Index . Oddity List . Official Story . Summary
UWO Unidentified White Orb
SOURCE VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDceU9x58vc
Images below slightly brightened for visibility. Conversion rate 5 images per second. First image below (01:25:40 EDT timecode) is image #644 in sequence.
UWOs Also Seen in Other Footage of Suspected DEW Attacks
See UWO at 1:37:21 into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsAJFmc90O8
Evidence of CGI?
“Independent” footage of 911 event, mostly provided by persons linked to massmedia as “producers” (as revealed by SEPTEMBER CLUES documentary) has always carried an indellible stigma of uncertainty regarding the “planes”, owing particularly to the extreme if not total (in the patently absurd case of Flight 93) lack of residual evidence. The “no-planes” theory rightly persists.
Included in that no-planes is the hypothesis of video fakery / CGI manipulation. In fact, some official footage shows what appears to be a black “orb” apparently tracking what, in other footage, appears to be a plane — “apparently” because there is no known one-to-one spatial correlation of the footage (because the camera views were uncontrolled); for example, the ‘black orb’ footage shows the orb seemingly drooping whilst in other footage the corresponding ‘black plane’ maintains a perfectly horizontal course. The lack of other flying objects in the footage allows correlation by time and nearness but not verifiably exactly identical positioning/tracking: The orb and the plane appear at roughly the same location and at exactly the same time in the footage. RICHARD D HALL’s valuable research into the event includes a 3D model and mathematical analyses of video angles, etc.
The white orb UWO (“Unknown White Orb”) is not seen again in the main Zapruder 2.0 A-roll footage (it does not appear in the Zap 2.0 B-roll view), and its horizontal “sweep” travelsal happens in-between the two “blackouts” of the DALI, meaning its traversal logically seems to preclude it being involved directly as a beam weapon source. Is it a means of monitoring / observation? Is it providing some technical component of holography? Does it feed final attack coordinates to the beam weaponry machinery?
2 disappearing birds — more evidence of CGI?
Evidence of CGI — 2 disappearing birds (from Part #2). This does not appear to be a typical artifact of video compression; however, it is worth noting that the 2 birds are the fastest moving objects in the footage.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/TEQJwDaL553I
STRAWMAN (logical fallacy) Comment: “WHAT IS THE POINT HERE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THIS BRIDGE HAS NOT COLLAPSED AND IS STILL STANDING?”
RESPONSE: “The media is playing people again. Just like the planes on 9/11. LOL”
https://www.bitchute.com/video/TEQJwDaL553I/
The Theory of Unidentified White Orbs (UWOs) and Video Fakery at Suspected DEW Attack Sites
Introduction
Unidentified white orbs (UWOs) have been reported in various videos of suspected directed energy weapon (DEW) attack sites, such as the 9/11 World Trade Center (WTC) and the Baltimore Key Bridge. These orbs have generated considerable debate and speculation within the communities analyzing these events. One prevalent theory is that these UWOs are not physical entities but rather products of CGI or video fakery. This blog post will delve into this theory, examining the evidence and arguments from both proponents and skeptics.
Background: Sightings of UWOs
Reports of UWOs in videos of DEW attack sites have surfaced over the years, with the following notable incidents:
- 9/11 World Trade Center (WTC)
- Multiple videos purportedly show small, white, spherical objects near the towers just before and during the collapse. These orbs are often cited by conspiracy theorists as evidence of advanced technology or extraterrestrial involvement.
- Baltimore Key Bridge
- Videos from an alleged DEW attack on the Baltimore Key Bridge show similar orbs hovering or moving rapidly around the site, raising questions about their origin and purpose.
- Other Sites
- Other videos from suspected DEW attack locations have also documented the presence of these mysterious orbs, further fueling the debate.
Arguments for CGI and Video Fakery
Technological Capabilities
Proponents of the CGI and video fakery theory argue that modern video editing software can easily create realistic-looking orbs. Programs such as Adobe After Effects or Autodesk Maya enable users to superimpose and animate objects within video footage seamlessly.
- Digital Artifacts
- Analysis of some UWO videos reveals anomalies such as inconsistent lighting and shadows, suggesting digital manipulation. These artifacts are often pointed out as signs of CGI.
- Historical Precedents
- Instances of known video hoaxes and fake UFO footage demonstrate that creating believable CGI effects is within reach of skilled editors. The existence of such hoaxes makes the argument for CGI manipulation in UWO videos plausible.
Motivations for Fakery
Several motivations might drive individuals or groups to create fake videos of UWOs:
- Disinformation
- Deliberate creation of fake UWO videos could be part of a disinformation campaign to confuse or mislead the public about the true nature of DEW attacks.
- Sensationalism and Profit
- The allure of sensational stories can lead to the creation of fake videos to gain views, followers, and financial profit from ad revenue or direct contributions.
- Psychological Operations (PsyOps)
- Governments or other entities might use fake videos as part of psychological operations to shape public perception and control narratives around significant events.
Arguments Against CGI and Video Fakery
Lack of Conclusive Evidence
Critics of the CGI and video fakery theory argue that there is no conclusive evidence to prove that all UWO sightings are fake. They point out that:
- Natural Phenomena
- Some UWOs could be explained by natural phenomena such as reflections, lens flares, or other optical effects that can appear orb-like in videos.
- Witness Testimonies
- Eyewitness accounts sometimes corroborate video evidence of UWOs, suggesting they might not be digital fabrications.
Advanced Technologies
Another argument against the fakery theory is the possibility that UWOs represent advanced technologies, either human-made or extraterrestrial. This perspective is often supported by:
- Historical Context
- Advanced surveillance and reconnaissance technologies have been in development for decades, and it is conceivable that UWOs are manifestations of such technologies.
- Military Applications
- Some researchers suggest that UWOs could be related to covert military operations, potentially involving drones or other high-tech equipment.
Conclusion
The theory that UWOs seen in videos of suspected DEW attack sites are products of CGI or video fakery is compelling but remains controversial. While technological capabilities and motivations for fakery provide a strong basis for this theory, the lack of conclusive evidence and the potential for natural or advanced technological explanations leave room for doubt. Continued scrutiny and open-minded investigation are essential to unraveling the true nature of these mysterious orbs.