Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UFO seen in Meath by Garda, Politician & Pilot...

Options
1…6781012

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    6th
    Registered Users Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    Maximilian wrote: »
    Actually, would someone go and watch it for me and tell me what I think.

    You liked it but are going to wait for the DVD to see the alternative ending and extras.


  • Options
    #273
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    monkeyfudge wrote: »
    Yep. Rent Close Encounters of the Third Kind instead... it's a lot more impressive.


    Going through some of the footage we filmed on the day here. We have got an interview with Carl Nally at his stand where he explains himself. I'll see if I can get that up by tomorrow.

    That would be fantastic. Cheers.
    Close encounters was great for sure, and it also took less time to release.


  • Options
    #274
    Scruff
    Registered Users Posts: 4,222 ✭✭✭Scruff


    6th wrote: »
    You liked it but are going to wait for the DVD to see the alternative ending and extras.

    lol
    i hear it been digitally remastered like Star Wars to make the laser special effects seem more real.


  • Options
    #275
    monkeyfudge
    Registered Users Posts: 23,216 ✭✭✭✭monkeyfudge


    Christopher Lee was completely cut out of the original version. But you'll be able to see him in the extended edition.


  • Options
    #276
    Slow Motion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Slow Motion


    monkeyfudge wrote: »
    Christopher Lee was completely cut out of the original version. But you'll be able to see him in the extended edition.

    I thought they had replaced him with a CGI character!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    Maybe it is all part of some viral campaign for "The Day the Earth Stood Still" - staring Neo.


  • Options
    #278
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    Slow Motion wrote: »
    I thought they had replaced him with a CGI character!

    Nah, that was the laser.


  • Options
    #279
    iamhunted
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭iamhunted


    i heard it won awards for the special effects


  • Options
    #280
    Slow Motion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Slow Motion


    iamhunted wrote: »
    i heard it won awards for the special effects

    Must have been a Razzi!


  • Options
    #281
    Pgibson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 406 ✭✭Pgibson


    iamhunted wrote: »
    *moving* is the operative word. what other shape? I dunno - any shape at all, as they are *moving* (theres that word again).

    did I just completely miss the whole point of your question?

    Just pointing out that a triangle is the ONLY shape the three points can make.......... apart from a straight line!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    iamhunted
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭iamhunted


    Pgibson wrote: »
    Just pointing out that a triangle is the ONLY shape the three points can make.......... apart from a straight line!

    i wouldnt agree. three connected points may only make a triangle maybe, but threes seperate balloons dont have to create a triangle or a straightline. they can, but they dont have to. I'm promise I'll stop being pedantic now ....


  • Options
    #283
    monkeyfudge
    Registered Users Posts: 23,216 ✭✭✭✭monkeyfudge


    A circle and a square could also have 3 points on them.

    Just because there is a light it doesn't been it's a corner.


  • Options
    #284
    Pgibson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 406 ✭✭Pgibson


    monkeyfudge wrote: »
    A circle and a square could also have 3 points on them.

    Just because there is a light it doesn't been it's a corner.

    I was referring to their appearance in the sky.

    You can imagine them looking like Homer Simpson if you like.

    "I saw three points of light that looked like Homer Simpson".

    Not a runner.

    .


  • Options
    #285
    monkeyfudge
    Registered Users Posts: 23,216 ✭✭✭✭monkeyfudge


    Recorded at Dublin ParaCon '08

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61cBoNxZmdA


  • Options
    #286
    DANNY22XX
    Registered Users Posts: 782 ✭✭✭DANNY22XX


    did he say orbs:eek: well then the footage has to be real,,,

    was a great day all the same ,,,i didnt see the footage,,thanks to the supervisor and the spider demons,,,,


  • Options
    #287
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    Orbs? Orbs??

    I'm sorry, but this guys credibility as a "paranormal investigator" has just been shot to pieces in my opinion.

    And then he goes on to categorically state that his footage is not chinese lanterns, because he knows the characteristics of lanterns. He doesn't even know the characteristics of orbs for crying out loud!

    His reasoning for keeping the footage out of the public domain is laughable. "So people who are really interested can come and see it". Give me a break.
    - So "interested people can enjoy it". Maybe I'm wrong here but the footage isn't entertainment?
    - So the footage won't become corrupted on Youtube? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.
    - Cyberspace anoraks will corrupt his video? LOL

    Lets get down to brass tacks here, this guy is afraid to put his video into the public domain. He is afraid of the scrutiny it will come under. He is afraid of damaging his own credibility after his initial statements. He is afraid of losing possible revenue.


  • Options
    #288
    Scruff
    Registered Users Posts: 4,222 ✭✭✭Scruff


    Focusing just on the ufo footage comment that bit about the footage for enjoyment only is a load of poo. For a person who believes in ufo's and is pushing the agenda that they exists it is quite odd that he doesnt want this supposedly superb footage of a "real" ufo scrutinized in any way and we're only supposed to take his word for it because he said so. so case closed it was real. cause he said so. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #289
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Noopti wrote: »
    Orbs? Orbs??

    I'm sorry, but this guys credibility as a "paranormal investigator" has just been shot to pieces in my opinion.

    And then he goes on to categorically state that his footage is not chinese lanterns, because he knows the characteristics of lanterns. He doesn't even know the characteristics of orbs for crying out loud!

