Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

any advice..took these pics in my backyard!! what do i do with them??

page: 7
1
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by constantwonder
why do we continue to entertain this hoaxer


Dunno, YOU go first with YOUR answer?





posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by bloodcircle

Originally posted by constantwonder
why do we continue to entertain this hoaxer


Dunno, YOU go first with YOUR answer?


Good GRIEF!
Please tell me that not one single person believes that to be a UFO?
Unidentified maybe...
But come on..
Again ..several pages of speculation over a BS post.
I like to give the benefit of the doubt..I really do..
but this is ridiculous.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by AccessDenied
 


I think the only speculation here is...

1. What is the fake ufo? (a fan, a baking utensil, etc?)

2. Did this new member intend to perpetrate a hoax on ATS?

These two items are the only reason I'm paying any attention to this thread.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by AccessDenied
 


I think the only speculation here is...

1. What is the fake ufo? (a fan, a baking utensil, etc?)

2. Did this new member intend to perpetrate a hoax on ATS?

These two items are the only reason I'm paying any attention to this thread.

True enough..
it looks like something welded together in the garage out of junk.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Face it, Its just fun the play name that HOAX,

What could it be?

I like the upside down wash tube myself.


Will



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 11:37 PM
link   
I am no photo expert, but I am very skilled with photoshop and photography. Looking at every picture, I conclude the same results for every picture, but I reference this one because it shows every point:
s42.photobucket.com...

A few key things to point out about these pictures...In any environment where you have natural light, the location comes from one source or one general location when dealing with the sun. The angular reflection at the bottom left on the branch has direct sunlight comming from the right side of the photo, causing a slight "shading" on the left side of the branch. The "object" floating has a reflective property which radiates the light more towards the viewer, thus providing light more centered on the middle of the "object". This show that the dimension (as in alternate dimension) that the photo was taken, has a unique light property...from TWO exterior light sources! Also this implies that the objects, while appearing in the same "frame of reference" were taken at different times.

Second point...One problem with this is the photos are obscurred by a "blur" effect which appear to be about 3-8%. This would eliminate any any "cropping" effect you would normally find when doctoring up digital pictures. Even in digital photography, a blurry photo has some uniquely clearer spots, providing the contrast needed to tell real photos from fake ones...that IS NOT the case here. The objects in the foreground are not found to have any more resolution than those in the background.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 11:44 PM
link   
all i got was a page saying the video had been removed by the user. is it somewhere elses now? does anyone else have it?



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Sorry if this dbl posts, but I tried to anonymously reply...
I am no photo expert, but I am very skilled with photoshop and photography. Looking at every picture, I conclude the same results for every picture, but I reference this one because it shows every point:
s42.photobucket.com...

A few key things to point out about these pictures...In any environment where you have natural light, the location comes from one source or one general location when dealing with the sun. The angular reflection at the bottom left on the branch has direct sunlight comming from the right side of the photo, causing a slight "shading" on the left side of the branch. The "object" floating has a reflective property which radiates the light more towards the viewer, thus providing light more centered on the middle of the "object". This show that the dimension (as in alternate dimension) that the photo was taken, has a unique light property...from TWO exterior light sources! Also this implies that the objects, while appearing in the same "frame of reference" were taken at different times.

Second point...One problem with this is the photos are obscurred by a "blur" effect which appear to be about 3-8%. This would eliminate any any "cropping" effect you would normally find when doctoring up digital pictures. Even in digital photography, a blurry photo has some uniquely clearer spots, providing the contrast needed to tell real photos from fake ones...that IS NOT the case here. The objects in the foreground are not found to have any more resolution than those in the background.



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Bottom line:

Pics and movies are useless as proof as they are so easy to fake. Secondly, you saying it's not fake means absolutely nothing. As soon as someone tells me "this is not fake" I automatically presume it is. If your "proof" can't "sell itself" then it's no use as proof. This pretty much goes for any pics or movies people are trying to "sell" as proof.



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 12:29 AM
link   
I embossed a couple of photos. I didn't see anything that could be used to hold it up such as fishing line. It just might be too thin and far away to see anything.

