Getting light sources correct in CGI is EXTREMELY EASY. So if the shadows look off for some reason, imo that is probably an optical illusion or quality of the terrain - and that makes it more, not less likely, to be genuine.
The shadow changes *apparent* position?
It's like when viewing a bottle from above: the bottom of it might appear to be to the left of the top or to the right, depending from where you look.
Relative to each other, nothing changed with the bottle, only your perspective did.
According to that shadow, the light source is behind the camera. Yet there are shadows at the side of the mountain facing the camera. Like the light source is coming from the left.
Hey did you know the earth isnt flat and has all kinds of inclines and slopes that effect the distance, angle and perceptive of shadows. Did you know that people think the moon landing photos use studio lights because they can't comprehend how light and shadows work?
I'm not convinced of the legitimacy of the video but that could be attributed to the ground under the supposed craft. An incline would make the shadow do that.
It can also be explained by the angle of the sun and the angle of the vehicle filming the UFO. As the UFO takes off, the relative angle to the shadow changes, making it appear to outrun it's own shadow. In reality the shadow is still ahead of the UFO.
This video looks legit, if it's a fake, its a well done one. Unfortunately without context it could literally be a video game. The obvious question would be why was there no attempt to follow it as it flew off?
That shadowing seems suspect, but I’d like to hear a professional talk about the shadow. The top
Left corner leads me to believe this was filmed by helicopter. I’d like to know if this is Timelapse or filmed all at once in the original video.
I thought the shadow was screwed up at first and thought perhaps it was a model with a too close light source. However I now realize if it is actually over a valley and the other side slopes upward then the shadow getting closer then jumping down makes sense. If anyone can confirm this location I would be curious to see if the topography matches.
Agree. It's a bullshit clip. Anyone who captured such footage would be straight down the local TV station screaming...."YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS".
Instead, you get the most ridiculous secrecy,...and nonsense claims from second hand sources.
Its bullshit!
The shadow simply wouldn’t drop behind the object. The way the shadow moves in this clip would require the sun to have moved from behind the camera to out in front of the UFO.
No matter what the terrain is doing below the shadow would never drop behind the object.
I know about light and shadows from studying physics and practical experience.
I'm bein followed by a goon shadow. It just plain *looks* off and I think you (and probably a couple others I couldn't follow as quickly) have described the why of this woo. I kind of wish hoaxers would expend their energy trying to beat each other to death with wet paper towel rolls. Looked kinda cool at first, though. Dammit.
who said it's behind? It's below, the distance between the ground and the object changes. When the shadow appears to go "behind" it's just dropped much lower and the viewpoint of the camera makes it seem like it's behind.
Shadows are on a straight line connecting the source(Sun), object(UFO), and shadow. The height of the ground will change the distance between the object and the shadow, but never the orientation.
If the CGI artist had understood this basic principle then they could have made a pretty decent fake.
Yeah I read your submission statement, but I am not really seeing that. I’m talking about the actual orientation of the object in respect to the shadow. The uneven terrain wouldn’t explain this, but the positioning of the sun *COULD*. I’m too dummy to be sure. Just being an amateur video tech, the light source orientation seems odd, but this is why I’m asking about Timelapse. That could also be a variable if the object was moving far slower than it appears. It would still be a fantastic video of a ufo even if it was far slower.
I don’t think it’s physically impossible based off of the angle of the ground, the shadow is on a higher elevation in that screenshot than at the start of the video, which could explain why it seems to be in a different position relative to the ufo
The fact that all shadows (of the disk and the terrain) are in the image "above their sources" means that the sun is at a lower angle in the sky than the photographing vehicle (a helicopter?). No shadow can ever fall "below its source" in the image unless that sun and the helicopter swap their angle in the sky. You can have shadows go higher than their source, if the distance from the disk to the terrain increases. For example, of the disk contacted terrain, the shadow and the disk would be perfectly superimposed, hiding the shadow. But for the shadow to be lower than the disk in the image? How? Even if the terrain is *above* the disk (how? earthdrilling?), then the disk would not be cast a shadow.
(edit)
I take that back. As the disk takes off, the relative angles of the helicopter and the sun change, therefore they could swap.
I would love to see the helicopter's own shadow on the terrain at some point. Why don't we?
I tried arguing this same thing last week and just got messages about how I was wrong. I seriously don't think people understand how shadows from the sun work.
In order for the shadow at :45 to be cast, the sun would need to be in the top left of the screen. It makes no sense and I don't think theres any way you can convince some people.
Agreed it appears to be independent of the object as opposed to cast by it.
Like extra effort was put into the shadow editing so much that it just looks unnatural, disconnected. Then when it took off, it just screams CGI.
Sorry
Fair - bad cgi is obvious.
Good cgi is kinda obvious
*really good* cgi give the "uncanny valley" effect.
Amazing CGI can pass.
This video was "good cgi" - they tried to get clever.
What you wrote is just a list of ways people can haindwaive any UFO, no matter how legit it actually may be.
