It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO pics which cant be explained

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 04:19 AM
link   
wheres all the experts when you need them?
wheres all the believers most people who replied were sceptics i want some ideas peoples
like this sceptic
"Guys look at the pictures again - carefully - objectively. This guys takes pictures of condensation on his camera lens. It is absolutley and once you look again, obviously condensation.
Vance"


[edit on 7-10-2006 by CYRAX]




posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   


posted on 10/7/2006 at 05:19 AM (post id: 2535449) - single REPLYQUOTE
wheres all the experts when you need them?
wheres all the believers most people who replied were sceptics i want some ideas peoples
like this sceptic
"Guys look at the pictures again - carefully - objectively. This guys takes pictures of condensation on his camera lens. It is absolutley and once you look again, obviously condensation.
Vance"


Experts are busy writing books and hardly ever go to public forums.

The best of disinformation national security advocates could not do a better job
with an approved list of denials of visual, mental, or any truth being sought.

It may be just human nature to find alternate truths.

People see fake or cgi or jets or rockets or bugs but not electron streams or what
I think of. Wait for the next round of books.

Even MAN-MADE UFOS had a recent printing and only put updated pages at the
end. It is mostly review of news stories and nothing detailed. At the end it
included Lyne's attempt at ufo drawings are now revised and show nothing of
ufo workings except it has an engine and Tesla cone coils now replaced in his
book by flat coils, which I think he got something there.


Also a good technique is look carefully to change your mind, a good trance
technique always works.



[edit on 10/7/2006 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   
OK CYRAX, here's something I could do to your pictures.
But first of all, I noticed that all pictures, according to the EXIF tags were taken with the same focal length (63mm) and this can't be true. So either your camera doesn't save correctly this kind of data or the images were processed.
I tried to figure some scene details from the pictures but there is not enough information to do that, only some guesswork - the tilt angle, the filed of view angle, distance to the power pilar and to the house corner... So...I couldn't figure out the distance that the object covers between succesive frames.

Now, using these pictures:
i54.photobucket.com...
i54.photobucket.com...
i54.photobucket.com...
I got this one

You can clearly see the path followed by the object (and knowing the field of view, the tilt of the camera and assuming a certain height of the object in the sky you could determine the distance covered between frames and hence, its speed).
But like I and others said, this object looks like a plane with contrails.

From these pictures
i54.photobucket.com...
i54.photobucket.com...
I got this one

Combining the pictures I saw that you moved a little bit from one frame to the other. But anyway, you could see that this object is moving approximately the same path as the object in the second set of pictures. So my guess is that this also is a plane. It could be a propeller plane or the atmospheric conditions didn't allowed the formation of contrails (the other object had quite short contrails). I bet there is an air route (I don't know exactly how it's called) or a major airport in that area.....Do you often see planes in that area?


cjb

posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Cyrax, unless someone can refer you to a Scientific law that states why discs can't create contrails (or shows you a pic of an obviously similar plane..) I would give little credence to the opinions on this thread about your pics. I, too live in Sydney and have been photographing what looks like the same kind of activity...chris

www.surfin.com.au...

Still frame from clip
www.surfin.com.au...



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Triangle craft, as I define it is an unknown object in the sky with three
disks of light, powerful enough to make disks of lightning on which
back and forth and sideways motion it acheived.

Photos are good but videos are good too, 3 disks and a flare at night,
the flare being and extention of the vortex of lightning into a cylinder.




Day time triangle: (two circles are dark)





As far as making chem or con trails, the hot lightning might make both
under the right conditions, but in these cases its a lightning display.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apass
OK CYRAX, here's something I could do to your pictures.
But first of all, I noticed that all pictures, according to the EXIF tags were taken with the same focal length (63mm) and this can't be true. So either your camera doesn't save correctly this kind of data or the images were processed.
I tried to figure some scene details from the pictures but there is not enough information to do that, only some guesswork - the tilt angle, the filed of view angle, distance to the power pilar and to the house corner... So...I couldn't figure out the distance that the object covers between succesive frames.

Now, using these pictures:
i54.photobucket.com...
i54.photobucket.com...
i54.photobucket.com...
I got this one

You can clearly see the path followed by the object (and knowing the field of view, the tilt of the camera and assuming a certain height of the object in the sky you could determine the distance covered between frames and hence, its speed).
But like I and others said, this object looks like a plane with contrails.

