Chris Ramsay dissects the "Skinny Bob" videos uploaded by Ivan0135 in April 2011, examining claims of 1965 Holloman Air Force Base meetings and a revised Griotta Treaty. While metadata suggests seven tapes totaling 180 minutes, analysis reveals post-production tampering like ghosting and artificial shake, contrasting with Error Level Analysis showing no clear CGI. Comparisons to Type Two EBEs in Majestic 12 manuals persist despite theories of incompetence or blackmail, leaving the footage's origin unresolved between government leaks and complex hoaxes. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, Qwen/Qwen3-ForcedAligner-0.6B, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Unusual 2011 UFO Footage00:04:23
Freeze this frame and watch the eyelids.
That shouldn't be easy to fake in 2011.
14 years later, there's still no set photo, no maker, and no clean original tapes.
This is one of the most unusual videos I've ever seen.
And today, we're going to separate the footage from the packaging and let the details speak for themselves.
Quick rewind to 2011.
The UK drops 35 Ministry of Defense UFO files.
8,500 pages were set out to the public, including Pages from pilots, people who claim they've been abducted, mass sightings.
Then the FBI launches the vaults and the 1950 Hoddle memo gets released, sparking an insane amount of interest among UFO researchers.
And in March of 2011, the Pentagon admitted to having 24,000 highly classified and sensitive files stolen from them.
And in the middle of this crazy storm, a new channel emerges on YouTube and uploads four of the most mysterious.
Eerie and jaw dropping videos of what seems to be real aliens and real UFOs.
So today, I break down all the clips.
The close up with the stadiometer where they measure out this being, the color walk with human escorts, the crash site, the autopsy, the flying saucers just hovering in the sky.
If this was a hoax, it was at the highest level.
And if this is real, it was definitely.
Curated.
Either way, it is the most convincing alien footage on YouTube and it has yet to be fully debunked.
Like this video, subscribe, hit the notification bell, and I'll see you guys in the bunker.
In about 2002, when my daughter was around 10 years old, we were driving north on 80 towards Travis Air Force Base and we noticed three big rigs driving in the slow lane that were oversized, silver, very, very clean looking.
And didn't have license plates.
So we were very curious about this.
So we drove closer and pulled up alongside of them.
And my daughter, being the brave little girl that she was, stared at them pretty hard, and I would glance over as well.
And all three drivers looked alike.
They all had very white, pale skin, slicked back black hair, wore dark sunglasses, and white button up shirts with a black tie.
And no matter how much my daughter gawked at them, they wouldn't move, they wouldn't acknowledge her.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the bunker.
This video is going to be a little different this week, and I'm going to try and spice things up just to, you know, shuffle it up a bit, keep you guessing.
Normally, we look through these Freedom of Information Act documents or chapters from old books that I've had, or old cases, in fact, or even transcripts from videos.
But today, we're going to be looking at a video, well, multiple videos, featuring the most famous alien on the internet, according to me.
This unresolved case has been haunting me and plaguing me for years.
There's a massive debate online.
Some people think it's clearly fake due to some of the things that they've added in posts.
And some people, especially the people that have looked further into this, have said, well, let's not jump the gun.
So originally, these videos were posted by a user to YouTube by the name of Ivan0135.
He's only posted four videos, those are the only videos that live on the channel.
He's added descriptions to some of these videos, and he's even responded to an email, allegedly, which we'll get into a little bit later, that sheds a little bit more light and adds context to some of these postings.
This was posted in April, I think April 13th, the first one in 2011.
2011 was a bit of a remarkable year for UFOs in general.
You see, the Ministry of Defense in the UK released 35 files on UFO encounters.
Disturbing Leaked Air Force Video00:05:46
Over 24,000 secret files, top secret files from the Pentagon were stolen.
Makes you wonder was Skinny Bob a part of that leak?
The FBI launches the Vault Archives, where you can go and through the Freedom of Information Act and through all the other released files, you can go search some declassified stuff on the FBI's website and just check out their archive.
The most famous and the most clicked on Piece of document on the entire website surfaced, which was the Hoddle memo, which is this here.
And the Hoddle memo is basically about a guy, Guy Hoddle, that wrote to the director of the FBI saying that an investigator for the Air Force stated that three so called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico.
They were described as being circular in shape with raised centers, approximately 50 feet in diameter.
Each one was occupied by three bodies.
First of all, 50 feet in diameter.
Three bodies.
Who does that sound like?
This sounds like the sports model.
Each one was occupied by three bodies of human shape, but only three feet tall, dressed in metallic cloth of a very fine texture.
Each body was bandaged in a manner similar to the blackout suits used by speed flyers and test pilots.
They also said that the saucers that were found in New Mexico were dropped due to very high powered radar setup in that area.
And it's believed the radar interferes with the controlling mechanism of the saucer.
So that went absolutely haywire when that came out.
That was.
April 2011, quite timely, quite timely indeed.
So, either Ivan had this video in his back pocket and was like, This is a perfect time to release, you know, the craziest alien video ever, or this was from March of the same year, and he doctored the video a little bit to mask it using the audio or the scratch marks or the fake KGB symbol.
Maybe that's what happened.
And why would he do that?
Well, we'll get into that a little bit later.
There's several reasons why you might want to do that, including 2011 was a different time period.
It isn't like today.
If you wanted clicks online or you wanted people to see your videos, you know, we're talking about the alien autopsy video.
The famous one, the graphic one, which again, still debated is it real?
Is it not?
I'm leaning towards not, but the virality of that video is similar to this.
So maybe he wanted to emulate that video a little bit more to give it a little bit more legs.
Well, that isn't it for 2011 because April 2011, in the exact same month, the Russian teenagers confessed to the Alien in the Snow video, this one here.
Being a hoax, they said it was made of chicken skin and bread, which I still don't see.
I mean, you get an A in your home ec class if you're making chicken skin bread aliens look this good.
And not to mention in pop culture, we had alien themed movies.
We had Battle of Los Angeles in March, Paul in March, Super Eight in June, and The Darkest Hour in December.
So, quite an eventful year 2011 was for the UFO community.
I mean, it sounds like the heyday.
It sounds like, you know, the golden age.
Okay, so we're going to break down the videos one at a time in order.
I will let you watch the entirety of the video, after which, we'll go through a little bit of a breakdown consulting skinnybob.info, as that's probably the best place to get all the information out of it.
The first video here was released in April, and it shows footage of a saucer shaped UFO hovering above a building.
It looks to be shot from the perspective of a moving car.
Then the footage transitions to a closer look at the craft as seen in the air from maybe a plane or a helicopter.
And before depicting the scene of what appears to be a non fatal UFO crash, with the UFO in the background, smoke billowing from the UFO.
