Are these legit pictures of aliens?

reply to post by IAmRobot



If it's impossible to create a "realistic" alien, it should also be impossible to create a "realistic" dinosaur (under the hypothetical consideration that no living person has seen a living specimen of either). Is that right?



Is the above dinosaur real? Of course not. But based upon our pre-existing ideals of how Raptors look, this looks exactly like one.

In other words, a model can be made of anything, with varying amounts of detail, depending on the sculptor's skill. A good sculptor could easily create a fake model of an alien for a picture, yes.

2. Basically faulty logic. Even if it WERE possible to imitate REAL looking aliens, it would not prove there are none. Example: If we can “forge” pictures of real looking houses by software (or by skilled craftsmen) this does NOT prove that houses are fake/non-existent in general.

This is accurate. Showing that a model can be made and a picture can be taken that looks extremely realistic does not invalidate alien life, but it does invalidate pictures of them. In exactly the same way that pictures of living dinosaurs are invalidated by models and Billy Meier.

What's the first thing someone would ask if they saw a picture of a "living" dinosaur? "Where's the proof?" or "Where's the body?" and so on.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by EsSeeEye]

reply to post by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
... I mean, all the photos posted here do not look any more legit or real than these aliens here........

Not at all. Many of the pictures I (and other posters) linked on page 2 look twenty times as real as the questionable CGI alien. Examples (the third one already posted on page 1 by "Cybernet"):

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b39f8a2af603.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a7bb64b77f73.jpg[/atsimg]




[edit on 30-11-2009 by IAmRobot]

ok i'll post a couple Alien pics

Alien on rooftop-Mexico










Chino Zayas ET.

Describing the creature’s ‘skin’, she said it was, when freshly killed, of a deep olive green hue. She also said that "Chino" had told her how, inside the cave, the two boys had seen a whole lot of the creatures jumping and gambolling about and sqeaking and chirping. Also, she said, in addition to the little creatures, the cave was full of small balls of light which were also leaping and fluttering about in the air. She said that at first the little dead creature had had a small amount of sparse fair or whitish hair around the back and sides (the top of the head was bald) but after being in the jar for a while all the little hairs had fallen out.

The head was large, out of all proportion to the body; the eyes very big with pupils vertical, like those of a cat. The eyes were strange, colourless, transparent. The arms were long and thin, reaching right to the knees or even beyond . The hands had four fingers, “rather like a fork”, with long pointed nails like cats’ claws and membranes between the fingers. The feet were very strange, nothing like “humans’”, but like the feet of frogmen’s suits, with long thin nails like those of cats, and again with membranes between

www.fsr.org.uk...

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
Can anyone shed some light on these questions?
Why are aliens always naked? Or almost always naked?
If they come here, will they be arrested for public indecency? Will they be forced to live in nudist colonies?
Will we introduce them to fashion?
Will they be given a plastic poncho by the press before they photograph them? Or a least a blanket?

In the naked photo's, why are their genitals never seen? Maybe photoshop is used to remove the genitals?

Seriously. The immodesty of aliens is starting to bug me.

Okay. I don't think any of them are real, because I think real aliens would have the common decency to put on some clothes before making their debut.

To: iamrobot
In the photo's above you posted, the middle "deceased" alien looks so real it is disturbing and distressing.

I really like this thread though, and enjoyed all the photo's from everyone real or no.

Peace out
liw

[edit on 11/30/0909 by ladyinwaiting]

Originally posted by IAmRobot




[edit on 30-11-2009 by IAmRobot]

That alien picture for example was not even a hoax - it was an exercise at building an alien model that is well documented on the internet with photos of the making of for anyone that is willing to find the truth instead of just believing pictures they see.

That is all I am saying - and you're obviously getting upset but I assure you it is not my intention to upset you - these pictures have been discussed and proven fake HERE. You say I have to provide the links - there's a search utility. It is your duty to use it before providing what you think is "new" evidence. Don't expect other members to repeatedly, day after day, bring up links of discussions that already happened. The information is here - if you're interested use it. If you're not that's fine stick to your beliefs.

In any case I'm really sorry if I upset you - it is 4 am and I want to go to sleep with a clear conscience.

Cheers.

EDIT: ... 4am.. quoted the wrong pic.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by InTrueFiction]

[edit on 30-11-2009 by InTrueFiction]

Originally posted by Cybernet

I went looking around and found another perspective of this picture:




I have a feeling the picture was cropped and artificially colored to remove the "less than realistic" body.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye

 

If it's impossible to create a "realistic" alien, it should also be impossible ...

