I write mostly about UFOs.

The Aviano/Pordenone UFO: The Story Behind the Most Debated UFO Footage

Many have seen the footage. Far fewer know its tangled backstory.

Is it an early‑2000s hoax or a genuine recording of an unknown craft? The video, also referred to as the Pordenone UFO, has a surprisingly intricate timeline and a long trail of debate behind it.

The video first attracted international attention in 2005, when Italian-American researcher Paola Harris presented a fourth-generation copy at the 36th Annual MUFON International Symposium in Denver, Colorado. Harris, who was then living in Italy, stated that the footage had been supplied by an anonymous source who associated it with the Aviano area. The identity of the original cameraman has never been established, and the severe degradation caused by repeated copying has made detailed analysis difficult.

The video:

How the Aviano UFO Video Emerged

The story begins with an anonymous VHS tape.

The footage was allegedly recorded in 2003 near the NATO air base in Aviano, Italy. In 2004, a VHS copy of the video was sent anonymously to the well‑known Italian ufologist Antonio Chiumiento, accompanied by a brief but ominous message:

“Ho paura” (“I am afraid,” in Italian).

The tape was subsequently sent to other Italian ufologists in the following months.

Despite receiving the material in 2004, Chiumiento chose to keep the video confidential at first, allowing time for further analysis. The footage only became public in 2005.

That year, Italian‑American journalist and ufologist Paola Harris presented the video at two major events:

The versions that later circulated on YouTube were largely derived from a DVD of her MUFON presentation.

Harris stated that she received a fourth‑generation copy from an anonymous source claiming it was filmed near Aviano Air Base. She believes the object is likely a terrestrial military prototype, specifically a remotely piloted vehicle, and says analysis in Boulder, Colorado, indicated a real physical object rather than pure CGI. The operator’s precise framing at the moment the object appears is seen as evidence of a planned test rather than a random sighting.

Paola’s statement:

This old video, which I have been showing for three years, was not provided to us, Italian researchers, by the Air Force. It is not one of our technologies. I had the tape analyzed in Hollywood by my friends Rob and Rebecca Gordon, who had the contacts and financial means to do so. This is a seventh-generation cassette tape. It was given to us without explanation. It is a real object that we see in the film. It was shown in my presentations at MUFON and in Laughlin, and then someone uploaded it to YouTube and Google. The video was filmed in the Veneto region, in Italy, in a place called Ponte di Giulio, near the NATO airbase in Aviano. It is a dry riverbed where the military was conducting maneuvers, and the cameraman had set up a tripod and was waiting for the object to emerge from the forest. I doubt that aliens appeared in that location.

Paola Harris’ Clarifications

In response to growing doubts over the tape’s origins and credibility, Harris published a statement to address the controversy. In summary, she emphasized that:

Harris also described the filming location: a dry riverbed in the Veneto region, near a place called Ponte di Giulio, close to the Aviano NATO air base. According to her, military exercises were being conducted in the area, and the cameraman had set up a tripod, apparently waiting for the object to emerge from the treeline. Despite this, Harris herself expressed skepticism that the object was extraterrestrial, suggesting instead that it might have been some kind of advanced terrestrial technology.

On‑Site Investigation: Pinpointing the Location

Investigators Antonio Pischiutti and Stefano Saccavino visited the Ponte di Giulio area near Montereale Valcellina (province of Pordenone, Italy) to locate where the UFO video was filmed. They identified the exact spot on the left bank of the Cellina River, under the iron bridge on the SS 251 road. Based on the environment and perspective, they estimated the object was about 150–200 meters from the camera, moved from north‑northwest to south‑southeast, and was roughly 6–8 meters in diameter.

The area is heavily associated with military activity (near Aviano Air Base, test ranges, and a small emergency runway), as well as a nearby hydroelectric structure visible in the footage.

Photo taken by Investigators Antonio Pischiutti and Stefano Saccavino

The investigators noted that the region has a history of alleged anomalous events, including supposed teleportation, a crop circle, a possible abduction, strange lights near Mount Raut, and recurring UFO reports near the Aviano base. They suggest the area might be either a hotspot for “extraterrestrial raids” or a kind of “Dreamland” for exotic military aircraft. They find the footage impressive, especially when the object suddenly darts away, but admit that the object initially looks too sharp and perfect compared to the background, raising doubts.

Aviano Air Base:

Their work, published online and now Archived here.

The investigation focused on:

Pischiutti and Saccavino concluded that the location shown in the footage is consistent with an area near the SS 251 highway, a region of archaeological and military relevance, not far from Aviano Air Base.

Location:

Google maps

Based on their calculations, they estimated that the object was approximately 6 to 8 meters in diameter. It appeared to move from north‑northwest to south‑southeast, crossing the frame rapidly before disappearing. If genuine, such behavior raises questions about the craft’s propulsion and nature. However, the poor quality of the available footage severely limited their ability to reach definitive conclusions.

