It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pictures of the Same UFO in 4 Different Places?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 11:38 AM
nasty little thread here.

i'm definitely seeing birds in a couple of shots, and the others don't look like birds at all. interesting. although the shots of the grassy fields objects look a bit cut and pasted as someone above mentions. in this bottom photo, the object on the right seems like it should be blurred more. (?)

cool looking crafts if they are crafts.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 12:01 PM

Originally posted by BrokenVisage

We can agree that posting birds as UFOs does nothing for the community and even has negative connotations in many cases. However, not every instance is as cut and dry...

We aren't discussing every instance are we? We're discussing this one. I lived by the coast for a large part of my life, and I can recognise a gull when I see one. The fact that you take this to mean I'm "obviously" sceptical of every UFO picture out there is the assumption you have based your diatribes on. It's laughable, as is your attempt to make me out to be the aggressive one. You saw a statement you didn't fully understand, and attacked me for it. You completely misunderstood my "tin foil" comment and took it to be a personal insult, and you seem to be the only person on this thread interested in engaging in a "pissing contest".

Thank you for the entertainment.

[edit on 21/7/07 by Implosion]

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 01:13 PM
ok I Started the thread because of the similarity in shapes, I do not see how anyone can see a bird in the Jersey City picture, that is, (to use the words of the insulting jackasses above), "Idiocy" So to make things clear for those who just come in here to be @ssholes.

1) The one bird pic shown in page 3 shows alot of similarities to pics in BC, and UK.
2) The Jersey City pic is no way a bird, show me how that is and I'll give ya a buck.
3) Perhaps the Jersey City pic is different then the other 2, which ends my thread right there, because the start of this was about the similarity of the pictures shapes.
4) I never stated these were alien craft, I actually thought perhaps they were man made craft
5) I am the more a skeptic then a believer, it just took me as odd that (at least 3 of the pics) Showed what appeared to be the same object and ALL of them got put on a UFO evidence site.

Now I know some of you are SOOO smart it hurts your head, you can tell this by your self absorbed responses. But as I have said before I saw this as odd that what looked like the same craft would be pictured in 3 areas and shown as UFO evidence and I haven't see ALL 3 pictures discussed together on ATS.

Thank you to the people who actually added good reasoning to the thread whether for or against, but were able to act like adults and leave the insults behind.

This is the reason a lot of people do not like to post on this site. Because the arrogant few love to trash anything the do not believe, but I have a feeling they believe in a few things themselves that have no proof or even less proof then this.

Mod if this thread gets any worse feel free to close it. Sometime its just not worth posting on this site.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 01:36 PM

Originally posted by ShiftTrio2) The Jersey City pic is no way a bird, show me how that is and I'll give ya a buck.

A. Head - Notice that the dark area starts narrow (neck) expands into the shape of a bird's skull, then narrows again into the bill area

B. Bill - You need to look close, but there is a lighter area that is triangular shaped, matching a bill

C. The supposedly "missing" tail

D. Feet - Orange, matching the color of a species of white goose - The bird is dark because it is a juvenile or a "blue morph" variation

E. Left wingtip

F. Neck - Craned around 180 degrees - Yes, waterfowl do look behind themselves on occasion, even with their side vision - I've seen it

You can keep your buck

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 01:47 PM
Hi All

I just wanted to add my 2 pence worth .. when i first looked at thes images i too saw what i thought were UFO's, the Dorchester UK pic looked kind of like a metalic stingray flying to the top right of the picture .. the others look very similar but when someone brought the whole bird issue up i have to say it was an "oh yes ... i see that too" moment .. i can see eyes, a beak and wings in the Vancouver island image .. in my mind they're birds but thats me .. people see other things in those images and therefor need to keep discussing this and delving for their own answers .. this is ATS and everyone gets an opinon.. i hope ..

Just out of interest i found this picture of a few birds in flight, there are one or two in there that have similar features to the OP images ..(IMO)

Hope the link works ..... All the best ppl

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:19 PM
These are not birds at all, they are articificial craft shaped in the likeness of birds. You really have to distort your perception in order to see birds in these fat metallic things.

To me the UFOs have the "feel" of being photoshopped, compared to other genuine photos. So that would be funny: someone fakes UFO photos only to have them called birds by sceptics.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:31 PM
First off, British Columbia is a province in Canada. it has nothing to do with Quebec, I don't have a clue how it got mixed up like that.

Second, I think the third one is pretty much debunked, and the fourth is a joke right? I mean come on. Were not all idiots. And it doesn't look at all like the other three. And why would a shadow be that dark, in the middle of the sky!! Its pictures like that that give a bad face to the ufology world.


posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:34 PM
IMO i see birds ... my minds made up .. but thats my mind .. i'm not saying to all "these are birds .. nothing else"

So how can you quote "These are not birds at all, they are articificial craft shaped in the likeness of birds" ..

Is that it..???? just because you don't see what others do we're skeptics??? maybe put more into your theory of these "articificial craft shaped in the likeness of birds"

I'm far from a skeptic .. but i don't believe everything thats put to me ...

