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.

 

"Amazing UFO Pics of 2009"

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
A popular tabloid newspaper in England, The Sun, has published a multi-page article on its website : "Amazing UFO pics of 2009".

If the relevant photographs and videos are the best evidence that can be collated from 2009, then this year should not prove much of a challenge to skeptics...

The material collated by The Sun is really pretty low quality.

I don't think it is even worth copying the 8 images/videos, which can be seen at the link above, onto ATS.

Some of the images have causes that can almost be spotted in your sleep.

For example, Image Number 7 of "Amazing UFO pics of 2009" is a textbook example of Chinese lanterns.

In fact, one of the images (Image Number 5) in the article "Amazing UFO pics of 2009" not only has an obvious mundane cause and therefore is not terribly "amazing", it is in fact NOT EVEN FROM 2009!

Image Number 5 in "Amazing UFO pics of 2009" is clearly an image of a Solar Balloon and it was filmed in July 2008 - so I don't see how it is a pic "of 2009", let alone an "amazing ufo pic of 2009"...

Image Number 5 comes from the video below:


Although The Sun managed to find a ufologist prepared to say Image Number 5 was "very exciting", it is in fact quite obviously a solar balloon of the type seen in various stores and online - see the video below for an example:



So:

(1) Is the UFO photographic evidence from 2009 really that poor?

(2) Why are some ufologists prepared to help the circulation of certain tabloid newspaper by making comments on the exciting nature of some photos, when they have an obvious mundane cause?

(3) Which is the biggest thread to serious ufology - the nature of coverage of UFOs by the mainstream media or simply the statements made by some ufologists?

All the best,

Isaac


[edit on 14-12-2009 by IsaacKoi]




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I was pretty stunned by that article too. Particularly the Norway references (I suppose better a UFO/extraordinary theory than a Cold War adversary testing death from above specifically designed to defeat defences). The gut reaction of most people with no interest in UFOs from articles like that, in the mainstream press where they're likely to encounter them, is going to be that it's all bunk. If people wanted to spread the disinformation that people who have seen a UFO are all making something out of nothing, they couldn't do a better job. No doubt it's an example of cut and paste journalism/telling people what they want to hear rather than anything conspiratorial. Their sports and entertainment sections are entertaining
.

On (2) & (3) it's so 'which came first, the chicken or the egg?' and it's as much about calling around until they've got a source they can attribute the quote to (although I don't see anyone calling for a retraction).

On (1) I'm not sure. In some ways I think it is more difficult to separate signal than noise post social media, but that's an interesting one, and I'm interested to see how people reply. Could be for all of the noise I'm ignoring the reasonable pictures.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   
They did'nt even have this one www.ufocasebook.com...



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Well, Nick Pope declared the images 'interesting'. And he doesn't get excited over nothing. Does he?!




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by digdeep
Well, Nick Pope declared the images 'interesting'. And he doesn't get excited over nothing. Does he?!



That's true but then again Nick Pope appears on 'The Great Unexplained Debate' too ! And i know what i think about that !



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Yeah I saw the Sun online this morning (I scan through most online tabloids) and actually laughed when I saw that article, talk about crap journalism, your right OP the main population who read this nonsense will look at this piece of rubbish and scoff at anyone who claims to have seen a UFO, and it is the Sun after all, the target audience of this paper isn’t exactly the whole of the UK but it does nothing for the confidence of people who have genuine sightings and serious ufology.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackphotohobby
The gut reaction of most people with no interest in UFOs from articles like that, in the mainstream press where they're likely to encounter them, is going to be that it's all bunk. If people wanted to spread the disinformation that people who have seen a UFO are all making something out of nothing, they couldn't do a better job.


I agree. If those photos do not represent the recent best evidence, perhaps the ATS/UFO community could highlight the relevant material for the benefit of the media and anyone else that is interested.

But everyone seems to be too busy looking at the latest photo/case to stand back and adopt a more strategic approach. That's one of the problems with ufology just being an entertaining way to pass the time, rather than an occupation or science.

All the best,

Isaac



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


I agree completely with the sentiments expressed but do you have any suggestions of how to change that ?

Surely part of the issue is funding with the subsequent necessity of commercialism and conflict of interest considering funding isn't going to come from recognised organisational programmes.

