Mid-Air UFO Sighting sent into C2C

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by The Coward

 

The point is there are very few photos of true UFO's. ATS, as well as many other sites are flooded with countless photos. Some are hoaxes, some are honest mistakes. The great majority are as easily dispatched as this one. The wheat has to be separated from the chaff.

The photo was posted here. The OP asked for opinions. He is getting them.

Hi Phage, thanks for you input, I apprecaite both sides of the fence of this issue; however, something caught my eye with your sentence below...

Some are hoaxes, some are honest mistakes.

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, none of them are real in your opinion?

Looks like a styrofome bead taped to the window in this particular picture.

But I'm not so quick to call hoax because I have seen some things like this around Cheyenne Mountain.

Originally posted by Phage
Clouds are out of focus. All the scratches and imperfections (including "object") on the window are in focus. Autofocus on window.

Condensation droplet on inside of the outer pane of the window.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by Phage]

[edit on 14-10-2008 by Phage]

As much as I dislike you for looking at the negative side of EVERTHING you respond to (lol), that was also the first thing that came to mind (water droplet)... but if you look at it non-zoomed it really looks 'out there'... also dont you think the person who took the pic would be able to tell that it's just a droplet of water by moving their POV around? I mean that's what i'd do and it'd be easily distinguishable.. and i'd be like oh,,, and just delete the pic and forget about it.
im positive there's 'something' in the pic.. just not sure what it is.. could be a balloon, could be a .... chrome basketball.. maybe god has butterfingers and that's just one of many games of heaven hoops that he's pissed people off for losing the game ball

edit- but yea the whole foo fighter idea came to mind as well... also many pilots have described 'orbs' that fly around and watch them.. and well, THEY'RE up there flying, not us... i think everyone needs to just see something for themselves, that's why i dont usually rely on ufo pics to convince myself. not referring to the other thread phage we were talking about a week ago or so because i know what i saw (you thought it was sirius) but i mean all the paranormal # thats happened in my life that fits together with everything anyone has ever mentioned...........now im just rambling. sorry.


[edit on 14-10-2008 by MurrayTORONTO]

reply to post by asmeone2


hmmm.. well.. given that fact that in order to 'tape' anything on the plane, you'd have to get on the tarmac, get past the numerious ground crew, 'sneak' up on the wing, possibly in broad daylight, in FULL new of most of the ground crew and security. Then get back down, and 'sneak' back to your seat.

Even if it was a ground crew member, it would still have to be completely elborate!!!

reply to post by Komodo


Unless it's on the inside of the window...

Originally posted by Komodo

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, none of them are real in your opinion?

Sorry, I wasn't as clear as I could have been. I meant to say that there have been few true UFO photos. The rest, the vast majority, have been identified as hoaxes or cases of mistaken identity.

There are photos that do not fall into these categories. These are what I'm referring to as true UFO photos. I have no problem calling them real UFO's (in the literal sense). The people that present them don't know what they are, experts don't know what they are, and I certainly don't know what they are.

I don't make the leap from unknown to extraterrestrial (or extradimensional, or extratemporal) easily. The argument that if we don't know what they are, they can't be anything else, doesn't hold water for me.

I don't comment on every "UFO" photograph and video. If I think I know what something might be, I'll speak up. If I don't know or if someone else seems to have the same explanation I would have, I just stay out of it. Am I just looking to debunk the photos? No, but I am looking for explanations, as are most of the people here.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by Phage]

Wow tiger woods got some serious skills!


Just joking.

Interesting find.

reply to post by The Coward


Could it be related to the starlike objects?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by asmeone2


You'd be able to see the tape .. think about it.

reply to post by Phage


Thanks for clearing that up. Yep, agreed with the fact that some can be debunked and those that can't remain...

U.F.O.

This is true that the windows do have holes in them. However, all the ones I have seen have the holes at the very bottom of the window, not in the middle.

i found a picture on flickr of an air plane window that shows the hole.check it out.......

and also a weather ballon ---->
looks similar to the OP's picture.



[edit on 14-10-2008 by miguelbmx]

reply to post by miguelbmx


it does look similar to the pic! Interesting, maybe it is, hard to tell from such a distance....however, on 2nd random thought...

1. How could an aircraft (Jet) know where weather balloons are stationed at in order to avoid them?
   

After doing a little searching..where' what I found off of good ol' Wikipedia...