From these pictures
i54.photobucket.com...
i54.photobucket.com...
I got this one

Combining the pictures I saw that you moved a little bit from one frame to the other. But anyway, you could see that this object is moving approximately the same path as the object in the second set of pictures. So my guess is that this also is a plane. It could be a propeller plane or the atmospheric conditions didn't allowed the formation of contrails (the other object had quite short contrails). I bet there is an air route (I don't know exactly how it's called) or a major airport in that area.....Do you often see planes in that area?



Nice work Apass:


Combining the pictures I saw that you moved a little bit from one frame to the other. But anyway, you could see that this object is moving approximately the same path as the object in the second set of pictures. So my guess is that this also is a plane. It could be a propeller plane or the atmospheric conditions didn't allowed the formation of contrails (the other object had quite short contrails). I bet there is an air route (I don't know exactly how it's called) or a major airport in that area.....Do you often see planes in that area?


I would draw a line between the images, that would be the arc of travel.
It is in same attitude indicating if it hovered, the time is the movement
of 360/24 or 15 deg of arc per hour.

Hovering jets do exist.
Thats the best explanation if you don't care for ufo stuff.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I would draw a line between the images, that would be the arc of travel.
It is in same attitude indicating if it hovered, the time is the movement
of 360/24 or 15 deg of arc per hour.

Hovering jets do exist.
Thats the best explanation if you don't care for ufo stuff.

But those pictures don't offer any information about the angle of the field of view. It could be 60 degrees or 10 degrees. Yes, the EXIF data contains the time stamps when the frames were taken, but without any hint about the field of view that's useless. Those 15 degrees per hour are true for the Earth's rotation. To use that value, the object Cyrax photographed should be fixed relative to the stars and the images don't say that.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by cjb
Cyrax, unless someone can refer you to a Scientific law that states why discs can't create contrails (or shows you a pic of an obviously similar plane..) I would give little credence to the opinions on this thread about your pics. I, too live in Sydney and have been photographing what looks like the same kind of activity...chris

www.surfin.com.au...

Still frame from clip
www.surfin.com.au...



Great pics, looks like flaring like the ghost rocket of yester year except
no V2s around to blame it on. See MAN-MADE UFOs or wikipedia for
story. Except the book has undoctored original news print with a dark
cloud underneath the flare.



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Okay.

I know that there have been multiple attemps at debunking on this thread already. Let me just post another possibility for these "contrails". It is loosely known as "Angel Hair". A key example of this is a case in 1952 in france outside of a school. It is extremely rare, having occured only about five or six times in history. period.

Angel Hair is seen when two or more ufos are observed flying in close proximity to each other. Reportedly, the witness sees a type of electric "arc", and then a substance rains down from the skies. It can be as thin as wire, or as thick as stretched out chewing gum. In most cases, the substance dissolved on contact w/ the ground, but it is also reported to be highly flamable and combustable.
For More information, please view this link, or read the book, The UFO Book by Jerome Clark.

Yet, when there is no other explanation to turn to, this may shed some light on this "contrail" debate.

Happy UFO Huntin!



posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   
thanks everyone for the help
going to read all the links



posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apass

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I would draw a line between the images, that would be the arc of travel.
It is in same attitude indicating if it hovered, the time is the movement
of 360/24 or 15 deg of arc per hour.

Hovering jets do exist.
Thats the best explanation if you don't care for ufo stuff.

But those pictures don't offer any information about the angle of the field of view. It could be 60 degrees or 10 degrees. Yes, the EXIF data contains the time stamps when the frames were taken, but without any hint about the field of view that's useless. Those 15 degrees per hour are true for the Earth's rotation. To use that value, the object Cyrax photographed should be fixed relative to the stars and the images don't say that.


I would ask CYRAX about how far away those line are from where he took
the pictures. Don't care if he was not standing in the exact same spot.

/ |
/ | |



posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by JackofBlades
The first few (of the light) look to me like you have taken a photo through glass and snapped a reflection of something behind you. The object could then appear to move either if you change the angle of the glass (which would leave the background the same) or moved the light source.


This sounds very reasonable to me. I was driving home from work the other day and somethin in my truck was creating a reflection on my drivers side window.
that looked very much like the first pictures.
I moved my head to change the angle and it certainly gave the impression of moving. I remember wishing I had my camera with me to see if I could capture the reflection. I will try it on my way home tonight.


[edit on 19-10-2006 by Sparky63]



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 06:03 AM
link   
sparky63
if you think these pics are from inside something wrong



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I would ask CYRAX about how far away those line are from where he took
the pictures.

Well...I did asked him in a U2U but he didn't answer.



Don't care if he was not standing in the exact same spot.

Not quite. If the power lines are 2 meter away, changing the position only a few centimeters (moving his head) would affect dramatically the perspective.



