Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hoax & Conspiracy Videos)   Actual, real live video of UFO . . . or someone threw an old TV antenna off the roof. Scary either way, ya know?   (hoaxandconspiracyvideos.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, UFO, The Incredibles, TV antenna  
•       •       •

6014 clicks; posted to Video » on 13 May 2013 at 9:31 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



47 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-13 08:12:36 AM  
Yeah, that'll make everyone believe.
 
2013-05-13 08:19:28 AM  
i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-05-13 08:19:50 AM  
OBJET? WTF is an objet?
 
2013-05-13 08:25:40 AM  
It's a streetlight.
 
2013-05-13 08:27:04 AM  
It's a good thing they reevaluated those wacky old designs.
 
2013-05-13 08:30:01 AM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


Airborne gynecologist?
 
2013-05-13 09:26:52 AM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


An obtuse jet?
 
2013-05-13 09:27:00 AM  
www.user.dccnet.com

One of those things tried to abduct my wheelbarrow, but I was able to chase it off with a rake.
 
2013-05-13 09:28:28 AM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


It's a piece of art.
 
2013-05-13 09:49:48 AM  
Isn't this an old ThirdPhaseofMoon video? All his stuff is fake, pretty well exectued, but obviously fake.  I go to AnonymousFO for all my youtube ufo needs.
 
2013-05-13 09:59:45 AM  
95% of all UFO sightings can be easily explained.  5% cannot. watch this documentary for the 5% that cannot be explained and you will have another think coming.   even includes some actual radar video as well as government documents.

one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtBnB8ONiJA      SFW
 
2013-05-13 10:23:20 AM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


The Obama Jet.

It's like Air Force One, but with more wings, spinners on the landing gear and plenty of cool Colt 45 on tap.
 
2013-05-13 10:23:36 AM  

basemetal: Yeah, that'll make everyone believe.


They could have at least used a satellite dish. More believable.
 
2013-05-13 10:41:33 AM  

Linux_Yes: one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen


Problem is, it's still all 2nd hand testimony.
Until a UFO lands on the lawn of the White House, I figure it's safer to assume that interstellar distances make it too far to make such a trip worth it or even possible for most any life form.
There's life out there most likely, but we'll never meet them.
 
2013-05-13 10:41:44 AM  
Seriously, that's the dumbest thing I've ever seen:
1. Take old antenna arm, with its hollow tubing, and break it off an antenna.
2. Slide down fishing line, then film it with the sky as a backdrop.
3. Claim it's a friggin' UFO!
 
2013-05-13 10:57:23 AM  

Kurmudgeon: Linux_Yes: one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen

Problem is, it's still all 2nd hand testimony.
Until a UFO lands on the lawn of the White House, I figure it's safer to assume that interstellar distances make it too far to make such a trip worth it or even possible for most any life form.
There's life out there most likely, but we'll never meet them.


It doesn't have to be an alien spaceship for it to be a confirmed UFO though. I realize I'm pointing out an issue with semantics but there should be a distinction.
 
2013-05-13 11:02:45 AM  
There's a reason it's called an "aerial"
 
2013-05-13 11:17:53 AM  
Lifting wing kite.  Wings are mounted to a central spar.

http://www.design-technology.org/kites.JPG
 
2013-05-13 11:47:09 AM  

miss diminutive: sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?

Airborne gynecologist?


i105.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-13 11:53:29 AM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


It's a kind of dart.
 
2013-05-13 12:01:19 PM  

Linux_Yes: 95% of all UFO sightings can be easily explained.  5% cannot. watch this documentary for the 5% that cannot be explained and you will have another think coming.   even includes some actual radar video as well as government documents.

one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtBnB8ONiJA      SFW


thanks!! gives me something to watch at work. plus im a documentary freak.
 
2013-05-13 12:35:43 PM  

Freakin Rican: Linux_Yes: 95% of all UFO sightings can be easily explained.  5% cannot. watch this documentary for the 5% that cannot be explained and you will have another think coming.   even includes some actual radar video as well as government documents.

one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtBnB8ONiJA      SFW

thanks!! gives me something to watch at work. plus im a documentary freak.


