other exotic propulsion system. Then it ignites a crude SRB like system after passing the window of the chopper as evidenced by the thick chemical rocket plume which appears to have been done for dramatic effect. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">the UFO model appeared to be slightly in front of the building it should have been behind.</font><br /><br />Give me a good reason why it should be behind. In fact, with the 3D perspective showed the left side wall of the WTC, the right side wall was not visible. It was moving around the front right corner, so it didn't have to be behind the rear corner. It was moving a like character in a first-person shooter using "hide behind the corner tactics" if you know what I mean.

 

[qso1]

Without having made the video and considering the range of choices available for doing special effects shots, I cannot accurately explain what you requested.<br /><br />I will have to look and see if I still have the frame to show what I'm referring to. Despite that, someone should explain why a craft supposedly many years in advance of us, and clearly shown executing the kind of maneuver attributed to UFOs...explain why a crude chemical rocket is needed after it passes the helicopter. And...how this vehicle got so close to the chopper yet managed not to interact with the rotor blades. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[mlorrey]

Its a fraud, the actress in it already admitted its a hoax.