High altitude balloons are unmanned balloons, usually filled with helium, that are released into the upper atmosphere, generally reaching between 60,000 and 120,000 feet (18,000 - 36,500m). The most common type of high altitude balloon are weather balloons, although there are many other purposes to which such balloons can be put. Many scientific groups and universities use them to conduct experiments in the upper atmosphere, and modern balloons generally contain electronic equipment such as radio transmitters, cameras, and sometimes a satellite navigation system, such as GPS.

These balloons are launched into what is termed "near space" - the area of Earth's atmosphere where there is very little air, but which is not high enough to be in the realm of satellites.

A seasonal vortex in Antarctica allows balloons to be recovered very close to their launch site, making it a popular location for balloon-based research.

Due to the low cost of GPS and communications equipment, high altitude ballooning is an emerging hobby.[1]

source

Anyways, guess that will wait for another thread.

reply to post by Komodo


you get a star from me because i did not know any of that, thank you.

I'm going to try and not be a dink on this but...........Does anyone here have good depth perception? Look at the rest of the picture, one can see many anomalies on the window, be they scratches, or specks of water. To me the object looks to be a few hundred feet outside of the aircraft, not between panes of lexan, or whatever.

Some here do seem to be quick to debunk everything they see on this forum, but it is a ufo in that no one here can know for sure what it is, we weren't there, so everything is a guess.

All that said, have a great day/evening everyone.

reply to post by saturnsrings


I have to agree with you. Does anyone have an excerpt of the C2C interview?
I think to come to any rational analysis or conclusion it would be important to hear the eyewitnesses description of the event, to make ANY conclusion on this photo. For example:

* Was the object hovering in one spot as the plane passed?

* Was the object "pacing" the plane or keeping up, passing ...WHAT?

* Did the object perform any significant maneuvers that could not have been a "balloon" characteristic?



We all here are quick to "debunk", I think most agree its safe to err on the side of caution (especially with this bunch) but with that being said, we all need to be careful and look at ALL the evidence provided in any given case to be able to make an informed hypothesis and not just blurt out our random thoughts. I have been guilty of this myself. Debunking everything on sight without ALL the evidence is NOT ...Denying Ignorance.

As other already have pointed out... it looks very much like an artefact on the window itself - if I was the photographer, I would certainly take pictures from different angles to have some sort of comparison.

Originally posted by Alter-Ego
reply to post by saturnsrings

 

I have to agree with you. Does anyone have an excerpt of the C2C interview?
I think to come to any rational analysis or conclusion it would be important to hear the eyewitnesses description of the event, to make ANY conclusion on this photo. For example:

* Was the object hovering in one spot as the plane passed?

* Was the object "pacing" the plane or keeping up, passing ...WHAT?

* Did the object perform any significant maneuvers that could not have been a "balloon" characteristic?



We all here are quick to "debunk", I think most agree its safe to err on the side of caution (especially with this bunch) but with that being said, we all need to be careful and look at ALL the evidence provided in any given case to be able to make an informed hypothesis and not just blurt out our random thoughts. I have been guilty of this myself. Debunking everything on sight without ALL the evidence is NOT ...Denying Ignorance.

Good questions. It would help to have answers to them but apparently this picture was sent in to Coast to Coast with nothing more than the description shown. That's the only evidence provided.

Airliners fly at 500-600 mph. Unless the object is a fairly good distance from the plane and quite large, it would have flashed by the window. The photographer must have had his camera at the ready. There is also the focus issue. The other marks on the window are in focus, indicating that a) the photographer intentionally focused on the window or b) autofocus focused on the window. If the answer is a), then it is a deliberate hoax. If the answer is b) the problem is a question of field of view. Since the window is the point of focus, the object would have to be either on the window or quite close to the plane to be as focused as it is.

If the object were pacing the plane there should have been other witnesses. No one else saw it? The photographer wouldn't point it out to anyone? Shades of Nightmare at 20000 Feet! If there had been other witnesses it would be very helpful in determining what the object is.

Calling this debunking is not exactly correct.

I was on a jet to America, 35,000 feet over Greenland, when I saw the object and snapped a picture, I have this image as a result.

The photographer has made no claims at all. There is nothing to debunk, only attempts to explain.

[edit on 15-10-2008 by Phage]

to me it does infact look like something on the window... sorry

reply to post by Komodo


Weather balloon , dude. Just chill and enjoy a good spliff.

reply to post by ian990003100


Yes airplane windows have holes for pessure, but they are not located in the middle right of the window. They are centered on the bottom of the window.