How to Assess alleged UFO Film Footage... Suggestions Are Welcome!

[ExomatrixTV]

• How to Assess alleged UFO Film Footage's

Gave 80+ UFO lectures throughout the Netherlands (and 4 other countries) ... investigated dutch (chief of) police, military, pilots most of them who called me up after being on Dutch National TV 22 times, promoting my UFO Conferences and our Exposure Magazine discussing UFOs including analyzing 100s of possible UFO Footage's ...

Over the years I have used multiple different cameras in the past starting with Video 8 Camera in the early 1990s, Hi8 Camera in Mid 1990s, Multiple Digital Cameras around 2000, later in 2016 someone donated me a "Sony Alpha 20.1 Megapixel Video Camera" ... then in 2017 I bought a Sigma APO DG 70-3000 mm 1:4-5.6 Macro Motorized Telephoto Zoom Lens and recently in 2021 I bought a 4K Nikon Coolpix P950 83x Wide Optical UltraZoom Camera!

Filming all kinds of objects ... and studying the video noise (video compression artifacts) when filming moving objects, birds, balloons, air crafts, helicopters slowly going behind the trees etc. etc.

And used dozens of Video-Edit Software Programs since 1996 staring having a video capture card called Pinnacle Studio Pro I used to convert part my 300+ VHS Tapes Archive of Conspiracy & Suppressed News Research including 100s of UFO Documentaries, UFO News-Items, UFO Film Footage's, Mainstream Talk-shows discussing UFOs, UFO Lectures etc. etc. and me using all kinds of Professional Video Editing Software to analyze UFO Footage's including real original ones that people gave me because they saw my "UFO Hotline" (Private) Phone Number on TV ...

So I analyzed plenty UFO footage's last 32 years ... I remember that after watching several Bruce Maccabee interviews & lectures showing how he is analyzing (investigating) multiple famous UFO Film Footage's from all over the world including the Canadian Carp, Ontario "Guardian" UFO Case.




There is a long "check list" I made long time ago ... to rate any claim of a an UFO ... I always said (in Dutch) that anyone reporting a sighting is not the same as a real UFO after careful scrutiny getting/deserving the official label.

When the mass media systematically assumes that a "reporting" is the same as an "ufo" and do not separate the two you see headlines like: "UFO" turned out to be: "Venus" or "Balloon" or "Strange Weather Phenomena" or "Flock of Birds reflecting light in the Dark Night Sky" or "Laser Lights hitting Clouds" or "Military Aircraft", or "Goodyear Blimp" on and on and on and on ...

The mass media never says: "A report of an alleged (possible) ufo turned out to be ..." they standard state: "UFOs turned out to be .... long list what NOT an UFO is" ... and this mass condition of the masses to assume "UFO(s) equals misinformation" ... Meanwhile their FRAMING is totally bogus from the get go. But the majority of the mainstream newspaper readers believe how they frame this topic.

• So every time when I explained the difference between: "Reporting of a possible UFO versus the Real Deal the Genuine UFO" journalist refuse to repeat my insight ...

I also told them I have literary 100s of UFO News clippings from all over the world mainly from The Netherlands & Belgium where I was investigating the "debunkers" aka "(pseudo) skeptics" with their "Dutch Skeptic Foundation" and their "Skepter Magazine" and because of studying their modus operandi, their tactics, how they "explain away" stuff (sometimes correctly, but in my view, mostly not) I decided to create a site called "skepsiswatchers" in late 1990s early 2000s we were "debunking the debunkers" as we are healthy critical to the UFO critics seen in the mass media ... And they are many times in the mass media the LOVE to debunk every controversial research that is beyond their narrative ... I even met them face to face many times. Had several live UFO debates with them on Dutch National Radio before the internet was widely used.

• I made a list of what makes a UFO footage more credible or not ... What aspects of any source helps to figure out what we are seeing and how do we value what we see?

Soon I will try from memory to create this check-list again ... which I used for a decade in the 1990s when discussing UFO critics ... and the depth of my effort was never ever published correctly in dozens of interviews they did with me. I saw a pattern happening ... they (MSM) claim I am an "UFO Expert" or "Ufologist" multiple times but I always called myself just an "UFO investigator", nothing more, but at the same time they refuse to quote me correctly that will do justice to the most important parts of my investigations & insights.

I told all journalists: "When you interview a brain surgeon and he is talking for 30 minutes and then he says there are the 3 most important discoveries 3 new insights ... most journalists will not be afraid to quote this brain expert correctly and chose to write about these 3 points even if you have no clue what he is talking about, you just "quote the expert" and let the people decide if it has any value or not.

But with real UFO Experts mainstream "journalists" just cherry-pick whatever they want/chose to use that fits their (corrupted) narrative and willfully ignore several important parts that are mentioned by the UFO investigator ... This happened over and over and over and over gain. >>> That is why I love to do live UFO debates/interviews on Dutch National TV & Radio because they lose the debate as their very predictable false projections/assumptions and framing gets exposed instantly.

Dutch "UFO Debunkers" have a huge list of false assumptions (projections) ... Now you understand why I made a practical "check-list" how to asses UFO reports & UFO Footage's!

