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.

 

For all those who say "derrr where are the clear photos of UFO's"

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I have been seeing alot of members on ATS say time and time again "where are these CLEAR UFO photo's ?" there are 1000000's of them here is just one

For the lazy members click here

Now unless you work for a professional photographic analysis lab id rather not hear you say "photoshop photoshop" or "hub cap" or better yet "this has been debunked by my 17 year old bother with PS 1.0"

So really now its just a matter of WHEN YOU CAN ACCEPT WHATS IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES
and stop making excuses for your inability to handle/accept the truth, UFO's ARE REAL !!!!!

[edit on 18-2-2007 by helium3]




posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   
While I'm skeptical, I acknowledge UFOs by definition. I've seen UFOs, written about UFOs, but I just don't make the leap of faith in thinking these are extraterrestrial craft. I don't think they are.

When you think about it, virtually all of the UFOs we know and love have only been seen in the vicinity of Earth. Even the best shots of them in space are still only about 300 miles above Earth — and, no, I don't count Billy Meier's interplanetary photo gallery as evidence to the contrary.


So I'm almost convinced, just based on available evidence, that 100% of UFOs (including the unexplainable variety) are strictly homegrown, right here on Earth.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 2/18/2007 by Doc Velocity]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by helium3
I have been seeing alot of members on ATS say time and time again "where are these CLEAR UFO photo's ?" there are 1000000's of them here is just one

For the lazy members click here

Now unless you work for a professional photographic analysis lab id rather not hear you say "photoshop photoshop" or "hub cap" or better yet "this has been debunked by my 17 year old bother with PS 1.0"

So really now its just a matter of WHEN YOU CAN ACCEPT WHATS IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES
and stop making excuses for your inability to handle/accept the truth, UFO's ARE REAL !!!!!

[edit on 18-2-2007 by helium3]



There's a lot missing here. Even an untampered-with photograph is just an image on a focal plane. It's nothing like being there. If you make that claim that something in the image is anomalous, you need to support that claim with more than the images in question.

Just off the bat, I have several beefs:

  • There is no supporting technical data offered.
  • These are low resolution scans. Why not post the full res?
  • There are no calibration shots. In that landscape, the scale is almost impossible to estimate. The object could be 2 feet across or 40 feet. All they had to do was have someone stand in the scene to get some scale.


This is typical of "UFO Evidence." they either don't know what evidence is, or don't care.

Really high quality photographic evidence is very hard to come by. I think your estimate of the numbers is off by orders of magnitude.


[edit on 18-2-2007 by disownedsky]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
While I'm skeptical, I acknowledge UFOs by definition. I've seen UFOs, written about UFOs, but I just don't make the leap of faith in thinking these are extraterrestrial craft. I don't think they are.



I think alot of people either forget or just don't understand this statement that UFO are just that unidentified flying objects. Which addresses my next big question:

Are UFO's crafts piloted by intelligent beings not from this earth ?, that will be LOT HARDER to prove then the UFO phenomenon.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by disownedsky


Just off the bat, I have several beefs:

  • There is no supporting technical data offered.
  • These are low resolution scans. Why not post the full res?
  • There are no calibration shots. In that landscape, the scale is almost impossible to estimate. The object could be 2 feet across or 40 feet. All they had to do was have someone stand in the scene to get some scale.


This is typical of "UFO Evidence." they either don't know what evidence is, or don't care.


Why is it that UFO photos have to stand up to the MOST SCRUTINY KNOW TO MAN ?.

Elvis

There is a photo of Elvis now do you need or require "supporting technical data" or "calibration shots" to believe this is the King ?. NO, But yet a UFO photos seems to require extraordinary amounts of data to accompany it, for people to believe what in front of them ?. Id love to know why this is ?.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by helium3

Why is it that UFO photos have to stand up to the MOST SCRUTINY KNOW TO MAN ?.


Wow, I foresee someone just going off on this question.

My brief response would be that when you're making amazing claims, it necessitates thorough evdence and proof.

I think people mistake "skeptics" as having an agenda. Most "skeptics" around here that I've obeserved just have the agenda of maintaining their credibility and wanting the truth.

It just seems that people have different philosophies about the cases they're presented.

A lot of people around here seem to believe cases are extraterrestrial by default. Is this really the scientific way to approach an incredibly important field of research.

Fine by me if you want to be "a believer". Please for the sake of all of us though, objectively analyze on a case by case basis.





