It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Romanek Pictures (Triangular UFO)

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Oh my word... Why is it that the photos these guys post on the web are so grainy and low quality. I mean for heavens sake, I have a digital camera that is how old, 1 Megapixel, and IT takes better pics than that!

That alone makes me say "no deal pal". And don't give me that baloney story of "it was re-sized for the web". If you want to convince people, you post something of substance, and that people can analyze.

Obviously, they don't want that, so hence the "great Quality" picture we have here from them.

And by the way, Believe him, because he says so....Yah right.

PS - just saw a pig fly by my 9th floor - so you will all believe me hey? I'll upload the pic as soon as I have finished the photoshop job




posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TortoiseKweek
 


I tell you what, you take a picture of a plane flying at full altitude with that 1 megapixel camera of yours and if its better than what he has I will give your opinion some merit.

It is real convenient to stand in your position and demand quality when your not the person trying to get a good picture of something that is very high in the sky, ESPECIALLY at night!

It get really annoyed when people don't really take things through before making comments like this.

Please share your 1 mega pixel splendor of a high flying craft in motion.
I would love to see it.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by NephraTari]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by NephraTari
 


Firstly, let's get this out from the start. I'm NOT attacking the OP or you, so I don't see the need for you to have a go at me.... OK?

I don't believe this guy, and that's why I was sarcastic towards HIM. I also made light of the situation with the pig reference. It seems people come on here to have a bash at someone else, instead of being civil.

Also, I don't see how that picture is taken at night (Never seen a flash light up the sky blue). If he says so, I don't believe that. That's my opinion, and I have a right to voice it, so if it annoys you then, tough. What if your opinion annoys me? I'm not here to bash others, but I also am not going to sit back when someone has a go at me.

To be honest, after looking at the picture for a while, it almost looks like it was a photograph of a TV screen. I'm not saying IT IS, I'm saying it looks like it. The grainy up and down lines, and the weird hue at the top, just looks out of place.

That's my 2 cents on it.

I'll try find some pics of planes from my 1 Meg camera and post later


(NephraTari - If I offended you, I apologise. That's not why I'm here. Peace)


Ok, these are 2 I took whilst driving on the 401 highway in Toronto (Mississauga)





This is a beaut. Took this whilst doing 100km/h. Just lifted the camera, and snapped the pic through the passenger window. So, 2 moving objects, and the pic came out clear. Hope you can see what I was getting at earlier. As said before, I Apologise if I offended you.

Hope you enjoy the pic




[edit on 25-10-2008 by TortoiseKweek]

[edit on 25-10-2008 by TortoiseKweek]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by NephraTari
reply to post by TortoiseKweek
 




Please share your 1 mega pixel splendor of a high flying craft in motion.
I would love to see it.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by NephraTari]


Right. Now look TortioseKweek . Much as I agree that this stan fellow is a dellusional fool , I also think that your photos are not a decent comparison, because the plane you photographed is not at HIGH altitude.At high altitude you wouldnt have been talking about clear definition between the wings and the altidude adjustor flaps.
NephraTari... Stans a nit ... we kick stan when we see him in the hope his ego will fall off , float away , and allow contact with a man who hasnt operated his intelligence clearly for at least half a decade. Hes a pleb . End.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
good old stan... he will be the next great prophet ... announcing a huge motherships arrival.. probably over colorado.. this time.. all of his stuff is for sale.. theres plenty of gullible people out there. for him to make a good living on.. P.T. Barnum... would of loved this guy.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit

Originally posted by NephraTari
reply to post by TortoiseKweek
 




Please share your 1 mega pixel splendor of a high flying craft in motion.
I would love to see it.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by NephraTari]


Right. Now look TortioseKweek . Much as I agree that this stan fellow is a dellusional fool , I also think that your photos are not a decent comparison, because the plane you photographed is not at HIGH altitude.At high altitude you wouldnt have been talking about clear definition between the wings and the altidude adjustor flaps.
NephraTari... Stans a nit ... we kick stan when we see him in the hope his ego will fall off , float away , and allow contact with a man who hasnt operated his intelligence clearly for at least half a decade. Hes a pleb . End.


That wasn't the point of posting the picture (although that was her request). So I should have clarified things. The point was to show how you can get a decent picture with a 1 Megapixel Camera (the lowest of all digital cameras), and make out some pretty good details.

That whole photo has terrible compression artifacts, not just the craft! That is the point.

