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: 94
99
<< 91  92  93    95  96  97 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by boombabyboom
I think I have a couple shots of the same thing you guys are talking about and when I looked on the map of where I think I took the picture, it was near the nuke plant!


(Emphasis added by myself)

Hold on here. You're saying that the pictures you have show a similar UFO over a nuclear facility? Which one?




posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by boombabyboom
Okay sorry for taking so long I've been busy with school.
Thanks for the idea of emailing the pic to myself that did it.
I think I have a couple shots of the same thing you guys are talking about and when I looked on the map of where I think I took the picture, it was near the nuke plant!

But damn people, I don't want to do interviews and all that #.
For personal reasons I don't want to be involved and some of you really dig deep into this ufo thing.
How can I stay out of this if I want to just upload my picture and you guys do the rest?


If you will use the "CONTACT ATS" Button on the bottom of the home page (it creates an email form) and put your email address in there I'll send you my email address you can forward the image to.

Or you can click this link: www.abovetopsecret.com... to find out how to submit the image anonymously and directly to the site.

Now I have to ask, did you say NUCLEAR ENERGY PLANT?!


Springer...



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   
One of those UFO pictures is fake!!!! I found out that its a mirrored version of a original picture of O'hare which has been used in the youtube audio interview.

WATCH!!
Copy this link to your browser!:
img179.imageshack.us...