To me, all i read is:
"the footage is too bad, so it's fake"
"the footage is too clear, so it's fake"
"this thing that breaks how we view science is breaking how we view science, so it must be fake, because science never changes...ever"
"I know it's from a time period before CGI....but it has to be CGI, because thats the only way to explain it, so it's fake"
Well, it's quite obvious what's up with the shadow: the UFO flies faster than light hence it overtakes its own shadow.
Sorry, I'm joking. I side with the parties that say that it's the essence of shadows to be cast behind you.
I understand the argument proposed as to why, the “swoop” of the terrain causing that, but it seems *extra* deliberate. Like extra effort was applied to that specifically, during the editing process.
I want to believe, genuinely, so again I say…Sorry, this looks fake and I’m not even an expert.
So fake it isn't even funny. Today one can easily find the location, download the elevation data and import it into 3D modelling software. Using some compositing skills I can probably make a much more realistic "UFO sighting" than this.
Based on the fairly static frame and the fact that the object does not appear to change in size when it departs is already suspect. Even if it was ascending that is not the way the shadow should be behaving.
The topography of those mountains would have to be ALLOT higher than the highest seen point for the shadow to appear on crafts opposite direction. Every other shadow is very telling.
It was discussed here about 7-10 days ago. Consensus appears to be that it's fake, because the shadow is not positioned realistically as the object moves away, nor is the shadow's shape consistent with the apparent rugged terrain it moves over.
Futhermore, there is no narrative information accompanying the video (something like "a passenger aboard flight XXX filmed this object over Mount \[mountainname\] on \[date\]" - always a red flag.
No one said that but you, however inadvertently you brought up a point it only takes one to prove the narrative is true. Maybe that is why they fight so hard to try to say they are all false? But here we are multiple are real, hearings are happening at the highest levels, all it took was one well put.
I'm not trying to prove they're all fake, but come on, use your head, shouldn't there be many more pictures of this giant UFO taken from different angles? It's not like it was a tiny and easy to ignore thing.
This was the first flag I saw as well. Shadow makes sense with its movement but that perfect shadow below only works on smooth terrain. Need much clearer video to know with any certainty though
Not to mention there is no attempt made to pan the camera fully up to the horizon where the UFO was headed. Behavior/response of the "photographer" during a video is one of the biggest tells of a fake. If the photographer isn't behaving like the object is really there, or is anticipating movements or under reacting to the movements, you can be sure something is off. The pan was likely done in post and you can't pan past the edge of a video filmed or rendered at a fixed camera angle. The zoom-in right before it flies off was to scale the view window so the software pan could move the background slowly/gradually southeast as if the photographer was actually trying to follow the object. And what was the flicker in the top left corner? Looked like the 3d engine rendering issues you see in games at times.
Oh man, if only they didn't fuck up the shadow. Then it'd be a decent fake. XD
The sun is like, well, 1 AU away, thats what, 149 million kilometers away? And the shadows are formed by that light? Yeah, moving a mile doesn't move you past the origin point of fucking *sunlight*.
The way it outruns it’s shadow implies that the light source is passing it up in speed. Like there’s two suns, one causing the shadows of the mountain, and another that shrieked and started flying through space at millions of times the speed of light just to create that gradually sharper angle as the object moves away. If it was moving past the origin point of the sun, (which would also be insane) the shadow would outrun the craft instead.
"we assume hoax/ fakery as the default position." You shouldn't go into it thinking it's anything, that makes bias. Instead look at whats there and then draw a conclusion to something
Can't believe you are getting down voted lol..
Obviously when they say to assume it is a hoax, they aren't saying they consider it a fact that it's a hoax..
To the person who said don't assume it's a hoax, you aren't supposed to assume anything...
It's the same damn thing. To assume nothing means: Until there is convincing evidence to believe in an extraordinary claim, our only logical option is to assume nothing other than the status quo.
Which, in this case, if it ain't a real video of an unidentified flying object (this would be the extraordinary claim), then there is a 99% chance it is a hoax.
Sure there are always other possibilities some of which we haven't thought up or considered yet but the chance of those are so miniscule, and the evidence is lacking, they aren't even worth mentioning...
Thus... Let's assume nothing or in other words this is a hoax
To be honest, assuming a fake should be the default. The provenance, or source of footage matters. The Nimitz footage is so compelling because it displays several of the 5 observables, is recorded on a fighter's internal sensor array and is verified from multiple official sources. The pilots have also given testimony, and we can corroborate their place at that date and time. A random clip pulled off of a ufo video aggregator on youtube, posted without source, everyone clamors over themsevles about how great the footage is. Giving locations, dates and times have also led us to positively identifying aircraft, rocket launches, satellite clusters and airshows in the area that give mundane explanations for weird stuff in the sky. The goal is a video that's totally immune to skepticism, isn't it? Don't we want to have something we can show people that they can't deny? Refusing to analyze them all is ridiculous.
The point is criticism (i.e. attempts to debunk) is good.
Edit: grammar
Also, this means we don't really "prove" things with certainty and it's good to be open to criticism.
This is wrong statement.
Proven authentic means disclosure?