And then one being is seen standing in the footage before the camera pans to the downed craft and another being laying on the floor.
let's have a look at this video.
Incredibly disturbing.
I don't know.
Maybe just me.
It looks disturbing to me.
I see something like that, and there's just part of me that's like creeped out thinking this might be real.
But before we get into the analysis of the videos, let's analyze something in sort of the metadata of the video.
There is the description of the video that we're going to take a look at.
So the description here is really interesting.
It says leaked Air Force UFO footage.
Project Blue Book Anachronism00:02:33
Okay.
First of all, so Air Force, we're talking Project Blue Book back then.
Not 1942.
I believe it was 1952, but the range works out as it says classified document 1942 to 1969.
Relevant information the video contains a sample edited fragments of tapes 01, 03, and 04.
Tape duration is 180 minutes.
Three hours, folks, and we're getting 1.26 minutes.
Okay, so these are fragments apparently from different tapes.
Tape one has a title Tinbird.
Tape three, flying twin.
Tape four has blue boys and blue boys meeting.
Now, what do they mean by blue boys?
Obviously, flying twin, assume this is some type of code language for the craft.
Same with tin bird.
But blue boys, I mean, that's interesting.
Blue boys, according to a lot of research, can mean one of two things.
One, assuming a German origin, it could be translated to blaue Jungs.
Which literally translates to blue boys in German, but that was the name or the term they used for the Marines that were in the German Navy during World War II.
Blaue Jungs, blue boys.
And the other more probable explanation would be this.
So it might actually be a moniker that's referring to Project Blue Book staff.
So a report by Lauren E. Gross from 1971 cites a NICAP publication on page five containing the following paragraph.
I duly noted the myriad explanations given out by the Blue Book staff, widely referred to as the Little Blue Boy Blues or the Little Blue Boys, of sightings which they evaluated as mistakenly identified stars, planets, meteors, etc.
So Project Blue Book was created in 1952, but the material in Ivan's possession was allegedly covering a span from 1942 to 1969.
Now, Blue Book, again, had only been created in 1952.
So what are we talking about here?
When's this footage from?
Now, Assuming they used the words blue boys in the context of Project Blue Book, you know, that would put this somewhere after 1952, unless Ivan just randomly put that in there, not realizing the slight anachronism.
Stock Audio and CGI Damage00:11:40
So here is a website, skinnybob.info, and it says a forensic analysis.
Let's read the foreword here, real quick.
We present a detailed analysis of allegedly leaked UFO and alien footage.
This time it's not about lights in the sky or anecdotal reports, but ambiguous imagery.
Authentic evidence of extraterrestrial visitation would be among the most sensitive and closely guarded secrets kept by intelligence agencies around the world.
Without an official disclosure process, the only way for the general public to tap into such knowledge is through whistleblowers and occasional leaks.
We might be dealing with such a leak here.
If your initial reaction is dominated by disbelief and ridicule, your brain is wired properly to live a healthy life in a complex world, but perhaps not to unveil something truly exceptional far out in the fringe.
In hope, And in the prospect of doing so, we dare to peek into this rabbit hole with an open mind, an expectation to witness initial absurdity becoming harsh reality.
Be careful with quick and overly confident assessments based on cursory inspection of the material and preconceived notions about the topic.
Both credulity and premature rejection could be misleading.
Promoting the possibility of skinny bob being authentic is a bet against all odds and bears the danger of getting carried away by a fantasy.
But since unlikely things happen every once in a while, what if the truth is actually right in front of you?
Now, let's talk about Ivan for a second.
The videos were uploaded to a YouTube channel named Ivan0135 in 2011.
The channel was created the same day the first video was uploaded on April 13th.
According to the channel description, the creator is from Russia and was born in 1969.
We can't verify the channel creator or uploader is in fact a single individual and really named Ivan.
For the sake of simplicity, however, we continue to refer to the uploader as Ivan and address him as a single individual throughout this website.
According to the information provided, the uploaded clips are small samples selectively taken from a larger collection of video material.
The original footage is apparently spread across several physical tapes.
Ivan provides detailed lists of tape numbers and timestamps for all the clips presented, even embeds an animated timestamp in the first two videos to indicate where the original footage, the sequence, was taken from.
So Ivan put a bunch of keywords as well for the SEO, the search engine optimization, the keywords.
Are, you know, UFO, crash, accident, alien, department, leak, abduction, New Mexico, yada, It does say, however, note the misspelling of Roswell and sloppiness with spaces, causing, for example, top and secret to become separate tags.
That misspelling of declassified as dis declassified could be due to the Spanish slash Portuguese equivalent of desclassificado.
This could Hint to Ivan's native language.
Very interesting stuff indeed.
Or a purpose, you know, a purposeful red herring, who knows.
So these are all the original videos.
We've just checked one out.
Now we're going to be talking about that first one.
So the very first video Ivan uploaded starts with an image showing the insignia of the KGB, the main security agency of the Soviet Union.
Above and below are black bars seemingly censoring something.
Okay.
It's so cool to know that there's like internet detectives out there.
It's such an awesome thing because it turns out that the still image was actually taken from a documentary, The Secret KGB UFO Files, released in 1998.
It featured a crashed UFO and an autopsy of an alien body.
So the Secret KGB UFO Files video released in 1998 was successfully and sufficiently debunked, making it a commercial hoax.
So Ivan used something that was on a hoaxed video.
And overlaid it on this.
How strange.
Just a quick reminder, guys don't forget to check out our brand new Area 52 tees.
These classic tees feature the Area 52 logo embroidered on the front and printed on the back.
They're super comfy.
Check them out.
Area52.shop.
The dirt overlay.
Okay, this part is really important for skeptics and believers alike.
Ivan tampered with the original footage by applying.
Various effects such as damaged film overlay, like this.
So, Brooklyn Robot on Reddit managed to track down the exact film damage overlay Ivan used the Shutterstock and the Pond 5.
And now you look at it, it's exactly, exactly the same.
You know, here are all the layers.
This is so good.
I mean, such a great deep dive here.
Possibly another film editor, but so many layers were applied.
And here's the order.
Oh my God.
So the upload date of the oldest stock with artifacts boom, you know, the KGB and then multiple ghosting, image ghosting, the black redaction shapes, the horizontal banding lines, and the slight rolling warp.
The diagonal rainbow moire, and then the MPEG artifacts.
That is so cool that they went and did this.
I love the internet for that.
So, again, we look at the timestamps here, those were put in post.
So, now we got to look at motivations.
What would compel someone to do this?
Number one, spicing up bland footage.
Imagine getting a hold of highly sensitive leaked UFO and alien footage from the 1940s, and it does not even remotely look like you or the general public expect it to look like.
