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

Antrim_Man

Deleted User wrote: »

To a skeptic no footage is good enough.

I saw the video also. Going by the video alone i cant say its real or not. For somebody to say its fake is just as crazy as somebody saying its real. You just cant tell.


Chinese weather baloons are being added to my list i call the skeptic list......

Sleep paralysis
Swamp Gas
No proof
Chinese Weather Baloons

Well if an independence day type scenario does indeed occur tomorrow as "predicted" by those in the know then I think the evidence will be enough for any sceptic, don't you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8c0ppYYT6o

Scruff

hmmm....can you be charged for littering for launching lanterns? I'd say its kind of hard to recover them when they fly off.

Would seem Carl Nally's\ufosocietyireland's credibility (ahem) is going down the toilet.
An enjoyable thread none the less!

faceman

I like a sucker bought the book so i will let you know what i think!

6th

Can I just say that Carl & Dermot were a pleasure to deal with on Saturday and were happy with the responses they got. Ufology isnt an area I have much of an interest but I do have an interest in the reactions people have to anything like this.

The guys from Blather put across an idea very well, that you dont have to be a believer or non-believer, you can just observe. I'm taking that stance with this situation.

Noopti

I repeatedly questioned the reasoning behind trying to make money from this footage pages ago, and the point was mostly ignored.
Now I hope Carl can finally come forward and answer his critics.

ghosthunter73

I personally didn't think much of the actual footage. I am not going to sit here and berate anyone for looking into events like this. A more subjective view might have gone over a bit better rather than exclaiming yes it was a UFO.
I did however find some of the reports they had interesting.

iamhunted

im glad i got to see the footage as I can now file it under 'unconvincing' and move on.

Slow Motion

I think if Carl et al can take time out of their busy schedules to have a stand at a conference, surely they could take a little more time to come on here and discuss the footage and the various responses and valid questions being brought up here? They can even shamelessly pimp their own organisation, I certainly wouldn't have a problem with that, and it would go a long way towards gaining credibility! He didn't want to come on and said if people had questions they could come to the conference. Fine, I couldn't make it and the conference is over now, anything he was going to get from it has been got. So let's have the chap on here to tell us his take on this incident!

iamhunted

yes, otherwise a lot of those damned skeptics will just find it all a bit 'lets only show this to people who pay in' ......

I must be quite skeptical then ....

Slow Motion

iamhunted wrote: »

yes, otherwise a lot of those damned skeptics will just find it all a bit 'lets only show this to people who pay in' ......

I must be quite skeptical then ....

Well, I said early on in this thread that I have no problem with the chap making money, and that was one of the reasons I accepted the "it will be at the convention" responses, the con is over now so lets have it out with the footage and the gent in question, I think that is a reasonable request!

iamhunted

i think he wants to only show it at conventions though - it wont be on youtube, disclosetv or anywhere

6th

iamhunted wrote: »

i think he wants to only show it at conventions though - it wont be on youtube, disclosetv or anywhere

i think thats the case alright and maybe its the right choice for them? Once it gets online (and I think it will) it will get lost in a swamp of other videos ... maybe thats all it deserves maybe its not.

Slow Motion

You may be right 6th, I just thought it might have been an opportunity for him to come here and kill two birds with one stone, i.e. answer questions and drum up some more business, If it is only to be shown at conventions then my interest ends here!

iamhunted

6th wrote: »

i think thats the case alright and maybe its the right choice for them? Once it gets online (and I think it will) it will get lost in a swamp of other videos ... maybe thats all it deserves maybe its not.

i wont demonise anyone or stand here calling out 'fake!' - but i find the footage highly suspect and i think its highly dodgy to, rather than trying to understand what the footage is, instead claim its a ufo and try to make money off the back of it.

I viewed the footage much the same way I'd view any 'paranormal' footage - if it looked like I could easily recreate the same thing myself then its not convincing.

iamhunted

we may have anoher shot at the lp interview as well 6th - last time half the interview (ie me and danny) didnt get recorded. its the aliens I tells ye.

monkeyfudge

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

1. The three lights that make up the ufo in a triangle shape are not fixed, the triangle changes shape constantly throughout the 30 second clip. Which means they are 3 individual objects rather then 3 lights on a single body.

Their movement could still be in relation too each other. Their positioning relative to each other wouldn't be consistent if that object was tilting away from the camera and foreshortening occurred.

0utpost31

So we were all in the right not to take this claim seriously. No wonder this forum is under "Recreation". Ha!

i57dwun4yb1pt8

http://www.ufo-blog.com/ufo-blog/

Noopti

Wasn't it already established that that footage was nothing to do with the Irish one?

monkeyfudge

DaDumTish wrote: »

http://www.ufo-blog.com/ufo-blog/

That's not the correct footage at all though.