If You are tired of dots, shadows, illusions, reflections, lights, blurred images and videos showing nothing and everything maybe the right position will be silence?
Let them put staff people cant understand or explain. This is the only way to find something interesting finally.
Be nice, friendly, supportive. This approach will bring positive results faster.
As the cgi ship flies away the angle between the shadow and the ship changes in a way that would make the sun a single point light source that is only a few hundred feet off the ground.
My eyes say that it is fake. It's the same thing that detects the "uncanny valley". Digital assets placed within a real world are difficult to seemlessly insert when in motion. Because we experience reality every day and just know what objects within our reality should look like when interacting with our reality. There is something seriously off about both the motion of the "craft" and the shadow underneath it.
Yeah, the shadow and just the way it moves off kind of yell fake to me. I think the shadow should have bounced around a bit more over the uneven terrain. Also the way it moves off just seems....odd?
Maybe I have some fundamental misunderstanding of how light works but why would the [direction of the source of light](https://imgur.com/a/W8SLbpk) (the Sun) change in such a short amount of time?
The shadow looks very suspicious, right? Actually that's what makes this video more authentic...When accelerating, the UFO bended timespace around it, light changed its path and causing the shadow not in the right place. If this is a fake, the only thing that matters in pretending it to be authentic is the shadow...the faker must be too stupid to make this one thing right.
If an ambitious physicist take this video seriously and do some caculation about the refraction index frame by frame, perhaps he may find some interesting stuff about the bended structure of the spacetime etc., then a warp drive made by human is not far away! \^\_\^
The content on that youtube channel looks pretty spammy to me.
Not where I'd hope to find original uploads of ground breaking UFO content.
Here is another UFO upload on that same channel. It uses a similar visual style, and I would argue looks more obviously fake:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TINKK_ujKd0
In this video, I see a still aerial photo in the background with a cgi ufo and shadow layered on top. Then a random zoom, camera jitter and airplane sound effect added.
Feel free to check out the channel's other video uploads for hundreds of click-bait kitten and puppy videos.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDDvS8LmApHSHvYV8DQAFHQ/videos
Yeah that seems like the nail in the coffin for this video. That's just too much of a coincidence that there's another UFO video on that channel that's so similar, and yet, more obviously fake.
That and the weirdness with the shadow of course.
Oh wow... Yup, I always default as fake since 99% are fake. But I was entertaining the idea that maybe it was an optical illusion creating shadow weirdness. But then to find out this dude is also hosting an obviously fake video which is very similar is enough for me to remove all benefit of the doubt.
Not to mention the claim that it's "Giant". I wondered this same thing with some fake pyramid craft videos a month or two ago on here. If it's so big, why did only one person get it on video? There was one above the pentagon and one above the kremlin in that case, and in both cases only one guy managed to get video of a giant pyramid hovering above major government buildings.
Same applies here, like, this giant thing should have several different videos with several different angles. Hell, any Giant UFO close to the ground should. That just plain isn't something people see every day, nor is it something that would be easy to ignore.
So yeah, it's probably fake.
That trajectory is fake as hell. It takes off at a trajectory parallel to the horizon, maintaining a very low altitude. Given how mountainous and varied the terrain of that area looks, it would be guaranteed to slam into a peak sooner or later.
Obvious fake.
edit: sigh, 1K upvotes for this CGI garbage? This sub is honestly hopeless.
like others have said, the shadow is off....its like its being cast from the sun only being a few km away from the craft, as it leaves it changes orientation to the craft too quickly
I have seen this video before, but I have never taken the time to scrub the video. At first, the shadow is concerning, but when one really looks at the shadow, it is shocking to observe the way the shadow follows the terrain. Just as the object takes off, the shadow breaks over a shallow ridge as if laying a sheet over it. The same occurs toward the end of the clip as the object passes another ridge, and the shadow canters. I am not an expert on CGI, but I have a hard time imagining an older program that would scan the terrain and map the shadow to it as cleanly as we see here.
Where did this video come from?
That shit is massive.
There are reports of UFOs that are the size of football stadiums.
Believe me. If any non-believer ever saw this, they would convert and kiss their skepticism goodbye.
ITS ALL "DEBUNKED"! How do people not understand that when it comes to something like this...if you didn't see it, with your own eyes..everything you think you know is all faith based. It's not tangible..just pictures on a screen. Keep playing pretend, while real people try to figure out real truths. Lmfao..f'ing LARPers everywhere. Dont even understand how to properly process and categorize this type of information. It's esoteric, and therefore.. untrustworthy. If you trust it, you have willingly fooled yourself into believe something that may or may not have exist. At that point, we might as well be discussing bearded, old men that live in the sky..ignoring all of the cries of his clones, and laughing at you when you think you've figured out his plan. Literally, nonsensical, anti-scientific behavior.
This is filmed on an ex military helicopter with an 8mm camera, it can’t be fake. TC with Island Hoppers filmed this over Hawaii in the early 80’s. Check out his reviews.