Digital Analyses and Suspicions of a Hoax

In parallel, researcher Giuseppe Garofalo, from the SIRIO Nucleus, examined three different versions of the Aviano video available online. His analysis highlighted several suspicious features, including:

Giuseppe Garofalo analyzed the three versions of the video found online and found inconsistencies and anomalies: transparency effects in the object’s structure, apparent shape changes, odd filters and noise, a brief on‑screen timer, and mismatched lighting. He suspects digital manipulation, possibly involving a small physical model combined with computer graphics.

He concludes that the footage, especially in its online forms, is unreliable, although he argues that without the original video and direct witnesses, it’s premature to dismiss it purely as simple CGI.

The Blur Argument: “One Is Real, the Other Is Not”

One of the more striking fraud claims came from a user known as “onthefence” on the OpenMindsForum (unfortunately, their full analysis appears to have been lost and is not easily retrieved, even via WebArchive).

According to this researcher, the alleged UFO displays a blur pattern that differs significantly from the background. While some took this as evidence of a hastily rendered 3D model, onthefence argued that the discrepancy was more likely related to the contrast difference between the bright object and the darker landscape in the original footage.

Given the very low quality of the early online uploads, he argued that typical “pulsing” artifacts from quick 3D rendering would probably not be visible. Instead, he interpreted the mismatched blur as strong evidence that the saucer and the background were two separate layers: one genuine, one not. In short, the video appears to show a composite image rather than a single, coherent recording.

A Military Prototype?

Despite the fraud accusations, Paola Harris has maintained a different position. When she presented the video at the MUFON Symposium in Denver in 2005, she suggested that the object was likely a remotely controlled military prototype, not an alien spacecraft.

According to Harris, further analysis conducted in Boulder, Colorado, treated the object as a physical craft, not as CGI. A 3D reconstruction by Alberto Forgione supported this, depicting the craft with movable triangular thrusters, implying an advanced, deliberate design rather than a simplistic hoax.

Media Coverage and Circulation Online

In 2004, the Italian regional TV channel Antenna Tre Nordest, based in Treviso (Veneto region), aired a report on the footage, helping to spread awareness of the case in Italy.

The recording of that news report can be watched here.

Some of the oldest copies of the Aviano UFO video available online today appear to have been uploaded to YouTube nearly two decades ago. You can watch it here.

Over time, various stabilized, enhanced, and zoomed versions have appeared, each adding new layers of interpretation, but not necessarily more clarity.

Stabilized version:

The Alleged Witness: Stefan’s Testimony

In 2019, a Swiss YouTube channel dedicated to UFO sightings featured an interview with an alleged witness to the Aviano case. The man, an Austrian named Stefan, claimed that he was traveling through Europe with his wife and son when he and his son saw the Aviano UFO at the same time it was filmed from the riverbed. That interview can be watched here.

Stefan asserted that the video is authentic and matches what he personally observed. However, his testimony remains impossible to independently verify. There is no definitive way to confirm whether he genuinely witnessed the event, misinterpreted something, or is simply repeating information he encountered later.

Stefans sketch of the sighting:

An Unresolved Mystery

In the end, the Aviano UFO case sits in a grey zone.

What we do not have is the original, first‑generation recording or a fully documented chain of custody. The surviving copies are degraded, incomplete, and sometimes modified. This makes a final judgment extremely difficult.

As things stand, we cannot say with absolute certainty whether the Aviano UFO video is a clever hoax, a misidentified secret prototype, or something even stranger. The evidence is limited, the material fragmentary, and the investigations, while sincere, are ultimately inconclusive.

What can be said with confidence is that the story behind this footage, and the decades‑long debate it sparked, make the Aviano UFO one of the most intriguing and enduring cases in modern ufology.

What do you think?

Was Flight MH370 Teleported?

My detailed analysis of the plane and orb teleportation videos that some people have linked to the disappearance of MH370.

Why Is Skinny Bob Still Blinking at Us?

A look at the “Skinny Bob” alien footage, where I break down why it’s so strangely convincing, what’s likely fabricated, and why the videos still spark debates years later.

Did a 2024 Forgotten Languages Post Foreshadow The Nordic Drone Crisis?

A breakdown of a cryptic Forgotten Languages post about a supposed drone strike simulation off New Jersey, and how its details later echoed the real drone shutdowns across Denmark, Norway, and Germany. I compare the timeline, the political backdrop, and the odd overlap between fiction, leaks, and NATO airspace incidents.

Carlos Díaz: The UFO with the Glowing Molten Skin

A detailed look at the Carlos Díaz “Ships of Light” UFO: the molten amber craft he photographed over Ajusco, how it seemed half-machine, half-alive, and why the visuals still rank among the most striking UFO images ever captured, hoax or not.

The “Flyby” UFO Footage: And Why It Refuses to Fade Away

A deep dive into the 2008 “Flyby” UFO video, where a disc-shaped object appears to following an airliner (or jet?), and why this short, grainy clip still sits in that uncomfortable space between what is could be a clever hoax, or genuinely a real UFO.

Best UFO Photos of All Time

A collection of some of the best and most famous UFO photos ever taken. Looking at who took them, how they’ve been debunked or defended, and why a handful of images still sit in that annoying space between “obvious hoax” and “if this is real, everything changes.”

Follow me on X for more updates.