Another difficulty is that of the deliberate destruction of credibility of anyone who does treat in that manner and obtains any degree of success.

The dice are loaded, how can we stack the cards ?



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Thanks for sharing, Isaac

If i would be a fan of the theory that there's some ongoing disinfo campaing about UFOs, then i would indicate "the Sun" as the source # 1.
If (and i say, IF) they really take seriously what they publish about UFOs,
then there's something very wrong with some of them: but what really makes me wonder is Nick Pope's role in the game.
A good example is the so called "UFO over Cornwall":
www.thesun.co.uk...
almost everyone here (and not only here) identified it as a sea bird:
But in the article

Nick Pope, one of Britain's foremost UFO experts, said the photo was one of the best he had seen.
Nick, formerly the official Ministry of Defence UFO analyst, said: "If I was
still there I'd be looking at this very closely. The object looks
structured, symmetrical and metallic
. This man has caught something very interesting indeed."

In my (and almost all others') humble opinion the object looks exactly like a bird, and doesn't look neither structured (unless we want to call
"structures" his wing) nor symmetric, nor metallic.
But that's just an example:
Here can be found a compilation of articles mentioning his verdicts:
The Sun, Nick Pope, an pics query
Seriously, i rather post a link because the list of examples would be too
long.
I honestly couldn't find anything interesting in what he stated to be
interesting (in The Sun's articles): the most "puzzling" images were amorphic spots in the sky that could litterally be anything.
Now, since he's the former UK Ministry of Defence UFO analyst, this would
explain why UK MoD has decided to close down its UFO reporting service:
if his performances were the same, then the project was an obvious waste of time, money and efforts, hence to close it has been a very wise decision: less wise than just firing him, but wiser than persisting in wasting.
The Sun is second to no one, including ANW the unmentionable website, in
spreading nonsense in UFOlogy: they don't talk about UFO cases, they just
drop random stuff on the web to get attention.
A serious UFO case will NEVER be based upon a single evidence: and in my opinion they are aware of this, but maybe since they started publishing articles about pseudo-ufos, they increased their sales: that would explain their persistence, but serious UFOlogy is and will be the first victim of their behavior. Not all have the time to study image analysis or UFOlogy in deep, many people just want to know more, some of them even for their first time: but this way, The Sun betrays both their enthusiasm and their wishes to know more. People approaching NOW UFOlogy are our ONLY resource for the future: it is our duty NOT just to keep them away from "The Sun" but to encourage them in reading books, analisys, reports, everything that made of UFOlogy something worthy to spend some time in.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:28 AM
link   
I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but I find articles in the Sun consistently retarded, to be scientific.


They seem to spend an inordinate amount of time reporting on obvious explainable phenomena, which make us look foolish and continues the old game of regulating UFO stuff to jokes.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 05:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
I agree completely with the sentiments expressed but do you have any suggestions of how to change that ?


I don't think there are any easy solutions, but there are a few basic (if a bit boring) steps that could help:

(1) More thought being given by the UFO community and/or those on ATS to selecting and presenting (to the media, the public and others) the best evidence OVERALL, rather than simply tackling UFO reports on a case by case basis. I've written about this separately, and will be returning to the topic soon.

(2) At least as importantly, if not more importantly, pointing out nonsense when it is published. One of the various problems with the UFO/ATS community is the polarisation between "believers" and "debunkers". The "believers" need to be more pro-active in pointing out flaws in certain UFO reports and media coverage, even if it appears to favour their position by reporting on "amazing" ufo reports etc.

I tried to highlight a few issues in a separate thread, see Can ATS contribute more to ufology?.

I was slightly disappointed that the questions posed in that thread were not discussed a bit more...

All the best,

Isaac



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProRipp

Originally posted by digdeep
Well, Nick Pope declared the images 'interesting'. And he doesn't get excited over nothing. Does he?!



That's true but then again Nick Pope appears on 'The Great Unexplained Debate' too ! And i know what i think about that !


lol That was sarcasm. I guess you are in America.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by digdeep

Originally posted by ProRipp

Originally posted by digdeep
Well, Nick Pope declared the images 'interesting'. And he doesn't get excited over nothing. Does he?!