And the time between photos.

the time between the pohots is writen in the EXIF data. It is about 15 seconds between frames.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:23 AM
link   
There is a website called orbwar.com (link) that your photo reminded me of. Take a look at the link. The site owner has taken a lot of photos of craft that seem to be able to cloak themselves.

Some craft appear to be able to cloak itself by taking on the appearance of an orb (either white or black). He shows examples of orbs that are present in photos near the World Trade Center towers when they were hit.

At the bottom of the first link you can see the same white orbs hovering near the tower on the right. Strange. Does no one else consider that object strange?

On another page at this same site, you can see a black orb hovering near the second tower that was hit. The orb is actually very large, and it is NOT debris. It moves toward the second tower that was hit just as the plane crashes into it. It almost looks like the orb is watching, or directing the plane...very strange...No one seems to be addressing these very strange photos...

Thanks for posting yours Cyrax. It looks like there are intelligent craft appearing more and more at significant events around the world. Are people this dense? These events, and the recent NASA Atlantis events (and countless other recent phenomena) are very bizarre, and unnatural.

There are many other sites that report and have photos of orbs, in particular, around chemtrails. Why are orbs - which are unidentified craft - floating around jet streams, the World Trade Center, in our skies, or in near Earth orbit (Google or Youtube video shows an orb in a NASA video just above the Earth)? Even more unexplainable is that people are not asking the obvious questions about them. What are these things?!

It's clear to me that our government and science institutions (NASA secret keepers...did you know they not only airbrush photos, but they also tamper with radar readings? Oh yeah...They can't even let the "true" weather forecast hit our TVs and computers. Of course I'm sure that's not the real reason...) don't want these craft to be appearing as they are. Our government wants this kept quiet. Our gov. wants an airtight lid on all of this. It's funny though, because it's clear whoever is piloting or directing these craft, and other ufo, which can be seen by the naked eye, have a totally different view on things. They clearly WANT TO BE SEEN. Or don't care. So I suggest it's not our government, because they know that more and more people will be asking questions.

I want to give a shout out to the craft pilots! Keep it coming!

[edit on 20-10-2006 by OnTheDeck]



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 08:06 AM
link   
thanks for the links
orbwar is a great site



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apass

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I would ask CYRAX about how far away those line are from where he took
the pictures.

Well...I did asked him in a U2U but he didn't answer.



Don't care if he was not standing in the exact same spot.

Not quite. If the power lines are 2 meter away, changing the position only a few centimeters (moving his head) would affect dramatically the perspective.



And the time between photos.




the time between the pohots is writen in the EXIF data. It is about 15 seconds between frames.



Well I was thinking distance from the power lines, not where he lives or
or coodinates. But even that might tip off the power company and ruin
the next photos or the like.

Hight of the lines and width or vertical span since the object appears in different
sections. Still think if he was walking around a bit might not do much if
some of the bigger dimensions were known.

In 15 sec. it traveled that much, I thought the sky conditions indicated the
assertion the object stayed all day in one position. That would make the
arc time of first and last photo and dependent on the earth's rotation.

In any case, CYRAX takes the photos he's not into making all the
measurements. He just wants to know we think of the photos.



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Well I was thinking distance from the power lines, not where he lives or
or coodinates. But even that might tip off the power company and ruin
the next photos or the like.

But of course! That's exactly what I asked him!



Hight of the lines and width or vertical span since the object appears in different
sections. Still think if he was walking around a bit might not do much if
some of the bigger dimensions were known.

That's correct, but this complicates the math.



In 15 sec. it traveled that much, I thought the sky conditions indicated the
assertion the object stayed all day in one position. That would make the
arc time of first and last photo and dependent on the earth's rotation.

Yes, it traveled that much...and this indicates me that it is plane (a low flying plane, maybe). But since Cyrax moved between the frames, that distance could be exagerated.



In any case, CYRAX takes the photos he's not into making all the
measurements. He just wants to know we think of the photos.

Indeed. But it would be easier for us to know those things



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
These photo events are too random and he even says it may be by
chance.

Yet on some he knew what he was after especially when bright
light is flaring up in the sky.

Yeah you got to take a picture of it.

All his photos have been posted by others many times, I mean the same
examples or events. Groups of lights at night evening and daytime.
Little dark clouds oval or triangular alone or by a trail. A circular array
of stars or ball lightning craft in the sky on NASA film.

That about it.



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Apass
 


It looks like the illuminated aether columns got longer as the day wore on.

The second set is earlier the your first set.

Comparing aether columns to jet trails is like comparing apples to peanuts,
they are not even fruit.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join