Inicio > Mis eListas > debunker > Mensajes

 Índice de Mensajes 
 Mensajes 1575 al 1589 
AsuntoAutor
Illu y los OVNIs Frajalo
Lo último sobre el Frajalo
Lo que se dice en Frajalo
Re: Illu y los OVN Victor Q
Illu y los OVNIs illu min
Re: Lo que se dice illu min
de ovnis..para el Violeta
Re: de ovnis..para Jorge Ca
Sobre como hablar Frajalo
Segunda parte del Frajalo
Re: de ovnis..para JMBello
Re: Re: de ovnis.. Victor
Una pregunta para vilogo
Re: Bati Cristo.jp "Javier
Podria haber creci illu min
 << 15 ant. | 15 sig. >>
 
Debunker
Página principal    Mensajes | Enviar Mensaje | Ficheros | Datos | Encuestas | Eventos | Mis Preferencias

Mostrando mensaje 1584     < Anterior | Siguiente >
Responder a este mensaje
Asunto:Re: [debunker] Lo que se dice en Sci-Fi
Fecha:Sabado, 1 de Septiembre, 2001  09:22:27 (-0400)
Autor:illu minati <illu03 @.......com>

Dice  illu :

Pues deberias de traducirlo, pues esa es solo

es el parecer o las opiniones de alguien que considera

que el ovni tiene una misma mecanica de vuelo y produce

los mismos efectos en nuestra atmosfera que nuestros aviones

Esta es la opinion de alguien que como la mayoria de ustedes

solo toman como supuesta evidencia, no realmente lo que se

debe tomar como una  evidencia cientifica y objetiva, sino aquellas

que les conviene. para desacreditar lo observado. Tambien es interezante

que nuestro especialista "esceptico", pudo analizar todas las supuestas

anormalias del video  pero no observo, como tampoco notaron ustedes y el propio

sci-fi el visible arribo del ovni a la escena.

Yo tembien hice lo de los frame por frame y nada delo que el dijo

se observa, asi que a engañar a otro.

saludos

illu

Fotos del ovni de ny

http://www.elistas.net/lista/debunker/ficheros/2/verFichero/1/
http://www.elistas.net/lista/debunker/ficheros/2/verFichero/2/


>From: "Frajalo"
>Reply-To: debunker@...
>To: "Debunker"
>Subject: [debunker] Lo que se dice en Sci-Fi
>Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:27:00 +0100 (Hora de verano GMT)
>
>Apart from the obvious size inconsistancies, there are other clues that this
>"UFO" was added to the film in post production.
>
>Firstly, while the "UFO" is supposed partially obscured by the WTC, if you
>step through the clip frame by frame, you can see several times when it
>overlaps the edge of the building. So unless the "UFO" was jumping back and
>forth in front of and behind the building, which would have necessitated it
>passing through the building, it is not actually a real world object.
>
>Secondly, when the "UFO" darts off to the right of the helicopter, it does
>so at such speed that only twelve frames elapse between the first hint of
>movement and the point at which the womans arm becomes visible in the frame.
>
>So this movement from stationary to when the arm becomes visible takes less
>than a second. Yet by the time the arm becomes visible, it is already
>pointing at the new location. This means that this woman not only tracked
>the entire motion but was able to raise her arm to point at it in less time
>than human reactions allow.
>
>It would have taken at least a second to register the sudden movement, react
>to it, and move the eyes to follow it. In fact it happens so fast that the
>camera person doesn't even begin to follow with the camera. Yet by the time
>the camera pans back, here is this woman already pointing and saying "its
>over there". The only way this would be possible is if the woman already
>knew where the "UFO" would go. If this was real, a dialog more like "Where
>did it go?... There it is!" would have been likely. Who ever wrote the
>script shouldn't give up their day job.
>
>Finally, any solid object (even one with some kind of force field!) moving
>at the speeds shown would have set up a 'bow wave' (like a boat) of high
>pressure air in front of it and spreading out behind it. This would have
>severely buffeted a helicopter (not the most stable of aircraft) and
>possibly knocked it out of the sky, as the "UFO" passed so close by.
>
>Passenger jet aircraft moving at relatively sedate speeds compared to this
>UFO" leave the air so roiled and turbulent that they must be seperated by
>enough time to allow the air to settle before another aircraft can take off
>or land. This is called wake turbulence, and any aircraft causes it.
>Remember the movie Top Gun where they show a fighter crossing the wake of
>another and being knocked out of the sky? This happens. Yet whoever faked
>this footage did not take it into account.
>
>I guess we can consider the case closed.
>
>Perdón por no traducirlo pero es que ya me da mala gana. Si este OVNI es real voy a empezar a tener que pedirle perdón al duende verde que vive en mi nevera.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Para darte de baja, envía un mensaje a: debunker-baja@...
>Para obtener ayuda, visita http://www.eListas.net/lista/debunker
>Archivo disponible en http://www.eListas.net/lista/debunker/archivo
>debunker es la lista oficial de http://www.ciberesceptico.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>http://www.eListas.net/
>Crea y administra tus propias listas de correo gratuitas, en español.
>


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com