Please post any footage you have. However good/bad you think it is. The problem with me with all the crap on youtube is that there is no corroboration - no personal aspect. However, if you chose to post a video and are willing to state that you shot that video and there was no fakery, then as much as that counts for anything in this world, it's good enough for me until proved otherwise. The very fact you mention this in such a forum as this lends a good bit of credibility to your story.
As I said, I would really appreciate if you could manage to post any footage. I know many other forum members would be equally thankful. To me, this is the good shit, despite maybe not being great quality - it has a no-profit/fame factor that is appealing. Also the fact you haven't spewed a pile onto here before also shows you haven't went out to fake stuff and get the world to believe it.
No, as much as I can tell, this rings true, if I'm any judge with the info available. Some personal description with the footage would also be invaluable.
If I ever shoot any UFO footage, this is the one place I would even think of putting it up on. Least you are guaranteed a fair hearing and some honest opinions!
While I remember. How easy is it still to get an old-style analogue film for cameras - you know - like 36mm etc? I wonder about picking up maybe a second hand old camera for next to nothing and then loading it up with some real colour and black and white film - carry it around the times these sightings tend to happen. If there is no discernable pattern to the UFOs appearances then just carry the thing all the time!
This way there is no need to spend a lot. Also, it is far harder to fake using old film, it is good that the negatives can be examined too. Also, these films can be blown up a good deal with less quality loss than many modern digital cameras. I think to be really worthwhile for UFOs, digital cameras need to be very high megapixel values etc, you want maximum quality esp.
when zoomed into.
One thing that Jose Escamilla pointed out - there are modern camcorders that have an infra-red capability. He very clever showed that by taping the same section of sky with two distinct video cameras, one on normal the other on infra-red - he could demonstrate that there were craft often aloft that the unaided eye does not see. He has split-screen footage of a piece of sky and on one you see nothing out of place, on the other side, the infra-red side, you plainly see what looks like a rotating structured craft hovering for some time.
How often are there craft above us that are not visible? It is plain that the UFO occupants either no not want all of us to see them openly all the time, it is plain that sometimes they seem to want to be seen, or at the very least, are uncaring about being seen at that particular time.
I can imagine there are therefore many times in which UFOs want to go about their business in our skies but without being seen. If they have the ability to do this at will, then they may well be doing this most of the time! What if there are many, many more sightings to be had and recorded, if we only extend our surveillance of them past the visible band of the electromagnetic spectrum to include the infra-red (and why not ultra-violet too, the other direction?) I think if this became a matter of course for cameras, we may find many more UFOs in our skies than we believe are around right now. The implications, if true, are huge.
