Multiple video clips show brightly lit UFO flying over streets of Tehran

[Dejarma]

it's CGI- boring zzzzzzzzzzzz

[preacherman76]

On 6/14/2024 at 9:55 PM, Dejarma said:

it's CGI- boring zzzzzzzzzzzz

Prove it. 

[Hazzard]

4 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Prove it. 

Someone will, and soon.

 

[Dejarma]

18 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Prove it. 

Prove it to who?

The lighting on the object & it being far too defined withing the footage makes it bleeding obvious CGI.

I've proved it to me 😉

[astrobeing]

Now that I think about it... this strongly reminds me of the "Dragonfly Drone" hoax that began in June of 2007. The fake CGI UFO in that hoax also was mainly a big doughnut and the hoaxer went through some trouble to create multiple renderings from multiple locations (even at differing quality!) to give the impression that several independent witnesses had seen the same thing. The guy kept the hoax going all summer and even created an entire conspiratorial backstory with documents and fake stories.

No one ever figured out who was behind it. Is he back again?

[Hazzard]

9 minutes ago, astrobeing said:

Now that I think about it... this strongly reminds me of the "Dragonfly Drone" hoax that began in June of 2007. The fake CGI UFO in that hoax also was mainly a big doughnut and the hoaxer went through some trouble to create multiple renderings from multiple locations (even at differing quality!) to give the impression that several independent witnesses had seen the same thing. The guy kept the hoax going all summer and even created an entire conspiratorial backstory with documents and fake stories.

No one ever figured out who was behind it. Is he back again?

Could be, if not a copycat... or some film student that wanted his 15 minutes.

[preacherman76]

On 6/16/2024 at 7:41 AM, Dejarma said:

Prove it to who?

The lighting on the object & it being far too defined withing the footage makes it bleeding obvious CGI.

I've proved it to me 😉

So basically it’s looks to real? Ok. 

[Dejarma]

3 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

So basically it’s looks to real? Ok. 

oh right... if you feel it's worthy of your fantasy then enjoy. Who am i to say you can't fantasize 

[Portre]

It's a genuine UFO.

[Hazzard]

4 hours ago, Portre said:

It's a genuine UFO.

Im not so sure it is...

[Portre]

2 hours ago, Hazzard said:

Im not so sure it is...

Unidentified

Flying

Object

Which part aren't you sure about?

[the13bats]

2 hours ago, Hazzard said:

Im not so sure it is...

Do you have any leads, it's a fake and it will come out as such any minute.

[ChrLzs]

Don't have time for a deep look, but two things.......

1.  Look who's pushing it:

Forgive me while I vomit.  It's the Maussan Kiss Of Death.

2.  The best cgi artists check everything and make sure that what is added to the real scene is not just the object, but also any perspective characteristics and things the object may affect, is in their fakery...

3.  To be a little more specific,  not-quite-so-good fakers might miss things, like getting pincushion/barrel distortion to accurately match the background scene's perspective ... and also checking for shiny surfaces that should be showing a reflection ...?

 

So I'm pushing that it's CGI, at first glance.  I'll happily grovel an apology if wrong.  I don't often get to do that. 

[the13bats]

19 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Don't have time for a deep look, but two things.......

1.  Look who's pushing it:

Forgive me while I vomit.  It's the Maussan Kiss Of Death.

2.  The best cgi artists check everything and make sure that what is added to the real scene is not just the object, but also any perspective characteristics and things the object may affect, is in their fakery...

3.  To be a little more specific,  not-quite-so-good fakers might miss things, like getting pincushion/barrel distortion to accurately match the background scene's perspective ... and also checking for shiny surfaces that should be showing a reflection ...?

 

So I'm pushing that it's CGI, at first glance.  I'll happily grovel an apology if wrong.  I don't often get to do that. 

Oh hell I didn't see that Capt charlatan himself UFO hall of shame member and desecrator of human remains to turn a buck of the credious himself was involved. Yep it's a hoax fake.

 

[Hazzard]

On 6/19/2024 at 1:58 AM, Portre said:

Unidentified

Flying

Object

Which part aren't you sure about?

 

Well, if its CGI then it wasnt Flying at all, was it?

[astrobeing]

4 hours ago, Hazzard said:

Well, if its CGI then it wasnt Flying at all, was it?

And it certainly wouldn't have been an object.

[the13bats]

19 hours ago, the13bats said:

Oh hell I didn't see that Capt charlatan himself UFO hall of shame member and desecrator of human remains to turn a buck of the credious himself was involved. Yep it's a hoax fake.