And as said in the first post... "Oh my word... Why is it that the photos these guys post on the web are so grainy and low quality. I mean for heavens sake, I have a digital camera that is how old, 1 Megapixel, and IT takes better pics than that!"

I do however agree with you on Stan



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   
Lie detecter tests are not fully accurate, and I read how his test was rigged for him to fail it. I think his case may be true. Let's not forget Billy Meier PASSED his test.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by tom502
 





posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   
That was funny and made me laugh. But still, this rigged "lie detector" test doesn't mean anything. And like I said, Billy Meier passed his, so does that mean his case is true?



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tom502
 


Do you really need a lie detector test to determine if Billy and Stan are legit?
For me their silly evidence and antics speaks for itself.
Billy takes photos of dinosaur ILLUSTRATIONS in a book and tries to pass them off as actual photos of dinosaurs from when he went back in time.
Stan likes to play games with flashing lights and tape recorders.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
Rominek is a snake oil salesman if ever there was one!

Since the alien in the window fiasco and the subsequent lie detector failure, this man hasn't an ounce of credibility. All he can do is harm UFOlogy from this point forward, thus giving further credence to the critics that say UFOlogy of full of scammers & fruit loops. I just wish he would go away to be bluntly honest.

IRM


Not that I'm taking his side,there is alot of question marks to his story,but I dont see failing the lie detector as
proof his story is fabracated.It's actually pretty easy to fail one,if the questions need more than a yes or no answer,and you hesitate or not shure your right,its going to say your lying.
And what reallys sucks about the test(used for ufo,alien,etc... stories) is even if you pass, people think you new how to beat the detector or
there stories are still not considered true.
but as soon as someone fails they take it as proof there fake.
I guess what I am trying to say is lie detecters don't prove *hit. _javascript:icon('
')




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
That was my point, I think a lie detector test is not valid, and doesn't really mean anything. The tests can be manipulated and the results interperative.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by tom502
 


Romanek is a interesting case. Cause his "first sightings" can be traced back to 2000, I'm refering to the video on youtube of the news story.
I don't know the record for keeping a "hoax" going. But 11 years seems a bit much.
It's a interesting story with the equations and all. I do have his book and occasionally check his site.

I'm a big skeptic of the whole ufo topic.
A few of his pictures look "debunkable" to me.

The book (fake or real) is pretty good though..

edit on 31-1-2011 by AtruthGuy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Why are some claiming this guy a hoax? You can't just say it, and not show it? I was recently all into the Meier case, and well, I think it is a hoax, though an entertaining one, but the people that claim hoax on the Meier case, take it's evidences one by one and show what's wrong with them. I don't see anyone doing this with the Romanek evidence. I don't know for a fact, but I think this case may be real. It seems more realistic too, to me, of the grey type aliens, as compared to Meier's beautiful Pleiadians.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   
to the poster above your really insisting i make my little cousin put on a novelty mask and a black shirt at 1030 at night and have him pull a peeping tom with my camera set up waiting to catch the action? With all the technoloy "aliens" have they have to peek there head through a wide open camera set up window and not have the slightest clue? The whole thing is not believable.
edit on 1-2-2011 by ThatGuyInTheKnow because: re worded



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Show us a video of a real alien peeping his head up to a window and then we can compare footage. You don't know if this is real or not. Just because we(you) have preconcieved ideas of aliens does not make them so. It seems to me they do have a physical body, so why couldn't they look into a window? I don't know if the footage is real or not, and if this was all the guy had, he'd have a hard time proving it was relevant too, but he has a lot of documentation and evidence, as well as many witnesses. So, I lean to that it may be real.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tom502
 


Im not gonna site here and argue with you, the guy maybe intially did see a ufo and maybe "really" or what he thinks was part of an abduction. But now hes trieng to milk in an income agiasnt poor saps like you and i think you deserve it. Lets even say that the footage is "real" what do you think the odds are that he could provide proof again with even more incredible evidence then before? Then read this? Stans feb 2011 Workshop The guy wants your money ands thats it!



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TortoiseKweek
Oh my word... Why is it that the photos these guys post on the web are so grainy and low quality. I mean for heavens sake, I have a digital camera that is how old, 1 Megapixel, and IT takes better pics than that!


Not taking Romanek side on this but aren't 99% of "ufo pics"
grainy and low quality?



edit on 3-2-2011 by AtruthGuy because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join