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.

 

I have a picture of a UFO flying over my sister's house

page: 14
17
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I have a question or two.

Is the original image still on the memory card of the camera?

Would you be willing to provide that to a researcher as irrefutable proof, something that would carry much more weight than an image stored on a computer and emailed?

This, in my opinion would cut out the arguments of whether it is a modified image or not.

I, myself am of the stealth type aircraft camp, by the way.




posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   
obviously that b-2 stealth craft which is supposedly made from recovered alien material.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by RygelUK

Would you be willing to provide that to a researcher as irrefutable proof, something that would carry much more weight than an image stored on a computer and emailed?


Op already said a few posts back "too many chefs spoil the soup" or something to that. I wouldn't hold your breath on this one, it's has all the makings of the typical hoax to a tee.

It doesn't take an "expert" to notice...

If it looks like a chicken
Tastes like a chicken
and lays eggs like a chicken...

Well, duh.

Sorry, I am becoming less and less tolerable of all the bs that is submitted here and on other sites. Either back up your stuff with more proof, or move on. A "REAL" witness would have no issues with doing anything to further help identify an object, the situtaion surrounding the sighting, day, place, time, additional area photos etc.

The Op has stuck to the "Let the experts decide" off one picture. The reason for this is he's secretly hoping they give him an ounce of hope regarding "it could be a ufo" and then we'll play on this thread for another month, then we'll get the "hoax" tag on the thread.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 04:19 PM
link   


Is the original image still on the memory card of the camera?

Would you be willing to provide that to a researcher as irrefutable proof, something that would carry much more weight than an image stored on a computer and emailed?



If one of the experts currently examining the photo requests this, I would have no problem with providing them with the memory stick. Yes, the image is still on it. I would eventually want it back and I would also be a bit concerned about copyright issues etc. I don't know how to keep this from being stolen from me. If this is a true UFO and based on the way it acted, I believe it is (or something of ours that has abilities I wasn't aware existed), it must be worth something. I just want to be the one that gets the money for it not someone that ends up stealing it from me. That's why I am only having the ATS experts examining this photo.

If anyone on here has a problem with this, it isn't my concern.



Sorry, I am becoming less and less tolerable of all the bs that is submitted here and on other sites. Either back up your stuff with more proof, or move on. A "REAL" witness would have no issues with doing anything to further help identify an object, the situtaion surrounding the sighting, day, place, time, additional area photos etc.



Let me tell you, Knows But Doesn't....by the way, an excellent choice of names. If this is BS, why do you continue to be involved and give your uneducated opinions?

I have backed up my situation with all the "proof" and information I have. Do you want me to "create" more proof. Would that help you? I can't creat what doesn't exist. You say:



A "REAL" witness would have no issues with doing anything to further help identify an object, the situtaion surrounding the sighting, day, place, time, additional area photos etc.



I have done everything in my power to help identify the object by giving to the owners of this site to have their experts examine. This isn't enough for you? I also answered all your questions about where I was and what the circumstances were regarding the taking of the photograph. You didn't like the answers so now you say I never gave the information? You are making no sense. I have answered the same questions over and over again for you. I will say this one more time: You can ask the same questions over and over again and it is not going to get you new answers. You want NEW answers, ask NEW questions. If you don't like the answers, that is your problem.



The Op has stuck to the "Let the experts decide" off one picture. The reason for this is he's secretly hoping they give him an ounce of hope regarding "it could be a ufo" and then we'll play on this thread for another month, then we'll get the "hoax" tag on the thread.



Is there a problem with letting experts examine this photo? Should I let someone like yourself examine it who has been rude and insulting? and who I haven't a clue who you are and if you have any credentials whatsoever? Would that be logical, or stupid?

What I am hoping is that this photo turns out to be the real thing as it was. I never saw anything like it before and I have a picture of it. I honestly hope I can make some money off of it.

I assure you it is no hoax. You believe whatever you want. At this point, your opinion means absolutely nothing to me and based on your comments a short while back, I don't even understand why you continue to post here.

[edit on 2-8-2007 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I personally don't think there is a problem with wanting to have a PHOTOGRAPHIC EXPERT examine the photo however I don't see a problem with showing it to everyone who asks, as it should be able to stand up to general scrutiny.

If you're hoping to make money off the photo, who do you think is going to pay for it? The people here after a fashion. It would probably be bought by a magazine with a readership such as those individuals who come here to express their opinions.

I don't think it's appropriate to be rude to you but you came here to share this find and should expect to be questioned and also expected to provide evidence to anyone that requests it. If you didn't want that, you should never have opened this thread and instead gone right to the EXPERTS.

I have analyzed the photo myself and found it to be of terrestrial origin and of small size comparable to an RC hobby plane or medium sized kite.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I doubt whether that is extra terrestrial in origin, but I wasn't there and the picture isn't clear enough to come to a solid conclusion, so I give the op the benefit of the doubt for sure. Looking forward to see what the experts have to say!



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 05:11 PM
link   
I am in no way trying to be disrespectful but who are these experts and what are their specific credentials that qualify them to inspect and determine the authenticity of the photo, size, location, etc... of the object? I'm just curious.

Thanks for responding.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 06:14 PM
link   
David Biedny and Jeff Ritzmann. They are UFO and paranormal investigators.

You can here David hosting podcasts -- with Jeff as a frequent guest -- here:

www.theparacast.com...

[edit on 3-8-2007 by Tuning Spork]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
I would also be a bit concerned about copyright issues etc. I don't know how to keep this from being stolen from me. If this is a true UFO and based on the way it acted, I believe it is (or something of ours that has abilities I wasn't aware existed), it must be worth something.