[edit on 2/18/2007 by lagos]



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by helium3
So really now its just a matter of WHEN YOU CAN ACCEPT WHATS IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES and stop making excuses for your inability to handle/accept the truth, UFO's ARE REAL!!!!!


So what exactly are you getting at? That there are odd things flying around in the sky (although this one certainly looks rather small, as if somebody tossed a motorcycle part into the air and took a picture of it)?

Fine. I don't think there are many people who still think UFOs "don't exist."

But I hope you're not implying that this picture in some way proves ET aliens are visiting Earth, or some other such nonsense, because if you are, I'd like you to walk us through your reasoning on that.

It may be a "real" photo of a "real" UFO, but what does that ultimately mean? That something unusual is going on? I think that's pretty much a given. What does it prove? Nothing.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SuicideVirus


But I hope you're not implying that this picture in some way proves ET aliens are visiting Earth, or some other such nonsense, because if you are, I'd like you to walk us through your reasoning on that.

It may be a "real" photo of a "real" UFO, but what does that ultimately mean? That something unusual is going on? I think that's pretty much a given. What does it prove? Nothing.


what does it Prove, it "proves" an anomaly exists, thats all it proves, that is the 1st step. how many of you "skeptics" can prove that this is "ANY" governments secret aircraft? I don't claim it's an "ET" craft. I claim it's an anomalous craft that lacks a public relationship to any other known aircraft.
I don't "believe" in "UFO's" cause that would be the same as saying "I believe in the sun". I know there are anomalous objects being seen all over, I have no Idea their origin. Hence the reason I and hopefully most of you are here. but like Occams razor states, the simplest answer is USUALLY right, no KNOWN relationship to known craft, so ie, it's of non known origin ergo not of "our" earth.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Why do some of you simply not get that no matter how good the photograph looks it will never be considered proof. ever. Full stop. You can show me a photograph of a UFO sitting on the lawn of the Whitehouse with a little green man standing next to it shaking the hand of Elvis and holding up a copy of today’s newspaper and it would still not be proof.

A photograph dos not fulfil the scientific criteria required.

In order to prove the existence of something one must apply the same stringent scientific measures one applies to any disputed phenomenon.

They didn’t prove the creation of the atom bomb by taking a photograph of it and sticking “Atom bomb” to the image. You’re not going to prove the existence of UFO’s by that method either.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 06:30 AM
link   
"Skeptics" will never acknowledge ufos and even if they do they will claim they are somehow terrestial. No amount of evidence will ever be enough for these people. You must understand these people are on a ufo public denial agenda and they must behave accordingly to keep their jobs!

Skeptics are different! They view the evidence and through the process of elimination they make up their minds. No outside "help" is really necessary but unfortunately all these ufo/paranormal boards are plagued with "skeptics" that pretend to analyze but in reality only try to confuse and distort the truth.

Here are some black/white photos of ufos over Rhodes, Greece back in 1967. The sightings spanned approximately 2 weeks!










Yes some ufos maybe of terrestial nature assuming some governments have managed to reverse engineer captured ufos but to assume that the majority or all of these sightings are terrestial is clearly more far fetched than assuming that at least some if not most are extra-terrestial. If they are mass producing these objects(and were are the assembly plants?) then the deceit is tenfold since first they are telling us ufos(terrestial and extra-terrestial) don't exist and at the same time they are producing, testing and flying them!

Regards to the original poster for bringing this up! Wake up people!!!



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by
Why do some of you simply not get that no matter how good the photograph looks it will never be considered proof. ever. Full stop. You can show me a photograph of a UFO sitting on the lawn of the Whitehouse with a little green man standing next to it shaking the hand of Elvis and holding up a copy of today’s newspaper and it would still not be proof.

A photograph dos not fulfil the scientific criteria required.

In order to prove the existence of something one must apply the same stringent scientific measures one applies to any disputed phenomenon.

They didn’t prove the creation of the atom bomb by taking a photograph of it and sticking “Atom bomb” to the image. You’re not going to prove the existence of UFO’s by that method either.



Like say the big bang? dark matter? subatomic particals, quarks, muons, photons the speed of light? the distance between stars? evolution, the Nasca lines, what about the Gaza pyrimids? I wonder how much you believe is real, a flat planet perhaps?
Spuggy, I assert YOU are not real, Prove my assertation wrong LMAo
I can prove they are anamalous, can you prove they are not?

