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.

 

Is this an UFO on my picture?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Regenstorm
 



This really sounds like "people move on, nothing to see here"...
I am not convinced by the analysis by Armap and GreenEyedLeo.
It could be a bird, could be not. I have also some pictures showing spots in the sky. One of them looks really like a UFO but it is too small to determine what it really is, so it remains a UFO, just like this one.
In my opinion it looks too metallic to be a bird.


"Nothing to see move on?" I am no "debunker" as that appears what you are insinuating by "sounds like nothing to see here, move on." The truth is there really is nothing MORE to see here, there was a case presented and three well knowledgeable ufological experts on ATS (and others, even the OP) concurred that what was "to see" was nothing more than a bird in all probability.

You are free not to be convinced by greeneyedleo, ArMaP, or myself (as well other concurring members including the OP.) Whatever "spots in the sky you have seen are completely irrelevant to this case, regardless if they are alien craft or not. THIS case is about a close object at low altitude that fits all common characteristics of birds analyzed over years of UFO and optics research.

Did you read GEL's or ArMaP's posts about the light reflectivity of bird feathers? Or bother to look up numerous cases that had the same "odd metallic effect for a bird" that actually turned out to be birds? Have you thoroughly researched light reflectivity and optical physics?

As stated,it has been shown scientifically time and time again that birds can and usually do exhibit such coloration, blur, shape, and refractions. So in your opinion because "it looks too metallic to be a bird it is a genuine Unidentified Flying Object"? You may want to do some external research before just jumping the gun like that (I mean this in a nice way), only trying to help.

You do realize that ufology is based solely upon probability of available evidence right? We MUST use that format because the very nature of the field would run us around in circles if we had to be 100% sure of everything before closing a case. It is like that in modern physics as it is just not worth the time to attempt to fully explain something that appears in all likelyhood to have a legit answer. I mean either way, even if this was some real mechanical UFO what would it prove? NOTHING...So take the expert opinions based on known facts and science and move on,even if the answer is not what we want to hear.

 


reply to post by Spinotoror
 



Yeah, the fact that it looks like a bird doesn't make it being a bird.

I think that's logical..


What? Logic dictates that if it looks like a bird than it most likely is a bird.
 


reply to post by The Shrike
 



Logical opinion? From a blurry photo that elicits various responses as to what it may be? What gives you this "special" gift to say the case is closed? Where do you get this authority? Leave the case alone for others express their opinion also. Know it alls - hah!


That blurry photo is a CLASSIC example of EXACTLY what a bird looks like when captured in flight on film out of focus. I have not stopped anyone from expressing their opinions but you seem to be trying to stop me from doing so.


The general consensus is a bird, not because we are all "debunkers" but because some of us have seen images like this before and study ufology quite extensively. I stated my opinion that this case is closed as most agree, as far as what "special gift" I have..

Well for one I have been studying ufology EXTENSIVLY for SOMETIME,am not so desperate to prove ETs that I become ignorant, have seen COUNTLESS similar photos of known birds(and all kinds of "things in the sky"), am majoring in physics, trust the expert opinions of both ArMaP(A ufology subject matter expert and image PRO) and greeneyedleo who is VERY knowledgeable in ufology and related topics (but with you being a member less than a month old it is expected you wouldn't be aware of their credentials (as well mine) and contributions in this forum). Use logic, agree with the consensus of the members based on logic and the same process I use to determine things. Oh, by the way I also have quite a bit of knowledge in ufology myself...


So again, based on the obvious evidence IN FAVOR of the object being a bird (or at best some unknown object that will not do ANYTHING to help propagate ufology) I feel in my opinion that this case is closed, no further discussion, arguments, or anything further needed, nor wanted. Time to focus back on the propagating of real cases and ufological ideologies.

Of course you and anyone can continue to believe what you want it really doesn't matter to me or any serious ufologist, we are more concerned with FIDING THE TRUTH, NOT STATING THE TRUTH WE WANT.