Meticulously assembled clips of clean recordings for scientific documentation and archival purposes.
Ivan might have thought that at least for the initial release, it has to conform to certain visual expectations to gain traction.
That's a really interesting thought, and I don't rule that thought out at all.
You know, if you put out something that's too clean, people might assume that it's CGI.
Now, obviously, all of us watching this video disagree.
We're like, no.
Because then you can prove it's fake.
That's terrible.
It's a terrible idea.
But at the time, this is 2011.
This is prior to really having so many people on the internet understanding what raw footage looks like.
It's a different time.
So we do have to acknowledge that.
And again, coming from the past autopsy video, which featured similar grain, he might have thought, Maybe I have to spice it up for people to actually watch it.
Number two is incompetence and Naivety.
Never underestimate human decision making and the possibility of bizarre reasoning like, I thought it looks cooler that way.
And that, you know, you can't rule that out also.
Three, planned degradation.
The effects could have been an integral part of a hoaxing project to hide imperfections to limit production costs.
Now, this is highly likely, in my opinion, if you are going to hoax something.
Like, for instance, today, this is really interesting because now that we have AI video.
If I want to mask something to make sure that you don't think it's AI, I might do so by adding in film, you know, blurs and scratches and moire and all of these different tactics, maybe a shaky camera, so that you can't pinpoint whether or not I have six fingers on my hand.
Number four is blackmail.
The leaker might have wanted to show just enough to make the original owner aware of the extent of the leak with the implicit threat of an uncontrolled release.
Number five, responsibility.
Ivan, Ivan might have tampered with the footage to initially keep it in a gray zone and gauge the reaction of the general public to determine how to move forward.
Six, damage control.
If the material was stolen from the Pentagon, as we mentioned before, or defense contractors, they might have decided to release heavily edited parts to jeopardize claims of authenticity in anticipation for the full material to surface at some point.
This to me seems like it might be the most probable reason, meaning that the Defense Department.
Knowing full well that this stuff was out there, wanted to nip it in the butt.
So, created some type of like hoax like footage, put it out there in case somebody backed this up somewhere and was going to release it.
That I don't know, but it does seem like that's something they would attempt.
The problem there is that if I was holding on to that footage and I saw some fake skinny Bob footage out there, I'd be like, you got it all wrong.
I've got the real footage.
Check this out.
So, you know, maybe.
Number seven, ego.
Ivan might have received a portion of the original footage with the condition to publish it only in an edited form so that releasing the full material remains a privilege of the actual source.
And eight, power.
Ivan might enjoy the feeling of being in possession of material other people would die for to get a hold of and create a teaser to feast on the begging for more content.
Number nine, ambiguous provenance.
Intentional obfuscation as a layer of abstraction and de watermarking a Attempt in case of multiple distinct copies circulating among those in the know.
I think that's also possible.
If you look at whistleblowers today, whistleblowers in giant quotation marks, but if you look at people today going through the DOPS or sort of approved path to disclosure, they're often redacting a lot of what they put in books or what they say or what they put in writing or what they show.
Even, you know, you look at FLIR footage, you look at photos that the Pentagon's released through Arrow.
And they're all sort of redacted.
It's all like small little chunks of something blurry.
It would seem like you don't want to release any national security threatening evidence or just information.
So you might blur, cut, and shape things so that it doesn't actually harm national security.
That's a possibility.
And finally, the audio effects.
Okay.
So Ivan's videos are either on mute or emulate the sound of an old film projector to create the illusion that what is shown has been captured.
From a screening of old film reels.
We're pretty sure this was not the case.
As shown in the previous section, the audio might just be another stock effect.
Red Dwarf B discussed it rudimentary but without a conclusion.
The problem in its simplicity and low information density with arbitrary tampering potential.
It could come from anywhere, and it's easy to drag and drop an audio track as the other effects.
If the stock film damage was not discovered, tracking down matching stock projector noises would be interesting.
But now that we already know the stock effects were used, it's Probably of no additional value.
And I agree there.
Stabilized Image Analysis00:15:13
Whether he's filming it from a screen, like if somebody's actually projecting it, or if he added those sounds in post, is completely irrelevant at this point now that we know that the visual effects have been added in post production.
Now, let's get all this straight.
All the layers that are on the original footage we can assume to be complete garbage, fake nonsense.
I'm with you there.
But what about the core?
What about the video itself?
What about the contents of the video?
Are those fake?
Well, this is where things get a little more interesting and, pardon the pun, becomes a bit of a gray area.
So let's start with video one.
Video one features the Tin Bird, it's a poetic description of the classical UFO looking like a metallic saucer we see in this very first clip.
Contrary to what people think when watching the shaky video for the first time, the UFO is not flying along a trajectory but actually.
Hovering statically in the sky.
We've got this, what looks to be reflective surface metallic football shaped object.
And I won't say disc because it does not look like a disc.
It does from this angle, however, it might be a disc, but it looks like a football.
And it's just kind of chilling there.
It says, without context, the hovering object could be an oval tethered balloon.
At first glance, it could also be mistaken for a blimp at a distance.
So if you look at the blimp here, the image of the blimp, it does look like it could be that, but blimps usually do have fins and various protrusions.
And so you would expect to at least partially see some of that.
And it says here furthermore, blimps are typically huge, and the object we see is not much wider than one of the trees it's hovering above.
Given the context, the object is an alien spacecraft.
If Ivan presented the videos in chronological order, we hypothesize that the UFOs we see in the clips are actually identical.
So, first, it's in the air as shown in Tin Bird and Flying Twin.
And later crashed on the ground in Blue Boys.
The topology of the hull can be seen accurately in Blue Boys and allows for a comparison with a few good zoomed in frames of the flying twin, revealing obvious similarities and thus supporting this hypothesis.
Besides the UFO, the house is also interesting to analyze and could help narrowing down the geographical location the encounter took place in.
So I will say, from my own eyeball, I find it interesting that.
Although this stabilized image, you know, it does feel like we are looking at the UFO, the UFO, the camera's actually looking at the house.
And if you had a UFO out there, unless the camera's clearly moving with the house, you see it in the frame following the house.
Which, if the UFO was actually there, that's not what you'd be filming.
Maybe it was a focus issue.
I don't know.
Here's the website says it needs your help.
It says if you recognize this house and, hey, we have the whole internet here.
It says, please contact them.
So, reach out to myself or reach out to skinnybob.info.
And here's a 3D reconstruction.
Man, so proud of the internet with this stuff.
So, this is it here a 3D construction of the house.
Pretty remarkable, actually, that they were able to reconstruct that.
And now they're saying because of the construction of the house and the trees and everything else, it seems like this might be like an Acadian or Cajun style house, or a plantation mansion, or a southern mansion.