It could be photoshopped but I don't see any evidence of that.

So....



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   
It's an attic ventilator fan. The Grainger catalog I have has a similar model. It looks like it was pasted in and doesn't match the overall exposure of the images quite perfectly. The image grain looks a little too colorful.

www.grainger.com...

My printed catalog is older and has something more like it but I hope the one at the link has enough recognizeable features to illustrate the point.

[edit on 7/28/2008 by EnlightenUp]

[edit on 7/28/2008 by EnlightenUp]



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


Thank you iwas about to say the same thing.Different years and different times.Way to stretch out 90 seconds OP



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied

Originally posted by bloodcircle

Originally posted by constantwonder
why do we continue to entertain this hoaxer


Dunno, YOU go first with YOUR answer?


Good GRIEF!
Please tell me that not one single person believes that to be a UFO?


I could tell you that, but I doubt I have the authority to speak for every living human being.

And Im not quite sure Id want to speak for the human race as a collective. I'd get us all into a lot of trouble..




Unidentified maybe...
But come on..
Again ..several pages of speculation over a BS post.
I like to give the benefit of the doubt..I really do..
but this is ridiculous.




So then, by all means, continue to add posts to a thread that you find hard to accept has gone on for so many pages.

(Which was the point of my reply to Constantwonder.. ?!




posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


emboss is NOT an analytical tool - its a gimmick

PS - try an experiment - set out lemghts of fishing line at 5 , 10 , 20 and 30m distances from you and take a picture -

then examine the image to see if you can find the line



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hamlin
Jesus!

Given by the responses given in this thread if I ever get photo of something I can't explain I won't be posting it on here.


Neither will I Hamlin... the attitude of many of the posters in this thread stinks to high heaven.

ATS is definitely NOT the place to bring any photos, or relate any events, of strange things that might have happened to one. If it ever happened to me I would try contact one of the UFO groups or researchers out there. ATS would be the last place I'd share anything of this type with.... a complete waste of time asking this bunch of harpies!



Originally posted by Hamlin
Fair enough be skeptic, express your opinion. But people giving personal abuse and asking for bans? How do you know the so called "hoaxer" wasn't being hoaxed? As far as I can tell someone posted something he saw that was weird, asked for opinions on what it is, and got a # load of abuse for his troubles.

What a fantastic place this is to express close-minded opinions. Bravo.



I agree completely... If I were the OP I wouldn't bother returning to this thread. Very sad indeed!

Hamlin, have a star for so eloquently expressing what I was thinking!




posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 08:00 AM
link   
So evaluating materials and finding them to be fake is no longer allowed?
Do we just have to accept everything that is posted?

That (IMO) is NOT what ATS is about.



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dagar

Originally posted by Hamlin
Jesus!

Given by the responses given in this thread if I ever get photo of something I can't explain I won't be posting it on here.


Neither will I Hamlin... the attitude of many of the posters in this thread stinks to high heaven.


Hold on there. Surely you cannot expect every claim to go unchallenged and accepted without strutiny especially in the age of ubiquitously available tools of fakery. I won't even accept my own perceptions of things I observe at face value regarding the subject of UFOs or supernatural phenomenon (and well, pretty much any other empirical observation) and they are subject to the same or greater scrutiny I would bring on anything presented here. This is because I'm interested in the truth of the matter and not simply belief. I am a skeptic, not a debunker and I want to believe it but even more so I don't want to be fooled by a charlatan.



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Dagar
 


Look I have seen the real thing many times in my life, I know UFO's exist but that does not mean I am going to sit back and look like a pathetic gullible idiot and entertain something that is a clearcut hoax.

You call a hoax a hoax. I do not call something that is believable a hoax. I do not jump and scream hoax at every post but this one is blatant and not even remotely close to good.

BTW Hamlin is a NEW member as well.. registered just to back up the hoaxer?




posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


That may be so. Sunlight reflects on fishing line somewhat so embossing the photo may pick some up. I have seen that analysis done here before.



posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 08:58 AM
link   
The video has been removed by user...

Apparently...

@_@





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join