Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

O'Hare Airport UFO Sighting -- UPDATE: Photos & Analysis

page: 28
93
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeddyhi

Originally posted by zeeon
I'm kind of dissapointed in the slow response to this photograph. People have been asking for this thing for weeks now - and here it is - and all we have in the last hour or so is 3 replys. I thinks that kind of sluggish if you ask me...

Come on ATS'ers - Disseminate this shiznit !


Try putting it in a new thread with a title that mentions a photo of alleged O'Hare incident. I'm a member here and I just happened to find this photo through an off site link!!!

It needs it's own thread!


Maybe we need some moderator assistance to get the word out ! Maybe they could change the big header from the Ed Brown situation to something more like "Alleged photo of Ohare UFO Sighting Released!" or anything catchy like that




posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:13 PM
link   
ok fellas I did some editing and the one is quite amazing I think.. gimme a sec to post them



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:23 PM
link   
this one I liked alot

This one I thought was quite amazing... kinda takes the shape of a ship when i outline the solid objects

image 4

image 5

image 6

image 7

image 8

image 9


Now I liked the second one the best..... it kinda looks like a ship... I also pixelated the image... and nothing out of the ordinary.. it's definitly part of the photo



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Those are amazing ! Great Job l0rds!

Another poster had mentioned the possiblity of the ufo actually being a water droplet ... what do you guys think?



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   
could be water, but I would thing it would amplify the section of the pic where the water was, or make it blurry, but it doesnt..... I can confirm though that it wasn't added to the photo... I looked at the pixels, and it is for sure part of the original pic.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   


it kinda looks like a ship


Yeah it does, but that only because of that effect.

4th one down looks quite good,bit like an old photo from the early 1900.

It DOES have "rain drops on the lens" characteristics, which worries me regarding its authenticity.

Where has this pic come from? who came foward with this, how did this come about?

Sorry if it was mentioned in previous a previous post, but my Internet connection is playing up, and ill be lucky to get the page loaded before tomorow


cheers



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:45 PM
link   
basically an annonymous poster. named 00000000



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Thats a good point ... who is this anonymous poster?
It would definately be nice to have some background on where the photo was taken, how it sits geopgraphically in correlation with O'hare International's layout and time of day etc.

Whoever posted this please .... can you provide any information??



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Ok, i looked back at the page with "00000000".

Obviously (maybe), extremly "care-less" hurried account sign up. No care or thought for name. Unless "00000000" is his/her "thing"


One thing i was wondering, as this is, "anonymous" poster saying "a "friend" sent him this saying he was at the airport...

And you KNOW some VERY sad individuals get a kick out of making an "impact" like this in the form of "attention seeking" hoaxes.

...Is there any way to assertain Where/when this was taken, VIA google maps, arial photos of the airport,light angles/hue etc.

We know ROUGHLY where the craft was, im assumming the lights at the bottom of the pic is a runway.

Is there anyway to assertain what the "messy dark" area is,making up the horizon?


[edit on 23-1-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
Ok, i looked back at the page with "00000000".

Obviously (maybe), extremly "care-less" hurried account sign up. No care or thought for name. Unless "00000000" is his/her "thing"


One thing i was wondering, as this is, "anonymous" poster saying "a "friend" sent him this saying he was at the airport...

And you KNOW some VERY sad individuals get a kick out of making an "impact" like this in the form of "attention seeking" hoaxes.

...Is there any way to assertain Where/when this was taken, VIA google maps, arial photos of the airport,light angles/hue etc.

We know ROUGHLY where the craft was, im assumming the lights at the bottom of the pic is a runway.

Is there anyway to assertain what the "messy dark" area is,making up the horizon?


[edit on 23-1-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]


excellent idea man

my maths isnt that great, but if we could figure out where this photo is taken from, using the forground airport as a reference, we can use triganometry(?) to tell wether the object in this photo is in the correct location (gate 3c i think it was)



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:06 PM
link   
apparently they are not going to say anything, considering he posted and jetted.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   
Hmmmmm. This is really getting more interesting. I think the only way to prove the authenticity of the picture is to produce more supporting data or anything from the one who sent this.

I wonder how the ATS Mods are taking this one.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I registered here because of this thread and have been following it with great interest (have never been to this site before being linked to this story through Rense.com).

With that said, here is my deduction of the photograph and of my knowledge:

1. It was posted anonymously by a user whose registration date for this site is January 23 (today). Most likely it is someone who works at the airport, or someone who knows someone that works at the airport or it is the original poster rampagext's new alias since 1. he told us he wants to stay "under the radar for a bit" so to speak and 2. he is the one that initially told us that he has heard of a photo and he will attempt to obtain it. However for the time being let's play down this situation because we do not need to expose rampage becaues he is doing a valiant and valuable thing here.

