UFO: The greatest story ever denied [Archive] - David Icke's Official Forums

View Full Version : UFO: The greatest story ever denied

Navieko

23-01-2007, 02:39 AM

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5980990221766439646

For anyone who is skeptical in the area and has not yet seen...a must!

bj face our ego minds

01-02-2007, 02:01 AM

classified

15-01-2009, 03:52 AM

croatiancoffee

15-01-2009, 06:52 AM

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5980990221766439646

For anyone who is skeptical in the area and has not yet seen...a must!

That was a really enjoyable viewing. Mainly about UFOs but touching upon related areas. 1st half is better for the "evidence" and the second half is more on the interviews, and it doesnt drag on much at all.

What you expect to see in a docu like this, but done very well. A little too much music.

cluas

15-01-2009, 07:16 AM

I dont like this one, the background music is way too loud and more like "foreground", making it impossible to hear a word :o

hagbard_celine

15-01-2009, 06:33 PM

Absolutely.
Another good one: Fastwalkers
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4807962636315529202 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4807962636315529202)

I follow Greer @ Disclosure Project quite closely and they seem to be on track of whats really going on.

Yeah I've got a lot of time for Greer.:)

Paola Harris, who appears in Fastwalkers, is another very good researcher:cool:.

scatlond

15-01-2009, 06:42 PM

I dont like this one, the background music is way too loud and more like "foreground", making it impossible to hear a word :o

The "foreground" music is rather off putting.

flamesong

01-10-2009, 08:23 PM

I dont like this one, the background music is way too loud and more like "foreground", making it impossible to hear a word :o
I just started watching this and I can hardly bear it. Whoever edited this should be tied to a chair in a warehouse and have Stealers Wheel played to them.

The older footage is difficult enough to hear without the 'Hollywood Sounds'.

Technology in the hands of people with all the gear and no f*cking idea, to borrow an expression from the equestrian community.

But as far as the rods bit I just managed to watch, this is merely a lack of understanding of the photography of moving images. They have been fairly comprehensively debunked.

The persistent refusal to accept simple rational explanations is what makes the term 'conspiracy theorist' such an effective epithet to dismiss genuine issues without analysis.

jamesc

01-10-2009, 09:16 PM

flamesong

01-10-2009, 09:27 PM

No. I said, 'the persistent refusal to accept simple rational explanations'.

nicolaj

01-10-2009, 09:32 PM

this vhit infrared camera i dont know. where can you buy infrared camera? but i know they are wery fast.... i think they are not from other planet. they leave here on earth. but on other frequency range. and here are alot of ufos and aliens on this planet. i think. something is going on here and nobody realy knows what.

This is what I've started to believe..I think they are already here and not on some distant planets. For sure they work with the governments maybe it's even military sometimes flying these crafts for all we know.

777equals666

03-10-2009, 01:21 AM

I just started watching this and I can hardly bear it. Whoever edited this should be tied to a chair in a warehouse and have Stealers Wheel played to them.

The older footage is difficult enough to hear without the 'Hollywood Sounds'.

Technology in the hands of people with all the gear and no f*cking idea, to borrow an expression from the equestrian community.

But as far as the rods bit I just managed to watch, this is merely a lack of understanding of the photography of moving images. They have been fairly comprehensively debunked.

The persistent refusal to accept simple rational explanations is what makes the term 'conspiracy theorist' such an effective epithet to dismiss genuine issues without analysis.

I highly recommend the DVD version of this film if quality of sound and picture is a concern for you.

I disagree with your assessment on UFO's, especially if you are going to use an episode of Monster Quest as your scientific backbone for the non-existence of RODS.

As a general rule of thumb, "Theories" tend not to have Videos, Photos, Satellite Images, Government Docs, Witness Testimony and Whistleblowers to support its existence. I have found clear historical evidence as well which spans the entire human record (Cave Drawings, BIBLE, KORAN, Paintings, Etc) to be overwhelming in support of the UFO experience. If there wasn’t any of this type of evidence sitting around as a point of reference for the existence of UFO's then I would agree with you, but this is not the case.