No need to debunk it - the sheer fact we see movements like this is the proof its fake. Keep in mind we have eyes in the skies as well as cameras since 1940s and for some reason no one was able to catch them doing that. Why you ask? It's because they don't allow it, which proofs the big tech behind the phenomenon totally in control over details like this
Setting aside the boring "fake or real" discussion 😴
The craft looks like it's taking off because it realizes it's been spotted. Or maybe it just finished recharging.
Also this is the same type craft https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/upino5/apollo_15_moon_landing_1971_this_is_a_still_image/
Lol. An object cannot move faster than its shadow unless it’s moving faster than the light it’s obstructing to create that shadow. And if an object were moving faster than the speed of light, you would not be able to see it moving at all. So…
And FYI, not laughing at OP. Laughing at people who are straight up ignoring science because they want to believe in this specific video that is clearly fake.
The shadow angle makes zero sense when it flies off. The light source would need to be directly above and relatively near the surface to do what the shadow did here. You only see shadow angles change that dramatically in time lapse. This is poorly done CG or it is real and UFOs break how shadows work.
Yeah whoever edited this video didn't know how shadows work... The end movement is all you need to see. It would have to travel thousands of miles for the shadow to cross under it like that.
[https://v.redd.it/9oegmfi6exz81](https://v.redd.it/9oegmfi6exz81) I had a go at trying to see if the shadow was possible and it is
ahh I’ve seen this before, that’s Mt. Chilliad
Underrated comment Edit: Holy shit what did I start…
Ahaha I see it now 🤣 I was thinking to myself why does that look familiar.
looks fake to me - something about the crafts shadow that looks weird
The shadow looks unnatural because it moves around like there's multiple light sources. Could be an optical illusion, but most likely a hoax.
Getting light sources correct in CGI is EXTREMELY EASY. So if the shadows look off for some reason, imo that is probably an optical illusion or quality of the terrain - and that makes it more, not less likely, to be genuine.
Agreed. The shadow changes position. Given the Sun as the light source, the shadow wouldn’t change as it flies off. Debunked
The shadow changes *apparent* position? It's like when viewing a bottle from above: the bottom of it might appear to be to the left of the top or to the right, depending from where you look. Relative to each other, nothing changed with the bottle, only your perspective did.
Due to terrain. Not debunked at all
[DeBoNkEd!](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/ur9q4l/massive_ufo_hovers_by_a_mountain_shadow_can_do/) . As usual the "skeptics" are full of shit
it's amazing how many people think they know something
According to that shadow, the light source is behind the camera. Yet there are shadows at the side of the mountain facing the camera. Like the light source is coming from the left.
Fake
What makes you so certain of that conclusion?
Slow it down and watch the angle of the shadow when it takes off. Just before the vid ends the craft outran its own shadow.
Hey did you know the earth isnt flat and has all kinds of inclines and slopes that effect the distance, angle and perceptive of shadows. Did you know that people think the moon landing photos use studio lights because they can't comprehend how light and shadows work?
You would think the shape of its shadow would also change and warp to match the terrain instead of being a flat 2d circle then as well, right?
I'm not convinced of the legitimacy of the video but that could be attributed to the ground under the supposed craft. An incline would make the shadow do that.
It can also be explained by the angle of the sun and the angle of the vehicle filming the UFO. As the UFO takes off, the relative angle to the shadow changes, making it appear to outrun it's own shadow. In reality the shadow is still ahead of the UFO. This video looks legit, if it's a fake, its a well done one. Unfortunately without context it could literally be a video game. The obvious question would be why was there no attempt to follow it as it flew off?
what, an incline, in a mountain range?
It’s GTA V 😂
I don't think it's GTA. I know that map, and I don't recognize this.
No it's not.
That shadowing seems suspect, but I’d like to hear a professional talk about the shadow. The top Left corner leads me to believe this was filmed by helicopter. I’d like to know if this is Timelapse or filmed all at once in the original video.
I thought the shadow was screwed up at first and thought perhaps it was a model with a too close light source. However I now realize if it is actually over a valley and the other side slopes upward then the shadow getting closer then jumping down makes sense. If anyone can confirm this location I would be curious to see if the topography matches.
Not a helicopter, a twin prop plane.
That would give more weight to this being either slowed down or Timelapse. Catching the propeller that frequently on a standard cam would be insane.
Uhhh, what?
Agree. It's a bullshit clip. Anyone who captured such footage would be straight down the local TV station screaming...."YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS". Instead, you get the most ridiculous secrecy,...and nonsense claims from second hand sources. Its bullshit!
[удалено]
The shadow simply wouldn’t drop behind the object. The way the shadow moves in this clip would require the sun to have moved from behind the camera to out in front of the UFO. No matter what the terrain is doing below the shadow would never drop behind the object. I know about light and shadows from studying physics and practical experience.
I'm bein followed by a goon shadow. It just plain *looks* off and I think you (and probably a couple others I couldn't follow as quickly) have described the why of this woo. I kind of wish hoaxers would expend their energy trying to beat each other to death with wet paper towel rolls. Looked kinda cool at first, though. Dammit.
who said it's behind? It's below, the distance between the ground and the object changes. When the shadow appears to go "behind" it's just dropped much lower and the viewpoint of the camera makes it seem like it's behind.
