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.


Proof that Aliens exist - The $10,000 challenge!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:18 PM
it seems to me.. that all he did.. was take a portion of the ice crystal.. and cut out a design he thought looked like some kind of doll.. or what he thinks an alien might look like.. I suppose you could do the same with a snow flake.. or a close up of a grain of sugar.. if you bring it up close enough..and then when the pixels get in there.. they automatically look like a circuit board... I would think any one could do what he did.. if they take the time.. .. besides.. if you look at that tether footage.. I would count at least a hundred crystals floating around out there.. do you really think ,, they were alien ships cruising around the shuttle so they could see a broken tether????? get real...

posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:26 PM
oh dear - another pointless ` willie waving ` " challenge " .

before spending any time whatsoever on this - i would urge anyone to examine the so-called " appep " process first

how EXACTLY does APPEP work ? who knows the clim to have it patented - but will have not given a patent number , inventors name or any details - why ??

thier ` needle example ` is pointless < pun > IMHO and i have grave reservations that the claimed process is actually a valid one

to be blunt - any idiot could fake the ` needle example ` - just as any idiot could fabricate what ever they WANTED to see from endless enlargements of an image

i might actually set THEM a challenge to proove the validity of ther ` appep process ` - pretty simple - just send them an image file of a random string of characters , ie :


photographed at a comparable scale to thier needele example image one

id they can decipher it - we could move on

but i just find it strange that the ONLY place that this " appep proccess " appears on the web is this one silly ` ufo challenge `

colour me skeptical

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:29 AM
I think it's very interesting how people dismiss everything so quickly, I mean the op has showed us a very interesting enhanced photogaphic piece and also pointed out that there's a $ 10000 waiting for whoever can prove it's not real specially to the scientific community and that's at least challenging. I would like to read what the experts on ATS have to say about the image and the enhancing process because I simply lack experience and knowledge of digital edition.

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:31 AM

Originally posted by seawolf197
I just ran across this challenge. I didn't see it posted anywhere.

Proof that Aliens exist - The $10,000 challenge!

Some of my recent articles on the subject of UFO´s and Aliens have received a few critical comments, because I mentioned that more solid proof was needed in order to prove that aliens do indeed exist.

Following one of these articles I was contacted by two people, who claimed that they had the proof I was talking about. After exchanging a number of emails and studying the images they had, I agreed to present the information they were offering. CLICK HERE to view a specially created page revealing the images and information they have provided.

Link to the source

Link to the challenge

Surely someone her on ATS can debunk this.

Good Luck!

These 'challenges' come up all the time-so what-whatever you bring them short of an actual living breathing, singing, dancing alien-they dismiss

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 12:40 AM
$10,000 huh wow. I sure could use that money.
Hey I just remembered, I got a hairy alien in my deep freezer...

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:59 AM
O My, this is the worst picture processing I've ever seen.
Grasping at straws taken to the extreme.....

With that kind of processing and imagination , you can convert any fuzzy image on earth or space to that of an alien and his flying saucer.

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 09:35 AM

Originally posted by RonnieUFO
Don't be suprised if scientists try and duplicate the process of enlarging a single frame of film from the STS 75 Tether video and that they only prove the photo's to be real. I just have this feeling people making the offer already know the truth and want the Scientific community to investigate the photo's. What's your take on this?

Thats my take exactly well put. The tether incident is a fantastic feather in the ufology hat. To try and cover up saying that they are 'ice crystals' may fool some people but not the ones that have woken up. Lets hope they take the challenge and get the publicity it deserves.

Well done OP star and flag for you.

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 11:27 AM
The problem is that there is no way of proving that the photo is not real, the photo is really taken from NASA footage, the meaning of the what we see in the photo (and in the video) is what matters, not if the photo is real or not.

Offering 10000 dollars or even more to those who can prove that a real photo is a fake is at least misleading.

If he had real proof of the existence of alien life then the challenge would be different, it would be something like "prove that this photo does not show an alien life form or an alien built object".

He knows that there is no way of proving that aliens exist or that they do not exist only by those images, so it shifts the challenge to something completely irrelevant to the proof of alien life, and people see it for what they are expecting it to be, not for what it really is.

Also, the "scientist" whose name never appears is also suspicious, as is the miraculous enhancement of the photos.

If something in the photo is represented by just one pixel, for example 50% grey, it's impossible to know what four pixels of that area would look like, they could be all the same or they could be two black and two white, and in that case which are the black and which are the white?

