<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: UFO Hoax Video Still Dazzles</title>
	<atom:link href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/02/ufo-hoax-video-still-dazzles-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/02/ufo-hoax-video-still-dazzles-2/</link>
	<description>The latest Technology news and blog posts from ABC News contributors and bloggers.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 23:48:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: julianpenrod</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/02/ufo-hoax-video-still-dazzles-2/#comment-2650940</link>
		<dc:creator>julianpenrod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/?p=116764#comment-2650940</guid>
		<description>This may not to be printed or will be removed, but, the fact is, though, what is the proof that the claim of being a hoax is itself not a hoax?  What if they managed to procure the tape from someone and then proceeded to issue a denial?  &quot;Science&quot; devotees would demand proof when it fits their wishes, but, when it benefits their agenda, just a simple, uncorroborated &quot;admission&quot; suffices.  For example, as with crop circles.  Huge, elaborate pattterns are laid out in the space of a few hours in the dead of night, with no lights, no noise and no commotion.  Then a couple of hacks put together a tape of them laying out a single simple circle in the middle of the day with no attempt made at concealment and &quot;science&quot; devotees declare crop circles to be &quot;debunked&quot;!  There is no reason provided to assume this is necessarily a faked film.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This may not to be printed or will be removed, but, the fact is, though, what is the proof that the claim of being a hoax is itself not a hoax?  What if they managed to procure the tape from someone and then proceeded to issue a denial?  &#8220;Science&#8221; devotees would demand proof when it fits their wishes, but, when it benefits their agenda, just a simple, uncorroborated &#8220;admission&#8221; suffices.  For example, as with crop circles.  Huge, elaborate pattterns are laid out in the space of a few hours in the dead of night, with no lights, no noise and no commotion.  Then a couple of hacks put together a tape of them laying out a single simple circle in the middle of the day with no attempt made at concealment and &#8220;science&#8221; devotees declare crop circles to be &#8220;debunked&#8221;!  There is no reason provided to assume this is necessarily a faked film.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/02/ufo-hoax-video-still-dazzles-2/#comment-2649180</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2013 16:11:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/?p=116764#comment-2649180</guid>
		<description>at first glance it was obviously done by CGI - don&#039;t take too many bows, lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>at first glance it was obviously done by CGI &#8211; don&#8217;t take too many bows, lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>