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.

 

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

page: 34
99
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Palasheea
And finally, this photo is showing a very foggy day... not just an overcast -- IT'S SHOWING FOG. Not one witness who has so far come forward to describe that sighting ever said anything about it being foggy out that day at 4:30 PM.


That's kinda what struck me too, it looked good other than it would be pretty difficult to punch a hole in that. A thin layer of clouds maybe, but not fog...




posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann
Ok I'm early in this as of yet, I just been busy with so much else...

In looking on Google Image Search for shots of O'Hare I found this shot, which shows an issue of airplane congestion on incoming flights:


You can see the image here, at this link from Google

I was looking for shots that might have been manipulated, or I thought I might come across the same vantage point by some stretch of luck.

But, I noticed it was a little strange that certain angles matched the degrees of the Ohare UFO shot, like the bend in the runway. So I overlayed them. This animation might take a couple secs to load but here's a dissolve on the two:



What I notice is there's either a slight bit of lens distortion IF they arent the same picture. OR, I just cant get them aligned right, which might be due in part to being manipulated for making it into the UFO shot. I've aligned them as best I can right now. Again, there's certain angles like the runway that line up so close it's hard to ascribe to luck in positioning. It's really, really close.

What I note is the wicked similarity of stationary objects, and the lights on the horizon area. We dont see them in the UFO shot. But, when you look back and forth between the congestion and the UFO shot, the UFO shot seems to have dark areas around where the lights *should* be. Could they be painted over? Cloned over with treeline? Seems possible to me.

This begs the question to me: If the UFO shot is overcast, and somewhat dark, and the congestion shot seems to be the same, why arent those lights on? You'd think they'd be auto-eye controlled. Maybe the exposure of the cell phone doesnt depict the light conditions, but it was 4:30, reportedly just before dark. I think those lights oughtta be on...thats just me.

Manipulated? I dunno yet. I can say the grain or noise of the UFO photo appears to be very uniform, but I cant say thats exactly out of the nature of a cell phone cam.

I try to picture someone wanting to fake this shot, and coming across this picture (congestion) and thinking that this almost looks like a UFO shot already.

Now, if it IS NOT the same picture manipulated into a UFO shot, then we're looking at a photo thats taken exceedingly close to the same position of the UFO one. We're currently looking into finding a map of the airport so we can determine if this object was indeed over the gate area as desribed. (unless someone has already done that)

Just an interesting shot I wanted to show, might be a clue. I'll keep diggin.



Holy crap is this the smoking gun? This is IDENTICAL.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   
The vantage point looks to be at the end of a runway. I do not know the layout of Ohare. Can that view be seen from the terminal or out on a street or highwway? Maybe it can only be seen from the airport property accessible by ground crew? Maybe an employee took either or both pics.

Would be nice to know the details of the landing photo by carbon.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Geez, great work, so much for 00000000.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:51 PM
link   
seems like none of you really compared the two pics (besides those bad excuses why it has the adobe string in...)

look at both pics.

you'll notice the different backgrounds, next look at the runway of both pics...they're not taken from the same position.

the faked pic shows that the guy who took the pic stands on the ground.

the ohare pic was taken from inside a plane (perhabs the plane was about to make a touchdown...looks like) the angle is not the same as in the faked pic.

and the ufo in the ohare pic is not at the same height as the plane.
img267.imageshack.us...




[edit on 24-1-2007 by AgainstSecrecy]



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Looks identical to me.

J-ritz puts another notch on his belt!


Peace



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy
oh c'mon man, bad excuse...really.

"no! it's no fake"


but it's funny...a picture that was not edited by some software and has no tags in the code is claimed to be a hoax? lame

reverse logic...