external image

[edit on 4-2-2007 by AIRmichael]

~~~~~~~~~

Pic too large....stretching page

[edit on 5/2/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by AIRmichael
One of those UFO pictures is fake!!!! I found out that its a mirrored version of a original picture of O'hare which has been used in the youtube audio interview.
[edit on 4-2-2007 by AIRmichael]


Thanks...but that's already been posted here WAY back. The image was found on Google about 20 or so pages back, which is probably where the person that put up the YouTube video got it from.

Hydden



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Just got off the phone with Mr. Hilkevitch, extremely nice guy.
He has not received any images yet either. He plans on doing another story and is not giving up on this story either.


I also spoke with Linda Moulton Howe a minute ago she has NEW REPORTS on her site www.EarthFiles.com from what she says are VERY credible witnesses of yet more weirdness in the Chicago Skies.

Definitely need to check this out, huge and these guys mean HUGE (500 - 1000 feet huge) crafts in the sky, two different witnesses both vetted by Linda.


Springer...



[edit on 2-5-2007 by Springer]



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Definitely need to check this out, huge and these guys mean HUGE (500 - 1000 feet huge) crafts in the sky, two different witnesses both vetted by Linda.


Springer...
[edit on 2-5-2007 by Springer]


Very glad (relieved) to hear that Mr. H of the Trib "made it back" from his vacation.

In a previous post I suggested that the object seen over O'Hare was, at 20-25 feet in diameter, "too small" to be an interstellar vehicle, and wondered "Where was the mothership?".

Just goes to prove "Be Careful of What You Wish For...You Might just get It!"


[edit on 5-2-2007 by Bhadhidar]



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Just got off the phone with Mr. Hilkevitch, extremely nice guy.
He has not received any images yet either. He plans on doing another story and is not giving up on this story either.


I also spoke with Linda Moulton Howe a minute ago she has NEW REPORTS on her site www.EarthFiles.com from what she says are VERY credible witnesses of yet more weirdness in the Chicago Skies.

Definitely need to check this out, huge and these guys mean HUGE (500 - 1000 feet huge) crafts in the sky, two different witnesses both vetted by Linda.


Springer...

[edit on 2-5-2007 by Springer]


This is great news as i thought that this was starting to drop of the radar(no pun intended).
Surely sightings of something that BIG would be making some waves in the mainstream media.



posted on Feb, 5 2007 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Just got off the phone with Mr. Hilkevitch, extremely nice guy.
He has not received any images yet either. He plans on doing another story and is not giving up on this story either.



Thanks for keepin' us up to date, Springer.


Did he seem aware of the the renewed interest, in this story? (i.e.- internet, tv news, etc)

Did he voice any opinion, or genuine interest in covering this type of subject?

In fact, I'd be interested to hear any other impressions, or info you got from Mr.H ,
if you're of a mind, to relate 'em.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Anything you may relate about your concerstaion would be interesting....springer.
Meantime we seem to be flagging here,
Without more input this thread and consequently us are out of ammo.
I think its time to develope a sort of standard plan to deal with these reports which can be adhered to without a pile of dithering back and forth before hand,
who may have come forth if we had put an add in the trib immediately,maybe the akroid film could have come this way...who knows?
I think the overall slow reaction was the death of this thread.While every one argued about pics and nhoaxes the real fiilm got away....
perhaps thats over stated but perhaps not.
The less progress i see in this area among ats people, the more im inclined to think that this is another disinformation ploy.
Who knows who is registered here...
The problem is that everyone is interested in giving opinions but most arent even interested enough to read the whole thread.Let alone contribute in a meaning full way.might as
well be gazing up a dead horse if this keeps up.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 01:24 AM
link   
I have never seen a real ufo in my entire life, but I do believe that the pilots at the Chicago International Airport did see an alien spacecraft.

I mean look at all this. 3 different sightings since the beginning of 2007, this year, 1 sighting before 2007 on November 2006.

1. Pilots spot a UFO above Chicago O'Hare International Airport.

2. A mysterious meteorite crashes into a New Jersey home.

3. UFO found in Hawaii skies.

4. UFO found in Australia

I have a feeling the truth is about to be revealed this year, just watch, I know it.
Something big is about to happen.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 02:13 AM
link   
where was the one in Australia? Is there a thread for it?
I saw some pretty unusual stuff the other night above Sydney. There was a weird bright light in the sky which seemed to appare there and when i took photos of it it was like a weird snake thinig that keeps moving round and breaking apart and putting it self back together



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by funky monk
where was the one in Australia? Is there a thread for it?
I saw some pretty unusual stuff the other night above Sydney. There was a weird bright light in the sky which seemed to appare there and when i took photos of it it was like a weird snake thinig that keeps moving round and breaking apart and putting it self back together





please post these



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Well... after I had some time to devote to this subject, I'm of the opinion that the picture from "000000" is a fabrication. All due respect to jritzman and his analysis skills, I've managed some pretty hot-shot Photoshop experts in my day-job, and it's pretty much possible to fake anything in a digital image and be completely untraceable. There are even tools now to create and modify EXIF data. -sheesh-

I firmly believe many people saw something fantastic at the O'Hare airport that ends up being exceptionally embarrassing for "the government" on a great many levels. Even though I've previously been highly skeptical of the possibility of extraterrestrial visitation, based on the stories of this object, I this sighting is one of the very rare ones that could be of non-earthly origins.

So if this image is faked (I think it is), it's perhaps the most unusual fake we've ever seen... which leads to an interesting question... why?

It's very different than anything some "kiddie" hoaxer would create, we've seen lots of those.