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:05 PM
think this is the guy who prossecd the pictures?

ron stewart

noah's ark

edit: found a better link

[edit on 18-8-2008 by Kalomar]

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 01:19 PM
reply to post by Kalomar

The logo is the same, the "photo enhancement" is the same, I think you're right.

Good find!

posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:30 PM
I have heard from a Yahoo group that NASA or any other Scientific group has stepped up to call the photo's a fake. What are they waiting for? It's clear the Proof that Aliens exist-$10,000. challenge has not had anyone provide real proof that the photo's are a hoax or faked. I have heard several people have tried to get the money without providing any evidence, but then you know they would be out there. Where are the real scientists who debunk everything elese?

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:06 PM
Jeff Peckman comes to mind.

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:29 PM

Originally posted by RonnieUFO
I have heard from a Yahoo group that NASA or any other Scientific group has stepped up to call the photo's a fake.

They're not "fake," they're poorly enhanced and distorted to make it seem like there's more there than is really there. No one would claim they're "fake" since the originals are from NASA, just that their processing of them is incapable of revealing real detail.

What are they waiting for? It's clear the Proof that Aliens exist-$10,000. challenge has not had anyone provide real proof that the photo's are a hoax or faked.

No one is claiming either, just that they're invalid. The challenge is irrelevant. We should be challenging them to provide proof that they can reveal hidden details below the resolution of a camera using their technique with photos WE provide, not the other way around. Their stupid challenge is a lame attempt to reverse the burden of proof.

It's clear proof you can make interesting shapes out of individual pixels by butchering a photo. I could use the same technique to reveal "hidden details" and "alien spacecraft" in a very similar looking "notch object" which is actually an out of focus star. It wouldn't be fake in the sense that I really did take a picture of an object in space and really did pick out shapes - it'd be no less valid. Neither is proof of anything though.

I have heard several people have tried to get the money without providing any evidence, but then you know they would be out there. Where are the real scientists who debunk everything elese?

I have heard of several people who have tried to inflate their credibility with money without providing any proof that their evidence is valid. Where are the real researchers who publicly publish their materials and methods?

[edit on 19-8-2008 by ngchunter]

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:32 PM
Well that image enhancement technique is certainly interesting.

Of course you cannot resolve details that were not recorded in the first place and I find that needle example very strange because the first picture clearly lacks the detail that is bought out in the subsequent pictures, the detail is just not there in the first place to be enlarged.

I understand the concept but with the snowflake image it just seems like the details bought out are just artifacts caused by the image being enlarged so much. Even if you do it in steps, if you enlarge an image beyond it's native resolution you will be adding false information based on what's already there, it becomes interpolated so to speak. the more you enlarge, the more false information is added. The process can be very effective but it has it's limits and with such extreme examples as these the resulting images are probably 20% actual recorded information and 80% added by whatever processing algorithm was used.

Those snowflakes are maybe 10 pixels across, maybe 20? there just isn't enough there in the first place to create those kind of results genuinely. Any image recorded on any medium has a resolution limit, it's not the same as putting a real object under a microscope.

If this processing technique was genuine it would be like taking a surveillance video of a store robbery and bringing out enough detail to see the individual pores on the suspects skin and if that was possible it would probably be impossible to get away with any crime if you were caught on video even if you only showed up as the size of a snowflake.

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:12 PM
In fact, to prove my point I had a little look at the snowflake picture and found a few aliens that he missed, even a dancing rabbit alien!

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

I'm really surprised at your question, actually. More surprising is that, while phrasing your comments, you invoke the noun "god". "Proof" that aliens exist would either radically alter religious views or fly in the face of them.

Questions about the origins of life would have to be reformed, rephrased.

But that's all the foofy impractical stuff. More importantly would be finding out what sort of energy they're using for their travels...if we could learn from them, it might eradicate all of that mundane stuff you mentioned.

posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 09:05 AM
It needs the photo analyser that Deckard used in Blade Runner.


posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 11:50 AM
this is just hype surging the ufo community does anyone else this for what it is.

if you want to see alien in craft just check the dorothy izatt phenomenon. she has proof that not even 'Industrial light and majic' can dissprove..

she has pics of alien in the windows of their craft and it looks way better than any of this stuff.


[edit on 9/17/2008 by LordThumbs]

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in