That's true but then again Nick Pope appears on 'The Great Unexplained Debate' too ! And i know what i think about that !


lol That was sarcasm. I guess you are in America.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by digdeep

Originally posted by ProRipp

Originally posted by digdeep
Well, Nick Pope declared the images 'interesting'. And he doesn't get excited over nothing. Does he?!



That's true but then again Nick Pope appears on 'The Great Unexplained Debate' too ! And i know what i think about that !


lol That was sarcasm. I guess you are in America.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 



The Sun is second to no one, including ANW the unmentionable website


now that's something i never thought possible !

i'm gonna email Cohen and tell him the good news



all joking aside, i always thought that Sun news paper was just like the national enquirer that has bat boy in it so why are we surprised by all this is what i am asking ?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
all joking aside, i always thought that Sun news paper was just like the national enquirer that has bat boy in it so why are we surprised by all this is what i am asking ?


Hi there,

A couple of points:

(1) The Sun isn't quite at the level of publishing some of the really silly stories that appeared in the National Enquirer or Weekly World News. That's not to say The Sun is my favourite paper...

(2) Although not many people now seem to remember it (including some fairly well known UFO historians), at one point the National Enquirer used to publish some fairly well researched stories on UFOs. In fact, as covered in my thread on ATS Best cases - National Enquirer Panel, the National Enquirer once offered a million dollar prize in relation to UFO evidence which was judged by a panel of some of the top names in ufology. That Panel involved participation by Dr J Allen Hynek and representatives of APRO, NICAP and MUFON. It even involved a former Attorney General of the USA. It was the company referred to when I asked the following questions:



Many UFO researchers have complained about ridicule of UFO witnesses, arguing that a fear of ridicule has resulted in many UFO witnesses failing to report their sightings.


What if, partially in an attempt to overcome that fear and obtain further reports, a company were prepared to offer a reward of $1,000,000 for proof that UFOs come from outer space and are not natural phenomena?


What if the same company were prepared to offer $10,000 for the best report submitted each year, even though not the proof required for the $1,000,000 reward?


Anyone involved with UFO research for a few years must have wondered how much more progress would be made but for the constant bickering between researchers and UFO groups. What if the company that was prepared to offer a million dollars had also managed to persuade the heads of the three most influential UFO groups (say, NICAP, APRO and MUFON) to put aside long standing feuds to work together, and join forces in screening reports submitted for the $1,000,000 prize?


What if the same company were prepared to provide funds to investigate reports screened by those two groups and/or provide financial rewards for investigators for performing thorough investigations of interesting cases?


What if the same company managed to get several of the most respected scientists involved in UFO research, individuals such as Dr J Allen Hynek, to agree to look at the best reports selected as a result of that screening? If those scientists were put in a room together and asked to agree on the top UFO cases, which cases would be nominated? This would involve researchers reaching agreement on the relevant list of cases (i.e. producing a true “consensus” list), and thus can be contrasted to the approach of taking a poll of UFO researchers (as to which see Parts 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9).


For good measure, what if the same company also managed to persuade to persuade several highly respectable members of the legal establishment (such as a former Supreme Court Justice and former Attorney General, and a former New York Court of Appeals Judge) to review any cases considered by the panel of scientists to be a UFO that is not a natural phenomenon and came from outer space?


A pipe dream?


No. It has already happened.


It’s just a shame that the relevant company was “The National Enquirer”…


All the best,

Isaac



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


thanks IsaacKoi,

great info and i will be checking out that thread in more detail later


the Sun news is not something i take seriously but i am sure many people read it and could be influenced by the stories they present about ufo's so i understand the problem. since i believe the MSM and all news outlets (not ATS news
) are controlled by illuminati agendas i can't help but think what was posted in the "amazing ufo pics" story is nothing but a dis info campaign. this type of strategy has been used for a long time and will continue because TPTB want to keep the truth from the public. putting out silly ufo stories is a way of misleading the sheeple who will fall for it. i think your thread here is a sign that some of us can recognize the crime being committed. good work and thanks for bringing up this subject because the more people that see the truth , the better



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Surprised they didn't include this one.
www.ufocasebook.com...



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join