Did I say it's impossible? I repeat it MIGHT be possible but would actually be very difficult. Read my last post on page 3. Or look at the SECOND picture on page 4. Try to fake that.

.. This is accurate. Showing that a model can be made and a picture can be taken that looks extremely realistic does not invalidate alien life, but it does invalidate pictures of them.

Why does it invalidate pictures of aliens? Same faulty logic. The fact that extremely realistic imitations can/could be made (I repeat: difficult), does neither mean (all) "pictures of them" are imitations.

The little green men, where it all started:

When one of these shaved dead babies is dyed green, and you put his G-suit and helmet on, with those like DEAD eyes looking out from under those droopy eyelids, the effect is EERIE enough to convince some gullible people that they are “aliens”. The dead lab animals were shaved, in order for the G-suits to be effective (the pressure with the animal hair would be ineffective). The total effect was in fact TOO WEIRD, and even the government bunglers eventually backed off from that one. The key words here are LAZY and BAD TASTE.

The original photos showed the fatal flaws—identifiability of the critters as monkies, and apparently man-made constuming and equipment—since aliens capable of traveling millions of light years through interstellar space, would probably not use conventional sewing machines and lacings to make their garments. Exposure of the 1947 fakery, exposes the ensuing protracted hoaxes. Ergo, the newly created (c. 1985) MJ-12 documents scenario, ex post facto, was also a hoax. The original hoax at Roswell was already out of the bag and had to be altered, since it was obviously bungled. A hoax to conceal a bungled hoax.

Way at the bottom of the top heading partial: HOLLYWOOD ON THE TAKE

So do any of us know people in Hollywood.
Gee, an explanation why Aliens are naked.

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
Can anyone shed some light on these questions?
Why are aliens always naked? Or almost always naked?
If they come here, will they be arrested for public indecency? Will they be forced to live in nudist colonies?
Will we introduce them to fashion?
Will they be given a plastic poncho by the press before they photograph them? Or a least a blanket?

In the naked photo's, why are their genitals never seen? Maybe photoshop is used to remove the genitals?

Seriously. The immodesty of aliens is starting to bug me.

Naked because it's more frightening and more alien-like. Hollywood did it's job teaching how aliens "should" look.

I guess if I or you were meant to know about aliens, the aliens would beam you up one day to show you their pimped out spaceship.

I don't think they want anything to do with us as you know that the governments of the world would surely dissect and run experiments on them. They surely do them to us on a regular basis - in the Holocaust and other times, like those mind-control experiments. If they do it to us, they'd surely do it to aliens.

Originally posted by IAmRobot
Did I say it's impossible? I repeat it MIGHT be possible but would actually be very difficult. Read my last post on page 3. Or look at the SECOND picture on page 4. Try to fake that.

If one can be fake, all can be fake. The point is that if it's possible to fake them, then all are suspect as fakes, and shouldn't be taken at face value without any additional evidence.

Originally posted by IAmRobot
Why does it invalidate pictures of aliens? Same faulty logic. The fact that extremely realistic imitations can/could be made (I repeat: difficult), does neither mean (all) "pictures of them" are imitations.

The difficulty isn't important, because it's possible. The same logic could be applied to the idea that aliens can even visit earth through the vast expanses of space, and that's been tossed away by believers just as easily.

In other words, without the bodies that the pictures are depicting, there's really nothing there but pixels, and pixels can depict absolutely anything, no matter how difficult it might be to create.

Edit: On a personal note, keep in mind that I'd love to eat my foot about all this. If a body showed up and it turned out one of the especially fake-looking pictures were actually real, I'd be the first to grovel my apologies. I think everyone here has at least some modicum of "belief", but I think it's always better to keep our emotional judgments miles away from our logical reasoning.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by EsSeeEye]

reply to post by InTrueFiction

Originally posted by InTrueFiction
That alien picture for example was not even a hoax - it was an exercise at building an alien model that is well documented on the internet with photos of the making of for anyone that is willing to find the truth instead of just believing pictures they see.

Really funny explanation. But you don't really believe that, do you. Could it be that "explanation" is a hoax to deny convincing evidence? And, you again didn't even supply one link to support your claims.