So, like somewhere in New Orleans, or that type of deal.
You can see here as well the chimneys and then the protrusions in the house.
Also, they said when analyzing the house in the video, care must be taken to not mistake artifacts from post processing effects as actual features of the house.
So, as you can see here, it looks a lot longer than it is fine.
The vegetation as well.
And look at this.
They've even gone so far.
To recreate the trajectory of where the camera is pointing.
So they get an estimation of the path the camera traveled and thus a rough shape of the street or railroad track near the house.
All of this, by the way, will just help you pinpoint exactly where this is, which to my knowledge hasn't been discovered yet.
And I assume with people like Rainbolt or, you know, ChatGPT, we might be able to find this one day.
Now, the flying twin.
This time, the UFO is not filmed from the ground as the tin bird, but from the sky and presumably.
From an airplane or early helicopter.
So the name Flying Twin is a bit mysterious.
It might refer to the situation in the sky where the aircraft is being accompanied by the UFO in close proximity.
When pilots report UFO encounters, they often claim the UFO was mirroring their movements while maintaining a constant distance.
Such maneuvering might have led to that title Flying Twin.
Also, the Germans developed an airplane apparently called Zwilling, which means twin.
Is that the plane they're using?
The United States Air Force Beechcraft Model 18 was also nicknamed Twin Beach.
Specifically, the F 2 model was used for photographic reconnaissance.
That seems a lot more likely.
But also, 1942 was the first long distance flight of a Sikorsky XR 4 helicopter, which took place in the United States.
What if this historic flight attracted someone or something?
If Flying Twin was actually filmed from a helicopter, it was not necessarily during this particular historic flight.
For location finding purposes, however, it might be interesting to follow the route described in the recollection of the pilot.
So here you see basically a shaky camera operator filming this plane and sort of what to expect, which kind of, you know, matches what we're seeing here.
Look at this, man.
Just look at that.
Isn't that wild?
Unbelievable.
So, the following image is a stitched panorama of the better flying twin frames showing the area we hope to eventually track down.
So, this is so cool.
They've stitched together the frames.
Look at this.
Look at this.
How incredible is this?
They've mapped out the area using like computer graphics and using what little information they had.
And so, with that, they were able to determine that these are probably.
You know, either greenhouses or places for agricultural purposes, maybe places to, you know, house a bunch of cows.
It's also talking about the automobiles and the train wagons that go by.
I mean, really, really interesting stuff.
But now we have the first impression of an alien being.
This one is a little hard to identify, as you can see, because of the low lighting, but there are several interesting movements and what appears to be.
Uniform as well in this video.
Looks like it's wearing like a turtleneck, but not quite, like almost like a spacesuit.
And it does look silvery and shiny, which is also, you know, coincidentally or not coincidentally, what Guy Hoddle talked about in that memo.
And so many others, by the way.
So, right here, it's saying that there might be some stuff in the background.
And if you take a look at C and D here, it almost looks like it could be the craft in the background.
But then it also might be a person, and a person might be more likely.
And then that person might be holding a gun or antenna from a military backpack radio, both of which are a little hard to determine, I'll be frank.
But the alien is interesting.
So the next scene shows what could be the UFO seen in the flying twin and possibly the tin bird, but at this time as burning wreckage on the ground, as if it wasn't enough.
There's also an alien body lying nearby, all right, for dramatic effect.
So we have smoke obviously billowing from this craft.
And then it pans to this alien just lying down.
And this is probably one of the coolest things that they've done, in my opinion.
An alternative video stabilization shows how the camera is rotating and captures the crash scene moving towards and orbiting around the body.
So, if you see here, it shows the entire scene.
And if you stitch all that together, it kind of gives you this image here.
So, we see here we have, you know, some brush, we have the craft, and we have the body all in one particular scene.
Very interesting.
You can also see the smoke section here.
And, oh, this is cool a faint lens flare.
Might seem like nothing, but a lens flare proves that.
Whatever's happening is happening in camera and is not done in post.
Obviously, it could be done in post, but I mean, I don't think, given everything else, that that would make sense.
But maybe, who knows?
But it makes sense with the movement.
It says here note that such flares are generated inside the camera housing and depend on the angle a bright light source, such as the sun, is hitting the lens system.
The clip above has been motion stabilized, resulting in the flares moving pretty much linearly.
Ooh.
So, although it's shaky, The flare is moving linearly.
That's interesting.
So it turns out that this seemingly minor and overlooked effect is proof for an artificially induced camera shake.
As a post processing effect, the original footage should display a much more reasonable and calm camera handling.
That's crazy.
He added the camera shake effect in there.
And you can tell because of the lens flare.
That's so cool.
So, here, when stabilizing the whole scene, certain dark smudges turn out to be additional smoke and shadows casted by the plumes.
So, the smoke that's coming out here that we're seeing is actually casting shadows here.
That is, I mean, beyond technical if you were to hoax this using CGI.
Also, around the aliens seem to be footprints coming from the direction of.
Of the UFO behind, telling the story that the alien climbed out of the wreckage, managed to walk away, but eventually collapsed.
I feel sad for this little being.
Just wanted to say that.
So, the alien lying there might not be dead.
A closer look reveals that it's still moving.
Look at the hand, folks.
And this hand, too.
And the head.
Oh my God.
The finger of the right hand is likely contracting in A.
The head appears to be rolling slightly in B.
And the left hand appears to be twisting and see.
Oh my God.
That's crazy.
Now, only in Blue Boys do we see the whole body in its entirety, including the feet and legs and head, which is extremely helpful in roughly estimating the height of Skinny Bob.
And this is how it's done they create a coarse digital model of the alien based on proportions.
We have Skinny Bob standing under a statometer.
Which is like this measuring device that they had back in the 40s and 50s.
And then they estimate the camera and the sun position to align with the torso and feet in the 2D image.
And that's the result.
So the result is this.
Have a look at this, folks.
Check this out here.
We got the body.
This is later in the footage when we look at the family vacation.
The footage earlier in this video and then the later Skinny Bob footage, they all match up.
And they do that by looking at the thickness of the arms and the legs and comparing them.
And that's how they sort of size them up, which is really smart.
Here is the Blue Boys meeting.
So we're seeing an autopsy performed on an alien body.
Assuming the original tape is longer than a few seconds, Ivan provided, there might be more going on that causes the title Blue Boys meeting to make sense.
Okay.
And here is the stitched together panorama.
Reveals the corpse as a whole.
Here you go.
The long arms.
Look how long those arms are.
And the face here.
Tiny mouth, tiny nose, eyes that wrap around the side of the head.
Exactly.
Like what so many people describe.