I go back to one of our first knee-jerk reactions... was this image intended to discredit the entire sighting?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   
SO-I dont know that Biedny and I completely disagree with you. As he's said, it seems to be a legitimate image, that has been tampered with. I cannot personally drop it to a hoax when I've got a witness who had no idea where I'd pegged the object...then then coinsides with where she saw it initially. (Forget the Photoshop stuff, after all there's not much to go on anyway as we said)

This is a witness account unknown to any hoxer (or any of us for that matter) at the time of possible fabrication. I dont see any real way to account for that.

Yes you can do clean composite work, but again, whats the incentive for that kind of work. I think we've shown alot of those aspects of ridiculous subtle changes and points that wouldnt be made if this was a garden variety fake. That in some ways is more interesting as well. Again, I dont disagree with you that this might have been tampered with to discredit the sighting...or even possibly ATS and it's members.

Any way you cut it, it's a suspect image. Whether it's a legit or not. Really unfortunate. Have to wait and hope for more.

[edit on 6-2-2007 by jritzmann]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann
This is a witness account unknown to any hoxer (or any of us for that matter) at the time of possible fabrication. I dont see any real way to account for that.


Well. there are easily two ways to account for that...

1) The image and witness are two tactics in a discrediting strategy. This seems unlikely as "Eyewitness" comes across genuine, but hey, this is a site where we speculate on conspiracies. (And would not be the first time in the long history of UFOlogy where "witnesses" have been created... no offense to Eyewitness, just stating a historical fact.)

2) The image is an exceptional coincidence. There are rarely exceptional coincidences, but they do happen.

I'm feeling like we're back in the middle of Serpo again.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
2) The image is an exceptional coincidence. There are rarely exceptional coincidences, but they do happen.


What worries me the most is the "coincidence" that Eyewitness and that image agree on the location of the thing which is NOT the same location as in the other accounts. To my understanding it's not even close. And it just strikes me that this doesn't seem to bother anyone.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Sorry if this post comes across as a little heated, I mean no offense to anyone here.

But why the heck are we still debating the photo? I mean yes it needed to be analyzed as evidence, but you can only go over a picture so much until you determine what jritzman had ... that it is probably tampered with but at such a high level so as to question the tampering in the first place. Thusly, it really yields no DIRECT insight into how to break this thing open. Disinfo? Possibly. Someone getting their kicks and showing off their mad ph0to5hop hax0r skills? Sure. But at this point, this picture is not going to do anything other than cloud the issue and spawn more fakes.

It seems that Springer (via phone calls and other forms of communication) and myself (by going to O'Hare, albeit just that once) are the only ones from ATS doing any REAL leg work on this. Now granted I know everyone can't fly out to Chicago and ask every person they see if they saw a UFO, but it seems like everyone is content to sit behind their computers and just wait for someone else to pick up the slack.

I am off today, but the weather is bad (not TOO bad snow-wise, but the roads are slick as hell and visibility is crap here in the southern suburbs) ... otherwise I'd make another trip to the vicinity of O'Hare again.

I mean it's great to want disclosure, but you have to fight for it. Remaining passive will yield you nothing more than a label as a UFO nut.

EDIT: horrible grammar


[edit on 6-2-2007 by Fiverz]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
Sorry if this post comes across as a little heated, I mean no offense to anyone here.

But why the heck are we still debating the photo? I mean yes it needed to be analyzed as evidence, but you can only go over a picture so much until you determine what jritzman had ... that it is probably tampered with but at such a high level so as to question the tampering in the first place. Thusly, it really yields no DIRECT insight into how to break this thing open. Disinfo? Possibly. Someone getting their kicks and showing off their mad ph0to5hop hax0r skills? Sure. But at this point, this picture is not going to do anything other than cloud the issue and spawn more fakes.


You have to ask why we are still debating the photo? Because it's the only photo that has had arguments in favor of it being legitimate. That's why.

As for the "high level" tampering. As someone that uses Photoshop, I'm inclined to think the opposite. If I had to guess, someone snapped a shot of the source photo on their dirty monitor. Of course I could be wrong and it may be unaltered. We'll never know for sure.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by bizone
You have to ask why we are still debating the photo? Because it's the only photo that has had arguments in favor of it being legitimate. That's why.


That's fine ... but even if we declare this picture to be a hoax, it is no indication that the event itself is a hoax. I mean if your tire on your car goes flat, do you go searching down the highway for the nail that caused the hole, or do you go look for a replacement for the tire? What I'm getting at is too much time is being spent on this picture, rather than doing REAL work trying to find out more details on the event. This picture, even if it is real, is not going to be enough proof of the event for the majority of the public anyways. We need eyewitness testimony.


Originally posted by bizone
As for the "high level" tampering. As someone that uses Photoshop, I'm inclined to think the opposite. If I had to guess, someone snapped a shot of the source photo on their dirty monitor. Of course I could be wrong and it may be unaltered. We'll never know for sure.


My point exactly.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I submit to you a 2 minute excerpt from the movie/DVD, "Fastwalkers."

The description that Alan G. Tolman, Aerospace Engineer, gives as his experience is strikingly similar to the O'Hare description....including the method of departure.

Please do not take into account the pictures of the UFO's that are planted during the interview (as in all UFO doc's) but instead, imagine him describing the O'Hare sighting.

Eerie...



Hydden



new topics

top topics



 
99
<< 91  92  93    95  96  97 >>

log in

join