Here is my thing about all of these "historic" sightings..... this was all done before almost everyone had a cell phone with camera on them at all times... now, if it is a "quick" event, maybe nobody catches it, but, something like that Arizona event, you'd have 100 videos of that "event" if it happened now (ie, look at that meteorite in Russia).... so, are we saying that nobody has had a "legit" event in the last 3-4 years?   Maybe someone wants to fill me in, but, I'm not aware of an event of that magnitude where you have dozens of people with video footage and you can clearly make out a UFO.
 
2013-05-13 01:15:03 PM  
So, what new video game is this an ad for?
 
2013-05-13 01:25:03 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Linux_Yes: one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen

Problem is, it's still all 2nd hand testimony.
Until a UFO lands on the lawn of the White House, I figure it's safer to assume that interstellar distances make it too far to make such a trip worth it or even possible for most any life form.
There's life out there most likely, but we'll never meet them.


Would you believe in UFOs if they landed somewhere else? Because, like, Amerka isn't the center of the universe. ;)
 
2013-05-13 01:34:02 PM  
Love the Weeners
 
2013-05-13 02:43:50 PM  

Nabb1: sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?

It's a piece of d'art.


Le fixed.
 
2013-05-13 03:05:12 PM  
I think it's Prince trying to decide on his next name.
 
2013-05-13 03:14:43 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-13 03:24:20 PM  
It might be a tumor
 
2013-05-13 03:51:23 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Until a UFO lands on the lawn of the White House, I figure it's safer to assume that interstellar distances make it too far to make such a trip worth it or even possible for most any life form.


Why do you have to assume anything? I haven't seen anything that I would call definitive proof of an alien presence on Earth, but it's still a possibility.
 
2013-05-13 04:14:32 PM  
Looks like a dual band VHF/UHF Yagi.
 
2013-05-13 04:25:38 PM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


You're just an objet in my eyes.

/Yes, I saw the typo too. Why can't these ppl spell check their videos?
 
2013-05-13 04:27:46 PM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


Lets try that again....

You're just an objet in my eyes.

/Yes, I saw the typo too. Why can't these ppl spell check their videos?
 
2013-05-13 04:30:31 PM  
Didn't you know UHF channels are broadcast by aliens?  That's their way of communicating with us.
 
2013-05-13 04:52:05 PM  

Lego_Addict: It doesn't have to be an alien spaceship for it to be a confirmed UFO though. I realize I'm pointing out an issue with semantics but there should be a distinction.


Well, preferably a ship with actual beings in it, though one being controlled remotely may be even scarier.

"

Quaker: Why do you have to assume anything? I haven't seen anything that I would call definitive proof of an alien presence on Earth, but it's still a possibility.


Because once you realize the vast distances involved , it's a pretty safe assumption and the possibility is very remote. I wish it was otherwise, in fact have wished so for quite some time. For now, until some evidence shows up that isn't 2nd hand or hear say, I've just tired of all the flim flam stories.
 
2013-05-13 07:00:31 PM  
I believe!
 
2013-05-13 07:30:26 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Quaker: Why do you have to assume anything? I haven't seen anything that I would call definitive proof of an alien presence on Earth, but it's still a possibility.

Because once you realize the vast distances involved , it's a pretty safe assumption and the possibility is very remote. I wish it was otherwise, in fact have wished so for quite some time. For now, until some evidence shows up that isn't 2nd hand or hear say, I've just tired of all the flim flam stories.


The whole distance thing is only relevant if you're using the standard model of travel, where you propel an object through normal three-dimensional space until you reach your destination. There are theoretical technologies that involve things like artificially generated wormholes and the folding of space itself that a civilization that's millions or billions of years old could well posses. They could even have some kind of technology that's so advanced that humanity can't even conceive of it yet.

But regardless, I still don't see the point in making any assumptions either way. If you don't know something, then you don't know. Making a decision based on probability is fine when you actually have to do or not do something based on that information, but in a case like this there's no harm in remaining totally objective.
 
2013-05-13 08:35:22 PM  

Quaker: The whole distance thing is only relevant if you're using the standard model of travel, where you propel an object through normal three-dimensional space until you reach your destination. There are theoretical technologies that involve things like artificially generated wormholes and the folding of space itself that a civilization that's millions or billions of years old could well posses. They could even have some kind of technology that's so advanced that humanity can't even conceive of it yet.


This. And even if you could travel wherever you wanted, where would you go? What galaxy? Which star systems? How would you know what's at the other 'end' of your wormhole if you've never been there? You could fly right into a star or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?!
 