Dude, you believe whatever ya want, I been doin this long enough to know what I'm talkin about. I never said this was a hoaxed shot, but if you can sit there and tell me there isnt absolute matches in stationary objects youre blind. If it's not faked it's absolutely at the same vantage point. Thats going to tell us something down the line. I dont wanna believe sh&^t, I wanna know.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

Dude, you believe whatever ya want, I been doin this long enough to know what I'm talkin about.

you mean debunking? dunno, i don't know you. and i could care less about a faked picture.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I don't see fog I see crappy cell phone image noise. When sharpened the noise reduces and the "air" is clear, that's not fog.
This picture may be "fake" but not because of fog.

JRitzmann's observation is the best evidence yet that it could be a fake but that is "up in the air" still I guess too. I would imagine O'Hare, like most major airports is photographed hundreds of times a day and there is bound to be several images of that show the same area.

While I am not ready to accept this is "the" picture we've all been waiting for, I would hate to think we had the "real image" and blew it off out of hand too.

The poster was hiding behind a proxy server which is unusual for a hoaxer in our experience, they usually don't care about their IP address because there isn't any danger in posting hoaxes beyond getting banned.

I am still on the proverbial fence on this one. I am hopeful "Rampagentx" or "Pagasus" will come back and let us know their thoughts on this one.


Springer...



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Hello,

I am new to this site but have worked 2 blocks from Ohare for the past 10 years. I know the area well and have friends in alot of industries that are significant to this amazing story. I work in ELk Grove Village in an industrial area that sits up against the new Ohare expansion area. I have friends in the media and at the airport and all I can say is that there is sooo much more to this story. From people that I have talked to it seems that the military had a significant presence during the sighting. Thats an angle that should be explored. I happen to know some really interesting people and they all give me the impression that this is real. I really can't say more which is not to say I know more only that I can't exactly disclose who I know. It definitely feels like something is about to happen.. I don't know what that means only that there is a feeling shared by many that we are on the verge. Could that be the discovery of other lifeforms? Who knows.


AS



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   

You have voted jritzmann for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Great work! The overlay comparison you presented seems to point to the O'Hare photo posted by 000000 as being a fake. Awesome work. Whoever thinks that these photos are not identical needs a softdrink and a place to sit down and rest lol.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ultraterrestrial
Holy crap is this the smoking gun? This is IDENTICAL.

It obviously is not.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
It took too long to come out. If it were real it would have been out long before now. That's just how I feel ... why'd it take so long?

I'm calling hoax on this one. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy
seems like none of you really compared the two pics (besides those bad excuses why it has the adobe string in...)

look at both pics.

you'll notice the different backgrounds, next look at the runnway of both pics...they're not taken from the same position.

the faked pic shows that the guy who took the pic stands on the ground.

the ohare pic was taken from inside a plane (perhabs the plane was about to make a touchdown...looks like) the angle is not the same as in the faked pic.

and the ufo in the ohare pic is not at the same height as the plane.
img267.imageshack.us...



[edit on 24-1-2007 by AgainstSecrecy]


I think jritzmann nailed this one. Do you seriously think that a picture purporting to show CONGESTION at O'Hare was faked?? Why would someone want to fake that? Those lights aren't supposed to be UFOs, just in case you didn't realize.

As for the pictures being taken from different angles, it just looks like the "congestion" picture was blown up a bit, cropped, and rotated slightly clockwise. A good way to throw people off your tracks if you are a hoaxer, no? But I think the similarity in distance, viewpoint, and background objects is far from a coincidence - this one is surely a hoax.

Good job Jritz


P.S. If we all stop posting on this thread now and let it lose popularity again, maybe we'll get another crappy camera phone pic from a throwaway account! Maybe this time it will be from the mysterious poster "11111111."

[edit on 24-1-2007 by Postal76]



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
I don't see fog I see crappy cell phone image noise. When sharpened the noise reduces and the "air" is clear, that's not fog.


That may very well be. But in all the sharpening I saw, it still looked like pretty thick cloud cover that would seem hard to see a hole in, but I'm no expert as far as cell cameras go, I don't even have one, lol.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
I don't see fog I see crappy cell phone image noise. When sharpened the noise reduces and the "air" is clear, that's not fog.
This picture may be "fake" but not because of fog.

