UFO photographed with Mufon director

These photos look good. But the kicker is that presumably, the MUFON director was present and taking film of the object. Maybe some of the resident photo debunkers could check these out.











The text from the report:

"THE DIRECTOR OF MUFON.COM [EARL]WAS INVITED TO MY RESIDENCE,WHERE I BLEW HIS SOCKS OFF..THE FOLLOWING PHOTOS WERE TAKEN ALONG WITH 3 OTHER CAMERAS RUNNING,ALL OF WHICH SHOW THE SAME STORY...THIS IS REAL."

Good find! S&F

I´ll be watching as this develops....

Very nice pics,clear too!The second one has a weird shape to it,not the normal disc shape.
Very interesting find Network dude!

I thought the first one looked promising, but then I saw the second image - IMHO - FAKE sorry.

If you look at the glowing object - the "glow" around it is forward of the tree and street lamp, and the object appears in the background...sorry to rain on the parade, but it looks like a bad photoshop job...

Star and Flag for you sir. Seeing as this was captured on so many cameras there should be lots of photos on the way. Whatever this turns out as I am sure the pics will be interesting.

Just to note the way I read that quote was the MUFON director having 'his socks blown off' by the photos not taking them himself, do you have a link for the article?

EDIT: WatchNLearn; seeing as there is ment to be more pics/vids coming I am willing to reserve judgement yet, but yes that glow is suss.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Steve B]

reply to post by WatchNLearn


I was thinking street lamp too, but you can see the street lamp right next to it and it's not on. It seems like it should be on given the darkness. But I am looking forward to hearing if this is confirmed by MUFON as a real event. If it really was filmed as well, it will be hard to disprove.

reply to post by Steve B


Here is he link to the MUFON report.

Sorry, I can't seem to get the direct link to work but here is the link to MUFON directly
Mufon reports

[edit on 16-9-2008 by network dude]

reply to post by network dude


I posted this same thing yesterday.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by network dude


trust me, I want to believe, I want to believe!!!! But I feel a healthy dose of skepticism is always a good thing...I suppose i am still waiting for the crystal clear up close shot - you know, like the one you would take of your new car to show friends. Why is it that people can take nice clean pics of their cars, families, dog, cat etc...but not UFO's

reply to post by network dude


Thanks Network Man i checked it out but i was hoping it was longer lol. The title clearly implies that the MUFON director was supposedly present I guess we will just have to wait for confirmation from MUFON.

The first pic looks like it might have been taken from inside looking out a window, and the "ufo" is an interior light reflecting on the window. Or it could be the same as explanation 2 below...



The 2nd is a bug, probably a moth, close to the camera being lit up by the flash...I am 100% sure on this one.



the 3rd is a so called "orb", which is just some dirt on or near the lens that is out of focus and taking the round shape....they appear all the time, and are nothing but a dust or dirt particle...or raindrop, or whatever. I have a picture of hundreds of orbs that I took, but it was when we were renovating a house, and the dust was everywhere.



[edit on 16-9-2008 by sensfan]

reply to post by sensfan


the third is just a picture of two guys filming the event. I aggree that both of the first two pictures could easily be debunked as reflections or a moth in the flash, but I eagerly await any findings from MUFON for confirmations that these pics were taken outside and there is film to back up the photos. If that happens, it will be pretty hard to debunk them. But please take what I say with a grain of salt. I was sure bigfoot was real a couple of weeks ago.

reply to post by WatchNLearn
I got lit into in this forum because I thought an object was further than most here thought it was. So my question to you would be, how do you know the object in the second photo is behind the tree? too me it looks like it is above the tree.

Originally posted by sensfanThe 2nd is a bug, probably a moth, close to the camera being lit up by the flash...I am 100% sure on this one.

LOL.... I am sorry but that is REALLY stretching it. It's a perfect example of wanting to debunk something so badly and in any possible way that you just make things up.