Also, it says that just like small details like the tablecloths back there is something that they had in the 40s.
There's a dark spot on the glove the physician is wearing in his left hand.
One single frame is focused just right to reveal more details.
So, random stains.
Perhaps two digit resembling the number 98, maybe that's a bit of a stretch.
So, anyways, this is just more corroborating evidence of you know this stuff.
This next video, well, have a look and we'll discuss it after.
Eerie Handprint Details00:14:42
Now that's gotta be, that's gotta be the eeriest little video ever.
I remember when I first saw this video, I thought to myself, like that initial feeling was like, holy crap, I think this is real.
And that feeling never really left me.
Every time I see it, there's something in my gut that tells me it's real.
Let me know in the comments if you feel that too, intuitively speaking, not from evidence, just intuitively.
You look at it and you're like, something about this creature, this being, Seems like it's real.
If a hoax, I mean, well done.
Incredibly well done.
Well, let's head to skinnybob.info to see if this is a hoax.
So, here, this is a more detailed clip of Skinny Bob featuring his entire body, featuring his, you know, blinking, his hands twitching.
Very, very, very strange.
It says Ivan might have reversed the playback direction for dramatic effect so that the head appears last.
One clue is the shaking of the camera, which could have been caused by the operator.
Touching and preparing the camera on a tripod for pivoting.
We take the liberty of showing the clip in reverse here despite having no conclusive evidence.
So that's a good guess.
Close up inspection of the blinking could further support or refute our suspicion of reverse playback.
Okay.
Regardless if it's reversed, I don't think it matters.
But yes, on A, it does seem to be reversed, and on B, it does.
Okay.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
Now, Skinny Bob's wearing a tight fit jumpsuit.
Looking good, Bob.
Looking good, little Robert.
He has some kind of crease on his chest.
For more convenient analysis, we stitched the video together with frames.
This is him in his entirety.
Look at that.
He does have some type of stitching going here.
Look at those long fingers, man.
Massive head.
And somebody commented that this particular posture is called contrapposto.
All right.
Not a valuable addition to the investigation, but a welcome one nonetheless.
But that guy's like contraposto, which means he's basically leaning on one leg.
This is a detail here that is really interesting.
So, comparing the outfit from the one in the Blue Boys video, the previous one, the collar style is notably different.
But another little detail there appears to be three dots on the alien's right shoulder, almost like a logo.
So, according to the mysterious email correspondence, which we'll get into a little bit later.
From Will, human clothes were provided.
And Skinny Bob does not wear the original outfit here.
Maybe it was him in Blue Boys, where he still wore the original outfit with a wider collar.
Directly above the alien's head is a wedge shaped object.
It appears to be a so called stadiometer, commonly found in doctor's practice.
So the second scene here shows Skinny Bob from the side as it moves and apparently interacts with something.
So he's, you can see him here, kind of like reaching out.
Right there, like reaching out for something.
His shoulder moves here and he blinks, like, man.
I don't know about you, man, but this looks real to me.
This looks like a chair back here.
So he's probably sitting and he doesn't seem to be alone in the room.
So here, at one point, you see just a little bit right there somebody maybe leaning in or somebody's arm or something.
And then he's given something, I guess.
And now they're trying to match whether that's like somebody's coat or whatnot.
And they also said, according to the correspondence, this particular scene has been cropped, meaning it's been cut, maybe to obscure or to, you know, cut out the person talking to Bob there.
Some people say that the posture with the hands and the shirt and the curvature due to the fabric tension.
And I don't know how they're getting all this from one simple little, you know, thing, but they said it seems like exactly.
Like those sort of Eisenhower jackets, making me wonder is this Eisenhower himself?
I don't know.
I don't know if I buy that.
So the scene is cropped.
People trying to evaluate the authenticity of Skinny Bob by close inspection of his movements often claim to clearly see some bad underlying Bezier curves used from digital animation.
There are, in fact, occasions where the head moves in a jerky way.
So kind of like bobbles, you kind of see him a little bit.
But they don't think that that gives away sort of a CG origin.
Here's why the other head movements are smooth.
From all the non trivial to implemental details we see in this and other scenes, smoothing out a major head rotation curve would be the least difficult thing to do.
And Ivan's videos have frame rate issues, both repeated and dropped frames, that impair motion.
We don't know how aliens move, is the last explanation.
That's probably the best one.
And here they're looking at the brow and sort of like how his eyes are moving.
And how here, look at the shadow move.
And then it seems like he might have possible bruises or cuts on the forehead, meaning maybe this guy was the one that was laying down.
And man, they got individually shaped heads.
Like if you look at the heads here, like the cranial morphology shows like different, slightly different variants of heads.
And he appears to have black fingernails.
Bit of a gothic little Bob.
Gothic Robert over here paints his nails black for some reason.
Or they're just black, you know, originally.
But they do appear to be black.
I will give you that.
They are long and gangly.
Are there only four?
There are only four.
That's something that's come up quite a bit in abductions as well.
And black fingernails are apparently a part of obscure old UFO lore from 1995.
Let me go ask ChatGPT.
Two notable references.
One from J Rod, mid 90s, J Rod with black fingernails, a drawing in the mid 90s.
So, J Rod is a famous alien that was brought up numerous times by different people that was held at S4.
And then the other one is Skinny Bob.
So, those are the two references there.
So, not much to go on.
I wouldn't say that's too much of a big revelation there, but it is interesting.
Now, this last part of the video is maybe one of the most bizarre pieces of the puzzle yet.
It features what looks like almost like a.
Lens of glasses that has symbols or shapes on it.
It's pretty obscure and makes you wonder what it's for and why they would show to include it.
Well, let's have a look.
So, this is from the scene called How to Drive, and it shows something barely recognizable.
Given the context title and that we've seen a UFO before, this thing could be a control device for maneuvering an alien spacecraft.
A closer look suggests it being some kind of glass plate with something casting a shadow on it.
Now, that shadow to me almost looks like a person or something, but the lens itself, I mean, interesting if that is how you drive a UFO.
And you can see that the actual etchings or whatever those symbols are, are casting shadows as well.
So it's lying on a table, the camera's moving around it, and you're getting these shadows on this weird thing.
Those are pretty clear.
So, these are like the interpretations that they're giving here.
Very interesting.
So, here is a reference to the creme alphabet from Reticuli, supposedly a fictional creation by Judy Falscog, aka James Van Grunen.
But similar squiggly characters are seen on a copper plate allegedly dropped by a UFO in Edmonton, Canada in 1967.
That's interesting.
So, yeah, squiggly type writing.
This also looks like Bill Herman's writing.
Bill Herman was, you know, someone who alleged to have been taken by UFOs and aliens and abducted and also channeled them to, you know, he was like writing, you know, things that they were giving him symbols.