Kind regards

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:35 PM
I'm certainly not taking the p*ss out of anyone here but I do think it strangely funny that some folk still think they're UFO pics when it's clearly pointed out to them that they're only birds. It's funny. It really is. And now there's a forum fight going on. Unbelievable. Birds versus Craft. Can I ask the folk on the "pics are Craft" side, if my photo is a UFO too then? I live a couple of miles from the Bass Rock, probably the biggest gannet nesting site on the planet. I take photos every day. When these pics starting appearing on the net I knew what they were as soon as I saw them. The first three pictures are birds, one of them is a bit more fuzzy than the others and you can't see the beak in profile but that's about the only difference. Now, if I didn't know seabirds, and I took one of those photos, I might think it was a UFO, but seeing it alongside the others, with folk telling me what they were, bang would go my UFO explanation. I did say earlier I'd eat my hat if the the last one wasn't a piece of tape stuck to a window. Someone's pointed out it's a butterfly and guess what, I believe them, they're right. I didn't see that to start with but I'm now eating my hat.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:37 PM
Full-scale alien invasion!

Some of you people...

[edit on 21-7-2007 by SuicideVirus]

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:38 PM
Anyone else see flying sting rays? Seriously.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 02:50 PM

Originally posted by hbdale309
Anyone else see flying sting rays? Seriously.
Funny you should ask that. Now I have seen real UFOs. My closest sighting was of a black craft very much like a sting-ray with the flaps/wings turned up the way. It had a flashing pink/red light and it was a daylight sighting. It was about the size of a large car.

[edit on 21-7-2007 by wigit]

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 03:13 PM
One thing that always surprises me is the fact that some people say that if it looks metallic, it cannot be a bird.

The only thing that gives us the idea of metallic reflexes is the difference in colour, in the same way the "buttons" on a computer screen look 3D when they are only 2D.

That difference in colour can (and is) used by many things in nature, and birds are notorious in their use of colours and varying shades.

So, although there are no metallic birds (as far as I know), there are many birds with colour schemes that make them look metallic.

After all this rant about colours and metallic looks, I would like to finish by saying that the first three photos look like photos of birds to me. I see seagulls everyday (and sometimes at night) here where I live, and I like to watch them fly. One characteristic of seagulls and other birds like them is that they can fly for minutes without flapping their wings, making it easy to take photos like those.

Unfortunately, my camera is not working, and although I can use a Panasonic DMC-FZ30, I do not have it at home right now.

To me, the last photo looks like a moth landed on the lens.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 03:51 PM
Well, alright alright, if you guys see birds then thats valid of course. Since I EXPECT to find UFOs on this type of forum it might be me who has the distorted perception in this case.

I admit.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 04:55 PM
Pics 1 and 2 are not birds. Pics 3 and 4 look like birds. The explanation of the New Jersey photo gave me a good laugh. This is a bird flying with his head turned completely around according to some on this page LOL. The first two are clearly U.F.O.'s and they would have to be analyzed by professionals to determine if their known objects or not. It's funny how people on a message board try to act like experts in order to support what they already believe. It's okay to say you don't know what it is. That doesn't mean it's an extraterrestrial vehicle it just means it's unidentified.

You could look at pictures of planes from certain angles and make the case that there birds because a bird is something your familiar with. The first 2 pics are not birds and they need to be analyzed by professionals. An expert will tell you the characteristics that are consistent with birds and the characteristics that are not consistent with birds and then the skeptic will have to explain the inconsistencies. If it's completely consistent with a bird, which is very much in doubt for pics 1 and 2 then case closed but until then it's all speculation.

This is the skeptics game. They will see a pic of a U.F.O. and they will say it has consistent characteristics with a known object but they omit the characteristics that are inconsistent with that known object.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 05:05 PM

Originally posted by polomontana
This is the skeptics game. They will see a pic of a U.F.O. and they will say it has consistent characteristics with a known object but they omit the characteristics that are inconsistent with that known object.

That is a complete assumption and you are tarring a great deal of individuals with the same brush. Binary thinking: It's either black or white, no shades of grey. They are obviously birds, and there is more than enough material on this thread to support that claim. To proclaim that anyone who does not agree with your appraisal of the situation is some kind of hardcore sceptic is arrogant and insulting.

posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 08:56 PM

Originally posted by triplesod

Originally posted by IMAdamnALIEN
Someone quoted my poop joke

I am still laughing.

You're an idiot!

Thanks buddy! I love you too..... sadly my poop joke got deleted my the mods.
too bad.....

[edit on 21-7-2007 by IMAdamnALIEN]

posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 05:21 AM
Again. Please save my SEAGULL pic to your files and compare it to the "UFO" pictures. My seagull pic
The UFO pic
I can see a few similarities. Are you lot blind? However, if I've taken a photo of a bird and it's actually a metallic craft as a few of you seem to still think, I'm willing to sell for a moderate fee. Any bidders?

posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 05:36 AM
To Polomontana

"The first two are clearly U.F.O.'s and they would have to be analyzed by professionals to determine if their known objects or not"

That is your opinion, they are not clearly UFO's to me as i can identify in my own head birds, but i definately agree that it would be good to have a professional examine the images once and for all.

I'd like to say again that i am no where near a skeptic, i often get involved in discussions with friends regarding UFO's, paranormal ..etc etc.. and get annoyed at their non willingness to listen to my side and their willingness to laugh and mock. . As an example i asked a friend (who is a skeptic through and through) if he believed in god.. he said yes as he was brought up in a religious family, i said i'll show you some evidence of "possible" spacecraft/UFO's you show me evidence of god... anyway i'm sure you see my point, i won't go on anymore ...

Just for fun, i'll be prepared to show my a$$ in Leeds city centre (UK) if at least image 1 is left as unidentified after a professional examination. I think we can all safely say that 3 and 4 are solved ..

Sorry for the long post and Kind regards

posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 07:32 AM
Don't look like birds to me.

These UFOs look metallic, and also I can see sunlight reflecting off them. I've never seen the sun reflecting off birds?

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in