UFO Photos Extremly Close Up, 2006 'part 2'

Hi Jeff

Springer suggested I post in your forum for an update on this thread, he mention he'd spoken to you about this on the phone:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


image source: http://www.uksoundlabs.com/ufo/sequence.jpg



here are the photos again, just in case you don't have them:

external image
external image
external image
external image
external image

And straight from the camera card:

uksoundlabs.com...

I understand that you are really busy, but any light you can shed on this for all of us would be gratefully received.

many thanks
Amber

looks s sketchy to me. i dont know though.
it just strikes me as photoshopped

Hi DalairTheGreat

We have addressed the photoshop issue in the thread link above.
But for everyone i'll just give a brief run down on these photos.

The photos were taken by me in Wiltshire 2006, I posted them on ATS and after much debate it seems to have been agreed that I didn't photoshop them. Springer stepped into the thread and decided that Jeff would be the person to look at them to see what he thought they could be.

Springer returned to the thread and mentioned he'd talked to Jeff about these photos and I should come here for an update direct from Jeff.

So here I am

Amber, good to have you and your pictures back. Let's see. Were you told that it was a model R C, or that one could be outfitted to duplicate the look of what you saw? There's a big difference in the two statements.

Also, is there any more news about other witnesses? And if I remember correctly, they were thought to have video?

Because you have shown the courage to return, I wish i had an award left, for I would surely spend it here. As it is, all I can say is that you are doing everything within your power to clear up this mystery.

And for those who are somewhat late to the show, so to speak, on this thread, it would be good for you to look up the old thread on this and get the facts. Bashing the pictures is easy, but there's more to it than that. And if you get nothing else from the older thread, read the parts where the OP says she does not know, or, ever claim to know, what these pictures represented.

We will await more developments.

Hi NGC2736

Thank you so much for that

I only know what Springer said on the thread:

Springer:

I agree with you, there is a huge difference between being an RC model and one that could be made to look like what I saw.

I just hope that Jeff will post the video and the pictures here, as I said, i'm open to ideas as to what it was, and if someone can prove to me that it was ......(whatever) then at lest I will know the truth.

I'm going to be honest here, I'm still a bit speechless about the half conclusion on this, it just doesn't feel quite right. I have tried hard to provide everything asked of me, and taken my time to try and find out the truth, i'm not sure if I feel that has been reciprocated yet!!
So there are things I want to say, but I'm waiting till we hear from Jeff, I'm not going to go away, not unless everyone wants me to because what I saw effects everything in my life, its one of the most important things that has happened to me.
I want to understand it, I had hoped here to find some answers.


In regards to the video, thanks for the reminder, I will try again to get a copy.

But thanks again NGC2736 for taking the time to comment, it is appreciated.



[edit on 2-5-2007 by Ambergambler]

[edit on 2-5-2007 by Ambergambler]

having an avid interest in the RC world, thats what first came to my mind.
not to say it is that, but thats what I first thought right away.
and not trying to say it was intentionally faked in anyway.

So Springer said:

"Jeff told me over the phone that he has an RC model that he filmed a couple years ago that is identical to the images in this video. That's all I know."

I'm sorry but that simply does not seem to me to be good enough! In fact, in view of all the information that Amber posted and the courteous and detailed replies she gave to every single query and comment (some of them extremely dismissive), I think it's just a bit insulting. (I'm not badmouthing Springer here...) That response from Jeff Ritzmann gives me the distinct impression that he simply gave Ambler's images a cursory glance, did not acquaint himself with all the details she had given on the original thread, and he clearly did not bother to enlarge on this solitary comment with the kind of details that would obviously be needed to answer the questions that his comment raises when considered alongside Amber's data.

junglelord, it has been definitively established on Amber's original thread (a link to which she provided in her first post) that these images were not faked. There was no doubt about that and the issue then became: what exactly is it that appears in her pics?

thats why I said I never made any relation to them being fake.
thanks
like I said in the RC world based on other pics and video...thats what they reminded me of right away.
that in now way makes them a RC
thanks again

[edit on 2-5-2007 by junglelord]

Hi Junglelord

maybe you can help me then, on the other thread, I ask some questions about RC models, might you be able to clear some of them up for me?

I'll post them here also:

1. Is there a silent flying RC?
2. Could we all have watched this for 45mins and not realized it was a toy?
3. Can RC planes stop motionless in the air?
4. Can the battery of an RC last for 45mins?
5. Could an RC fly in total darkness, following the contours of a hill at extremely low level?
6. Could night-lights on a bee/flying wing or bat RC be programed to switch on and off independently?
7. What would be needed for someone to pull this stunt off and fool us all?
8. Do I think it was an RC?
9. Could one of the witnesses, an RC enthusiast be wrong when he told me there was no way it was a model?
10. Could two/three fly in formation in the dark so close without crashing?
11. Could it come so close to me and yet I still couldn't identify it?
12. How could it hear and locate us on the hill?
13. Why have there been no other photos from that area of this type. In fact no other sightings like this. Would a hoxer only go to that effort once?