2. The photograph seems to be very consistent to me, with the information that I have about the actual sighting.

A. The UFO in the photograph matches perfectly the physical descriptions that we have, of being oval and fuzzy looking (the quote about it being 'hard to focus on')

B. The photograph seems to match exactly the height of said UFO. It was supposedly around 1000 to 1500 ft if I can remember and from my judgement in the photograph that is the altitude I would describe it at.

C. The SKY/WEATHER condition matches identically in the photograph to the original reports of the sky being very overcast with low clouds etc.

3. As for the elevation of the photograph here is my assumption: the most initial reports that came out said that it was a PILOT who had opened up the plane windows and taken a picture with a cell phone cam, I remember this particular detail specifically. Thus the height from which the photograph was taken can be explained it seems to me by the fact that it is being taken out of a plane window by a pilot.

4. The "rain drop" theory to me seems inconsistent with the shape of the UFO. In my opinion, a raindrop which is flying downwards from the sky, upon hitting the lens would form an oval that is extended VERTICALLY in its length not horizontally as the force of impact against the lens would force it to extend DOWNARD. How would a raindrop form a horizontally extended oval? To me that seems implausible. Furthermore, if there is a light rain or drizzle what are the chances that only ONE perfect raindrop would have hit the lens rather than multiple ones?

5. Now for some skepticism to play devil's advocate: Why is the UFO not centered in the photograph and is so completely out of the center of the shot as to be in the remote upper right hand corner?

6. Secondly, if someone did have access to a camera and has seen such an incredible sight as a UFO hovering over O'Hare, why would they take only one such poor photograph? Why is there not multiple if not MANY photographs from this same source and why are there no shots of the parted clouds beneath blue sky after the UFO had shot up through the clouds? Surely, if there is a worker with a camera watching and taking a photo of this incredible occurrence, surely he would take multiple photos and wait until the UFO is gone for certain before being content to pack away his camera. Who would be content to look up at a once in a lifetime sighting of a UFO, shoot one mediocre/poor quality shot and then stuff their camera into their back pocket? Of course one possible explanation is that this photo is the tip of the iceberg OR at the least there are several others in existence (perhaps anonymous user would like to upload the rest for us?). However, if this was the case, why are these photos being released literally MONTHS after the initial incident?? Certainly something is off here. Perhaps the whistleblower is sort of 'testing the waters' a bit first.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:20 PM
link   


excellent idea man


Why
thankyou very much.

So we need some one in here with "fair£ mathematical skill and meanwhile someone could pull up everything they can using ariel photos, google earth, ground shots etc.

Im going to bed now as its 5:11am here, But i certainly don't mind doing some searches tomorrow.

Links and pics/images should be put up of the area, PERTICULARLY a few pics on the thread, for quick/easy viewing and something refer back to.

Turn it into abit of a research project. If anything, knowl;edge is a GOOD thing, and it would be both useful AND nice if everyone viewng this thread was privy to research data regarding location etc.

Just think, we COULD be the first (ie ATS), with a pic of the incident, and we should make the most of it, which INCLUEDS doing our BEST to verify its authenticity.....

Keeping up the quality of ATS tradition.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Furthermore, I forgot to mention something very important.
Here is a direct quote from the Chicago Tribune's story on this:




The sighting occurred during daylight, about 4:30 p.m., just before sunset.


One of the first things I noticed in the photograph is that it seems to be taken right before sundown as one can readily see that it's beginning to get dark. Hence, this would perfectly align with the event having occurred at around 4:30 pm of Nov7, "just before sunset" as the article states.

Personally my verdict is that this photograph is almost certainly authentic. I just refuse to believe that there is only one in existence, there has to be much more, if not entire cell phone videos etc that people are for some reason withholding.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:28 PM
link   
It does make sense that the people have described the object as "fuzzy looking." Maybe this is the result of looking at an object that is using anti-gravity devices?



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Ultraterrestrial...

VERY good break down of the situation, from both sides of the fence




the most initial reports that came out said that it was a PILOT who had opened up the plane windows and taken a picture with a cell phone cam


This is good, when i was looking at the pic, there was "something" i couldnt put my finger on, and what you just said "CLICKED" with what i was thinking.

this is indeed, a good possibilty


and the other points you made, hieght elevation, weather conditions, object not centralised.

Top marks my man



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   





posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Exellent!!

If you want to put an image up on the post so its visable to all, just use the B/W computer/paint-pallet icon (10th in from left), and add URL.



posted on Jan, 23 2007 @ 11:39 PM
link   


If someone knows (im afraid i dont) how to mark WHERE,as accurately as they can...on the image and repost it, that would be great.

All helps to give a nice perspective on the situation.

Nice work ultra


[edit on 23-1-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]

[edit on 23-1-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]





new topics

top topics



 
93
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join