    His reasoning for keeping the footage out of the public domain is laughable. "So people who are really interested can come and see it". Give me a break.
    - So "interested people can enjoy it". Maybe I'm wrong here but the footage isn't entertainment?
    - So the footage won't become corrupted on Youtube? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.
    - Cyberspace anoraks will corrupt his video? LOL

    Lets get down to brass tacks here, this guy is afraid to put his video into the public domain. He is afraid of the scrutiny it will come under. He is afraid of damaging his own credibility after his initial statements. He is afraid of losing possible revenue.


    Tell me who would be credable to you so ?


  • Options
    #290
    Pgibson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 406 ✭✭Pgibson


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Tell me who would be credable to you so ?

    I believe the wedding guests.

    (Even if they were all well drunk at that hour of the night.)

    .


  • Options
    #291
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Tell me who would be credable to you so ?

    Credible would be a paranormal investigator who doesn't ascribe a good investigation to finding some "orbs".

    For example, the two guys from TAPS (on that show Ghost Hunters) come across to me as being credible investigators. Of course, that is just based on their TV show, so I still won't categorically say they are 100% credible.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    iamhunted
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭iamhunted


    it's a pity the footage isnt just put out there, then people will see it's not particularly convincing and this whole saga can find its place in infamy alongside the recent big foot fiasco. I think the intentions are much the same.


  • Options
    #293
    GhostInTheRuins
    Registered Users Posts: 5,963 ✭✭✭GhostInTheRuins


    Noopti wrote: »
    Orbs? Orbs??

    I'm sorry, but this guys credibility as a "paranormal investigator" has just been shot to pieces in my opinion.

    And then he goes on to categorically state that his footage is not chinese lanterns, because he knows the characteristics of lanterns. He doesn't even know the characteristics of orbs for crying out loud!

    His reasoning for keeping the footage out of the public domain is laughable. "So people who are really interested can come and see it". Give me a break.
    - So "interested people can enjoy it". Maybe I'm wrong here but the footage isn't entertainment?
    - So the footage won't become corrupted on Youtube? Maybe someone can explain that one to me.
    - Cyberspace anoraks will corrupt his video? LOL

    Lets get down to brass tacks here, this guy is afraid to put his video into the public domain. He is afraid of the scrutiny it will come under. He is afraid of damaging his own credibility after his initial statements. He is afraid of losing possible revenue.

    I think you hit the nail on the head right here.

    There is absolutely no reason why this video shouldn't be released to the public if it is what he claims it is.


  • Options
    #294
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    iamhunted wrote: »
    it's a pity the footage isnt just put out there, then people will see it's not particularly convincing and this whole saga can find its place in infamy alongside the recent big foot fiasco. I think the intentions are much the same.


    It will be out soon enough. It is being sent to some video experts (dont know who they are)

    At the end of the day its going to be like one of those pictures shrinks use. People will see what they want to see. There is no way to prove its a craft. There is no way to prove that its chinese Lanterns .

    The video is what it is.


  • Options
    #295
    Pgibson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 406 ✭✭Pgibson


    Deleted User wrote: »
    There is no way to prove that its chinese Lanterns .

    The wedding guests can go back to the shop where they bought them and check where the other ones in the shop were made.

    Maybe even buy more and do a "Repeat Demo" !!!

    This is one CRAZY thread !!!

    Love it.

    .


  • Options
    #296
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    Deleted User wrote: »
    People will see what they want to see. There is no way to prove its a craft. There is no way to prove that its chinese Lanterns .

    The video is what it is.

    A religious parallel, if you will.

    I don't know the truth of this evidence, but I do know the paranormalians want to believe it so badly they can't see the possibility it might not be extramundane.


  • Options
    #297
    6th
    Registered Users Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    I've seen no one here say its what carl nally is saying it is, I only see people saying its lanterns and otehrs saying there isnt enough evidence to say what it is - making it unidentified.


  • Options
    #298
    iamhunted
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,569 ✭✭✭iamhunted


    nipplenuts wrote: »
    A religious parallel, if you will.

    I don't know the truth of this evidence, but I do know the paranormalians want to believe it so badly they can't see the possibility it might not be extramundane.

    you severely underestimate "paranormalians"


  • Options
    #299
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    nipplenuts wrote: »
    A religious parallel, if you will.

    I don't know the truth of this evidence, but I do know the paranormalians want to believe it so badly they can't see the possibility it might not be extramundane.
    As with the two previous posters, majority opinion here has been either against CN, or undecided. Its a sweeping misjudgement to say all 'parnormalians' (whatever they are) want so badly for this to be an alien craft. All people want here is to be allowed to judge for themselves based on the evidence, and to read expert opinion, both positive and negative, in order to come to some conclusion on what it is most likely to be.

    Paranormalians dont exist, you know.


  • Options
    #300
    Noopti
    Registered Users Posts: 2,776 ✭✭✭Noopti


    Oryx wrote: »
    Paranormalians dont exist, you know.

    Of course they do, they kept a couple alive in Area 51 for a long time.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    6th
    Registered Users Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    I lived in Area 52 for a while, those feckers in '51 where the worst neighbours I've ever had .... parties all night, spacecraft parked outside my bunker ...


Advertisement