And then there's some embossing there.
It's just kind of, dude, the length people have gone through to, you know, kind of recreate this stuff is incredible.
So that concludes video number two of the Skinny Bob saga.
The most haunting one, perhaps, in my opinion.
You see him blinking, which is like, I don't know, there's something, something uncanny valley about him, but it's not CGI.
It's, if anything, really expensive animatronics, which, you know, begs a question.
Why?
And why only there?
Why not release something that you can make money off of if you're going to spend that much on animatronics?
All questions that we're going to get to in a second.
But first, let's have a look at this mysterious third video that doesn't feature the being at all.
It features a message and a handprint.
An ominous, bizarre message that says that you are the one who creates the misinformation.
Tom Vernon in the video trial of Skinny Bob suggests that, you know, this sounds a lot like something Richard Doty would say, you know, Richard Doty, a famous, I would say, quote unquote, whistleblower who also was known for seminating disinformation within the UFO community.
That he would also get upset when people didn't believe him when he claimed he was telling the truth and saying, you're looking in the wrong direction.
You know, this isn't misinformation type deal.
So I thought that was a good point to bring up from Tom there.
All right, here we go.
This is the handprint.
We have the edge of the paper showing signs of wear, line presumably framing the area, and perhaps markings or redactions of pieces of tape.
Okay.
The forensic analysis says the visual quality of the picture is pretty good, suggesting that it might not originate from a scanned film frame, or if it does, that the original footage of this is high quality.
It's also possible additional paperwork was attached to the films, including this photograph.
So they're saying that, you know, this might not originate from a video.
If it does, and the video is really high quality, or they might have attached that, kind of like what they do with, you know, when they brief you in police offices and stuff, or when they put you through whatever.
So they might have, because it's, you know, in a government facility, they might have just, you know, I don't know.
Maybe they had to fingerprint him because he came in drunk, crashed his saucer.
On Earth, and they were like, dude, skinny Bob, what are you doing?
And they processed him, you know, took his fingerprints, threw him in a drunk tank.
That theory has yet to be debunked, just saying.
So, the hands of skinny Bob can be seen in several clips when we try to straighten the fingers and compare it to the hand.
It looks like a good match.
Okay, so that's pretty cool that they've kind of taken his side view and measured it out.
And that's pretty much it when it comes to that video.
So, not much to go on, just kind of him being salty.
You know, the material does not belong to any film, video game, television series.
We know this.
No one who is out of this may prove to be the owner of this material.
No one who is out of this can prove he has in his possession the original material.
So he's saying that if the comments say, hey, that's my video, that's probably not true.
And then the revelation of further material will depend on the events and people, is something he says as well.
You are the ones who reject this material.
Maybe you are looking in the wrong direction.
Yeah.
Sounds like someone who's kind of upset about the response.
He's like, I gave you the holy grail and you guys are making fun of me.
Well, dude, don't edit these videos so heavily next time.
Internet's still going to say it's fake no matter what.
Final video, folks.
This is the final one and quite a happy one, I will say.
Color Clip Treaty Incident00:03:48
This is family vacation.
All right, but not your typical family vacation.
No surrey, Bob.
This is a vacation with gray aliens, possibly from Zeta Reticuli.
Have a look at this video.
The description says Family Vacation, Tape 6.
From the first contact in 1942, a series of diplomatic visits to discuss matters of mutual concern were planned.
Under the Treaty 2304, these meetings would take place in secrecy.
A limited number of special agents would escort the visitors, and they would only meet high ranking officers.
According to the document 072E, at the meeting of 1961, there was an incident involving three subjects.
Due to the violation of the agreement by the officers at the military base, when they discovered that their arrival was being filmed with a hidden device without their consent.
Under the treaty, 2304, the meetings would be confidential and filming or taking photographs would not be allowed.
After the incident, the treaty was revised.
Now, there is a famous treaty out there that we refer to as the Griotta Treaty.
There's also another meeting that happened that I think it was astronaut Gordon Cooper who talked about a meeting.
A small old saucer apparently flew overhead and put down some landing gear and landed out on the dry lake bed only about 50 yards out.
And these were old pro cameramen who were used to flying in all kinds of vehicles to take all kinds of pictures.
So they picked up their cameras and started over toward it and going to get some close-ups.
And with that, it lifted up, put the gear back in, and at a very high rate of speed disappeared.
Did you ever see the film?
I saw the negatives, yes.
And yeah, the other one was the meeting at Holloman Air Force Base in 1965, allegedly, as well, where these aliens came down and met with high ranking officials.
And apparently, they were filmed without their consent.
And the result is a few of these aliens, God, they look creepy, looking at the camera, talking to each other.
There seems to be other people walking by, and they're kind of like, you can tell they're giving you a look like, hey, Put that camera down.
Let's get into the analysis here.
Family vacation.
So, this clip being the only one in color.
Now, this is interesting that we have a color clip, meaning there's probably other color clips, meaning also it's probably taken at a later date.
This might not be our little Bob in question.
The clip being the only one in color and therefore presumably from a later production date features multiple alien beings at once.
They're walking alongside a wall and are accompanied by.
By humans.
The name family vacation could refer to the aliens in a sense that they came and visited as a group.
Another possibility is a connection to the infamous dentist visit of Dwight D. Eisenhower on his vacation in Palm Springs on February 20th, 1954, suggesting that President Eisenhower took a family vacation but was actually brought to meet these aliens at a meeting.
It's challenging to keep track of how many entities we see in total.
So it goes from two.
Three, four, yeah, maybe four.
A few frames show the floor, and one frame is focusing on the wall, revealing the surface, its surface structure.
So it's kind of looks like rough concrete.
Convenient Entity Placement00:12:17
Now, the metadata he provides associated with the video clips.
So it says here it appears to be divided into seven tapes, and those again are divided into cases.
If a tape refers to video eight or high eight or digital eight cassettes, the tape duration is 180 minutes, suggesting PAL, which is a European video standard.
They're saying here, yeah, the feedback was like some type of emotional response.
He seems to be annoyed by people speculating about the origin of the tapes.
Curiously, he was the one that put the insignia of the KGB in the front of the first clip and is now claiming that there is not any reference which may link the material to any organization that is working today in the material exposed.
So he's either contradicting himself or added working today on purpose to indicate that at least the modern KGB is not involved.
And here it says.
Don't underestimate the human factor, assuming, you know, that someone's sitting on a treasure trove and deciding to slowly release it to the public, expecting overwhelming reactions and gratitude, but receiving the opposite.
The person might now be upset and decides to cancel disclosure for the undeserving public.
That, I mean, seems like something, you know, that would happen in today's internet culture.
