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.


[HOAX] 3 Mufon pics need looking at. [HOAX]

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 05:36 AM
The pictures are nothing to do with me. I are not a hoaxer.

This is the report, on todays listings.

I was watching the TV when the television signal was interrupted and the same signal problem with the radio. I just get out of the house when i saw our neighbors looking at the sky and taking some pictures of a strange craft. I ran out to the house to get my digi cam and i took alot of pictures of it. It was moving slowly and some other times it was moving in great speed from left to right. The people freaked out when it came above us. We ran to the tricycle ( kind of vehicle) still taking some pics from the vehicle window. Others are brave enough to took shots of pictures under the ufo. It was really huge and television signals are interrupted. Some people were scared. We shared our pics to each others. it was still mysterious. Most of the witnesses are kids playing in the playground with some adults. My friends also witnessed the craft. At night, i hear some voices i dont know what it was saying. It was just whispering and murmuring. That happening made me really scared that i hold the rossary and start praying. It only occured that night. I always dreamed that the craft had landed and when i woke up i was sweating. Im not that really scared but theres a few creep deep into me. I believe that they exist.... I was just thinking if that night the aliens are talking to me.

these are the pictures in question. And if they're genuine,

Have some of that UFO hunters



The hoax has been revealed in THIS POST by ATS member Kryties. Good work.



[edit on 3-4-2009 by SkepticOverlord]

[edit on 3/4/2009 by Acidtastic]

[Mod edit]
sarcasm removed,

[edit on 3/4/2009 by Sauron]

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:07 AM
Hmmm.. Wonder why the 2nd picture has plastic wrap on the bottom.

I also thought the kinks in the wire on the left (pic 3) looked suspicious. but when you look down it there are 3 , so looks as though it is just where it was folded for storage.

Good pics, but pic 2 has my spider senses tingling.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:13 AM
Sheesh. I went straight to pic2 as noted by the 2nd posters comment.

I just thought "A GPS device windshield sucker pad".. I then looked at the rest and retracted the thought.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:24 AM
Looking at the bottom of that thing... it sure looks dirty and scratched, you'd think if they were E.T they'd be advanced enough to avoid flying into things and busting up their ship. If it's man-made then you'd still think that the human pilots would firstly avoid flying into things considering how expensive the craft is, and secondly to avoid flying in suburbian neighbourhoods and freaking out the locals.

Even fighter jets dont have scratches and marks all over them like that. I highly doubt these pics are of an actual craft.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:25 AM
Yup!! it's definately a sucker doubt.(2nd pic) no idea about 1st or 3rd.

But I'm still gonna go ahead and go call it "swamp gas"

[edit on 3-4-2009 by MoonandStar]

[edit on 3-4-2009 by MoonandStar]

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:28 AM
Interesting thing I've just noticed... In the third pic there's a sign for used cars that almost looks as if the pics are taken in a used car lot - the hubcap theory seems to fit in that case.

Actually... - this could be a disc brake, check google images.

[edit on 4/3/09 by mortalengine]

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:38 AM
The third picture screams fake. The flying saucer looks like it was superimposed.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 06:49 AM
The object looks like one of those so-called "Policeman's Hat" road bumps. I cannot seem to find a picture of one anywhere so I photoshopped one up (very poorly I might add
) so that you may know what I'm talking about....

The larger 'base' of what you see in the photo's on the bottom of the object would be what is buried under the road surface.

I could be wrong but I do not think that I am.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:03 AM
The EXIF data shows this..

Camera seems to be a Panasonic DMC-LS1 with f2.8 Lens.

Date + Time
Image 1 = 2009:03:26 11:56:43
Image 2 = 2009:03:26 11:47:10
Image 3 = 2009:03:27 11:17:06

ISO + Exposure
Image 1 = ISO400 f5.6 1/1000
Image 2 = ISO64 f7.5 1/400
Image 3 = ISO64 f5.6 1/320

All shot on auto and show no editing data... Sooo these do look like the original images...

I call brake disc for image 2.

Also image 3 was taken the day after at roughly the same time as image 1 +2.. Looks like they were having fun at lunch time...