JRitzmann's observation is the best evidence yet that it could be a fake but that is "up in the air" still I guess too. I would imagine O'Hare, like most major airports is photographed hundreds of times a day and there is bound to be several images of that show the same area.

While I am not ready to accept this is "the" picture we've all been waiting for, I would hate to think we had the "real image" and blew it off out of hand too.

The poster was hiding behind a proxy server which is unusual for a hoaxer in our experience, they usually don't care about their IP address because there isn't any danger in posting hoaxes beyond getting banned.

I am still on the proverbial fence on this one. I am hopeful "Rampagentx" or "Pagasus" will come back and let us know their thoughts on this one.


Springer...


You are right Springer, it's probably looking like it does because it's taken with a crappy camera. This probably explains why this photo looks so foggy.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy
The pic you found is a fake...here is the code:

ÿØÿà JFIF  d d ÿì Ducky   < ÿî Adobe dÀ ÿÛ „   



   

ÿÀ  È  ÿÄ ™         !1AQaq‘"¡±ðÁÑ2áB’#ñRb‚3²ÂÒâSc$T   !1AQaq"‘Áá2RÿÚ   ? ÷]~ AÔR±Ôߊ§È¦­ƒþÄJŽ‚¢Êÿ

adobe...cooooooooool *irony*...anyway nice try.


Whats fake? The airport? LOL...because there's an adobe tag doesnt mean it's "fake" as you say. Thats in there when it's sized, saved as a different format, or compressed for web use...among alot of other reasons.

Nah I dont think the congestion shot is "fake". If the incoming lights are fake, thats not the airport, nor the buildings, nor the skyline.

[edit on 24-1-2007 by jritzmann]


Jeff please show/post WHERE you found this alleged photo. You say you randomly found it on google? Show us where rather than showing us its location on your own personal server, until then there will be suspicion that you have faked it.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgainstSecrecy
seems like none of you really compared the two pics (besides those bad excuses why it has the adobe string in...)

look at both pics.

you'll notice the different backgrounds, next look at the runnway of both pics...they're not taken from the same position.

the faked pic shows that the guy who took the pic stands on the ground.

the ohare pic was taken from inside a plane (perhabs the plane was about to make a touchdown...looks like) the angle is not the same as in the faked pic.

and the ufo in the ohare pic is not at the same height as the plane.
img267.imageshack.us...



[edit on 24-1-2007 by AgainstSecrecy]


Inside the plane huh. Care to prove that one? Because I for one would like to see that. So go ahead.

However make sure you align the picture to match known stationary objects, unlike your lop-sided comparison which isnt. If someone were to have faked this, they surely wouldnt use the same photo unaltered.

Now I'm a debunker huh? LOL, man....truly clueless. I'm still wiping tears from my eyes at the "inside a plane" remark.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Postal76
I think jritzmann nailed this one. Do you seriously think that a picture purporting to show CONGESTION at O'Hare was faked?? Why would someone want to fake that? Those lights aren't supposed to be UFOs, just in case you didn't realize.

As for the pictures being taken from different angles, it just looks like the "congestion" picture was blown up a bit, cropped, and rotated slightly clockwise. A good way to throw people off your tracks if you are a hoaxer, no? But I think the similarity in distance, viewpoint, and background objects is far from a coincidence - this one is surely a hoax.

"Do you seriously think that a picture purporting to show CONGESTION at O'Hare was faked??"
dunno why the faker did that, but it is obviously a fake.

"Those lights aren't supposed to be UFOs, just in case you didn't realize."
where did i wrote that those planlights are ufos? nowhere!

to the rest: I doubt that. but nice try

you guys should read my signature before you're trying to convince me



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ultraterrestrial
Jeff please show/post WHERE you found this alleged photo. You say you randomly found it on google? Show us where rather than showing us its location on your own personal server, until then there will be suspicion that you have faked it.


I did. It's on my original post of the dissolve. It's at the "google" link.



new topics

top topics



 
99
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join