Conspiracy = YES
Theory = NO

flamesong

03-10-2009, 11:58 AM

I am a video producer and I fail to see how the music/narrative audio balance is going to differ from watching it on a DVD rip and the source DVD. The music is simply dominant and it swallows the narration. The audio quality I referred to was that of old degraded footage from the 40s/50s/60s - the characteristic of the degradation was the same as you hear when listening to Neville Chamberlain with his piece of paper. The audio quality of the music, on the other hand was CD.

My assessment of UFOs? I didn't even mention UFOs, so how can you disagree with my assessment. Jeez! That's two people who have commented on what I said who I would not want as witnesses in court! Is my handwriting really that bad!?

As for rods, on which I did mention, I am not aware of 'Monster Quest', though its title sounds a little puerile.

My point was, if you read it, made in the one sentence:

'The persistent refusal to accept simple rational explanations is what makes the term 'conspiracy theorist' such an effective epithet to dismiss genuine issues without analysis.'

I imagine that what you inferred from this was contaminated with your own prejudice, i.e. that anybody who does not believe everything must believe in nothing. How f*cking logical! Just the sort of poor analysis to which that sentence refers.

The phenomenon of 'rods' has a fairly rational explanation to me, a photographer of 30+ years and a film/video producer of 10+ years. If you have the most elementary understanding of shutter speed and frame rate, the explanation is so obvious that to insist that it is proof of some hitherto undiscovered life form is embarrassing.

But don't infer that this means that I don't believe in hitherto undiscovered life forms or, indeed, UFOs. Or a myriad of other unexplained phenomena. Because that really says a great deal about you.

For the record, I have been interested in UFOs for as long as I can remember, as well as cryptozoology and much more. In order to remain objective one must recognise rational explanations and investing emotional energy in stuff which does not stand up to scrutiny devalues one's credibility - it simply makes one an easy target for JREF or the vultures of the MSM.

As I often found, trying to be objective opens me up to attack from both sides. It is difficult to get the sheep to look outside the flock but dealing with over-credulity is the more challenging.

I am sorry if this offends but you made yourself open to criticism by simply not reading what I wrote.

I highly recommend the DVD version of this film if quality of sound and picture is a concern for you.

I disagree with your assessment on UFO's, especially if you are going to use an episode of Monster Quest as your scientific backbone for the non-existence of RODS.

As a general rule of thumb, "Theories" tend not to have Videos, Photos, Satellite Images, Government Docs, Witness Testimony and Whistleblowers to support its existence. I have found clear historical evidence as well which spans the entire human record (Cave Drawings, BIBLE, KORAN, Paintings, Etc) to be overwhelming in support of the UFO experience. If there wasn’t any of this type of evidence sitting around as a point of reference for the existence of UFO's then I would agree with you, but this is not the case.

Conspiracy = YES
Theory = NO

777equals666

04-10-2009, 10:49 AM

I am a video producer and I fail to see how the music/narrative audio balance is going to differ from watching it on a DVD rip and the source DVD.
All I know is for sure with out tutting my own horn on my video experience is that anything hosted on a source like google video or youtube is going to be compressed automaticly and the quality is not going to be the same as if it was coming directly from a DVD in a DVD player hook up to your TV. This goes for both Audio and Video. I currently work as the head of marketing and promotions for TBLN Films (Makers of this UFO Film) and I am also a producer on a new film called LUNA, Jose's next big film, and when we host a video on either of those sources (Google/Youtube) we lose alot of quality from the original. You may not agree with me based on your "experience" :confused:, but take it from the horse's mouth on this one....;)

My assessment of UFOs? I didn't even mention UFOs, so how can you disagree with my assessment. Jeez! That's two people who have commented on what I said who I would not want as witnesses in court! Is my handwriting really that bad!?
It's not your handwritting, its your wording. You imply and suggest certain things and then you get affended if a person infers apon it? You did mention that I am the second person to comment to you in this way....