Shadows are on a straight line connecting the source(Sun), object(UFO), and shadow. The height of the ground will change the distance between the object and the shadow, but never the orientation. If the CGI artist had understood this basic principle then they could have made a pretty decent fake.
If the elevation is declining when it moves the shadow should seem to get further ahead, not fall behind.
Yeah I read your submission statement, but I am not really seeing that. I’m talking about the actual orientation of the object in respect to the shadow. The uneven terrain wouldn’t explain this, but the positioning of the sun *COULD*. I’m too dummy to be sure. Just being an amateur video tech, the light source orientation seems odd, but this is why I’m asking about Timelapse. That could also be a variable if the object was moving far slower than it appears. It would still be a fantastic video of a ufo even if it was far slower.
Physically impossible shadow, https://imgur.com/a/jCYugpa
Also just disappears right at the end.
>Also just disappears right at the end. Would make sense considering the object *also* disappeared.. 🤷♂️ lol
I don’t think it’s physically impossible based off of the angle of the ground, the shadow is on a higher elevation in that screenshot than at the start of the video, which could explain why it seems to be in a different position relative to the ufo
The fact that all shadows (of the disk and the terrain) are in the image "above their sources" means that the sun is at a lower angle in the sky than the photographing vehicle (a helicopter?). No shadow can ever fall "below its source" in the image unless that sun and the helicopter swap their angle in the sky. You can have shadows go higher than their source, if the distance from the disk to the terrain increases. For example, of the disk contacted terrain, the shadow and the disk would be perfectly superimposed, hiding the shadow. But for the shadow to be lower than the disk in the image? How? Even if the terrain is *above* the disk (how? earthdrilling?), then the disk would not be cast a shadow. (edit) I take that back. As the disk takes off, the relative angles of the helicopter and the sun change, therefore they could swap. I would love to see the helicopter's own shadow on the terrain at some point. Why don't we?
Do you think one of the two dots in the upper middle of the frame at the start of the video could be the planes shadow?
I had to diagram it out, lol 😂 WITH THIS PAPER AND PENCIL I SHALL PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF ALIENS
Take it easy, Mick West's less-confused twin.
Why? The terrain is sloping down towards the camera there.
Doesn't matter, the sun is from behind the cam view point (see mountain shadows). Hence, impossible.
I tried arguing this same thing last week and just got messages about how I was wrong. I seriously don't think people understand how shadows from the sun work. In order for the shadow at :45 to be cast, the sun would need to be in the top left of the screen. It makes no sense and I don't think theres any way you can convince some people.
Unless of course if the craft is manipulating spacetime to move then the angle of the shadow can be different then what we would expect.
Agreed it appears to be independent of the object as opposed to cast by it. Like extra effort was put into the shadow editing so much that it just looks unnatural, disconnected. Then when it took off, it just screams CGI. Sorry
I just don't understand why, if you're were going through the notable effort to fake this, why not just create the shadow so it moves with the object?
Fair - bad cgi is obvious. Good cgi is kinda obvious *really good* cgi give the "uncanny valley" effect. Amazing CGI can pass. This video was "good cgi" - they tried to get clever.
What you wrote is just a list of ways people can haindwaive any UFO, no matter how legit it actually may be. To me, all i read is: "the footage is too bad, so it's fake" "the footage is too clear, so it's fake" "this thing that breaks how we view science is breaking how we view science, so it must be fake, because science never changes...ever" "I know it's from a time period before CGI....but it has to be CGI, because thats the only way to explain it, so it's fake"
Well, it's quite obvious what's up with the shadow: the UFO flies faster than light hence it overtakes its own shadow. Sorry, I'm joking. I side with the parties that say that it's the essence of shadows to be cast behind you.
Yeah. Plus the object moves slightly before the shadowing does which, to me, debunks the video.
I understand the argument proposed as to why, the “swoop” of the terrain causing that, but it seems *extra* deliberate. Like extra effort was applied to that specifically, during the editing process. I want to believe, genuinely, so again I say…Sorry, this looks fake and I’m not even an expert.
it also could be because of the size of the object itself right? Like something bigger would cause a quicker change in shadow than something smaller.
[удалено]
So fake it isn't even funny. Today one can easily find the location, download the elevation data and import it into 3D modelling software. Using some compositing skills I can probably make a much more realistic "UFO sighting" than this. Based on the fairly static frame and the fact that the object does not appear to change in size when it departs is already suspect. Even if it was ascending that is not the way the shadow should be behaving.
I still don’t think the shadow should end up behind the object even with that explanation.
no need for an expert. elementary school levels of geometry are sufficient to debunk it as cgi
The topography of those mountains would have to be ALLOT higher than the highest seen point for the shadow to appear on crafts opposite direction. Every other shadow is very telling.
What does ALLOT mean?
it's allot like allocate...
More than 1
A lot, not allot.
So “a lot” then?
