Real aliens captured on two different videos???!??

By | March 12, 2009

Warning: This post could freak you out.

Thanks to a sharp-eyed “Out There” reader, videos of identical and extremely bizarre living forms have emerged from two different countries. Both show odd “stick figures” that look nothing like any “alien video” ever made. One was taken in Fresno, California and the other in Santa Rosa de Quives near Lima, Peru. Because it is no longer possible to definitively conclude that any digital video is authentic, we cannot confirm the authenticity of these videos. However, the extremely bizarre nature of the figures and the way they move are so strange, and so completely unlike anything that has ever been offered before as “alien video,” the suggestion is strong that these are real images of unknown bipedal creatures, whose body morphology is so radically different from what has evolved on earth that the conclusion is almost inescapable that they are aliens. (The relevant image begins 2:49 into the Fresno (first) video. It begins immediately in the Peru video.) There is no other place in the world where the right combination of readers and editors exists for something like this to have been discovered and presented to a wide audience. Unknowncountry.com is subscriber supported. To join this extraordinary community, click here. via Whitley Strieber’s Unknown Country.

These things made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck.  We may finally know what a REAL aliens look like.  At least now I know how I will feel if I ever do see real aliens. Whitley Strieber writes:

I have never seen anything that looks like this and I do not recall anything in all the letters and emails we have received over the years that describes anything like this. Instead of huge heads and staring eyes, these creatures seem to have very narrow heads and vestigial faces, if any face at all. One would think that such a small head must mean a small brain and therefore a simple one, but this may not be the case. We know that many birds are highly intelligent. In fact, the most intelligent land animal besides us may be the African Gray Parrot, which has a tiny brain. And yet, African Grays can learn as much language and use it at least as skillfully as the most highly trained apes. So it could well be that this is a normally or even highly intelligent creature that is just built along lines that work, but that have not evolved here on earth.

The odds are, of course, that they are fakes, computer generated animation. There was another stick alien reported years ago, however. This is from my blog from 2004:

One obscure type [of alien] most people will not have heard comes from a very recent strange sighting of a “pencil-thin being with knobby, pointed joints” seen by motorists on Saturday, January 24 – 7:30 p.m. on a rural Indiana roadway.

Here is the report from my archive of the web page that is now removed:

While driving his black Chevrolet Cavalier, a 1999 2-door model southbound along North Hogan Road, near Manchester, Indiana, a “figure” was spotted in the headlights of the automobile as it was crouched down near a puddle of water. From the driver’s perspective, the “figure” was spotted out the windshield on the right of the car. “I passed it and looked in rear view mirror, then it was standing,” he said. After passing the frail-looking figure, the driver looked into his rear view mirror and again observed – illuminated by the tail lights of his car – what he described as a tall, abnormal figure that moved strangely with pointed joints that “buckled out.”

He estimated the figure stood around 6 feet, seven inches. “I had no idea what it was,” he said. “It had protruding joints and moved very strangely.” The driver said he was able to ascertain the figure, alleged to be dark gray or black and ‘pencil thin,’ stand up and take several steps toward the woods along the roadside. The ‘figure’ definitely walked on two legs and was thought, somehow, to be a male – although no clothing was noted. No face or eyes could be seen, but the witness had the impression that the ‘figure’ was looking straight at him. The ‘figure’ was immediately thought to be something out of the ordinary, not a human being. The duration of the sighting was ‘hurried’ and possibly within the 3 to 4 second range. The driver continued on for a small distance after passing the figure and finally put on his brakes, coming to a stop at an estimated 2-minute “walking distance” on the road from the location of the sighting. He looked back to further observe the entity.

At that point, a second car came into view and approached from the opposite direction, passed and then reached the spot on the road where the ‘figure’ was thought to be. The 17-year old motorist reportedly watched closely and observed the second car undertake what he thought to be an evasive maneuver near the vicinity of where he thought the figure would be situated, then the car turned around at that spot and shortly pulled up behind him, somewhat in the grass. He could then see it was an elderly couple in the car, both in their late 60s or early 70s, and both with gray hair. The driver, who wore glasses, said: “Boy, did you see something back there? I’ll tell you right now, that was no person.” The passenger in the silver 2-door Cavalier, an elderly female, said: “It was no human being. It was no man.”

The elderly couple were reportedly “spooked” but offered to follow the first witness the remainder of the trip down North Hogan Road, clearly in the opposite direction of their intended destination route. It was thought that the elderly couple observed this same ‘figure’ on the opposite side of the road, and possibly had observed it more closely. With the elderly couple following close in the car behind him, the 17-year old motorist continued down North Hogan Road to his destination at a friends house where he called home to tell his mother of the encounter, advising her to lock her doors (his residence is less than 3-miles from the sighting location), and then called his uncle. The witness was said to become increasingly hysterical, and within an hour was describing the figure as “an alien.”