As for rods, on which I did mention, I am not aware of 'Monster Quest', though its title sounds a little puerile.

My point was, if you read it, made in the one sentence:

'The persistent refusal to accept simple rational explanations is what makes the term 'conspiracy theorist' such an effective epithet to dismiss genuine issues without analysis.'

I imagine that what you inferred from this was contaminated with your own prejudice, i.e. that anybody who does not believe everything must believe in nothing. How f*cking logical! Just the sort of poor analysis to which that sentence refers.

The phenomenon of 'rods' has a fairly rational explanation to me, a photographer of 30+ years and a film/video producer of 10+ years. If you have the most elementary understanding of shutter speed and frame rate, the explanation is so obvious that to insist that it is proof of some hitherto undiscovered life form is embarrassing.

But don't infer that this means that I don't believe in hitherto undiscovered life forms or, indeed, UFOs. Or a myriad of other unexplained phenomena. Because that really says a great deal about you.

If you think the entire RODS phenomenom is simply the shutter speed on a camera then is it safe for me to assume that you also think that most UFO sightings can also be explain with these simple rational explanations such as it being swamp gas or a weather ballon....LOL!

Your shutter theory on RODS which was presented in an episode of Monster Quest and featured on the History Channel does not hold any scientific weight for the RODS that we have filmed deep under water and from Low Earth Orbit outside NASA's space shuttles. If you can provide me with a white paper that has been scientifically peer reviewed and proves that the RODS we have caught on film using Infrared/Ultraviolet cameras are simply the toggling of the cameras shutter speed, then I would like to see you put your money were your mouth is? :rolleyes:

For the record, I have been interested in UFOs for as long as I can remember, as well as cryptozoology and much more. In order to remain objective one must recognise rational explanations and investing emotional energy in stuff which does not stand up to scrutiny devalues one's credibility - it simply makes one an easy target for JREF or the vultures of the MSM.

As I often found, trying to be objective opens me up to attack from both sides. It is difficult to get the sheep to look outside the flock but dealing with over-credulity is the more challenging.

I am sorry if this offends but you made yourself open to criticism by simply not reading what I wrote.
Believe what you want, nobody here cares at the end of the day and I wont hate on you or lose any sleep because our opinions are different but I can tell when somebody is trying to put me together and certainly I was born, but it wasn't yesturday...;)

flamesong

04-10-2009, 01:37 PM

I didn't watch it on YouTube or Google Video. As I said, it was a DVD rip - full resolution. I was not tutting (sic) my own horn, I was merely pointing out that I know the difference between 50 year old analogue audio and digital audio and that it was a matter of narrative/music balance.

If you still take my point about the refusal to accept rational explanations and how it affects the credibility of stuff which cannot be explained by conventional means to mean that I am dismissing all unexplained phenomena, then there is little I can do about it. It's like suggesting that because I don't believe in fairies that I don't believe in electricity. It's this kind of black vs white thinking which alienates (npi) the general public and in doing so discredits the rational, objective and analytical.

Yes, I did say that you are the second person to comment. The first person said:

"You saying that all the disclosure evidence from credible witnesses or sources is debunked or flawed??"

Is that what I said?

No.

I said:

"But as far as the rods bit I just managed to watch..."

Did you get that? '...as far as the rods bit I just managed to watch...'

Does that sound like I am referring to 'all the disclosure evidence from credible witnesses or sources'?

So, to be specific, I assume that what you mean by 'toggling of the camera's shutter speed' you mean using a shutter speed roughly equivalent to half the frame rate - most of the footage I have seen has a gap between 'tail' and 'head' of the 'rods' which occurs between frames which is roughly equivalent to its length which would indicate that, for example, on a European video camera (25 fps), the shutter speed was about 1/50th.