 

I mean really I'm not trying to be a big jerk but when a true believer worships the warrens or praises and defends maussan as a poor victim that's pretty much a dead end for any rational open minded thinking, it's like when some believer will say they never heard anything being hailed only could be paranormal...except their experiences.

 

[Hankenhunter]

On 6/13/2024 at 10:44 PM, pallidin said:

Exactly. That is the most critical point in this so-called UFO event.

Possible, but there was a min. of 4 vids. Are they all cgi, or ai?

[the13bats]

38 minutes ago, Hankenhunter said:

Possible, but there was a min. of 4 vids. Are they all cgi, or ai?

CGI or AI or both, it's sadly more likely than a small craft looking like that flying low, it could be towed by a drone out of frame but I don't think so, it's not aliens so what's left?

In my RC hobby I could make something that looked like that I don't think I could copy the flight just right unless maybe I used a blimp type RC .

The video of the person petting creature as the UFO drifts into frame is from a sloppy hoaxer point of view just how a naive camera person would stage and frame it.

Plus if that thing flew over at least four locations we would have to have other videos we don't yet, we only have only one source so it's a very dubious case.

[pallidin]

4 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

Possible, but there was a min. of 4 vids. Are they all cgi, or ai?

I do understand the issue of having 4+ vids, and I would like to see them.

Are they available? 

[Hankenhunter]

47 minutes ago, pallidin said:

I do understand the issue of having 4+ vids, and I would like to see them.

Are they available? 

Click on the op's link, and scroll down. All 4 vids are there.

[pallidin]

48 minutes ago, Hankenhunter said:

Click on the op's link, and scroll down. All 4 vids are there.

Ok, thanks. I'll check them out.

[pallidin]

1 hour ago, Hankenhunter said:

Click on the op's link, and scroll down. All 4 vids are there.

Ok, I did view all 4 vids. Not sure how I missed them before. My mistake!

You already know I'm a firm believer in much (not all) ET-type issues, including UFO's. That will never change.

However, I do not believe in everything that comes out of the gate, even sophisticated renditions of suggestive activity.

Hankenhunter, CGI/AI can definitely present from multiple viewing angles if desired, so the issue of more than one video at different locations does not negate CGI/AI at all.

My biggest problem is that, for whatever reason, that UFO itself does not look "real" to me. Maybe it's the design, or its lighting, or its movement, idk. Or I could be flat wrong and its genuine. I have nothing to personally compare it to because I have never seen a suggestive ET-UFO in real life. I have seen a fair amount of CGI/AI, though, and for some reason I get that "feel" here.

Do you remember that recent vid of a UFO flying past an airliner and filmed by someone's phone that was an admitted CGI/AI as an AI test? This reminds me of that (in the sense of looking "off")

Curious vids out of Tehran, but they do not at all change my opinion of it. I do hope I'm wrong.

 

 

 

 

[Hankenhunter]

1 hour ago, pallidin said:

Ok, I did view all 4 vids. Not sure how I missed them before. My mistake!

You already know I'm a firm believer in much (not all) ET-type issues, including UFO's. That will never change.

However, I do not believe in everything that comes out of the gate, even sophisticated renditions of suggestive activity.

Hankenhunter, CGI/AI can definitely present from multiple viewing angles if desired, so the issue of more than one video at different locations does not negate CGI/AI at all.

My biggest problem is that, for whatever reason, that UFO itself does not look "real" to me. Maybe it's the design, or its lighting, or its movement, idk. Or I could be flat wrong and its genuine. I have nothing to personally compare it to because I have never seen a suggestive ET-UFO in real life. I have seen a fair amount of CGI/AI, though, and for some reason I get that "feel" here.

Do you remember that recent vid of a UFO flying past an airliner and filmed by someone's phone that was an admitted CGI/AI as an AI test? This reminds me of that (in the sense of looking "off")

Curious vids out of Tehran, but they do not at all change my opinion of it. I do hope I'm wrong.

 

 

 

 

I'd like to see our August skeptics create something simaler to these vids. See if they can create a realistic UFO from four different angles like the op. Should be a piece of cake for such  knowledgeable members of UM.

[preacherman76]

On 6/18/2024 at 11:15 AM, Dejarma said:

oh right... if you feel it's worthy of your fantasy then enjoy. Who am i to say you can't fantasize 

I mm what?? 
 

The topic of UFO’s used to be fun. I’m not sure exactly how I got sucked in to speaking about it with bitter rude angry people.