So now let's get to this mysterious email.
So Will from Planet Under Attack claims to have contacted Ivan or at least someone affiliated with the videos via email on June 17th, 2014.
And received a response two days later.
He says, Secondly, do you happen to know who the copyright holder is for the skinny Bob footage?
I'm also wondering who is the original leaker of the footage.
Somebody told me this footage originally came through you.
Any info would be great.
Regardless, thanks again, my friend Will.
His response, we were sent that footage to release from a source, the same source that sent us blank.
I know it's the original source because the original version is not available to anyone.
That's why you won't find it anywhere on the internet.
We released the footage using several SOC channels on YouTube and other sites.
We did it this way to make sure the info got out, even if our channel, website, etc., was terminated.
Blank granted copyright as long as we did not profit by it or release the full unedited version.
As a complete film, only short clips were released, not the full 12 minutes of the footage.
For example, oh, wait, so hold on.
So, someone affiliated with the videos responded.
Sorry about that.
For example, the clip where the alien is sitting down is cropped.
The full scene shows him sitting at the table looking through what looks like star maps.
Government officials are also seen at the opposite side of the table in clothes of the time.
The clothes it's wearing are explained at the beginning of the footage, too.
Full footage shows original clothing.
The jumper and trousers are not.
The original clothes.
Original clothes were taken for analysis.
Human clothes were provided.
Alien can be seen wearing a dull silver type ski suit with a utility belt and dull silver footwear.
I'm hoping the source will allow us to release the full unedited footage at some point, but I cannot release without permission.
In this game, mutual trust is everything.
Hope this helps and you're welcome.
Dang.
So purely anecdotal, unverifiable, they still decided to include the email.
Totally fine.
The person replying claims the original footage is 12 minutes long and a previous description told recording the duration of.
1260 minutes is mentioned, and most of the time stamps exceed 12 minutes.
That's a significant discrepancy.
Yeah, okay.
This is interesting here.
There's a documentary that recreates the meeting of aliens with humans in front of a wall at Area 51.
It's the 1970s now, so this clip is in color.
The similarity of family vacation is striking.
Huh.
This is also a totally different case that I was looking into.
This is close to here in Rivière Rouge or L'Assomption in 1992.
These creatures were just found on some type of like ski trail, like a snowmobiling trail.
There were photos.
There's a video of the photos and of some of the people there, but no one ever claimed responsibility for these.
No one came up and said those are mine.
So there's no provenance.
There's nothing to go on except for the general location of these.
But they do seem to match Skinny Bob, definitely.
So.
First, okay.
Let's talk about the arguments.
So, many claim that the material is obviously fake, but usually fail to elaborate for why exactly that is.
And others find it totally authentic and base this claim on how Bob blinks.
We approach the big question in a more rigorous way by compiling a list of pros and cons first.
So, unresolved for more than a decade.
I mean, now, you know, going on 15 years almost.
No credible claims of authorship.
So, no one's taken.
Responsibility for this.
No one has said, Hey, that was me.
Have those puppets, or that was all my work.
There is highly diverse content.
So, again, we're talking about many different types.
It's not just the one piece of footage, which in itself would be pretty compelling.
Arguably, you know, even more compelling.
I don't know.
But it's interesting that so many different varying clips of color from the sky, from a car.
Like, I mean, all these different clips.
Very interesting.
No commercial use, despite Production costs.
So, assuming that this costs a lot of money to recreate, whether it's animatronics, whether it's costumes, or whether it's CGI, did cost money.
At some point, it cost somebody a lot of time, and time is money, but no commercial use.
This was never, there were never any ads on these videos.
Unless this guy's selling like Skinny Bob dolls on Etsy, I don't know how he's making money.
The underlying footage essentially flawless.
So, the footage itself, not the edited stuff that's put over as a filter, but the stuff that the core footage is flawless.
Quality preventing consensus among experts about hoaxing techniques.
Yep.
Okay.
Hoaxer would have taken an unnecessary risk by showing a potential recognizable house and aerial view.
Why would he risk showing that?
There's a map, essentially, that he shows when he shows the aerial view or he shows the house.
He would risk being called out as a hoaxer if that footage exists out there or if that person that's living there comes out and says, No, this is my house and that was my footage.
I don't know.
Irrelevant yet costly details presented in a barely recognizable way.
Way, the table behind the operation that had a cloth on it, or the UFO and the smoke, and then the smoke billowing, casting a shadow.
You barely recognize that unless you really zoomed in and slowed it down.
So, yeah, that seems a little odd that you would go through great lengths to have these tiny little details.
Not impossible, just unlikely.
And not a single unresolved hoax contender of comparable quality.
Meaning, there has not been any other unresolved footage that meets this quality.
Think about it.
There's nothing on the internet that meets this in quality that is unresolved.
That alone should be cause for pause.
Now let's go to the cons.
Occasionally jerky movements of skinny Bob.
So, as we talked about, there's like these glitchy things, although we also said that that could be due to dropped frames and we don't know how aliens move.
Stereotypical presentation of UFO artifacts with alien symbols.
Again, That could be because that's what it is.
I mean, it seems to be that way with the Aztec crash.
It seems to be that way with many other sightings and encounters and abductions.
Extremely short and shaky clips, signs of intentional eye obfuscation, limiting hoaxing efforts.
That I will concur with.
I think that that is definitely, you know, if you were trying to obfuscate whatever someone's looking at, you would 100% make it shaky, you know, add effects over it.
But it's so wild that the effects and the shakiness seem so blatant, like blatantly overlaid, compared to the insane amount of effort that went into creating the animatronics or makeup or whatever that may be.
Convenient placement of the alien body next to the UFO, looking staged.
Skinny Bob's physique being suspiciously compatible to a human child.
I don't know if I saw a human child with that physique, I would probably dropkick them because I would be like, you're an alien in disguise.
Both plot and aesthetic similarities to a documentary aired 14 years earlier.
That's this documentary that they're showing.
Yep.
That, I mean, true.
It's saying that the plot is similar to this movie that came out 14 years prior.
It had alien symbolism, human interrogator, the strange symbols on the how to drive thing, the inspection of the alien, somebody filming like this.
Maybe the autopsy scene, and then obviously the meeting here.
Again, maybe that's based on real stuff.
The best way to cover it up is to lean into it, I think.
Then we have the potential overestimation of production costs, meaning, like, what if this person made everything using chicken skin and bread, right?
And then we're just overestimating, oh, this doesn't actually cost $100,000.
This costs $50 bucks in a trip to Walmart or whatever.
And then the possible fallacy of mistaking circumstantial evidence for planned evidence.
Details.
Okay.
Meaning the convenient placement of things and all of the.
