1. PaulPRMI

    PaulPRMI New Member

    Was it possible to digitally alter video in 1997? I can't seem to think of any other possible explanation other than some sort of CGI. In the comment section of that video, some people claim to have seen this in person .

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H6sEbDLb1o
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2017
  2. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Yes. While 1997 might seem like a long time ago, it was also the year the heavy CGI films like Titanic came out. More to the point it was also the year the Special Editions of Star Wars were released, which incorporated CGI into the original live action (and miniature models) of the 1980s films. These were vastly more complex compositing things than the little UFO video above, for example this Jabba the Hut was all made in CGI in 1997 and composited with existing footage.

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93DzOXD_91o
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Wow, this is a blast from the past. This is probably the first UFO video I ever saw on the internet. I remember thinking it was a pretty shoddy fake even back then.
  4. PaulPRMI

    PaulPRMI New Member

    Is there anything in particular that stands out as being an obvious sign of a hoax?
  5. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    It has been discussed a lot over the last 20 years. Basically it could be a hoax, and really that seems like the simplest explanation. Consider that the person who "discovered" the video and the witnesses was Jaime Maussan

    Source: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8s579_historic-ufo-over-mexico-city-augus_tech


    Maussan has basically been pushing stories that seem fake for the last 20 years, the most recent one being this:
    (That's Maussan in the back)
    • Informative Informative x 2
  6. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    For one thing it shows a classic "flying saucer" shape, and the whole "saucer" image comes from a misinterpretation of the Arnold UFO sighting back in the 1940s, so that immediately makes it suspicious IMHO.

    Then there's the very unnatural and asymmetric wobbling motion. Ok you could argue that if it was an alien ship it might have an alien motion, but it just looks wrong.

    I accept that those reasons are pretty subjective, but I also recall that there was analysis of the video which showed that while the buildings exhibited motion blur due to camera shake, the "UFO" did not (or at least did not to the same extent), suggesting that the UFO was not present in the scene as filmed.

    I think the analysis was published in the MUFON journal but I don't have a link right now.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

  8. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    There's a detailed investigation of this case here, tracking down who made it.
  9. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 22, 2017
    • Winner Winner x 5