Pen1987

I'm with Blitzkreig on this one. He made his points excellently.

I have to say that the way Carl Nally handled his "questions" period was silly. He used his background in NLP to (poorly and blatantly to anyone who know about his background) discredit anyone who dared to question the validity of this footage.

Constantly refering to anyone who asked probing questions online, on forums like this one, as 'cybernerds' and online geeks as if the fact that someone comments online is automatically an amateur armchair fool with no idea about the topic, get off your hihg-horse Mr.Nally.

His handling of the questions only caused anyone who may have wished to ask a question which he could of used to boost his argument to quieten down because his tone and style was so intimidating.

The footage from what I could see was simple and far from 'proof'.

The fact that the footage was tampered with when posted on here adds to the likelyhood of this being a fake. Even after that, the fact that the footage wasnt handled forensically means to me that the footage is useless.

BlitzKrieg

I also see a lack of sceptics asking for proof that they were your lanterns also.

Well I'm not very good as a sceptic because normally I am quite open to ufo stuff as a curiosity, but as the reasoning behind me believing quite strongly that the video is fake has nothing to do with lanterns but of technical limitations and artifacts, then I really dont care about the lanterns.

the laser's dubious addition to the footage puts everything else in doubt, without the laser I would have been more open, I'd consider Monkeyfudge's theory that the movement of the lights could be the saucer tilting and would like to investigate it more (see what directions the lights go and compare to tilting a trianguler surface, obviously in certain directions one of the lightsources should be blocked by the body of the craft.) But the laser is far too blatant a construction.

It doesnt match the limitations of a camera (let alone a camera phone) if the laser was powerful enough to be picked up as a strong fully visible red line for a single frame then it should have come out in the footage as a flash of light in full motion and in single frames there would be a fading auro around the main current.

it doesnt match the limitations of the cameraman, the laser's trajectory is completely off for the angle it was filmed at, it doesnt take into account that the cameraman is filming up at an angle. If they were parralel it would be correct, but they werent.

It doesnt match the limitations of the digital recording. A camera phone records between 25 fps to 30 fps, 25 is standard pal, 30 is a bizarre luxery some devices like mobile phones seem to embrace (to compensate for lacking other elements). at either frame rate neither would pick up an instantanous laser, they would pick up a constant laser but even then it would be a faded broken line. Just google photographing lasers, and read how much work goes into taking a photo of a laser to make it a clear strong image. The laser in this shot occurs for a single frame it appears fully bodied and disapears completely in the next frame. To anyone who has worked with editing software thats a telltale sign of a cut, its too artificial to accept.


I am not sure if I want to go out and call this an attack on Nally and co, he seemed a nice person when I talked to him personnally before the talk, and in the interview he gave me. But the talk itself was a different matter, his q+a was bordering rude. (Not to mention he did completely jumped around giving an answer on who the expert in trinity he got studying the film.) And the impression I got was that they knew what they had wouldnt stand up to scrutiny outside of conventions, whether its because they've been duped with someone sending them a hoax video or someone within their own organisation tried to *improve* the footage.

. Also carl Nally made no money from this convention, he was not paid to be there just given the opportunity to show this footage and talk to people about it.

*cough*

I like a sucker bought the book so i will let you know what i think!

BlitzKrieg

the photos the minister took havnt been released yet. they would be a crucial element I'd wager.

iamhunted

as ive said before - i cant say the video is a fake, but its not convincing.

At the same time I couldnt say it was chinese lanterns either. It just isnt convincing.

GuanYin

M&MJ has been banned for abuse.

Keep it civil.

I don't want to see a single other post where anyone is called a liar.

Scawgeen

Is the footage going to be available online soon, the suspense is killing me. Maybe tomorrow morning I'll see the real thing ...weather permitting and all that.

Scruff

Either that or it was attached to a chinese lantern and floated off on the wind.
I looked in the Recycle Bin and did a full search but its mysteriously vanished :eek:
I know this is the place where strange happenings dont often get fully explained but I would like to know why this thread inexplicably disappeared?

Slow Motion

Scruff wrote: »

Either that or it was attached to a chinese lantern and floated off on the wind.
I looked in the Recycle Bin and did a full search but its mysteriously vanished :eek:
I know this is the place where strange happenings dont often get fully explained but I would like to know why this thread inexplicably disappeared?

Ditto!

monkeyfudge

It was just getting too close to the truth.

HAHA