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 only seen after a photo is taken enigma

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link   
I've always wondered why many times a ufo is only visible AFTER a picture is taken and days later the photographer reviews old film only too see a giant ufo hover in front of the cameras lense, when at the time of shooting must have been invisible. I think this may possibly have something to do with the ufo actually moving within the same space but in a different time. I wonder if someone where to film the sky 2 minutes before hand but to review the take and watch it as if it where live (in other words with a 2 minute or less delay), if these elusive ufos might be visible. One can only assume that given the mysterious propulsion systems on a theoretical ufo that it may in fact move in a differnt time/space format than we are familiar with, and if so, would this have an impact on someone taking a picture of apparently nothing at the moment, only to discover an object was there minutes (days?) after reviewing the tape? Would this provide a possible new technique for searching for UFOs if true (watching video in a delayed format rather than live?)

Just my random ponderings...



PSP

posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Hey dude!
Well my opinion is that you can see alien aircrafts and take pictures of them but you will see them while you take a picture and after when you watch your photographs.

I thought it was only so with ghosts that when you take pictures of darkrooms you can see ghosts on them later.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 02:30 PM
link   
It could be the way the naked eye processes light is just different, or perhaps simply the speed of the objects.

Along the lines of the first suggestion consider computer screen refreshing. When you look at a computer screen with the naked eye you cant perceive the refreshing. If you ever see a computer screen on tv though you can most certainly see the horizontal bands caused by the screen refresh.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 02:56 PM
link   

When you look at a computer screen with the naked eye you cant perceive the refreshing. If you ever see a computer screen on tv though you can most certainly see the horizontal bands caused by the screen refresh.


excellent point!

I know that humans can now create some sort of invisibility shield thing that wraps light around an object, but i think this particular phenonima (sp?) is slightly different as a "cloaked" ufo would not be visible during or after a photograph. Maybe there is something to the screen refresh idea.. I just think anyone seriously invesitigating the ufo enigma should try different techniques other than just using an ordinary video camera which we know does not always work. I mean how many unique tools do ghost investigators have? Why wouldnt a ufo investigator similiarly have unique video techniques for such an elusive and unknown participant?



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   
A Camera can view more of the light spectrum than the human eye. If a UFO is hiding in the infrared spectrum, we can't see it with the naked eye. However, an infrared camera would view it easily.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   
IMO, ETs have tapped into the human brain's filtering abilities.

For example read up on the blue-field entopic phenomenon.

en.wikipedia.org...

If your brain wasn't constantly filtering out artifacts from within your visual system, you'd see stuff like large webs of veins over everything you see.

Its my belief that extraterrestrials, at least some of them, have studied human physiology to the point that they have created technology that taps into this filtering system and keeps them invisible to us. Yet they are really completely visible.

This explains camera shots that show ETs or UFOs that humans did not otherwise notice when the image was taken.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   
so are you suggesting rather than looking through a open lense when looking for ufos (or with your own eyes) just look at a digital camera's view screen? Thats what i was somewhat thinking... or somesort of goggles that act like a digital view screen.


I've just read so many reports where the witness swears the ufo was not present when the picture was taken, that i thought someone should address this occurance and guesses as to what causes this.

[edit on 15-11-2006 by hiii_98]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   
[edit on 15-11-2006 by Palasheea]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 09:26 PM
link   
[edit on 15-11-2006 by Palasheea]



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Most of the time when ufo's are spotted after the picture was taken, you will find the object to be small, in the background far away and even a similar colour to the background making it harder to spot. And the fact that 100% of your concentration is with the subject in the photo, its not surprising you miss this small object.

You say "days later the photographer reviews old film only too see a giant ufo hover in front of the cameras lense, when at the time of shooting must have been invisible", but I doubt you will find any picture that shows a giant UFO hovering in front of the lense, unseen till development. If you do, I would like to see it.


I am not trying to shoot your idea down and make it look silly, my apologies if it seems that way, its just what I have seen from experience.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
I actually agree. The aliens might not be in a different dimension. They could just have an advanced cloaking technology that the human eye cannot see. Maybe the camera can see the ufo. maybe thats why the ufo's aren't ever in detail because the camera can just pick up the outline.



posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by hiii_98
so are you suggesting rather than looking through a open lense when looking for ufos (or with your own eyes) just look at a digital camera's view screen? Thats what i was somewhat thinking... or somesort of goggles that act like a digital view screen.