[edit on 11/7/2009 by jkrog08]




posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 02:46 AM
link   


Just Messing around with Photoshop, with a seagull in the suspected orientation..... Not a great match



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Cybernet
 
So ok it could be a bird, it's probably the most likely explanation. On the other hand it does look like a cluster of silver white type ufo orbs in flight formation. I have seen them clustering like that (clustering amber/orange types in my avatar) so possibly you have got something here.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 04:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by charlyv


Just Messing around with Photoshop, with a seagull in the suspected orientation..... Not a great match


Yes, the bird thing didnt leap out at me much either, but the reflecting gleam on metal did. Also, do note the shadow under a real bird's wing. Also note that if their wings where as clipped as the metallic "bird's" wings are, they probably couldnt stay in the air.

The more I see the pics, to compare, the more this appears to be a craft.


The craft in this photo resembles a closer match to the picture of the Vrill/nazi ufo, than the photo of the bird, the wings are a little to short to fly.

My son saw this and immediately said it looked like a Vrill craft.

[edit on 8-11-2009 by Unity_99]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Yep, that's what it looks like to me too. A typical Nazi Saucer.
It could be a bird like most members think but I'm not convinced.
But the Nazi UFO Story is something that is largely being ignored, probably because it ain't American. It is hard to accept for Americans that there is another superpower on the scene that could defeat them. However the Nazis have proven themselves by shutting off American AND Russian missile sites and destroying airborne missiles. A cat and mouse game. Just like the USOs which are most likely also German of origin.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Vrill was swept under the carpet, well literally project paperclip established it as NASA, and groom lake is one of its bases of operations, including various ones throughout the world including a deep base in Finland, and this is a zetan black op program that has been staging abductions and creating hybrids and is behind an attempt at a world takeover before 2012, nwo, and depopulation.
The Black pope, was a nazi youth and is a part of this entire thing as well.

I'm surprised however that an older craft was being used, if thats what it is, however, nothing really does surprise me after all, for they could be any number of reasons, for their little projects.

One thing I dont believe is that birds look metalic, have light gleaming off the reflective metal because there is no overhanging wing that would create shadow, and I do believe their wings are longer, more capable of holding them airborn.




[edit on 8-11-2009 by Unity_99]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Most likely. You can't directly jump and say it's a bird. 'Most of these videos are CGI so this is CGI'. Think on all the genuine alien aircraft videos or pictures that are buried due to this logical comment. I'm one of those that think every case is different.

[edit on 8-11-2009 by Spinotoror]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
well, the OP picture shows maybe 95% a bird, and 5% something else, because of the PROBABILITIES INVOLVED.

Only as simply human observers, then the OP shows 50% a bird, and 50% PAREIDOLIA=ANYTHING we imagine to fit the small information we have from the image.


Below are some of my examples of 95% birds with some "metallic reflections":



or



source: my bug/birds collection:
www.freewebs.com...
www.freewebs.com...
www.freewebs.com...
www.freewebs.com...


Also, below, an older one, when taking sequentials shots (1 sec apart) on a distant airplane, when also i cought involuntary a 95% bird in flight:



(the airplane is not in these crops)



Birds are common. Very common. Also insects/bugs. Also their manifestations when caught on film.
Do not ignore that.




[edit on 8/11/09 by depthoffield]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


Nope, "Operation Paperclip" didn't bring the VRIL-Society to America.
It's a pity that the books written by Haarmann are not available in English.
He has collected news items and information from around the world concerning UFOs, USOs and related stuff. Everything suggests that the Nazi are still fighting Russia and the USA aka ....



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Hm, now i'm puzzled at this...i guess we won't have any definite answer. There are reasons to believe it is a bird and reasons to believe it is not. Hm, shame the object is blurry and didn't fly slower.

Can someone find out the height in which the object flies?

@Regenstorm: You like Mumm-ra and his pyramid, don't you? Yeah, Thundercats were cool.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 


The problem is in getting a photo of a seagull in the right position.