When I was debunking the debunkers (gatekeepers for the status quo) they knew they will lose so they were looking for other ways to frame me ("judge me") using multiple defamation/slander tactics full of provable lies.

And yes, I too can make mistakes sometimes as everyone else can ... but when I do it sometimes I want people to correct me as fast as possible and I never ever claimed you "must believe me" ... I was even begging the audience multiple times to correct my mistakes or misjudgments if I have any. Lets say 1 to 2% is incorrect ... they will use that to throw away the rest of the 98% claiming they "debunked me" ... which at the time I found hilarious as I can do the same to them, even better as I can expose over 30% of flaws, false generalizations, quoting me out of context, provable bogus assumptions etc. etc.

In the early 1990s we (our CNI Foundation and our Exposure Magazine) obtained the official USAF (US Air Force) question-list for reporting UFOs to the Air Force and we translated it in to Dutch added some questions of our own ... Then when people reported UFOs via our "UFO Hotline" (even the police used that hotline) we sent a list of questions for the (possible) UFO Eyewitnesses to fill in ... This way we could analyze multiple independent witnesses from different angles of the same unexplained object ... You see almost nobody did this kind of work, back in the days ... but we did!

So when some one is sharing new UFO videos last 25+ years I always had a "default setting" of my own UFO check-up system how to asses new footage's.

Maybe it is time to write this check-list again soon

to be continued ...

cheers,
John Kuhles aka ExomatrixTV'
January 27th, 2022

[Spiral]

That's a very balanced, insightful & well written piece

The main things that come to mind for me is; that people need a good knowledge of aviation, a reasonable understanding of photography (if its pictures) and a basic grasp of astronomy, because they are the three main sources of misidentified objects.

Oh, and weather as well, lenticular clouds are called clouds for a reason lol.

The other side of this probably only effects certain people, those people who see a lot of "ufos", which is familiarity with the different kinds of phenomena that aren't in the mundane categories above.

[Sunny-side-up]

Hi John nice post.

1) I always let my gut speak to me first (dose it seem real or not, no thinking with this one just feelings
2) my social mind If there are any people speaking how are they reacting
3) the context of the scene, it's always an alert to me if the camera just happens to be pointing to a blank area of sky, for no reason ? but then?

I've seen a few very impressive craft? that I would need an artistic computer graphics pro to recreate them (My cuttlefish skin craft)
One standard disk shaped craft that actually left me freaked out because of it's cartoon like quality ?
If I had seen those in someones vids I would be thinking fake lol.

If I had filmed a dot in the sky I would not publish it saying a UFO suggesting it to be a piloted craft, no point if no detail, but then?

We all need a full on well filmed craft with lots of detail and whiteness, multiple angles if poss.
And that would still be called as hoax by many

[ExomatrixTV]

• "Onboard Plane Passenger Films Incredible Shape Shifting UFO/Entity At High Altitude"

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SnRQ3QvwNJ8

This video has multiple examples where you can use my check-list (soon available here) to asses if any of it is useful for serious UFO research or not!

• Incredible UFO filmed from Airplane window over New Mexico at 30,000 ft, December 8th, 2021
  

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=81H0RuKuYEo

"Too good to be true" Footage? ... thus it "must" be CGI special effects trickery? ... That is what most will say who are skeptical and I totally dig that ... but what if it is not? ... How can we be so sure it "must" be CGI? Tell me?

What kind of discernment-skills is needed to value both videos (and there are 100s if not 1000s of them worldwide!)

cheers,
John Kuhles aka 'ExomatrixTV'
January 29th, 2022

[ExomatrixTV]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=t79qorsF9GU

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jMKz33PYZGw

Source - "BRASIL URGENTE" Location- Brazil Date- February 16th 2021

So how would you asses this case? ... if it is 100% true it was broadcasted live on Brazilian Mainstream TV? ... or has anyone seen the same video without the alleged UFO and some one edited the UFO later on to make it look like it was "legit" ... Am almost certain most skeptics love to assume the latter ... correct? ... But to assume the latter you have to show evidence for this "debunking" claim! ... And it is totally possible but if no one shows me the evidence of it being a "hoax" my stance is to stay neutral before jumping to any conclusions for or against.

cheers,
John

[ExomatrixTV]

Part of how to analyze/asses alleged UFO film footage's can be seen here.

Please be aware any assessment any analyzing attempt is just an approximation not "set in stone" as it is a "dynamic work in progress" by default.

to be continued soon ...

cheers,
John

[ExomatrixTV]

• I made gallery this in 2004 (18 years ago):

And almost every UFO picture has a story to tell ... some are illustrational pictures ... some are 100% legit ... I assume most are not "officially" recognized by the majority of genuine UFO Experts.

cheers.
John

[ExomatrixTV]

• Ufo Report ‘Vindication’ For Man Who Tracked 1994 Sightings On Radar:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=QMQArS-s90I

[ExomatrixTV]

• 'Mysterious UFOs Spotted On Moon' - How Would You Asses This?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VsjUtp87gDQ

[scotslad]

cheers john, just clicked your link to get here - nice one

[ExomatrixTV]

• UFO orange Disk in Melbourne Australia▬OVNI disco naranja en Melbourne Australia Edit 28102015

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=yOU1ju1ViLo

How would you asses this video?