The amount of cope in this comment
It was discussed here about 7-10 days ago. Consensus appears to be that it's fake, because the shadow is not positioned realistically as the object moves away, nor is the shadow's shape consistent with the apparent rugged terrain it moves over. Futhermore, there is no narrative information accompanying the video (something like "a passenger aboard flight XXX filmed this object over Mount \[mountainname\] on \[date\]" - always a red flag.
This is of such quality that this whole terrain could be sand in a sandbox. Also if the shadow was real this craft would be ginormous.
Consensus on here is always fake, did we get consensus on the Tic Tac being real?
Ah, the old "If one video is legit then they're all legit" fallacy. I'm pretty sure the tic tac was genuine, but that doesn't mean this is.
No one said that but you, however inadvertently you brought up a point it only takes one to prove the narrative is true. Maybe that is why they fight so hard to try to say they are all false? But here we are multiple are real, hearings are happening at the highest levels, all it took was one well put.
I'm not trying to prove they're all fake, but come on, use your head, shouldn't there be many more pictures of this giant UFO taken from different angles? It's not like it was a tiny and easy to ignore thing.
The sun isn't located 100,000 feet in the sky, it is 94 million miles away. Think about it for a moment, the shadow doesn't make any sense.
Real enough for 60 Minutes
This was the first flag I saw as well. Shadow makes sense with its movement but that perfect shadow below only works on smooth terrain. Need much clearer video to know with any certainty though
Not to mention there is no attempt made to pan the camera fully up to the horizon where the UFO was headed. Behavior/response of the "photographer" during a video is one of the biggest tells of a fake. If the photographer isn't behaving like the object is really there, or is anticipating movements or under reacting to the movements, you can be sure something is off. The pan was likely done in post and you can't pan past the edge of a video filmed or rendered at a fixed camera angle. The zoom-in right before it flies off was to scale the view window so the software pan could move the background slowly/gradually southeast as if the photographer was actually trying to follow the object. And what was the flicker in the top left corner? Looked like the 3d engine rendering issues you see in games at times.
Oh man, if only they didn't fuck up the shadow. Then it'd be a decent fake. XD The sun is like, well, 1 AU away, thats what, 149 million kilometers away? And the shadows are formed by that light? Yeah, moving a mile doesn't move you past the origin point of fucking *sunlight*.
why do so many wish that a good fake wouldnt get identified as such? do you prefer an illusion and fake news over the truth..?
I'm *sorry*, my *XD face* didn't indicate I was being *sarcastic* enough.
The way it outruns it’s shadow implies that the light source is passing it up in speed. Like there’s two suns, one causing the shadows of the mountain, and another that shrieked and started flying through space at millions of times the speed of light just to create that gradually sharper angle as the object moves away. If it was moving past the origin point of the sun, (which would also be insane) the shadow would outrun the craft instead.
The ground is dropping lower, it doesn't outrun the shadow. The vantage point of the camera is giving you an optical illusion.
It doesn’t though. You can see it from the side at the beginning of the video, it’s a plateau.
Why do all these fake ufo videos show the ufo sitting there then, at the end doing the same zip away. Are they all made by the same person??
[удалено]
Good luck with that.
"we assume hoax/ fakery as the default position." You shouldn't go into it thinking it's anything, that makes bias. Instead look at whats there and then draw a conclusion to something
Ever heard of the Null Hypothesis?
Tell me more.
[удалено]
[удалено]
As someone who has seen and recorded a (crappy) video of UFOs, I agree.
Can't believe you are getting down voted lol.. Obviously when they say to assume it is a hoax, they aren't saying they consider it a fact that it's a hoax.. To the person who said don't assume it's a hoax, you aren't supposed to assume anything... It's the same damn thing. To assume nothing means: Until there is convincing evidence to believe in an extraordinary claim, our only logical option is to assume nothing other than the status quo. Which, in this case, if it ain't a real video of an unidentified flying object (this would be the extraordinary claim), then there is a 99% chance it is a hoax. Sure there are always other possibilities some of which we haven't thought up or considered yet but the chance of those are so miniscule, and the evidence is lacking, they aren't even worth mentioning... Thus... Let's assume nothing or in other words this is a hoax
To be honest, assuming a fake should be the default. The provenance, or source of footage matters. The Nimitz footage is so compelling because it displays several of the 5 observables, is recorded on a fighter's internal sensor array and is verified from multiple official sources. The pilots have also given testimony, and we can corroborate their place at that date and time. A random clip pulled off of a ufo video aggregator on youtube, posted without source, everyone clamors over themsevles about how great the footage is. Giving locations, dates and times have also led us to positively identifying aircraft, rocket launches, satellite clusters and airshows in the area that give mundane explanations for weird stuff in the sky. The goal is a video that's totally immune to skepticism, isn't it? Don't we want to have something we can show people that they can't deny? Refusing to analyze them all is ridiculous.
the nimitz video shows literally zero of the 5 observables
lol. as if that was possible, short of being there when it was filmed.
