[emily]

so, we know that this video displays unmistakable signs of digital fakery. it seems to me that it is intended to be obvious to anyone who examines it carefully; if it were a total fake, the artistry of the forger precludes such a glaring 'rookie error' of duplicate trees.

if something like this was actually filmed by an unsuspecting tourist, and then handed over to an accredited 'ufo reporting station', might it not wind up in the hands of some black ops agency and re-released onto youtube, invoking the concept of plausible deniability through the crude introduction of such an obvious digital manipulation?

in having studied the ufo question for years, it seems to me that this film clip issue fits hand in glove with the multi-layered mystery and disinformation tactics of the powers that be, with regards to the whole ufo phenomena.

we must also consider the law of free will in all of this, as plausible deniability can be looked at as a built in safety feature in aid of those whose free will would be violated if they were exposed to phenomena they were not ready to accept.

so, it seems as though someone has gone to an awful lot of trouble to make this look like a hoax, perhaps in line with 'national security' protocols. perhaps we should examine other or future such spectacular videos for such signature glaring digital errors!

i wonder if there are any documented cases of anyone claiming that their videos posted to youtube have been altered mysteriously. is it possible for a super-hacker to alter youtube content? or can we rest assured that such a grassroots public domain forum such as this is inviolable by the illuminasties?

maybe...strange days, indeed.