Bogus Imagery Muddles Compelling Navy UFO Encounter

Bookmark and Share

Bogus Imagery Muddles Compelling Navy UFO Encounter

UFO sighting in Britain on 10th July 2005
     During the recent presentation about Tom Delonge's new company, reference was made to an alleged UFO incident involving the USS Nimitz in November 2004. That discussion was accompanied by an image (left)(which was in fact of a sighting in Britain on 10th July 2005, probably of a balloon). That
By Isaac Koi
The UFO Chronicles
10-24-17
sighting is now being associated with footage (see below) which has, supposedly, recently been "leaked" online. In fact, that footage was posted online in 2007 and I reposted it recently in response to a request from another researcher that was having difficulty obtaining it.


Back in 2007, I tracked the first online copy of the video back to the website of a group of German film students that specialised in creating science-fiction movies with lots of special effects (Vision Unlimited). The story being posted back then didn't make sense and promised evidence was never supplied. The person posting about the video on ATS denied that he was a member of that group of film students and claimed that the video was uploaded to their website because it was more secure than websites in the USA. Mmm. This doesn't (and didn't) necessarily mean that the footage was a hoax but I found it rather interesting and, in the absence of the promised further confirmation/evidence, in 2007 I was inclined to reach the tentative conclusion that it was a hoax (while repeatedly requesting the promised further evidence that it was genuine).

I find it very interesting that the current rounds of discussion seem to ignore the provenance of the footage and don't mention that the footage was sourced from the website of several German film students interested in creating science fiction material. Are the researchers currently promoting this footage unaware of that background (which is easy to find online, in my posts in 2007 on ATS)or are they simply not mentioning this background (which I would find, um, questionable). I've been told that the footage has since been "authenticated" - but haven't seen any evidence of that.
Read more »

Related Posts

Subscribe Our Newsletter