Any advice info on this would be great, thanks

Ambergambler

When i was based in Warminster we would go out on salisbury plain a lot for exercise.

I can say this i have seen such lights myself along with my old army mates not in such detail as yourself but from distance and a short time only.

Sometimes we would see lights that were pure white and would number from 3 to sometimes 8.

Let's just say sentry duty was extra disturbing.

Well, Salisbury Plain is not a million miles from where Amber saw them - and, of course, it lends some weight to any speculation that there might be some military connection to what she saw.

Amber-
My apologies for taking so long to get back to you. I've been absolutely swamped at work, and it's left me zero time for literally anything else.

As far as my comments about it possibly being an RC vehicle, at first blush it does appear very similar to those type of toys and even the light colors are the same on some models. The RC craft usually moves quick and spins, leaving trails no matter what shutter speed youre on.

The main reason I havent had more then a cursory look at them has been time constraints, and the quality of the images themselves. Out of the "from camera" folder, one shot is really the only one I can see anything interesting on. That would be DSC00191

In that, I can barely make out what looks like some sort of structure off the lights right edge, which might (and it's a big might) lend towards this being a delta wing shaped, or boomerang shaped vehicle of some sort. However, due to low light and overpowering grain, I cannot make that leap to say whether it defintely is or not. It's very sketchy...VERY.

In your post, in the "my impressions" montage, it looks somewhat similar to the very top impression.

I purposefully didnt read your account of seeing this, so I'd not be trying to see what you might see in these photos. In instances where the quality is not real great, impressions and forethought can lend to false conclusions.

So, end result for me is this: The pictures simply dont have enough information to make a conclusion as to what it is. It could be a large delta winged craft, or something as simple as a delta wing kite rigged with LEDs. I just dont know, and the photos arent telling me enough to make any determination.

Looking thru your post, I dont believe you faked anything, and that you legitimately report what you saw. (As far as I can tell from an internet interaction) However, the photos just dont contain enough data for me to make any conclusion as to what it was. One out of the sequence is interesting, but thats about as far as I can go due to lack of data.

~JR

quite ovbious that you did not see an RC.
no matter what the pictures look like at first glance.
Like I said just because it looked like RC night photos does not mean that is what the photos are of....ovbiously not a RC.

Hi Jeff

Thank you very much for the response, I read everything you said and I thought you were very fair, I can't disagree with you at all. Obviously as I was there, the photos will always look different to me

In light of that, I suppose there really isn't anywhere else to go with this, its been ascertained that I didn't hoax them, and that from what everyone can tell the likely hood is that I am recounting exactly what I saw, and what I saw is shown in the photos.

It feels funny to me that people can see things like this, and in there hearts know what they saw, but in reality it makes no difference, what then is the point?

Thanks to everyone for all the comments and ideas, however challenging they were. I have enjoyed being part of ATS with you all

Cheers
Amber
x

I am glad you shared and the point was not lost Miss Amber

Cheers for having the opportunity to see, take photos and share.
Your important contribution only increases the proof of something unusual, either military or ET.
God Bless

Amber-
I've found that in the 20+ years of doing investigation and study, not to mention personal involvement with this stuff, is that the relationship of a sighting, visitation, etc, to us...is a toxic one. The toxicity of the injection of this sort of thing into one's life results in alot of frustration, aggravation, and extreme (at times) depression. It seems to be just the way it works.

Look at it this way, if I'd have said, "yes Amber thats a UFO, complete unknown, and here's processed photos showing it's full structure."

What exactly are you going to do with that? In the above fictional response, do I say what it is? No. Where it comes from? No. Why you saw it? No.

Lemme offer this, if it's not military hardware and truly something of the "alien" enigma, then you were meant to see it. It's just enough to entice you to get involved in the UFO question. But not enough for everyone to see what you have.

My advice? Walk away from it. Dont obsess over it, nor let it suck up alot of time from you. If it's truly "alien" you might see it or some other phenomena again. Until then, I wouldnt give it the time of day. You've done enough.

If it's going to show you something, let it show you something you can document.

Make any sense?

Hi Jeff

Yes, you make a lot of sense.

Thank you, the advice you have given is invaluable, sometimes we need someone to say what we already know, and you have just done that

Take care
Amber