A man recently observed a UFO streaking through the sky over southern California.
The witness, Ken Roberts, noticed the unusual object while driving, and stopped to record the incident on video. This video shows the bright object streaking through the sky, leaving a long tail in its path. While this UFO is burning across the sky, a strange bright object is seemingly ejected from the UFO. This second object shoots off in what appears to be the opposite direction of the larger UFO.
The witness describes:
I was driving home after work when this UFO or whatever you call it caught my eye. I pulled over in front of somebody’s house to film it. I would have got a better shot but I didn’t want to jump these peoples fence. Anyway I don’t know what the hell to make of it. Couldn’t have been a plane cause there was no noise. And I never heard a crash after either. The Orb thing flew straight up into the sky and disappeared. Sorry I didn’t film that. I didn’t know what to focus my attention on.
There is nothing in the video to suggest that the larger UFO is anything but a meteorite. And it is normal to see other aerial objects originating from a meteorite as it breaks up during the rapid decent to Earth.
But the smaller orb UFO in this video behaves differently than typical meteorite debris. It is peculiar for a single object to drift away from a meteorite, then, allegedly, fly “straight up into the sky.”
It is unclear from where in southern California this video was recorded. The date of the incident is also unknown. But the video was uploaded to YouTube on Monday, January 5. There were no UFO sightings reported to the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) in southern California during the past couple days. But, according to the American Meteor Society’s website, many California witnesses observed a fireball meteorite streaking through the sky on the evening of Saturday, January 3. But those witnesses are in northern California. One witness did describe that “some fragments seemed to emanate from the tail as it fell.” Another witness reported, “I saw a secondary little fireball (very light) at the time of maximum brightness of the first fireball.”
The Epoch Times points out another possible explanation for the video–the whole thing might be a fabrication. Some believe both the main object and the strange orb in the video were added to the video using computer software. A Reddit user comments, “I think this is faked. The explosion sound is synchronized with the separation of the object, which doesn’t seem possible for the implied distance. The masking on the main object gets sloppy near the end of the video, for example as it emerges from around the pole and passes behind/over the last wire. Also just before the last movement of the camera away from the small object, you can see the mask on the main object slip a bit ahead of time.”
It’s unclear if something unusual was truly captured on video, or if this video is a simple for-profit creation. Shortly after the video was posted to YouTube, another YouTube user posted a comment in response to the video, expressing interest in the video and proposing an offer for use of the footage. The description of the video has now been updated to inform viewers that this YouTube user, who aggregates videos on a YouTube channel related to UFOs, ghosts, and other paranormal topics, has been given “exclusive rights to use the video.”
Jettisoned occupants desert a sinking ship, like the alien rats they are.
If the video is real, it is very intriguing because the glowing object released actually seems to change direction and speed up as it flies away.
I’d agree with the redditor. That it is CGI. After copywritting his first ever vid on youtube to a new account. Now ‘Mister Enigma’ owns the rights to it. Mister Enigma is a known hoaxer on youtube.
It’s a re-entering piece of space junk. It appears to move slowly because of the high altitude. A piece of debris breaks off and begins to tumble, bleeding off speed as it does so. Not a meteor.
You can tell it’s CGI by the quality, movement, structure, and that everything is in silhouette. Classic FAKE environment.
a) It appears to be a static image with added shake and moving objects.
b) There’s no amazement or surprise when the little light goes to the right.
c) The background noise seems unrelated to the actual image.
d) He was driving home from work, and he jumped out of his car, so he’s on a main road, yet no other cars go by, or people.
e) The building on the left is also a dead give away. It conveniently blocks the rest of the view, and he doesn’t even try to look past the house to the left or look for the object on the right. Then the video stops, again the lack of commentary showing disappointment or wonder rings alarm bells. He also makes some excuse that he didn’t want to jump over ‘peoples fence’, so he realises that this looks dodgy.
f) It’s also strange that there is no initial wobbling of the camera zooming in, focusing etc.
g) The fact that comments have been disabled.
h) The history of the user is also very strange, and brand new.
i) The little ‘pop’ at the end of the ‘Sure hope someone else is getting this’, is a sound pop, where the vocal has been sliced in.
j) The fact that well known hoaxer Mister Enigma now has the video. I suspect it’s something to do with him.