[edit on 30-11-2009 by IAmRobot]

reply to post by EsSeeEye


And it is not even that - these particular pictures have been analysed multiple times and proven to be hoaxes, models, art (yes one of the pics presented is actually an artistic photo from a renowned artist) crops of other older pictures that were easier to prove fake (remember SERPO?), etc...

I hope new pictures and videos of aliens come out. And hopefully we will find something that is not fake. That's my sincere hope. My other hope is that we always keep our discernment on check and evaluate what we see with a clear unbiased mind.

reply to post by IAmRobot


You're just not interested at all in truth are you?
Want links? To your upper right... search. That picture has been completely debunked on the forum you are posting on.

That's all I'm going to give you. I will not research for you. I will not argue with you. I'm only interested in the truth. That picture is old news. Believe what you wish.

reply to post by InTrueFiction


I would love to see some links that show some of them. A few I'd already known about, but a lot of production value went into some, and they're interesting to say the least.

Here's another example:



This is a movie prop from this graphic artist (the alien can be seen on the bottom row):

www.shadowmillproductions.com...


The point of all this is that it's a much simpler explanation that every alien picture is a fake than it is that even one is real. And even if there are real pictures depicting real aliens, it's impossible to tell, because there is no substantial scientific data confirming their validity.

reply to post by IAmRobot


For argument's sake - here you go

reply to post by EsSeeEye


Couple those with Cabana's mermaids and ATS will need an art forum

Originally posted by InTrueFiction
reply to post by IAmRobot

 

For argument's sake - here you go

Awesome! Thanks for that link. Those guys are very talented.

Originally posted by IAmRobot
Did I say it's impossible? I repeat it MIGHT be possible but would actually be very difficult. Read my last post on page 3. Or look at the SECOND picture on page 4. Try to fake that.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
If one can be fake, all can be fake. The point is that if it's possible to fake them, then all are suspect as fakes, and shouldn't be taken at face value without any additional evidence.

You changed your angle of statement. First you said: "... but it does invalidate pictures of them". Now you assert: "If one can be fake, all can be fake. The point is that if it's possible to fake them, then all are suspect as fakes, and shouldn't be taken at face value without any additional evidence." I do not disagree with the latter.

Originally posted by IAmRobot
Why does it invalidate pictures of aliens? Same faulty logic. The fact that extremely realistic imitations can/could be made (I repeat: difficult), does neither mean (all) "pictures of them" are imitations.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
The difficulty isn't important, because it's possible ... without the bodies that the pictures are depicting, there's really nothing there but pixels, and pixels can depict absolutely anything, no matter how difficult it might be to create.

You omit one important point of logic: If there is evidence that could theoretically be a hoax, BUT does look convincing and has NO visible flaws (suggesting a fake), then the mere theoretical possibility of possibly being a hoax cannot win the argument. If you have a piece of evidence as described (convincing + flawless appearance), then this must be acknowledged as “convincing” evidence at least in a certain degree. Because the mere theoretical possibility of possibly being a hoax alone WITHOUT presence of any visible flaws is not “strong” enough to disprove a convincing/flawless appearance. Or in other words, “convincing evidence” doesn’t only mean “100 percent certain” but ALSO: “highly certain because without visible flaws/errors”.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by IAmRobot]

reply to post by IAmRobot


Anyone with half a brain knows those are fake photos or photoshopped, now you will ask me where’s the proof? Well if any picture of a real alien existed ...it would make worldwide headlines....now you will use fictional TBTB ( NWO, government whichever excuses you use) wouldn’ t allow it. All I have to say to that is...must be nice to have multitude of excuses to cover your butts when it comes to explaining the lack of evidence for the ETs are here scenario...

[edit on 1-12-2009 by kerazeesicko]

reply to post by IAmRobot


What you are saying here is that, given a convincing and "flawless" facsimile, a picture of an alien must be disproven to be an alien rather than the reverse? Because that is faulty logic, and the reversal of evidence. The tried and true "You cannot disprove a negative" is at work here. The extraordinary claim is that these are pictures of real aliens, so it is up to the claimant to prove such. Without supplemental evidence (For example, the body) the claims are left invalid.

You were right in correcting me before when I said all pictures are invalidated because one could be faked. But the point is that all should be treated as fake until one comes along that has supplemental evidence to back it up. The reasoning for it is that you can't use a picture to prove anything, because pictures can be faked, so a picture can only be used as documentation after a theory is proven. A picture of a flying car is nothing until a working prototype is revealed, for instance, because it would be very easy to fake a picture of a flying car.