After looking through Google, Picasa and Flickr I couldn't find a photo of a seagull in the exact position I think the possible seagull in the photo is.

But you can see in the images below that the position in which the seagull is captured changes a lot the final result.


The photo that is closes to what I think is the position of the seagull in the OP photo is the second from the first row, but in the photo from the OP the seagull is seen from below and not slightly from above as in this case.

PS: the middle photo from the bottom row does not match because I changed the background to blue before blurring the photo.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Regenstorm
Yep, that's what it looks like to me too. A typical Nazi Saucer.
I don't think so, as far as I remember those things were symmetrical, and this one is not.


It could be a bird like most members think but I'm not convinced.
But the Nazi UFO Story is something that is largely being ignored, probably because it ain't American.
I am Portuguese, and if I ignored the "Nazi UFO" it was because it doesn't look like one to me.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 

Well if you examine enough eyewitness accounts and photographic evidence, you'll find out that many pictures show non symmetrical objects. That doesn't mean that they are. If you accept the possibility that these vehicles are multidimensional crafts and thereby understand that they are partly here and partly not and this causes optical distortion it makes lots of footage/pictures plausible.

And I'm still convinced that it more looks like this:
www.kheichhorn.de...
than a bird.

[edit on 8-11-2009 by Regenstorm]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Regenstorm
Well if you examine enough eyewitness accounts and photographic evidence, you'll find out that many pictures show non symmetrical objects.
Are you still talking about the "Nazi UFO" or just about UFOs?


If you accept the possibility that these vehicles are multidimensional crafts and thereby understand that they are partly here and partly not and this causes optical distortion it makes lots of footage/pictures plausible.
And that "explanation" is very convenient.
Think a little about it and answer me this question: what would people say if a sceptic said something like "hypothetical weather conditions can cause an unknown optical distortion that changes birds into strange shapes"?

Even known optical distortions are dismissed by many people, but we should accept a hypothetical (and as far as I know unproven) optical distortion created by a hypothetical (and as far as I know unproven) "multidimensional craft".


And I'm still convinced that it more looks like this:
www.kheichhorn.de...
than a bird.
Ok, let's do the same comparison.




posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Well, my opinion is that most undefinable saucer shaped aircrafts have a German origin. You don't hear me saying that there are no aliens, there is evidence enough to support those too.

My explanation sounds convenient, indeed, but the video I posted above backs that statement, just like other pictures that are close up but fuzzy.


BTW: Your comparison makes the Nazi UFO look like a bird.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Regenstorm
 


But not like a seagull, as this solid black bird would have no feather shading.

I thought armap simply phased the nazi ufo into the next dimension slightly? But seriously, I see no curvature on the ufo blur here. In the op there's a slight curvature, and that us why I say it looks like a bird.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenstorm
BTW: Your comparison makes the Nazi UFO look like a bird.
Only if we think of a bird in which the front looks the same as the back and with wide wings with square (or almost) tips.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   


Looks really similar if you forgive colors


Here's the bird I used

www.stevequayle.com...

[edit on 8-11-2009 by Spinotoror]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
I can see how this could look similiar to a bird but I'm on the fence it seems that this is just another photo we will probably never have a definite answer to.

What is hard is ufo's have the ability to mimic their looks and also sound so......................



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
The thing is this, if we always remain 'on the fence' on EVERYTHING UFO related because there is no definite proof we will never get anywhere, it is like running in circles. In most cases (like this one) we have a highly probable answer that this UFO is a bird. Also keep in mind that we base A LOT of things in life on likelyhood and probability, just because something can not be said FOR SURE doesn't mean that all the other evidence(as in this case) is not equally as convincing. Leave it at that, probability dictates it. Move on to some real cases that could offer REAL proof, or...just keep arguing over some blurry image or blinking dot in the sky.


EDIT to add: Also I think it is obvious A LOT of the groups of people that will always maintain something is a UFO, regardless of the evidence do so because they want UFOs to be real, they want proof.

[edit on 11/8/2009 by jkrog08]




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join