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.

 

AREA 51 - uknown device shown and discussed

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   
To all the tight sphinctered detractors of this thread…the unexplained blue ring is from URANUS

Really, this OP has brought to light, the essence of what ATS is all about.
This is not a normal geological formation (unless Imperial Walkers are now springing up from the dessert floor:lol

I would like to know what the OP thinks about what the blue ring is for.
Star
and Flag




posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Sorry about my earlier dummy-spit post but honestly, the "it's a rock" response is starting to wear thin.

Take a GOOD look at that area and there isn't a single large, let alone a pile of rocks to be found. There is a hill/cliff/rocky outcrop behind the object but definitely NO large, loose rocks ANYWHERE ... even if there were some, it would be somewhat difficult to explain why they're in a pile on top of each other and no other rocks in the vicinity.

Then there's the striking colours of the so-called rocks - bright yellow and green and blue ... and all in a pile ? Don't think so.

I'm also surprised that most of you "rock people" fail to see the obvious symmetry built into the object.

And finally, once the background has been removed, the artificiality of the object is readily apparent.

Sorry, but again I have to say that I've spent a lot of time examining this object and it most certainly is NOT a natural formation of rocks ... what we have here is ARTIFICIAL and clearly out of place in that location.

I can see why the DoD, military, whatever don't have to fear accidental or unintentional disclosure of what they're up to in that area ... they simply have to sit back and let ATS do the work for them with "instant debunks" of rocks !



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Sorry, dude. It's pretty obviously rocks and shrubs. I have been studying these pictures and there is nothing remotely artificial looking about this feature. I find it difficult to believe that you would have thought there was in the first place, much less that you would continue to insist upon it.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
Sorry, dude. It's pretty obviously rocks and shrubs. I have been studying these pictures and there is nothing remotely artificial looking about this feature. I find it difficult to believe that you would have thought there was in the first place, much less that you would continue to insist upon it.


Don't worry about it ... it's definitely not the end of the world just because you insist it can ONLY be a pile of rocks after perhaps a few mins of inspection.

On the other hand, I've devoted months to examining VERY CAREFULLY the overall location, the site itself and most importantly, the device. I've used various aids to enhance the original image to bring out to the best of my ability the devices underlying structure ... and the undeniable conclusion is that we have here a constructed device.

In the final analysis, it makes little difference how many try to fob it off as just a "pile of rocks", as it most assuredly is NO SUCH THING !

Are there any other rock piles nearby ? NO
Are there any large rocks nearby ? NO
When was the last time you saw a cylindrical yellow rock and a blue rock on top of a flat green rock ? NEVER

You haven't offered any explanation to account for the geometrical shapes of EVERY ONE of your "rocks".
You haven't offered any explanation to account for each of your "rocks" pure monochromatic colours (yellow, green, blue, brown).
You haven't offered any explanation for the glowing ring effect (how does a rock do that anyway ?).
You haven't offered any explanation for the bilaterally symmetrical "head" rock.
You haven't offered any explanation for the 2 darker "rocks" ... attached to opposite sides of your green "rock".

And finally, if this is nothing more than "just a pile of rocks", then I assume there would have been no need for GE to degrade the original image so the details of "a pile of rocks' were obscured ! And yet, degraded it most certainly was !

Basically all I'm getting is "it's just a pile of rocks" and NO explanation for the above properties.

It truly is sad that for a site that supposedly thrives on the unusual and the unexpected, instead chooses to disregard and disparage some actual and displayable proof when it's finally presented and counters with nothing more reasonable than a quick few seconds glance of the evidence and concludes immediately ... "it's only rocks".

Sometimes I wonder if having "reasonable proof" presented to certain members is in reality more than they can handle ... perhaps you're all better off restricting yourselves to only those threads that make wild and completely unprovable allegations ... might keep your personal world views much simpler, safer and more secure !

[edit on 25/11/09 by tauristercus]



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   
Looks like rocks and shrubs to me. I can't quite make out the coordinates, but if I got them right n37 4 32.08 w115 34 28.1, it is an area very far removed from the base.

You can see stuff on Papoose mountain from the power line overlook and Tikaboo. Here is a microflect:
37.217464°-115.847031
Papoose Mountain Facility
37.205433° -115.840112°

The only doctoring I ever saw on google earth was around site-4. Even that blurring got removed later.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
Looks like rocks and shrubs to me.


This image looks like rocks or shrubs ? C'mon now ......




Once more ... THIS looks like rocks to you ??????



Explain the bilateral brown "head" ... connected by a thin extension to the top of the yellow cylinder ... the thin extension has an obvious ring encircling it ... the yellow cylinder sits on top of a flat green component ... there's a blue object sitting on the right hand side of the green area and directly in front of the yellow cylinder.

Are you all being deliberately obtuse ?????



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Your image is quite "enhanced". Also it is in an area where the resolution is poor. I'm sure with photoshop, you can select all sorts of stuff that looks like something. However, look at the waypoints that I posted. You can see where there is something to see, well, it looks like something. Those microflects are quite small. Maybe 3ft on a side.

Not obtuse, just being reasonable.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Your image is quite "enhanced".


Siggghhhhhh .... "enhanced", yes ... "modified", NO !!!

In fact, here you go with a selection of "piles of rock" ... any of them look similar to what I'm showing you ?

And if you're not happy with my "piles of rock" selection ... please feel free to post your own "pile of rock" if you can find one that resembles my image.




posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
You can see stuff on Papoose mountain from the power line overlook and Tikaboo. Here is a microflect:
37.217464°-115.847031
Papoose Mountain Facility
37.205433° -115.840112°


Not sure what point you're making with these 2 coordinates ...as at both locations there are clearly artificial structures in place. And the important thing is that you do NOT need crystal clear imagery to immediately recognize that these structures are not of a natural origin but identifiably artificial.