Reduce the shutter speed to 1/25th and I predict that the 'tail' and 'head' in sequential frames will 'touch'. Increase it and it will get shorter. Not only is this logical but it has been demonstrated. No, not in a white paper but then I have not heard of a peer reviewed study which proves the phenomenon either. Perhaps you could provide a link.

I don't have the enthusiasm to spend time demonstrate this myself - I don't live in the right environment - but I just did a quick online search and found images which make precisely the point made above. Let people judge for themselves:

www.opendb.com/sol/bugs.htm (http://www.opendb.com/sol/bugs.htm)

home.flash.net/~storyink/hotrods/hotrods.htm (http://home.flash.net/~storyink/hotrods/hotrods.htm)

If anybody still believe in 'rods' after looking at these images and the elementary analysis, I despair.

I cannot comment on submarine phenomena or low Earth Orbit phenomena and don't see how they can be categorically linked. Where is the proof of that? That would be like saying that earthworms and snakes are the same because they look similar in poor quality photographs.

Again, poor analysis which only serves to discredit your wider hypothesis.

And trying to discredit me by alleging that I believe that UFOs are nothing more than swamp gas or weather balloons - (not having mentioned UFOs prior to your reply) somebody with analytical skills could not make such an assumption without any data.

Anyway, even your final statement is flawed. I do not believe what I want. I believe what is proven to me.

In this f*cked up world, I want to believe in God but unfortunately, logic denies me this luxury.

Do I have to add a smiley so that you know I don't hate you?

OK.

:D

Maybe this would be better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRnoUNwFOkE

777equals666

04-10-2009, 08:13 PM

I didn't watch it on YouTube or Google Video. As I said, it was a DVD rip - full resolution. I was not tutting (sic) my own horn, I was merely pointing out that I know the difference between 50 year old analogue audio and digital audio and that it was a matter of narrative/music balance.
Fair enough...

If you still take my point about the refusal to accept rational explanations and how it affects the credibility of stuff which cannot be explained by conventional means to mean that I am dismissing all unexplained phenomena, then there is little I can do about it. It's like suggesting that because I don't believe in fairies that I don't believe in electricity. It's this kind of black vs white thinking which alienates (npi) the general public and in doing so discredits the rational, objective and analytical.
I consider myself to be a very logical thinker and sensible at that, but everybody has their own definition of "rational thinking". Just like every TV manufacture has their own scale and method for determing a TV's contrast ratio. Every state has different Laws, etc, etc....

Yes, I did say that you are the second person to comment. The first person said:

"You saying that all the disclosure evidence from credible witnesses or sources is debunked or flawed??"

Is that what I said?

No.

I said:

"But as far as the rods bit I just managed to watch..."

Did you get that? '...as far as the rods bit I just managed to watch...'

Does that sound like I am referring to 'all the disclosure evidence from credible witnesses or sources'?

So, to be specific, I assume that what you mean by 'toggling of the camera's shutter speed' you mean using a shutter speed roughly equivalent to half the frame rate - most of the footage I have seen has a gap between 'tail' and 'head' of the 'rods' which occurs between frames which is roughly equivalent to its length which would indicate that, for example, on a European video camera (25 fps), the shutter speed was about 1/50th.

Reduce the shutter speed to 1/25th and I predict that the 'tail' and 'head' in sequential frames will 'touch'. Increase it and it will get shorter. Not only is this logical but it has been demonstrated. No, not in a white paper but then I have not heard of a peer reviewed study which proves the phenomenon either. Perhaps you could provide a link.

I don't have the enthusiasm to spend time demonstrate this myself - I don't live in the right environment - but I just did a quick online search and found images which make precisely the point made above. Let people judge for themselves:

www.opendb.com/sol/bugs.htm (http://www.opendb.com/sol/bugs.htm)

home.flash.net/~storyink/hotrods/hotrods.htm (http://home.flash.net/~storyink/hotrods/hotrods.htm)

If anybody still believe in 'rods' after looking at these images and the elementary analysis, I despair.