( how do"YOU" know there was an atom bomb? all you have seen is pictures and movies)

[edit on 19-2-2007 by thedigirati]



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I have a couple questions about the images you posted. You say these were take in Rhodes. Greece yet the images have Rhode Island clearly printed on them and they look remarkably similar to the bunk Billy Mier was passing around.

Where did you find these and why do you think they were taken in Greece?


Springer...



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   
First off, I believe in Alien life - I don think its here though and I sure as hell have never seen anything in a picture or a video to alter my opinion.

The picture shown does not prove the existence of UFOs in the slightest, it could quite easliy be an object thrown up in the air and photgraphed. It could also be a UFO aircraft from another planet. That picture however, does NOT prove either. The argument of the definition of a UFO, considering the forum you are posting in is a term used to describe uspected alien craft - but I get your point to some extent.

PS - personally I think it is a huge invisible rabbit that has non-cloakable eyes and in each picture he is winking at the camera man. To the poster - yes what I have just said is rediculous, but based on that picture, prove it not to be true.

My point is, the picture on its own is evidence of nothing other than a piece of paper with a combination of shapes and colours on it.

Love and Best wishes,

Q


[edit on 19-2-2007 by Quackmaster]



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Science requires proof. Photographs, while sometimes curious, are not sufficient proof. It's not about waking up, because i'm wide awake. I just don't believe every thing that comes down the pipe, just because i want so badly to believe in UFO's. I think that's one of the things that discredits the UFO community the most. I expect a lot of incorrect evidence to grace the digital pages of this forum, because this is what it is meant for. However, even when i watch a show about UFO's on television, i'm met with the same less-than-impressive imagery.

I do believe in alien life. In order for me to believe in extraterrestrials visiting us here on Earth, however, i need some bit of proof that i can bite into. I need documented (and accepted) alien contact. Either that or i need our civilization to discover a means to travel from star to star. Unfortunately, we can only exist by what we know, and we don't know either of these things yet.

To assume these UFO's are made by some otherworldly creature is a strech to me. At least until we discover evidence that it is even possible, because right now it just isn't.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Isn't it strange how the UFOs in pics from the 50's and 60's look dated like the aliens had style phases they went through like here on earth?? The ones on the Bob Lazar site look way more futuristic than the ones from the 60s - those have the same lines as a Chevy from the same time period.

I know that was stupid but I had to say it



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Isn't it strange how the UFOs in pics from the 50's and 60's look dated like the aliens had style phases they went through like here on earth??


That's not stupid at all; I thought the same thing! I'm half-expecting to see torquoise fins and flared wheel-wells on those old 50's UFOs!



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedigirati

what does it Prove, it "proves" an anomaly exists, thats all it proves, that is the 1st step. how many of you "skeptics" can prove that this is "ANY" governments secret aircraft? I don't claim it's an "ET" craft. I claim it's an anomalous craft that lacks a public relationship to any other known aircraft.


Maybe not known by you, but maybe by somebody else. Okay, there are weird things to be photographed in the sky. And...?


Hence the reason I and hopefully most of you are here. but like Occams razor states, the simplest answer is USUALLY right, no KNOWN relationship to known craft, so ie, it's of non known origin ergo not of "our" earth.


Well, well, if you're going to go all "Occam" on me, as I suggested above, is the simplest answer that it's an alien craft, or is the simplest answer that you just don't know all the possible things that might be flying around?



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Helium 3, it would be better if you were a little friendlier in your original post. Why are members lazy because you have provided a link to an outside source?

Anyway, looking at the photographs and the text attached to them.
It says the men went 'at least 100 times' to this location and photographed strange objects. We only have two pictures.
One taken straight after the other, it seems, because the object was moving so fast. I think it strange that the 'saucer' is a similar distance from the camera in both photos. Further, one picture shows a lot of cloud cover, the other pretty much a clear sky. Also, why do these supposedly highly technical flying saucers always have to wobble during flight? Won't the pilots suffer terrible motion sickness??



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   
derrrr

I'm dum becuz i dont c your poynt off vew



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by helium3


So really now its just a matter of WHEN YOU CAN ACCEPT WHATS IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES
and stop making excuses for your inability to handle/accept the truth, UFO's ARE REAL !!!!!



You know I want to believe in UFO's but I hate statements like these.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join