All adds up to one big fat HOAX.
I love it when skeptics with no Spfx or 3d, masking, animation experience dismiss a video out-of-hand as fake on a cursory viewing. If you bother to investigate you’ll see that the object trailing down goes behind two electrical lines: http://imgur.com/NZ5d5yW
http://imgur.com/yiswJIS
http://imgur.com/D3voHiz
http://imgur.com/WNC34iT
This is very hard to do without dead giveaways – to fake it you’d have to mask the entire electrical pole and wires, or compose the whole scene in 3d (which would also have some giveaways). The glow bleedthrough as the descending glowing object passes through these electrical lines appears to be natural and expected. To fake something like this to appear this real would require sophisticated expensive software (such as Smoke/Flame) and powerful enough computer processor(s) with tons of memory (rendering takes a lot of horsepower and time). Sophisticated fakes that look very real aren’t done by 10 year olds on a dated laptop. You would need skill, knowledge of software, lighting compositing, editing and POV angles. But in the “Occam’s Razor” of skepticism it is far less of a mental hurdle to simply declare “fake” than understand how something could be fake – what it would take to fake and investigate based on that likelihood. Skeptics would have you believe that of the hundreds of thousands of video evidence – it appears that half the Internet has 9k worth of software a 5k-10k investment in a computer and the mad skills equivalent to a 5 year Hollywood Spfx/CGI veteran.
Why is the burden of video proof entirely on the witnesses? All a skeptic has to say is “fake” as rebuttal and THAT is sufficient? If you feel this or other videos are fake – prove it yourselves- just simply saying “CGI” is NOT proof – it would be like me saying “Aliens” as part of a sufficient counter-argument. If it was faked – how was it done? With what software? What type of software – compositing – what effects plugins or packages were likely used? What would be the level of skill required to create such a fake? The problem is the majority of skeptics have no clue but rigidly defend their preciously protected world view by indignant two word rebuttal/critiques like “Fake” and “CGI” but are really talking out their ahems because they truly do not know what is required to pull off a realistic fake. I invite you to try to duplicate this person’s video in an as-realistic video if you think a teen is capable.
Most of the stuff on YouTube is bad CGI- this is especially sloppy. The trail is way too bright and flat for the distance and sky color, and that’s just the start of the problems with it. I’m sure some skeptic type will come out and claim credit for it and gloat how he fools those “UFO nuts”.
Assume that at least 98% of the stuff on YouTube is junk- it will improve your surfing experience immensely.
To the anonymous person who “love skeptics with no spfx experience”… Hello I am HOAXKiller1. I have many years experience with the subjects you mention. I must correct several of your points. 1: You claim someone must “mask the entire electrical pole and wires” to make the fake object move behind it. That claim is false. The most simple way to make an object appear to move behind the other is by using “chroma keying” also known as “blue/green screening”. As you see, with a nice blue sky in the background, all you have to do is use the blue sky as a blue screen, then you can put anything you want in the background, and it will only appear on the blue areas (so objects will appear to pass behind the wires and pole). Even simple editing software is capable of this. Another method is to duplicate the background video and turn all the blue sky transparent (a simple tool does it) and stack it on the top layer. Then add all the UFO animation in between the layers, like a sandwich. 2: Cheap computers these days are plenty powerful enough to make a silly hoax like this. The software can be pirated and often is. And there are tutorials all over the internet that any idiot can follow. Your unrealistic 5-10k investment and 5-10 year experience remark is simply ridiculous. Even more realistic when you take into account that most hoaxes are created by students in graphics and special effects class with access to everything you claim. Anyway… here are two videos of mine that prove this ‘ufo’ is hoax. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7Ug3qvciO0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFslM07xsQk Good day!