Okay.
Yeah.
I would agree with that.
So here are the current theories.
There's a leak theory where parts of the footage show a professional environment, autopsy room, examination room with a stadiometer, aircraft, suggesting that it's not a collection of amateur home video clips, but rather a documentation produced by a government agency branch or military or corporation.
It could have found its way to the internet by a whistleblower with legitimate access leaking it, could have been stolen like.
By the leak in 2011.
And the other theory here is that it's a hoax.
Here's someone that used the same tactics and techniques to create what seems to be like a floating UFO using the same lines and driving a car.
But the general consensus is that multiple people, multiple techniques, and possibly, but not necessarily, a lot of money was involved.
And it's unlikely for a single person to pull this off due to the complexity and variety of these scenes, which I agree with.
There's a lot going on here for one person to do all that.
But hey, I'm alone, kind of, in doing all this, except for this video.
This video is actually being edited by something else.
Shout out Lee editing the first full Area 52 video.
But normally, I'm a one man team and I know what you can get away with by yourself.
So it's actually quite surprising.
Claims frequently made by individuals about the clips being easy to reproduce remain to be demonstrated.
So we disagree, but encourage people that have done this that have the time, skill, and motivation to give it a try.
They have an email where you can submit the results.
Just don't forget about the 71% of content beside the skinny Bob close ups, right?
So you can do one of these things, maybe like this person here.
Like the Tin Bird using the Boris effects.
You know, even that doesn't look too real, like there's something unnatural about it, but it's a good effort.
So, people saying puppeteering, animatronics, costumes, computer graphics, motion tracking, stop motion, all of these things would have had to be used at some point to create this effect.
Compression Artifacts Reveal Truth00:06:14
And here, if you were to use a costume, I mean, the hands wouldn't match up.
You can see that here.
The face would actually match up.
That would be a decent costume for Halloween, I tell you that.
Now, there is something also that should be discussed, and that is this article written by Noah Raddick in July of 2024 says a skinny bob is not CGI.
And by applying a technique known as ELA, which stands for error level analysis, okay, error level analysis is a method used to check for markers of CGI manipulation.
It involves saving images or video frames at different levels of compression and mapping the differences.
This is able to show areas that were edited or inserted in posts, such as a face swapping, objects added, CGI effects, et cetera.
So, by doing this ELA technique, you'll be able to see.
Now, if you do the ELA technique onto a scene from Shrek, as you see here, clear outlines are given, right?
Where these have been added in artificially into this scene.
Skinny Bob, however, as you can see, not enough to indicate a clear outline like for Shrek or other CGI.
Other skinny Bob can be examined frame by frame.
This frame of skinny Bob during an interview with his inlaid eyes and broad and deep head.
He has a small mouth and small nose, which is typical of traditional gray.
The ELA has some slight outlines, but not enough to prove it was modified.
Only a part of his body is outlined with some noise and not the rest.
It's indicative that skinny Bob has not been modified at all and no processing has been done.
If he were CGI, he'd have to be created.
In one go and not modified at all, which is not usually how most CGI is created.
One conclusion that I don't agree with in the original analysis is that there was post processing done to the videos.
I don't see evidence for that.
It should show up under ELA unless it was intentionally obscured.
A program like After Effects or Photoshop would save the file at a different compression level, which would show up usually on the ELA.
One problem with this is the second Skinny Bob was saved as PNG rather than JPEG, which is not compressed.
However, It seems there was no apparent serious manipulation in the JPEG of Skinny Bob 1 either.
The original was likely saved in a compressed video format like MPEG, so it would have compression artifacts.
So, again, noise pattern on CGI image, noise pattern on alien image.
There's no, they don't match irregular patterns of noise indicative of camera noise rather than structured noise.
Folks, are we looking at a real alien here?
It's kind of insane.
It's kind of intense that that's what we might be dealing with, at least one of the types.
There are a lot of connections to be made with Skinny Bob, especially if you look at Psalm 1 or the Special Operations Manual from Majestic 12.
They talked about even type 1 and even type 2.
Two, this clearly being more of a type two situation here.
We can look at the type two description.
Actually, give me a second.
This is the EBE type two extraterrestrial biological entity as described by the special operations manual for MJ 12 that was apparently, you know, leaked to Dom Berliner in '94, I believe.
No, prior to that, would have been '94.
I don't know.
Regardless.
The size and build, these entities were small, standing between three feet five inches and four foot two inches.
This seems to check.
Head and skull, they have proportionally large skulls, much larger and longer than those of either humans or EB type one.
The skull features an extreme peak extending above the top of the head.
Now they did show tiny little bumps there.
The eyes are very large and slanted, almost reach the side of the head.
The pupils are completely black with no visible whites.
There is no expressiveness in the face.
Nose is minimal, just two small slits.
Now, this did seem to have a bit of a bigger nose here, and there's no external ear structure visible.
Skin and appearance the skin is described as pale blue gray, which we can't really confirm.
And the limbs are longer relative to the legs.
The arms are longer relative to the legs.
Hands possess three long tapered fingers plus an opposable thumb, almost as long as the toes, notably.
The middle finger is more robust.
But not as long as the index finger.
Okay.
Legs and feet.
The legs are small and slender and the feet have four toes joined by webbing.
That does sound a lot like the type twos, which would make sense if, you know, whatever was in the MJ12 documents was accurate and this was real.
That's kind of what this would look like, this situation here.
So, folks, I hope you enjoyed this video.
That concludes our review of the skinny bob videos one, two, three, and four posted by Ivan1035.
Ivan, if you're out there, if you're watching this, I would love to talk to you.
Even in private, reach out to me, find a way.
I look forward to the day that this guy posts one more video, gives us anything, any little piece of the puzzle at all, or just tells us that, hey, it's a big joke, it's a big farce, it's a really expensive hoax that I never took credit for.
What do you guys think?
Tell me what you think and if your mindset maybe shifted slightly from the beginning of this investigation to the end of it.
Do you find yourself now more convinced or less convinced that these videos are authentic?
Do you think Skinny Bob is real?
Do you think aliens are real, but the Skinny Bob video is fake?
I would love to hear your interpretations of all this information.
And clearly, we skimmed through a lot of it.
If you want to go and have a look for yourself, go to skinnybob.info.
A lot of pertinent information on that website.
Plus, there are tons of videos out there looking at this, analyzing it forensically.
And if there's anything that I missed, or if there's a geographical pin that you might have come across, Please let me know.
Final Authenticity Debate00:00:21
Reach out, hit us up in the Discord.
We'll be hanging out there.
I appreciate you guys watching and thank you for entertaining this much different style of video.
This might be something that we bring back in the future, depending on the reaction we get from you guys.