2013-05-13 09:51:50 PM  

Quaker: But regardless, I still don't see the point in making any assumptions either way.


No assumptions, they just haven't showed up. Until there is more actual credible evidence, even if just a faint transmission picked up by a space agency, odds are interstellar distances are too far for life forms to cross.
I can't take "theoretical technologies" because they are theoretical.
Sci Fi is great, but don't forget that the second word is "fiction".
As have been most if not all reports of "ufos" and similar.
I don't want to assume we've been visited or can be when all current evidence shows the opposite.
 
2013-05-13 09:53:57 PM  
"I can't take "theoretical technologies" because they are theoretical. "
Can't take them serious, I mean. Damn typos.
/sorry
 
2013-05-13 09:58:47 PM  

Kurmudgeon: No assumptions...


Your last two posts:

Kurmudgeon: ...it's a pretty safe assumption...

Kurmudgeon: ...I figure it's safer to assume...
 
2013-05-14 06:55:42 AM  

Quaker: Kurmudgeon: Until a UFO lands on the lawn of the White House, I figure it's safer to assume that interstellar distances make it too far to make such a trip worth it or even possible for most any life form.

Why do you have to assume anything? I haven't seen anything that I would call definitive proof of an alien presence on Earth, but it's still a possibility.


Exactly. Like giant flying rhinocerouses which poop sharks. That's a possibility.

/the existence of UFOs is a fact, of course, it's trying to get rid of the U that gets into "possibilities"
 
2013-05-14 07:11:23 AM  

sno man: OBJET? WTF is an objet?


it's a brand of 3d printers by dimension.  What a cool video, they can print flying antenna now!
www.dental-wings.com
 
2013-05-14 07:12:13 AM  
judging by the antenna shape, surely this guy was involved
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2013-05-14 09:11:02 AM  

Quaker: Your last two posts:


Yes, funny things happen when answering multiple people in a thread.
However, you should quote the whole sentence to help context.
"No assumptions, they just haven't showed up."
You deleted the salient point.
 
2013-05-14 11:06:22 AM  

Linux_Yes: one of the best UFO docs i've ever seen


That was a very good one, and good just to watch as a documentary. Many documentaries any more are very light on science or for that matter even content. (Case in point, almost any TV documentary with the word 'Dinosaur' in it and lots of CGI).

It is of course pretty disappointing that the Belgian Triangle photo was a hoax in the end. It survived so well because it was a picture of a physical object and not photo manipulated. But they forgot the single most important thing when a good UFO picture or video crops up: How many people saw this thing?

There was an amazing video that popped up a year or two ago in the middle east, multiple videos of an object over a city. But why weren't there hundreds or perhaps thousands of witnesses? Answer: because the object only existed in the video.

Once you have enough witnesses you know that there was definitely something there. Some can still be explained (hoaxers with RC planes or balloons, military aircraft, etc) but then sometimes you get something like the Phoenix Lights incident. Good luck explaining that one. No wonder they just tried to write it off.
 
2013-05-14 12:41:35 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Quaker: Your last two posts:

Yes, funny things happen when answering multiple people in a thread.
However, you should quote the whole sentence to help context.
"No assumptions, they just haven't showed up."
You deleted the salient point.


No one is saying that there's incontrovertible evidence, but whether or not they've potentially shown up is precisely what we're talking about since none of us can be absolutely sure. But you had clearly said that you were making assumptions to that end. And with a topic like this where you don't need to assume anything because there's nothing you need to do with that information anyway, I don't see the point.

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Quaker: Kurmudgeon: Until a UFO lands on the lawn of the White House, I figure it's safer to assume that interstellar distances make it too far to make such a trip worth it or even possible for most any life form.

Why do you have to assume anything? I haven't seen anything that I would call definitive proof of an alien presence on Earth, but it's still a possibility.

Exactly. Like giant flying rhinocerouses which poop sharks. That's a possibility.


Considering that just accepting that as a possibility would change absolutely nothing about the way that I actually live my life, I don't see the harm.

Saying that something doesn't exist unless there's direct evidence is fine for things like science and the law, because those things need to be black and white. If you're not convicted of a crime, then the law considers you innocent (as well it should). But in reality, we all know that there are plenty of guilty people out there who weren't convicted.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report