It seems the wing span might be enough to provide lift. That is the wings seem about a similar size to a hang glider. I find it improbable that he could generate enough power to provide the air speed needed to gain lift. I don't see a combustion engine so it would be simply down to batteries and electric motors assisted by his arm flapping. His arm flapping would be vastly less powerful than leg peddling and I'm not sure there are too many cycle powered flying machines. That would mean almost all the power would come from some little electric servo motors. That seems improbable to say the least.

fake, the gopro footage was obviously filmed from an RC plane

Well - I can't make up my mind. I'm a hang-glider and paraglider pilot, both free-flight and powered. Those wings are about 1/3rd smaller than a hang-glider. His power calcluation is wrong by one order of magnitude - he said 2000watts someplace - both my motors are 14hp (20kw) and other real electric "picolights" all use roughly that too. 20kw of motors and batteies for a 60-second flight is going to weigh 10kg bare min. Wings strong enough to hold you up are going to weigh 20kg min. He doesnt look like he's lugging 30kg of aricraft to me, and I can't see where they're supposed to be located. He doesn't have any obvious steering, and he's next to a lake - he would drown 99% for sure if he went in there. He's in a public park - that's controlled airspace almost for sure, and without any doubt it's illegal to fly anything uncertified, especially in a public place. The team ran away prior to the flight - what's with that? People are natural rubbernecks, they all want to get close - not run away... The guy is smirking prior to flight - he should be shitting himself, because he will die or be permanently crippled for life if anything goes wrong. Eye candy - who the heck beautifies experiments? His leg weirdness - I can't figure out this bit - yeah - he needs to put his legs up, and remembers to do that in-flight, but he's dangling from his back - that's going to be *hard* to accomplish, and will change the CofG so dramatically that he should stall from doing it... Still looks uber cool though. I *want* it to be real :-)

I loved this when I first saw it, and wanted to believe it, but there are a bunch of issues that point to this being an elaborate and very funny hoax. No-one's yet mentioned the straps holding the contraption on his back - they're just backpack straps. There's no chest-strap or leg straps like you'd see on a parachute harness. Fancy dangling off some madly flapping wings suspended from backpack straps?
The tail of the craft is entirely non-functional. It just flaps in the airstream. It has no vertical rudder element, which would help to stabilise side-slip and allow the pilot to initiate turns at low speed.
None of the ground crew make any reference to weather conditions, the strength or the direction of the wind. There's no windsock. Flying amongst trees as Smeets appears to do is a really bad idea, because trees cause turbulence and downdraughts.
These days, everyone has a camera on their phone; If this were real, I would have expected everyone present at the launch to have made their best efforts to shoot video of the flight. Also, in the shots showing Smeets taking off, we never see the camera person located to the side who took the shot of Smeets from the side.
None of these points have been made elsewhere.
The comment about the wing loading in the article rings true - there just isn't enough loading on the wing to look convincing. What gives me any authority to comment on this? I'm a power-kiter who's also done a bit of parachuting and paragliding, so I'm used to looking at foil flying machines.

Fake, 3 reasons why:
1. 15 mph head wind used to gain flight speed. If head wind was there then where is the wind on the wings in sec 18-23 where the human is standing in pre-flight?
2. Head Cam, head shake. In sec 35-37 the head cam is not shaking matching the head shake from the ground shot.
3. 3rd camera. In sec 35, the side shot of the take-off, the camera shot starts slightly in front of the wings and continues to pan right to left to show the lift off from about 7 meters away. There is no camera in that position in sec 34.

they don't say the brand of the motors but i can identify them, one of them is a TURNIGY 50-55A and the other one looks a TGY AerodriveXp 42 SK both are Turnigy Branded motors, an internal brand of a company called Hobbyking witch is famous for their price's in the R/C model world.
The video is for sure fake, no doubt,

To Ben K The reason your points weren't made elsewhere is because they are weak. You say the tail is "entirely non-functional". Actually that is not true. It appears to be useful (at least potentially) but it's not needed for the straight ahead glide this guy supposedly performed. Also that it lacks a vertical component is irrelevant in this situation. Again he didn't perform any turns and thus didn't need one. Besides birds turn just fine without a "vertical" rudder per se (although their tails are quite flexible and act as a pseudo-rudder). That the ground folks didn't reference any weather...so what? Maybe they didn't tape their discussion of it. No windsock? Really? So that means this is faked. Looks like they are in a park, not too many windsocks in a park. They aren't breaking the sound barrier so not sure what you would need a windsock for, besides the wind won't vary that much for a 5 second flight. That this guy apparently did something stupid by flying close to a lake again is irrelevant to the authenticity of the video. Lots of people do less than brilliant things in real life.
We don't see one of the cameras....so?
Don't take my reply the wrong way. I'm not advocating whether this is real or not. But I'm just skeptical of your skepticsm. You need a better set of arguments.

Sorry to agree with the intelligent posts above, it's a fake. Not a bad one but all the points are valid. Chief for me is the fabric of the wing never looks like it's under load, it just flaps around. Hardly enough, even if there was enough power and larger wing (it really is too small to lift him so easily), to lift much of anything. On the down stroke, the fabric sections should each show the load. They don't. It's CGI. When the guys run to the camera, which suddenly points down at the ground, then back up to the pilot about to launch, the wing looks different. I think they inserted the CGI wing in there, and the wobbly shot of the grass just before was to give him enough time to run out of the shot so they could insert the digital stuff. Many many other things just don't add up. I fly hang gliders, private aircraft, gliders etc. and this just looks wrong. Too bad, like others, I do wish it was true but you can't rewrite the laws of physics with underpowered Turnigy RC model motors, and that's too bad because wouldn't it be cool if you could? One other thing: this guy is just not a convincing actor. I look at his face as he's exulting in his "triumph". He looks like he's lying.

Its probably real. My opinion. Some of the technical skeptics posting here appear to have art degrees.

As Daedalus constructs wings made from wax for his son, Icarus....They melt and crash and burn. Apparently "Jar-no" human flyer. The lift off is decent CGI...The R/C theories are not correct either... The motion of the cameras as if he were flapping wings distracts your eyes from noticing the tire/wheel marks on the grass... Notice when he comes in for the landing and when he touches down... They didn’t think it out too well, as the tire/wheel tracks left the grass blades pushed down...They had some test runs, to determine if they could mimic the flight. Hence the trajectory of flight is directionally matching the tracks on the grass. The tire/wheel tracks are consistent with the width of a "cherry picker"...Your standard boom lift or scissor lift can reach heights of 70 ft.. I suppose the attention to the project alone is a success.