And that's EXACTLY what I'm saying regarding the device I'm displaying !

perfect clarity would have been wonderful, but even a less than perfect image that is of an artificial structure can still generate sufficient detail to immediately show that it's a construct.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 03:56 AM
link   
Hi,

If this is what you suggest it is, and I believe that you are suggesting that this is some kind of army sentry robot thing capable of negotiating tough rocky terrain ... then there is no way in hell that a military complex would allow this "thing" to roam around on its own.

It would be observed, conducting tests ... where are the observers or are we to believe that officials at Area 51 let a robot loose to do whatever it pleases unsupervised?

Great analysis though, you present a good case but I am of the opinion that it is not what you think it is.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by george_gaz
Hi,

If this is what you suggest it is, and I believe that you are suggesting that this is some kind of army sentry robot thing capable of negotiating tough rocky terrain ... then there is no way in hell that a military complex would allow this "thing" to roam around on its own.

It would be observed, conducting tests ... where are the observers or are we to believe that officials at Area 51 let a robot loose to do whatever it pleases unsupervised?

Great analysis though, you present a good case but I am of the opinion that it is not what you think it is.


Because I believe that the device actually does exist as indicated by these images, I naturally have my own ideas as to it's purpose and who owns it ... but I will keep those ideas to myself.

My sole purpose at the moment is to try and convince as many people as possible of the "real" existence of this device by showing as much detail as I can extract from the available images ... but so far this has been an uphill battle, to say the least !

I think that the main problem is that it's become almost a "fact or truism" in most ATS'ers minds that Google Earth cannot possibly show to the general public secret or black op projects by the DoD, military, whatever because such images would be immediately massaged by GE under instructions from "the powers that be".

This may or may not be the case but even if it so, I still fail to see how every square inch of every GE map image could be physically checked for detail that should not be made publically available ... humans being fallible, there are bound to be slip ups from time to time and I believe this to be one of those extremely rare slip ups. The image made it's way on to GE for a few months until "someone" eventually noticed and instructed the GE people to "intentionally degrade" that particular image location and lower it's visible information content.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 04:43 AM
link   
But the rocks you highlighted are not standing up like a robot, they are lying on the ground. If they were standing up there would be a shadow.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 04:59 AM
link   
If it is artificial I would like to think it looks like an exoskeleton for a soldier, maybe even a new kind of remote controlled vehicle.

It`s nice to see that you have put effort into analysing the images, but I think we will never really know unless someone can take a nice sharp up-close picture of those coordinates.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChristinaA
But the rocks you highlighted are not standing up like a robot, they are lying on the ground. If they were standing up there would be a shadow.


If you're referring to the collage rock pile examples I supplied a few posts back, take another look and you'll see a number of them do not have an associated shadow, indicating the photo was taken either on a very overcast day or that the sun was directly overhead.

But if you're referring to a lack of ground shadow of the device, I've just re-checked in GE the device's location and there are almost no obvious shadows, again indicating that the GE image of the device may have been taken when the sun was almost directly overhead ... admittedly, the left side of the device does appear to look as if there's a very slight shading effect, indicating that the sun was not quite directly overhead but slightly to the right of the device as we look at it's image.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lunatyx
It`s nice to see that you have put effort into analysing the images, but I think we will never really know unless someone can take a nice sharp up-close picture of those coordinates.


I completely agree with you ... a clearer, more detailed image would be ideal.
Irrespective, though ... I've spent more than enough analysis time on it to see that there is sufficient detail available to unambiguously state that it IS a manufactured device.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Hello,

Thank you for addressing my post


The problem that I see is that I cannot possibly begin to believe that it is what you think (but won't say) it is because it is just out there on its own.
Nothing, I would assume, in Area 51 is unsupervised for this exact reason.

I can see the shape of what you say, but that is like saying that Washington DC has a pentagram in its streets? People see what they want to see and not necessarily what is actually there?

This is an uphill battle but if this is truly what you believe and we cannot sway your opinion with "logic and reason" then keep going solider
because it was not long ago that people believed Troy was not real.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 05:55 AM
link   
The image clearly shows shadows of rocks and slopes but the device doesnt cast any shadow at all. How do you explain the lack of shadow from the device? And why is the landscape around it covered with the exact same tones of blue, red and green?

It isnt enough to crop out a shape of some theoretical device and claim its real, you also have to explain why its colored in the exact same tones as the surrounding landscape objects and why doesnt it cast any shadow?



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Same as the other members. I also, see nothing out of the ordinary, It seems like a bunch of rocks, or a pile of shrubs.

Great effort, and good research. More posts written and detailed like this one would be nice.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 07:05 AM
link   
You should go back and look at the two pictures you have side by side showing the original and the "Degraded" pictures.

Any one with 20/20 vision can see that these two pics are exactly the same except the photographs were taken at different times of the day.
The "Distortions" are nothing but longer shadows cast by the sun. Have another look and you will see I am right.

Excellent work though. Keep looking and you might come up with something but I doubt the people at area 51 would leave an alien body laying on the ground.

Chopppa..



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


You can chop blobs out of random desert all day long. The funny thing about google earth in those low resolution areas is things I know that are on the ground, such as a plane crash, just barely show up. The low resolution is the issue.

Regarding piles of rocks, I already posted what I think is a facility and had it declared a pile of rocks. I can't find the thread on ATS, but here is the photograph.
so called rocks on hilltop



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join