When asked by his uncle if there could be any alternative explanation for this ‘figure,’ the witness said that there was a chance it could have been an “improperly dressed elderly person,” but still described the object as a “dark, shadowy figure” and “super anorexic” that could have been wandering naked and lost (temperatures in the 20s) in the area without a coat. If so, the witness reportedly said, he would have ‘felt badly’ for the person. The uncle, Jerry Schedel, was contacted within an hour of the sighting and traveled to the area with his wife some 90-minutes later and did not see anything. There is a house and pond nearby, almost 1/4 mile from the area of the sighting. The uncle said his nephew knows the exact location and can identify the spot, but would not agree to return to the area until daylight.

COMMENT

His uncle did try to get his nephew to rationalize how this sighting might be explained, but the witness openly admits not accepting his own speculation efforts, instead telling this reporter: “I have no explanation for what this thing was, I think it must have been some type of alien.” He said that he did travel down North Hogan road this afternoon during daylight, slowing down to survey the location of the incident but saw nothing out of the ordinary and the ground was also covered with around 4-inches of snow. The witness sounds very sincere and cognizant. He answered my questions patiently and offered continued assistance in the investigation process, such as drawing a picture of the ‘figure’ and returning to the location for inspection of the area. Filed, Monday, January 26, 2004 KENNY YOUNG UFO Research

Are all three of these hoaxes? If not, what are these things? What are they doing here? Are they all over the place? Regarding the videos, several people believe the shadows are wrong, giving away the hoax. Example from posthumanblues blog:

I blew the vid up 200% and then 400%, ran it several times, and the mismatches between objects and shadows are even more evident. Better quality or first gen vids would likely only make these mismatches more self-evident, which is also why I speculated that one way of establishing a better simulation of reality (or hoax) is to superimpose a CGI construct into a real scene, and then make a fuzzed out, Nth-gen copy with the entire visual image, real and combined synthetic insertion, sufficiently blurred to obscure both evenly and create seemingly better overall versimilitude. This reduces the intuitive “uncanny valley” effect that otherwise sharper imagery and contrasting detail would usually provide and allow, and which would more obviously indicate fabrication or hoaxing if higher resolution video were available. Combine that process with non-standard “alien” imagery and odd motion (I really enjoyed the “walking pants” effect of the 2nd one–except for the lack of correlated bidpedal shadowing) and you can create a simulacrum with even more effective or psychologically and emotionally affective or intriguing results. You could call it the “WTF?!” effect.

… Add to that the “ordinary” locale, how most yard surveillance cams are known to be low-rez, “unavailability” of the original or even a decent copy of the video, the supposed initial reluctance of the homeowner to come forward, the back story, the MUFON presenters’ manner, and you have some essential ingredients for a fairly sophisticated but incomplete hoax, imho. I’ve seen this routine, or “package deal” many times before. This is not uncommon with a lot of South American ufology and ufo “documentation”–it’s even more sensationalistic and credulous than in the U.S., if you can believe that. Try my experiment, of blowing up the vids, running them a few times each at normal, 2x, and 4x size, and watch the point between the lower “feet” area and the related shadows to see that, if these were real organisms, how the shadows would more closely tally with the objects movement. They don’t.

Let me ask you this, if there was a high resolution video that showed these things were 100% real, would you want to see it? I think such a video would cause a lot of people to freak all the way out.

One thought on “Real aliens captured on two different videos???!??

  1. Ann

    The first video is during a Mufon presentation at conference – terrible quality. (A video of a video of a video.) It almost seems the original surveillance shots were shaking, but that cannot be said really. One just doesn’t know. The second is from Peru. Both appear to show thin, diminutive beings. But, the description of the analysis above is not very good. The video deserves better than that light brushing. And, what is it with the stereotyping: “I’ve seen this routine, or “package deal” many times before.” Makes one wonder about the critic’s orientation. And, sorry, Mufon is recognized for its work by Stanton Friedman and others.

    There was another video on Youtube.com which was only a few seconds long that depicts a very thin and nearly transparent being (perhaps is the problem with the shadows mentioned in the analysis) appearing on a sidewalk of a city and then just vanishes. I’ve tried to re-locate it again, but can’t.

    Also, don’t you remember the video from Peru where a guy took a video of his friend walking away in what a seems a like a narrow street or alley when supposedly a thin being reached out from behind a tree and appeared to try to touch him? It was in the news and later analyzed. Supposedly, as I understand the arm too thin and too long to be that of a human.

Leave a Reply