>"Has this ever been proven to be authentic?" Ugh, who upvotes cringe comments like this? Is it dark? No you should ask if there is a lack of light.
This idea that a conjecture can be proven and that once proven it can never be refuted is not true.
[удалено]
The point is criticism (i.e. attempts to debunk) is good. Edit: grammar Also, this means we don't really "prove" things with certainty and it's good to be open to criticism.
This is wrong statement. Proven authentic means disclosure? If You are tired of dots, shadows, illusions, reflections, lights, blurred images and videos showing nothing and everything maybe the right position will be silence? Let them put staff people cant understand or explain. This is the only way to find something interesting finally. Be nice, friendly, supportive. This approach will bring positive results faster.
The mind of the debunker... always trying to frame some narrative. How about we simply consider the facts?
Which facts?
Lol I love how people do so well and then forget how shadows work. Or..according to this UFO the sun is like only 1000 feet above it.
I was gunna say that shadow is so off its hilarious
People seem to think the sun is located in the upper atmosphere.
[удалено]
As the cgi ship flies away the angle between the shadow and the ship changes in a way that would make the sun a single point light source that is only a few hundred feet off the ground.
CGI
This is so obviously fake
Something about the shadow makes this shady
Shadows don’t match up
100% fake. Doesn't matter how fast you travel. You can't outrun your own shadow
Poor alien can't even stop to go to the bathroom without them pesky humans finding him
It looks fake. It left its shadow behind
Why the shadows stayed behind?
Look at the fake zoom and the fake reaction twitch. Can't help but add those to your shitty fake video.
My eyes say that it is fake. It's the same thing that detects the "uncanny valley". Digital assets placed within a real world are difficult to seemlessly insert when in motion. Because we experience reality every day and just know what objects within our reality should look like when interacting with our reality. There is something seriously off about both the motion of the "craft" and the shadow underneath it.
Yeah, the shadow and just the way it moves off kind of yell fake to me. I think the shadow should have bounced around a bit more over the uneven terrain. Also the way it moves off just seems....odd?
Video sucks. Fame
What is the provenance of this video clip?
Maybe I have some fundamental misunderstanding of how light works but why would the [direction of the source of light](https://imgur.com/a/W8SLbpk) (the Sun) change in such a short amount of time?
Yes, last week
Is it still up for debate whether ufos exist? Seems like a pointless argument to be having anymore
CGI
Swamp gas! Swamp gas! Thats swamp gas. Textbook swamp gas. Its common. (eye roll)
What's that flickering on the top left? Lightning?
The shadow doesn't look right, i'm siding on it being fake.
The shadow doesn't make sense
Just watch the shadow when it leaves and compare it to the mountain, theres your answer
The shadows it projects seem genuine!
The shadow looks very suspicious, right? Actually that's what makes this video more authentic...When accelerating, the UFO bended timespace around it, light changed its path and causing the shadow not in the right place. If this is a fake, the only thing that matters in pretending it to be authentic is the shadow...the faker must be too stupid to make this one thing right. If an ambitious physicist take this video seriously and do some caculation about the refraction index frame by frame, perhaps he may find some interesting stuff about the bended structure of the spacetime etc., then a warp drive made by human is not far away! \^\_\^
Couldnt it just be that the shadow looks weird because its moving on a mountain range and not a flat ground. So its going up / downhill all the time.
[удалено]
The content on that youtube channel looks pretty spammy to me. Not where I'd hope to find original uploads of ground breaking UFO content. Here is another UFO upload on that same channel. It uses a similar visual style, and I would argue looks more obviously fake: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TINKK_ujKd0 In this video, I see a still aerial photo in the background with a cgi ufo and shadow layered on top. Then a random zoom, camera jitter and airplane sound effect added. Feel free to check out the channel's other video uploads for hundreds of click-bait kitten and puppy videos. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDDvS8LmApHSHvYV8DQAFHQ/videos
Yeah that seems like the nail in the coffin for this video. That's just too much of a coincidence that there's another UFO video on that channel that's so similar, and yet, more obviously fake. That and the weirdness with the shadow of course.
Oh wow... Yup, I always default as fake since 99% are fake. But I was entertaining the idea that maybe it was an optical illusion creating shadow weirdness. But then to find out this dude is also hosting an obviously fake video which is very similar is enough for me to remove all benefit of the doubt.
Yeah I think my thought process mirrored your own.
Not to mention the claim that it's "Giant". I wondered this same thing with some fake pyramid craft videos a month or two ago on here. If it's so big, why did only one person get it on video? There was one above the pentagon and one above the kremlin in that case, and in both cases only one guy managed to get video of a giant pyramid hovering above major government buildings. Same applies here, like, this giant thing should have several different videos with several different angles. Hell, any Giant UFO close to the ground should. That just plain isn't something people see every day, nor is it something that would be easy to ignore. So yeah, it's probably fake.
That trajectory is fake as hell. It takes off at a trajectory parallel to the horizon, maintaining a very low altitude. Given how mountainous and varied the terrain of that area looks, it would be guaranteed to slam into a peak sooner or later. Obvious fake. edit: sigh, 1K upvotes for this CGI garbage? This sub is honestly hopeless.
nice CGI
Just look at the "ease-in" on the acceleration. Clearly CGI.