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:11 AM
look @ this pic - the ` sky ` in the centre hole does not match the suroounding sky

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:16 AM
brake disc ????


i am highly skeptical of these images

but - IMHO it is NOT a vehicle brake disk

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:30 AM
Did Billy Meier take these? gosh these look like the pictures from the 70s. interesting i guess, except for the seran wrap in pic 2.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:40 AM
Bingo! Found what I was looking for....

Compare this image of the supposed 'UFO'...

to this one....

The larger disc at the base of the 'UFO' is buried under the road surface and the upper portion serves as a 'bump' to warn cars they are cutting the corner.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:56 AM
now, people comparing it to this that and the other, fair enough like. But I'm comparing it to the UFO pictures taken not that long ago above a house. Which looked like a hat of sorts. Ifact, they look like the same "craft" (I'm not calling it a UFO, until the image experts got on it. Opinon saying "this looks like..." is fair enough, but i want the digital crew to look at it.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 07:59 AM
stay in your photo shop classes

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 08:02 AM
No city mentioned, country is PH = PHILIPPINES ? Event date: March 4th 2009.

[DateTime ] = 2009:03:26 11:47:10
[ExifImageWidth ] = 2304
[ExifImageHeight ] = 1728
[FocalLength ] = 101/10 optical zoom x 1.7
[DigitalZoomRatio ] = 0/10

Full size but resaved with IJG based software, quality 85.

[DateTime ] = 2009:03:26 11:56:43
[ExifImageWidth ] = 1280
[ExifImageHeight ] = 960
[FocalLength ] = 58/10 optical zoom x 1
[DigitalZoomRatio ] = 0/10 digital zoom not used

Seems to be an original JPEG file (unlike the other two there is no JFIF marker in this one) but quantization tables don't match an original JPEG. I don't know which software/hardware created this file.

10 minutes after the first one, the photographer changed the resolution to a LOWER value (about half), and took the picture from inside a car.

[DateTime ] = 2009:03:27 11:17:06
[ExifImageWidth ] = 2304
[ExifImageHeight ] = 1728
[FocalLength ] = 58/10 optical zoom x 1

Full size but resaved with IJG based software, quality 85.

The saucer came back the next day!!! Zoom not used again.

In all three pics, the "Software" tag is missing, it should be :
[Software ] = Ver.1.0

All 3 images are from the same Panasonic DMC-LS1 camera, 4-megapixel 3x optical zoom.

Conclusion: Dates mismatch with report. JPEG files not original. Could be easy faked by copy / paste.

[edit on 2009-4-3 by nablator]

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 08:19 AM
There's more in the next report:

I was about to take some food from my house when i saw the strange object hovering near the rooftop. It was low and moving slowly and sometimes it was moving fast. I was shocked and grab my camera. I also noticed some signal interruptions with our radio the same with some appliances like cellphone and television. i was scared especially when it hovers just above us. It just disappeared from a really great speed.

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 08:33 AM
The 3 new files are better. Compression signature matches originals. Quantization tables, Huffmann tables, subsample size, everything except the "Software" tag is still missing. Either it's a suspended model or very well done copy/paste + JPEG encoding, or it's REAL.

[edit on 2009-4-3 by nablator]

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 08:35 AM
I am a high level believer...

But these images looks like it is a model.

On third pic, the "craft" are just as sharp as anything else in that picture which to me suggests that the "craft" were at the same focus depth as the building.

The second image is also quite questionable. The object has a dens reflection that to me suggest it is pretty close to the ground. If so, it doesn't seem to be to big.

This looks like a simple lathe job. Lathe = turn.

Well I believe in many things and does not lightly dismiss images, but these ones have a feeling to them that don't feel right.

More over, I think the photographer have chosen the spots to take his pictures in a weird way.

Why take a picture out on a "street" ( refer to Nablators second picture. I get the feeling it is out on a back alley street of some sort ) and then run into a backyard, stand under a few cloth-dryer lines to take another picture.

Nah, I have a hard time embracing this.

[edit on 3-4-2009 by Akezzon]

posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 08:46 AM
[DateTime ] = 2009:03:26 11:07:32

[DateTime ] = 2009:03:26 11:56:43

[DateTime ] = 2009:03:27 11:17:06

The UFO hovered 49 minutes and came back the next day. These guys are sooo lucky...

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in