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.


Interesting UFO Photo That Claims to Prove Existence of Alien Life

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 2 2008 @ 03:13 PM
if the PPP can get a an enlarged image of the street light bulbs that are in the background i MAY just listen.

this 'technique' is not real in the slightest.

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 02:08 AM

Jar Jar Binks REALLY REALLY is your FRIEND. Don't worry. You will enjoy his happy, constant yabbling.

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 03:15 AM
The cash reward is not collectible and here is why.

If you have to submit the photo to them to do this magic process then they can just manipulate the photo any way they want.

If you don't submit the picture and do it yourself then they will just claim that you did it wrong because they hold the pending patent to the software which you do not have access to and they will have to check it.

Re-sizing an image even once adds false pixels as the computer tries to replace the pixels with the closest color available on the re-size and because we don't yet have anything that can do a perfect re-size in that aspect it has to create extra pixels and each time done renders some pixilation making the photo contain tons of false pixel data. Doing this multiple times renders the pixel data incorrect.

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 03:22 AM

Originally posted by riggs2099
Six diff aliens..
sure buddy...what in the blue hell would six diff aliens be doing cruising the universe together. And also why have they decided to all stand by the window or whatever it is thier doing....

God god almighty! Putting 6 differnt humans the same place without serious argument is a major achievement...never mind aliens. lol

Here's a test for PPP:

Write a unique phrase on a piece of paper and take a photo of it from the end of your garden. Lets see if they can read it lol. Anyone want to take bets that there will be some magic reason why they can't do it? Its a simple cost effective test that doesn't require any money outlay by anyone.

This 'process' seems to be little more than a magic wand to make what you 'want' to see appear. You cannot extract more information than already exists without increasing ammounts of extrapolation and guesswork. This is BS of the highest order and pulling the old 'we have specialy invented hardware' trick wont cut it either.

If someone was to create an impossible algorithim such as this, then the main market would be secret services and police forces around the world and museams. When you come back form your dream world please let us know.


[edit on 7/12/2008 by the secret web]

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 03:34 AM
LOL, OMG, i cant believe this thread is still going on

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 06:49 AM

Originally posted by dunwichwitch
This looks familiar... where's that one guy who always posts these types of things on here? You know the guy.

Perhaps you're referring to rikriley?


posted on Dec, 23 2008 @ 02:13 PM
Given enough monkeys, with enough pixels .......

posted on Dec, 31 2008 @ 04:58 PM
Experts can take a video of an object and overlay frame after frame and extract a clean image.

To me this picture has captured exactly what happens when a storm front comes through our neighborhood; it's a Wal Mart bag blowing by in the wind about to clog my pool filter. LOL.


posted on Jan, 4 2009 @ 05:14 AM
Hold on.

As far as I know, Photoshop doesn't have x-ray, thermo and inferred imaging filters, does it?

If this PPP process uses x-ray to reveal detail that otherwise is invisible in a pixal, then how can you deride Nussbeck's process!

posted on Jan, 4 2009 @ 08:58 AM
reply to post by venividivici

FFS - a single pixel is the smallest element of a digital image file - you CANNOT resolve anything further from one pixel

posted on Jan, 4 2009 @ 09:28 PM
reply to post by ignorant_ape

The size of the pixal is irrelevant if the subject in the image (pixals) is invisible to the naked eye. I can take a picture of my tooth with a 8 megapixal digital camera but it won't reveal the stuff my dentist can see in the x-ray image he takes. Maybe this guy has discovered a process to reveal more stuff from images than standard processing. Then again, maybe he is full of ^$*&.
I've got an open mind to it.

posted on Jan, 4 2009 @ 10:15 PM
I can tell you right now i can recreate his results.

Someone hand me a UFO pic similar to the one in the first -post. I will without a doubt duplicate his results. Until then- I will take one of my pictures and Pee Pee Pee in it.

Stay tuned for aliens all over the place!

Or- send him that one to 'analyze'....