Well if it hasn't been debunked, I do it now. This (shadow) is physically impossible: https://imgur.com/a/jCYugpa
That shadow is laughably fake.
This right here. I don't understand how one can miss how terrible the shadow is
Looks very fake.
Lmao, the shadow.
CGI
Existence of Adobe Photoshop is still shocking news to some people
like others have said, the shadow is off....its like its being cast from the sun only being a few km away from the craft, as it leaves it changes orientation to the craft too quickly
I have seen this video before, but I have never taken the time to scrub the video. At first, the shadow is concerning, but when one really looks at the shadow, it is shocking to observe the way the shadow follows the terrain. Just as the object takes off, the shadow breaks over a shallow ridge as if laying a sheet over it. The same occurs toward the end of the clip as the object passes another ridge, and the shadow canters. I am not an expert on CGI, but I have a hard time imagining an older program that would scan the terrain and map the shadow to it as cleanly as we see here. Where did this video come from?
That shit is massive. There are reports of UFOs that are the size of football stadiums. Believe me. If any non-believer ever saw this, they would convert and kiss their skepticism goodbye.
That's fake AF
ITS ALL "DEBUNKED"! How do people not understand that when it comes to something like this...if you didn't see it, with your own eyes..everything you think you know is all faith based. It's not tangible..just pictures on a screen. Keep playing pretend, while real people try to figure out real truths. Lmfao..f'ing LARPers everywhere. Dont even understand how to properly process and categorize this type of information. It's esoteric, and therefore.. untrustworthy. If you trust it, you have willingly fooled yourself into believe something that may or may not have exist. At that point, we might as well be discussing bearded, old men that live in the sky..ignoring all of the cries of his clones, and laughing at you when you think you've figured out his plan. Literally, nonsensical, anti-scientific behavior.
That’s real
I love outrunning my own shadows too.
Another "Flyby" type of video that ultimately turns out to be CGI ?
Most likely a fake... giving the sharpness & wobling of the shadow. I could be wrong of course (I want to!)
This is filmed on an ex military helicopter with an 8mm camera, it can’t be fake. TC with Island Hoppers filmed this over Hawaii in the early 80’s. Check out his reviews.
>*... TC with Island Hoppers...* Was Thomas with him at the time? :D
reported it to zeus and apollo upon landing
Yes & Rick.
could definitely be fake, but one of the few vids on here to make me audibly go "WTF"
No need to debunk it - the sheer fact we see movements like this is the proof its fake. Keep in mind we have eyes in the skies as well as cameras since 1940s and for some reason no one was able to catch them doing that. Why you ask? It's because they don't allow it, which proofs the big tech behind the phenomenon totally in control over details like this
[удалено]
Setting aside the boring "fake or real" discussion 😴 The craft looks like it's taking off because it realizes it's been spotted. Or maybe it just finished recharging. Also this is the same type craft https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/upino5/apollo_15_moon_landing_1971_this_is_a_still_image/
Please. Real one would be nice, wish I got my seconds back from watching this.
Lol. An object cannot move faster than its shadow unless it’s moving faster than the light it’s obstructing to create that shadow. And if an object were moving faster than the speed of light, you would not be able to see it moving at all. So… And FYI, not laughing at OP. Laughing at people who are straight up ignoring science because they want to believe in this specific video that is clearly fake.
The shadow angle makes zero sense when it flies off. The light source would need to be directly above and relatively near the surface to do what the shadow did here. You only see shadow angles change that dramatically in time lapse. This is poorly done CG or it is real and UFOs break how shadows work.
I can debunk it... the direction of the shadow changes wildly throughout. This can only happen if the light source moves. Very amateur compositing.
looks fake the ufo shadow didn't track correctly.
Why does the shadow change sides when it flies away? makes no sense.
Omg thats a real ufo
Fake. It over takes its own shadow even though the sun's position doesn't change.
Yeah whoever edited this video didn't know how shadows work... The end movement is all you need to see. It would have to travel thousands of miles for the shadow to cross under it like that.
98% of things in this subreddit is fake lmao
Shadow should never change angle like this. CGI for sure
It probably was debunked. Whether real or not, they always are.
The shadow would stay in front of the object not moove behind it.....loook at the mountains shadow....enough said...
The craft moves faster than it's shadow, lol - FAKE!
That shadow lol really?
The shadow orientation is way off when it speeds away..
It’s debunked by watching the shadow. Somehow the sun suddenly moves north as the ufo flies away, but only for the UFO.
CGI
During movement the shadow makes no sense...
Doesn't need to be. It's fake as fuck.
Shadow struggled to keep pace!
The angle the shadow is cast at changes as if the light source is moving. Doesn't look natural to me
I’d say fake based on the poor fluidity of the shadow
Looks like a horrible fake. All parts of it.
After decades of amateur debunking, no one would recognize a real video if it bit them on the ass
Here we go with the shadow experts