Don't worry about copyright. It was copyrighted the moment you took it. The fact that it as posted here at the time it was is proof it's yours, if it comes to that. But you seem unusually concerned about its potential worth. Sorry, but it's not worth much. It's not good enough. It looks kinda like a B-1 (or is it a B-2? I forget.) and it might be a kite or an RC. Meh? Wanting money for it reminds me of the guy who wanted $30K for a picture of a seagull flying over a marina a few months ago. I'm really sorry you played that card.

[edit on 8/3/2007 by schuyler]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   


Sorry, but it's not worth much.


Ballpark?

Why are you sorry I played that card? If it has value, why not take advantage of it?



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
Why are you sorry I played that card? If it has value, why not take advantage of it?


Well, any time money enters the picture it opens the door to the accusation that money is the issue. I don't think that is always a fair assessment, myself, but it still exists. My only source of earned income right now is from writing. I don't think it is unreasonable for me to sell my wares, so I understand why this should not be an issue. I need to eat and feed my dog, too. BUT it's an issue anyway. People will accuse you of just wanting to sell the picture. In terms of assessing its truth or falsehood, money sullies the picture a bit (no pun intended) because it shows your 'motives are not pure of heart.'

But the second reason is that it's not a very good picture. I'm sorry, but it isn't. I'm sure you did the best you could under the circumstances. I'm not being critical of you, personally, or even your photographic skills. It's blurry, and the resolution is simply not high enough pixel-wise to get it much better. Whether it is a kite, an RC, or really a stealth bomber, it has the appearance of a recognizable shape--a stealth bomber. So not only is it blurry, it's not particularly exotic. That's why I don't think it's worth much from a monetary point of view.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by atlscribe

Originally posted by RandomThought
It's funny how people keep claiming kite yet ignore the fact that the OP said it hovered for 10 min then took off real fast. How does a kite do that?


What's funny is how you are believing a confirmed liar that has been banned previously.


confirmed liar? banned previously? what?

mind pointing this out to me? thanks



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by RandomThought
It's funny how people keep claiming kite yet ignore the fact that the OP said it hovered for 10 min then took off real fast. How does a kite do that?[/qoute]

Well to start, eye witness testimony isn't reliable at times. Just ask a judge.

Ultimately, the only REAL evidence is the photo. If the photo shows a kite or a Hobby plane, then it may not matter what the testimony is.

At this point, the photographic evidence points toward a small object up close to the house.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Phantom
confirmed liar? banned previously? what?

mind pointing this out to me? thanks


It was discussed earlier in this thread.

Excitable_boy posted his photo at PhotoBucket under the name "Zabilgy". Zabilgy is the name of a member who was banned in, I believe, September '05. Excitable_boy joined ATS about 8 weeks later.

Excitable_boy and Zabilgy, coincidentally, have the same two locations of residence: Massachusetts and Sedona, Arizona.

As for being a "confirmed liar": I can't say for sure, of course, though I do believe that Excitable_boy and Zabilgy are one and the same person.
I have no idea why Zabilgy was banned, though, as that happened about six months before I discovered ATS. And the mods don't usually wanna talk, too precisely, about how a member got himself banned.

So, we're left to guess...

[edit on 4-8-2007 by Tuning Spork]



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   


it reminds me of the guy who wanted $30K for a picture of a seagull flying over a marina a few months ago. I'm really sorry you played that card.

[edit on 8/3/2007 by schuyler]


That is exactly what I thought when I saw this: "reminds me of that seagull picture." The first thing that pops into my head when I see this picture is that this is simply a small bird swooping down past the camera. If not that then some sort of kite or a B2. In my opinion these are the most reasonable explanations.. Why look for anything else? There are plenty of other better shots of 'UFOs' for us to ponder over.
I just don't understand why people feel the need to waste 14 pages on this crappy picture.

[edit on 4-8-2007 by andyzero1234]



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by andyzero1234
I just don't understand why people feel the need to waste 14 pages on this crappy picture.


It's just because Zabilgy is a dear old friend of ours.


And we like a good mystery.

SPRINGER!!!!!!! WHERE'S THAT ANAYSIS, ALREADY??!!!!!!!



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   


confirmed liar? banned previously? what?

mind pointing this out to me? thanks



Sorry to disappoint everyone, but once again, I am not the person that used the name Zabilgy here.

I'm still waiting for information from the experts. I'm also waiting to hear back from UFO magazine. Many of you seem to think this object was too small to be a manned craft, but I believe it was further away than some of you seem to think. I suppose it could have been some sort of un-manned craft as well though. All I DO know is it WAS something unusual. Something normal doesn't stay in the same spot for as long as this did and then pretty much disappear.

Everyone, feel free to continue to enjoy the mystery within the mystery. That's what this site is all about after all!

[edit on 4-8-2007 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Man they need to come up with some results for this soon, its been ages lol



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 07:06 PM
link   


Man they need to come up with some results for this soon, its been ages


I know. I thought it would happen sooner also. But, the last time I communicated with them, I was told they had quite a lot on their plate and to be patient. So, we wait.



posted on Aug, 4 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
I know. I thought it would happen sooner also. But, the last time I communicated with them, I was told they had quite a lot on their plate and to be patient. So, we wait.

You'll have to be patient.

If I remember correctly, it took a few weeks for JRitzmann to analyse AmberGambler's picture. Similarly, with JagMan's 'worm'.

The professionals have lives. They aren't paid to do this, so it's lucky we get their opinion, even if it takes time.

Sit back, relax, check the thread for any updates and be patient on the photo analysis.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join