I've just read so many reports where the witness swears the ufo was not present when the picture was taken, that i thought someone should address this occurance and guesses as to what causes this.


I assume you'd have to be looking through a camera view screen of some type to see them since otherwise their actual presence would be filtered from your brain.

This happened to great effect in the Cumberland Spaceman photograph.

www.ufoevidence.org...


Whatever was behind the girl in this picture was not seen by the cameraman nor his daughter and it was clearly very close to them.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   

but I doubt you will find any picture that shows a giant UFO hovering in front of the lense, unseen till development. If you do, I would like to see it.
well wouldnt the last posters comments suffice? I remember that case, crazy one, even the ufo's at the test site were invisible to the naked eye until the photos were developed, much less a giant spaceman walking behind a little girl! I mean the good news is even if the "aliens" have some cloaking technology, our current technology will still detect them, however we have to fine tune it for this particular search, as we obviously cannot trust our own eyes. I think this is something that can be turned on or off by the UFO. Or possibly it might have something to do with the propulsion system engaging or disengaging.

Also on a side theory, i starting thinking about why UFO's always seem to fly around in an almost illogical or child-like manner. For example tailing commerial airliners or buzzing trains and the like. I keep asking myself why would our own goverment (if they are at the steering wheel) be so careless? Or a super intelligent race , why would they toy around a airliner with childlike curiousity? Well i cannot pretend to understand an alien mindset, but i do have some familiarity with Artificial Intelligence. I think the ships themselves may be either an entity on their own, or more likely controlled by a complex AI program, that allows the ship to think on its own and to interact with its enviroment for survial and recon purposes. Thus what we deem as unusual and almost illogical manevuers and behaviors by some of these ufos, might really be a complex computer program reflecting moments of curiosity as something of interest invades its similar air space?... Just my random thoughts today, I enjoy hearing yours regarding these topics.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I hadn't read that story Frith thanks for the link.

I guess it comes down to one of these:

1) IMO, ETs have tapped into the human brain's filtering abilities... as suggested by Frith.

2) Their ships having some sort of cloaking device.

3) They're moving too fast for the avg human eye to detect.



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hiii_98

but I doubt you will find any picture that shows a giant UFO hovering in front of the lense, unseen till development. If you do, I would like to see it.
well wouldnt the last posters comments suffice?


If you look at the original picture, I would say the 'spaceman' blends in quite nicely dont you think. And IMO he also looks rather 'cardboard' like!



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I agree with Frith, I think they can influence our brain and make us delibrately not see them. Actually haven't some ET's told this to some encountered individuals?



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Shutter Speed. Eg 1/60th or 1/100 second with the object moving fast coming head-on or straight away from the camera.

Film or Digital camera's can capture the image the human eye cannot. If the object is moving fast left to right or right to left, depending on the speed, a camera may or may not capture it due to it's shutter speed setting. Basic camera techniques for taking pics usually have a section on this for standard moving image shots.

Dallas



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   


but I doubt you will find any picture that shows a giant UFO hovering in front of the lense, unseen till development. If you do, I would like to see it.


Here is one!
Cloaked UFO?

That is exactly what happend to me, I was looking at the sky and saw nothing yet in the photo I captured this object.



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 11:36 PM
link   
There is also the human condition known as agnosia in which even if your optic nerves are undamaged, you can actually be "blind" to what your brain is processing in its visual centers. There are multiple types of agnosia in which a person simply cannot perceive certain things, but see and recognize everything else.

Its most likely far easier to generate some type of pulse or beam that affects the brains of humans to keep them mind-blinded to a specific set of visual criteria than to actually manipulate light to the point of becoming truly invisible.



posted on Nov, 19 2006 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by xSMOKING_GUNx


but I doubt you will find any picture that shows a giant UFO hovering in front of the lense, unseen till development. If you do, I would like to see it.


Here is one!
Cloaked UFO?

That is exactly what happend to me, I was looking at the sky and saw nothing yet in the photo I captured this object.


Your having a laugh right? Your trying to tell me that you took that picture and missed the 'giant UFO hovering in front of you!'. Man, I had to search your photo to find the thing!
In fact I am amazed you managed to see it at all! What are you taking pictures of plain sky for anyway??



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join