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.

 

Talking flame. As discussed in chat 06/12/07

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Noscitare
 


That's a great point, that is a very plausible explanation for why we can't tell where the vehicle was, and why the flame is not center.

Hehe, maybe we shouldn't speculate too much like this, if he is a hoaxer, we might just be giving him excuses!




posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
OK If the Landrover was to the right of the flame in our perspective.

BUT..
Instead of cropping to pic to make a suspect photo..Why not use the 'photoshop big black marker' to mask the recognisable details of his brothers vehicle.

I'm sure that would be suitable enough 'security' precautions whilst leaving the perspective intact would it not?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT_T
Instead of cropping to pic to make a suspect photo..Why not use the 'photoshop big black marker' to mask the recognisable details of his brothers vehicle.


I agree, and was just about to post the same. I think that d4rk's cause would be much better served were he to have done just that. And he still can, should he so decide.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Here is what I would like to see.

The Land Rover back in the picture, with the license plated blured, blacked out, whatever. Why?


It will let us know how close the fire is to the vehicle, because I don't believe anyone in their right mind would ignite a fire near their automobile.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
It's pretty obvious to me how this crop was done, I have done this many times before on various pictures. It looks like the car was parked on the right side of the "flame", and DK just drew a box from top left to bottom right to keep the flame in, and leave the car out, leaving a strip off the bottom and right side. This would explain the flame's off-centre appearance.

Some questions for DK:

1. Do you have any thoughts as to whether this "flame" was linked to your friend's deceased father by any chance? It's the only link I can find between you and the flame...

2. What is your personal thoughts on what this really was?

Thanks for posting this too DK, it is appreciated.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Woo hoo I'm going to Nepal! Seriously. My non-profit organisation is called Earth Medical Corp. and we provide medical aide to those who need it. Anything I should know about Nepal? What region were you in?

BTW, just a theory, whatever this "entity" might have been, it is possible the flame was there because of whatever kind of crossover was happening; between time and space or something. That kind of intense energy, from a different being or technology, could induce flame in simply the air around it, thus making the flame appear, and appear to be talking.

Crazy stuff man. Stay off the acid!
(just kidding, but really don't do acid)



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   


So in reality we would have a photo more or less along the lines of this.(more subject,less car park)

I'm pretty sure SOME of that missing picture could be edited back in without causing a security concern.

I just always find it a little suspect when the photo topic is barely in frame.
I vote for the BIG BLACK MARKER version.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by AGENT_T
 


That is what I would assume, based on this picture size vs. a regular untouched picture size. guess I should have done that in my previous response. LOL



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjay
It's pretty obvious to me how this crop was done, I have done this many times before on various pictures. It looks like the car was parked on the right side of the "flame", and DK just drew a box from top left to bottom right to keep the flame in, and leave the car out, leaving a strip off the bottom and right side. This would explain the flame's off-centre appearance.


that is a definite possibility! Great thought!



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT_T
I'm pretty sure SOME of that missing picture could be edited back in without causing a security concern.


Certainly makes one wonder what, besides the land rover, might've been cropped from the photo.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Noscitare
 


He could also easily blur the vehicle....and show the original picture.
And how rare could a Land Rover look? Is it pink w/ purple flames???



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:26 PM
link   
DK, if your brother witnessed the flame with you, and if you have told him everything you know, then if your story and warnings are credible, why on earth would your brother ignore the facts? (sorryignorethefacts) Logic say's that especially after the flame incedence, he would beat feet and head to Nepal too... Does not feel right to me.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 

The "Merry Pranksters" do come to mind.


Merry Pranksters



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Agreed. That's the first thing that caught my eye. It's either something metallic that is emitting the fire (probably a canteen), or some sort of paper or wood that is being used to keep the fire going.





posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:43 PM
link   
What are the odds of someone hearing the deathbed story of the dark knight operation and within 6 months or so also be contacted by a talking flame.

I suppose if a person watched the flame a while that person could gain a state of meditation and then hear things related to things in their mind already.
Doesn't seem to be what happened here.

Two different people maybe, the same person, pretty big odds. Now I feel the need to doubt the first story more than before.

[edit on 12/7/2007 by roadgravel]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
why are the safety cones there if not to protect people from the source of the flame?


That's whats bugging me about this pic too. Why are they there?

Did you and your brother place them or did they just happen to be in the background?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
First it's claims of half mile high human figures in the desert and now it's talking flames with edited photos as proof?


.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   
since when do they use orange safety cones to block off an area surrounding a fire? i see no logic in that argument. i mean really, if someone was out there setting up rubber cones why didnt they just put out the fire, or better yet station a police man to keep people away.
i mean really. unless of course those are the special kind of nepalese rubber cones which provide an invisible force field. they really serve no point.
i believe the cones are there because the lot has car traffic, be it parking or driving through or whatever. but one thing is for sure their not there guarding against the fire! their there because they are traffic cones.
proof! is here: en.wikipedia.org...
and yes, they are used to redirect traffic from a hazard, but never have i seen the hazard be fire.

the next issue i have is with the 'newspaper'. yea ok thats what happened, there just so happens to be a newspaper sitting in a big puddle that is causing causing a fire. i think if anything this thing on the ground is metal, as another poster said, in fact it may very well be a drain, as another poster said. but i highly doubt its a newspaper, especially because the water appears to be moving/gathering as it would were it to be going into a drain.

next, why would he hoax now, after all this devoted time that he has dedicated to this site? it makes no sense.

also, what good would it do for him to travel to the airport, which for all we know coud be 10 hours away or heck even 10 days away. this is a pointless argument telling him to go to the airport with a sign. puh-lease.
its not like the mods, or you or i for that matter, couldnt just trace his IP.

all in all, i think he's being honest.



[edit on 12/7/2007 by agent violet]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Noscitare
 


It does, but then again, it also sounds convenient.

The only way to dispel this is to re-submit the image with the vehicle blocked out, and not crop the image.

I'm sure we all have enough to do in our lives than hunt down and point at a bloke who owns a 4wd, despite the fun it creates !!

Too much missing from the evidence, to validate the story, imo..



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by agent violet
 


Like I said in my first response here....I havent followed this member, dont know a thing about him...so my responses were based solely on the picture provided and not the member. I have no opinion on the member, at all.


I will say this though....in regards to your comment:


next, why would he hoax now, after all this devoted time that he has dedicated to this site? it makes no sense.


I used to post on a message board for a few years straight. There were NUMEROUS cases of "long term" members who posted fabricated things, only to be found out (by members doing some leg work) that the person was a complete fraud.

Im talking people claiming to have cancer and some kind soul collecting TONS of money, gifts, etc......only to find out later...the person didnt really have cancer and werent who they claimed to be.

I could sit here and type out many many many stories about situations like this that I saw - and even investigated myself.

Point is. It happens. And all we can do when online is be cautious.

Like I said. Im not saying this about the OP at all...as I havent read any other posts by this person....and my responses are on the picture posted and thats it. I just wanted to address your above comment



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join