[edit on 4-1-2009 by wylekat]

posted on Jan, 4 2009 @ 10:52 PM
I have my findings using my Simplified Heuristics Interpolation Technology. It's comparable to PPP in every way- but I also have managed to use quantum imagining along with the regular X ray and Stantz Ray. I took a portion near the ship's hull, where ionization of the gas interacting with the multidimensional field creates a pocket universe- and i applied my special process to it. I have found the following:

To the left, you can see one of the drones genetically created to work in this rarefied dimensional pocket doing minute repairs to the hull itself, being overseen by a robot to the right. The robot has a probe extended- possibly to check integrity of various systems. You can see the drone is holding what appears to be a sealing and repairing device. The device is obviously being used at the moment to reseal an errant gap in the field surrounding the ship.

[edit on 4-1-2009 by wylekat]

[edit on 4-1-2009 by wylekat]

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 03:38 PM
Looks like another air spider lost by the Illuminati.
Those series of dark spots could be the eyes of some dimensional spider.
A series of side bright spots have also been seem on UFOs.
This is perhaps what led UFO buster Lyne to connect devices around
the saucer for instant direction changes.

posted on Jan, 5 2009 @ 11:14 PM
Well- not what I was trying to prove, but looks like I got a bonus cookie.

Words cannot describe your post, yo. I have tried to no less than 4 times to.

posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 12:03 AM

Originally posted by wylekat
Well- not what I was trying to prove, but looks like I got a bonus cookie.

Words cannot describe your post, yo. I have tried to no less than 4 times to.

Which part. The spider reference?
A series of spider eyes in the sky could only be explained by
some UFO theory about other dimensions.
The other dimension theory is espoused by some.

I thought that was cool for those that bend that way.

The reference of:
A series of side bright spots have also been seem on UFOs.
Should be well known from the many UFO photos.
And would be the opposite of what we see in the photo under
analysis. So this type of UFO has been seen before.
Not a bad deduction.

So that was cool but not fully explained but we must assume
some familiarity with UFO photos.

The reference of devices around the sides is a hardware description
in case phantom reasons are not the desired theory.
The image of a band of circles are motion devices in a hardware

Well you must be right if I had that much accounting to do.

ED: Sorry, I was talking about this photo:

[edit on 1/6/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 10:53 PM
For those of you who know my name:

I've corresponded with this yokel, the exchange is detailed on this thread:

He's certifiable. You can quote me on that.


posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 03:10 PM
These Paranormal spooks are agents from the under government or
cartels that want any dialogue that is not scientific and especially not
about Tesla.

Ronald Nussbeck is offering $10,000

Discussion as sited above.

At that time I had a close encounter on July 2, 1981 outside of Rawlins, Wyoming on Hwy 80.

The americanchronicle page in OP.

So what have we here. Its real and its from Wyoming.
They tend not to travel too far from home.
Its just the opposite of what we think.

Yeah, but convince the paranormalist its man made, does not compute.


Calling all scientist’s, MUFON, NASA and governmental agencies from around the world! Ronald Nussbeck is offering $10,000 to anyone who can debunk these UFO photos and prove they are not real.

From the examiner link.
Yes, the photos are real.
You picked up a glowing object in a NASA video.
Pumping more into this help though as fools drop out as the truth drops in.

[edit on 1/8/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 01:25 PM
What says enough to me is, on the page that the beginning of this thread links to, the author even says "its lucky to even catch lightening on camera" yes it is. Clearly this pic was just a cool looking pic, clip art some alien looking ball in the corner, zoom in and pick what you want from it. Then create some name for this imaginary process, create an email address and charge people for having the same bull# work done to their pics. Yeah I’m out on this one.

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:24 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
The photo's of Alien's have been up for nearly three months with a $10,000.00 cash prize for anyone who can prove they are not real! So far no one has collected a dime, most of the scientists who have commented on the photo's agree that they are real....
The challenge was made to Optical Scientists as well as anyone who thinks they could debunk the photo's. Now PPP-PENETRATING PHOTOGRAPHIC PROCESS has just released photo's of Flight 175 from 9/11/2001 just moments before it crashed into the World Trade Center #2. The Cockpit photo's are the frist, CIA, FBI, 9/11 COMMISION was unable to retrive the photo's of the cockpit. NOW DO YOU BELIEVE IN PPP? IF SO THEN THE ALIEN PHOTO'S ARE REAL BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN REAL!!!!!!!!

Do you have proof of the cockpit shot? i would, and i bet everyone else would love to see that picture before it hit the trade centre. But until you show me and evryone else proof you are just a person on a massive acid trip seeing way too many things!!!

[edit on 13-11-2009 by GezinhoKiko]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in