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.

 

Second "O'Hare UFO IMAGE"? -- UPDATE: HOAX CONFIRMED

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   

UPDATE: HOAX IMAGE


JRitzman discovered this image to be a confirmed hoax.




ORIGINAL POST:

Yesterday we received an email (see below) via the "Contact ATS Button" that indicated another person had taken a photograph of the O'Hare Airport "UFO". Last night we received the actual image via email.

The image has two photoshop tags in it indicating it was created and modified yesterday. It is plausible the person who sent the image saved it in their computer with photoshop, removed any personal details it may have contained and emailed it to us.

It is also possible they added the UO in photoshop yesterday.

However there are some supporting factors that make this worth bring out for further analysis by our astute Membership...

The sender waited nearly eight hours after our reply to his initial email before sending the image to us. Most hoaxers want their "stuff" up ASAP.

We've been watching for the IP address of the sender in this thread and have not seen it.

We have searched the web for this picture and have not found it anywhere.

This image appears to be taken from inside the terminal and from a different area of the airport. We sent this image to two digital imaging professionals and we hope we will have their take on it shortly.

As usual, we offer this with ZERO endorsement.

The original email:


email received: 25JAN,2007

----Original Message-----
From: (Removed per privacy request) [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:50 PM
To: business@abovetopsecret.net
Subject: ATS CONTACT: new o'hare airport picture


Contact form submission user's IP: (Removed per privacy request)

Contact form submission user's name: Xxxx (Removed per privacy request)

===========================================================



Hi, this probably seems crazy, but I was at o'hair airport in a terminal waiting to board a flight (which happened to be delayed), and I saw the supposed UFO. I snapped a picture with my camera phone. this is not FAKE. It's not a hoax, and it looks somewhat similar to the picture posted, however I think the one already posted might be a fake because in that picture the object looks bigger than in the picture I took. I was looking out one of the terminal windows during that time and snapped the pic. Where can I e-mail the pic to? Also, PLEASE keep my entire name anonymous. if you want, you can use an alias, just don't mention my name.


The image:



Springer...



[edit on 1-2t-2007 by SkepticOverlord]




posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Wasn't it supposed to be metallic?

Peace



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
So this person only took ONE picture as well? If it were me, I would take an establishing shot, maybe like the one posted, then a few more of just the object itself. I find it hard to believe that someone would only take one picture.

Can you contact this person and ask if they took any more?



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   
that is the clearest camera phone photo I have ever seen. to hell with the ufo, I want to know who makes the phone.

the new angle should give jritz et al a bit more digging as to the location of these images.

we now have three pics of this thing. two of them appear to be very similar to other airport pics on the web. one of those has an object that looks like an airplane and has lights which goes against everything the witnesses have said. the other is up in the air as to credibility and now this one.

it keeps getting more interesting



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Is there a logical explanation why he isnt actually pointing the camera at the UFO? Thats what people tend to do when taking a photo of something. Unless he wanted to get a lot of the airport in to prove where he was.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
So this person sees a UO, decides to snap a picture, and very nearly has it 'out of frame'?

I also wanna know who made that phone. That is an amazingly good photo considering the alleged source.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:57 PM
link   
The quality of this image is amazing, considering it came from a cell phone.

I question why all of these pictures always have the UFO being displayed off in the corner, rather than aimed towards the middle. If I am taking an image of something, I am going to make an effort to center the object. Certainly if the object is moving, it would be quite difficult to center it. But in one of these pictures you would expect to see something along those lines.

With that, I've said what I have to say. Back to reading.

This has been very interesting.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Looks just like a cloud at first, but after checking the ufoevidence.org sketches, it really seems to match the report of the sightings. The dark coloration on the underside is what made me put the sketches together with the surfacing image.

Edit: link www.ufoevidence.org...

[edit on 26-1-2007 by bluesquareapple]



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
the out of frame issue might just be the result of the window they were behind. perhaps, given their location, they couldn't get a clearer, unobstructed view.

just a thought



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I don't know that looks like the same thing as in the other picture, just further away. Hmmm... the plot thickens.


And yeah, I agree the framing is questionable, as with the other photo. Maybe they didn't see it when it was taken.

Can you ask the submitter, if they saw the object at the time the photo was taken?



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:02 PM
link   
If you guys keep posting Fakes, this will kill off credibility of ATS. I have been seeing Hoax alerts on Coasttocoast and Rense about the ATS pics. That tarnishes the ATS name, and any "real" footage or pics in the future will not hold credibility.

But then again, what can one do? Nothing!



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
And yeah, I agree the framing is questionable, as with the other photo. Maybe they didn't see it when it was taken.


Just look at the original post: "...and I saw the supposed UFO. I snapped a picture with my camera phone."



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Well I will say that since it's springer posting it with the usual caviat I have to say I am a bit more open minded to the possiblity of it being real.

But it's just so dang hard to tell plus what with all the draamaa in the original o'hare thread coupled with how hoaxers tend to crawl out of the woodwork for whatever reason it's just nearly impossible to decide what is credible when it comes to o'hare.

Don't get me wrong I believe with most everyone on the board that something happened at o'hare but is this part of it? Be nice if it was but I won't hold my breath.

On a completely seperate note Springer can we have a "give this guy an alias contest"? He said you could give him an alias, let's have fun with it.

My entry would be "The Passenger!"...hmmm that sounds much more dramatic in my . what with robert logia's voice and the bumbumbum music and all.

Hope this guy turns out to be sincere...but again with the no breath holding.

As for ATS posting fakes I think there's a subtle but significant difference between posting fakes and promoting them as real as opposed to fakes being posted (and then debunked) during the course of debate...imo of course.

Spiderj



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Postal76
Just look at the original post: "...and I saw the supposed UFO. I snapped a picture with my camera phone."

Well then they had better take some lessons on taking pictures.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Just as a side note, it looks like this shot based on the location of it being taken coinsides with the first shot, and the location of the UO. I looked up a departing flight from American and they leave from gate A20. Now good look at A20, and see the vantage point of where I put the UO as being from the first shot.

Interesting no?

In essence, it's where it should be.

More to come.

[edit on 26-1-2007 by jritzmann]



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
with the sudden influx of photos, I'm awaiting news that the ip of the original sender was traced to New Mexico, that subsequent emails were edited by VM and emailed by BR to try and minimize the risk of getting nailed.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:20 PM
link   
JUst as another side note, I very much doubt this will be the last shot we get...I told Springer to expect more, because this thing was up there for a decent amount of time, in a populated area.

There has to be more...I dont see any way around it.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Is it just me, or do all of these pics seem to contradict the eyewitness reports in a big way?


NUFORC sighting report

As we passed the C Terminal on the Alpha taxiway we observed a dark gray hazy round object hovering over OHare Intl Airport.


Maybe the new ATS Dark Matter layout has warped my idea of what "dark gray" is



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by eaglewingz
Is it just me, or do all of these pics seem to contradict the eyewitness reports in a big way?


NUFORC sighting report

As we passed the C Terminal on the Alpha taxiway we observed a dark gray hazy round object hovering over OHare Intl Airport.


Maybe the new ATS Dark Matter layout has warped my idea of what "dark gray" is


Wouldnt that depend on where you saw it ie inside/outside. From what angle you viewed it, from what distance etc, position of sun and light reflection, all these variables would account for discrepencies of witness testimony compared to pictures. The human eye and memory are more unpredictable that a photo would be imo.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Springer any chance of getting a copy of the fullsize image with the exif data intact?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join