Again, poor analysis which only serves to discredit your wider hypothesis.
I am familiar with both these sites you have linked on RODS. After reading the extensive survey that was done to debunk the RODS phenomenom, the authors of these sites conclude that these RODS are merely insects being filmed a higher shutter speeds. One even suggest that they are simply wasps...LOL!

First off, I want to say that the web versions of these clips that I am presenting below do not serve as the best video source quality to collobarate the RODS phenomenom, so go find the original DVD versions if you want to be conclusive with the best available quality. I have these clips in the best quality so its easier for me to be conclusive and explain my position with RODS.

My argument is if RODS are simply insects or wasps for that matter, then when in history has insects demonstarted that they can fly at high speeds in altitudes of over 10,000 feet as presented below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT8st1snjzw

Have insects been proven to do this underwater:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvXR6h4Wt2Q

In UFO:The Greatest Story Ever Denied, Part 1 there is a cut scene that was filmed from an infrared camera aboard the columbia space shuttle showing 5 RODS shooting from Earth and going space bound. Look for yourself if its important for you to see this!

And trying to discredit me by alleging that I believe that UFOs are nothing more than swamp gas or weather balloons - (not having mentioned UFOs prior to your reply) somebody with analytical skills could not make such an assumption without any data.

Anyway, even your final statement is flawed. I do not believe what I want. I believe what is proven to me.

In this f*cked up world, I want to believe in God but unfortunately, logic denies me this luxury.
You see what you want to see, you believe what you want to believe, and you hear what you want to hear and somewere in all of that you have defined this as logic or rationalize thinking.. Hmmm... It's O.K. though, you are welcomed to your opinion and at the end of the day nobody here cares what you or me thinks, trust me, people dont care.

777equals666

05-10-2009, 05:31 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR6Wfx5F9J4

Who is this old angry man on the video clip flamesong? Hint, Hint! ;)

flamesong

05-10-2009, 01:10 PM

777equals666

05-10-2009, 08:24 PM

Thanks for that.

It:

Says pretty much what I think.

Demonstrates that you are a bit trigger happy to be considered rational.
For the record, this is me, the one on the right :cool::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAXX5XTnTiA

I am English (though the video was shot on the Isle of Skye in Scotland) and don't have a very convincing American accent.

If you look at the last few frames you will see the logo of flamesong.com at the bottom right of the 'STOP THE NEW WORLD ORDER' T-shirt I am wearing.

I wasn't going to bother replying to your previous post as you have really made yourself look rather ridiculous by asking questions about underwater and space insects.

But this is my last post in this thread. You can now stomp about claiming that you are right but in reality, I imagine that you are just emotionally (and very unhealthily) attached to a rather flimsy theory which has been comprehensibly refuted.

I support you in "spirit" towards the awareness of the NWO and that you would put yourself out there to educate people. I think thats a good thing. I myself have made attempts to educate the public on the NWO such as this example in 2003 @ Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9oss0J_kuQ
I use to be a World Bboy Champ and Choreographer at the turn of the Century and on rare occassions I would use my public or private performances and leave hidden messages in the music and dance moves letting them know whats up with the NWO...

Now I have shifted my attention in letting people know about whats been happening on the Moon. This is me recently giving Buzz Aldrin (2nd Man to Walk on the Moon) a copy of Moon Rising on May 25, 2009 (Photo taken the Day Michael Jackson Died which was only three blocks down the street from the hospital.)
http://www.tblnfilms.com/BuzzMoonRising1.jpg
If you have ever seen UFO: The Greatest Story Ever Denied, Part 2 - Moon Rising, then you will know how important that picture is and why he recieved this....

Since this is your last post on this topic I highly suggest that if you are going to argue against the existence of RODS in the future that you might want to study up a lot more on the subject and come correct next time...;)
JOSE and I arent Bullshit artists as some people would want the internet community at large to believe... We come correct the best way we can in the interest and "spirit" of everybody....

PEACE!

Bboy Peter Pan (AKA: Curtis Hedges)
Global Strategy, Marketing and Promotions for TBLN Films