I mean a moth lit up by the flash????? Are you saying the person taking the photo was just taking a picture of a black sky for no reason and a moth just happened to fly past and when he looked at his pics later on he thought "Wow a UFO..... just like the picture I took 10 mins earlier"

Sure... I want proof as much as the next person and don't believe everything I see...... but I don't start making up "excuses" and trying to debunk things based on a guess as to what it "could be".

If you are saying he is faking the photos on purpose great.... but there are easier ways to fake a picture than to wait for a bug to fly past your camera so that the flash reflects off it. If you are saying he isn't faking the photos... then the bug excuse is just absolute crapola given that he photographed something 10 mins earlier that looked similar.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Total Package]

reply to post by Total Package


Nowhere did I say anyone was faking the photo. Why the person took that particular photo I don't know, he/she would have to tell you why. If you look at the EXIF data for the photo, you will see that the flash was indeed fired, which would illuminate objects close the the camera (like a bug) just like what is shown.

ImageDescription -
Make - SONY
Model - DSC-P32
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - Microsoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6001.18000
DateTime - 2008:09:14 13:23:37
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
ExifOffset - 2360
ExposureTime - 1/30 seconds
FNumber - 2.80
ExposureProgram - Landscape mode
ISOSpeedRatings - 250
ExifVersion - 0220
DateTimeOriginal - 2008:09:13 20:18:05
DateTimeDigitized - 2008:09:13 20:18:05
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
ExposureBiasValue - 2.00
MaxApertureValue - F 2.77
MeteringMode - Spot
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Flash fired, compulsory flash mode, return light not detected
FocalLength - 5.00 mm
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 640
ExifImageHeight - 480
InteroperabilityOffset - 6372
FileSource - Other
SceneType - Other
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Manual
White Balance - Auto
SceneCaptureType - Landscape

Maker Note (Vendor): -

Thumbnail: -
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 0.01
YResolution - 0.01
ResolutionUnit - Inch
JpegIFOffset - 6558
JpegIFByteCount - 1188


Here's another photo of a bug caught in the flash...

reply to post by sensfan


Given the type of camera it is I have no doubt it was probably set to Auto.... so no doubt the flash would go off given it's night time. Proves nothing though... it's just a "theory" but you said you are 100% certain it was a bug. Fact is it could very well be a UFO that looks like an illuminated bug.... but just because it looks like a bug does that immediately mean it can't be a UFO?

I just get a little tired of people immediately trying to "debunk" every photo with absolutely no proof at all. There is not a thing on this planet that I could not come up with a "rational explantion" for...... hell I could probably write an entire thesis on why an A380 airbus would never be able to get off the ground..... all of which could sound "plausible" but which would be wrong.

So unless you can provide me with unmistakeable proof that it is a bug reflection..... you are guessing as much as the next man.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by Total Package]

Another thing to add. You will notice that everything except the "bug" is in relatively sharp focus...I say relatively because nothing is in perfect focus due to the low resolution of the photo, but even the trees in the distance are more in focus than the lit object. The only way this could be the case is if the object is CLOSE to the camera when the picture was taken.

This thread is redundant.

See BlackProject's post above...

Let's utilize that search feature!!

reply to post by starcraft


You are correct, but I am not a mod and therefore cannot delete the thread. If I could shift everything over to the other thread, I would. I don't care who puts it out there, I just want to make sure the informatin gets seen. I did search for dupicates with no hits.

Originally posted by WatchNLearn
I thought the first one looked promising, but then I saw the second image - IMHO - FAKE sorry.

If you look at the glowing object - the "glow" around it is forward of the tree and street lamp, and the object appears in the background...sorry to rain on the parade, but it looks like a bad photoshop job...

Actually that is normal. The glow is "happening" in the lense of the camera. You can test this with your own eyes. Go outside and find a streetlamp in the dark and put something between your eyes and the light. You'll see the same thing. The glow is generated in the lense of your eyeball.