Steve Greer (CSETI) Photograph ET Being

page: 20
23
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


So by your logic, no one can ever speak positively of Greer or the field trips, because if they do then that means Greer must have brainwashed or programmed them or paid them to lie. And yet we have absolutely zero hard evidence of any such thing going on.

Wow, how I love these assumptions that are made and conclusions that are jumped to!




posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   
This mockery is all well and good.

However, is this alien supposed to have 'stalk' like eyes, that protrude from its head? I'm not even sure if the part I'm looking at is supposed to be its head.. but if it is, it has some strange anatomy. It seems amphibian-like.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by angrysniper
This mockery is all well and good.

However, is this alien supposed to have 'stalk' like eyes, that protrude from its head? I'm not even sure if the part I'm looking at is supposed to be its head.. but if it is, it has some strange anatomy. It seems amphibian-like.


G'day angrysniper

I have enhanced the picture for you.



Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not


That picture of Oswald Q Ostrich is as much proof that aliens exist as anything Greeh has done or photographed - at least that photographer knew how to use a camera!



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by raiden12

You will note that the ET is suspended in a cone of light which is originating from a small orb to the left of the bush. This is precisely the orb that we had seen that followed us up the path, and is in the location where the ET voices were heard just before the photo was taken.

The ET appears to be a male, wearing a type of vision augmenting goggles



This reminds me of the stuff Basiago posts about Mars (and the reverse speech people say about their audio files). Most of the time, I can't recognize it even after I read the clue.

The ET is suspended in a cone of light?

No, it's my Aunt Sophie, sitting on the washing machine again.



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmicdjinn
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


You are getting your facts wrong my friend. it's a minimum 33 visitors, and tuition is $995 for a year, which includes 6 trips all over the country.

Just because someone removes an image does not make it a hoax, it just means that person didn't want that image to keep drawing bad attention.

Has no one seen my analysis images? and EXIF data?

No, I didn't. Ah! Wait...
did you mean these ones?


Image 1 - Standard
Image 2 - Invert
Image 3 - Over-Exposed
Image 4 - RGB-Enhance
Image 5 - Over-Exposed Shadows
Image 6 - Threshold
Image 7 - Mutliple
Image 8 - Multiple and Zoom
Image 9 - Render
Image 10 - EXIF

And according to you these are analysis? If it's a joke, then it's funny, but if it's not, then it's sad to say the least. To me (apart EXIF data which are correct), they look ALL to be random FILTERS, likely applied by someone who got as gift for his birthday the full photoshop filters fun toolkit.

Question # 1: what is supposed to be the aim of applying the "invert" filter?

Question # 2: did you know that an over exposure can be applied ONLY straight to the camera and ONLY BEFORE taking the photo? That is a CG EMULATION of an over exposure, and unfortunately, even IF one would manage to over expose such an image, all he would get would be some even poorer quality image (as it happened), and anyway the visual result would be jeopardized, period. CG UNDEREXPOSURE can be useful in case of SLIGHTLY overexposed (from the source) images, the opposite will NEVER work.

Question # 3: what is supposed to be the aim of the so called RGB-Enhance? In the "enhanced" image itself i read (verbatim)


This RGB enhancement alows us to get a better picture over all,. Saturated colors allow us to visualize better what objects are what and what light they are using.


NO. This caption is quite bizarre, immaginative and fanciful and shows some embarassing lack of knowledge from the guy who made it: THAT RGB "enhancement" just made more visible the pixels falling between some "x" and some "y" gamma colors, and obscured all the rest, this is what it did, all the rest is blah blah blah, OK? There's no need to be some rocket scientist to understand that it's yet another jeopardized image. Now since when one might even just hope to reveal some "hidden" details by ERASING other details and changing (FACT not guess) the color gamma of the suriving pixels? That's a big mystery to me.

Question # 4:
It's not properly a question: after seeing that you think that shadows can be overexposed artificially, and that it could be somewhow useful, I'd say that we can put to rest every discussion about overexposure, because it would be just a waste of time.

Question # 5, "Image 6 - Threshold":
Even my cat laughed when he saw it: the question is: do you own a cat? If yes, the try this experiment: show the image to him and film the cat while he's looking at it: it won't help for the analysis, but you'll have got some YouTube superstar video for sure


Image 7 - Multiple: multiple laughs
Image 8 - Multiple and Zoom: multiple laughs with parsley & boiled potatoes



The quality of the image throws it in the Hoax catagory, thats all. Everyone is basing their conclusion on quality. Where in fact this is a real image, taken where it was said, and under the conditions itwas explained.

MOST (not everyone) are basing their conclusion on the fact that it has been claimed that it was some extraterrestrial entity while all that we have is an amorphic bunch of pixels and claims, a whole bunch of claims, nothing else: since the source is a confirmed hoaxer and a liar, who tried to pass off as some "light interdimentional being" some MOTH (making you paying a FEE for it), who claimed to "have been briefed by CIA about UFOS" by James Woolsey, whom only fault has to have been so incautious to share a dinner party with him and a LOT of more sad stories that are available everywhere.
Here's why it's in the forum it belongs to : hoax forum, where people discuss about hoaxes, attention seekers and all those who want to exploit a REAL phenomenon like UFOs for making money.
As i always say, the biggest fault is the one of those who try still desperately to give to him some credit.



I think you all are too lazy to actually research...your having too much fun disputing.

Maybe you are right (actually i am lazy, but not whenever it comes to research, i spend ALL my time in research): i'm lazy whenever it comes to walk, to run, to swimm, ectcetera: but brain is not a muscle, it doesn't need any form of practice but THINKING and LEARNING.




Thanks all for proving how intelligent you really are, and how open you are to discover real truth. I know the truth, I don't have to defend this image, it is just an image. One day I guess you all will wake up and say "holy #$%^" they were right.


If you are wondering why i am being a little bit rude with you, then look for the answer in this statement: you are putting into the basket of allegedly non-intelligent people some of our BEST members, used to be noticed especially because of their intelligence and for always using reason, logic and common sense. They all have in common with me their love for this subject matter, and NO ONE can bring into question their intelligence, least of all some dude who has learned yesterday how to use Photoshop filters and tries to pass it off as image analisys, (which would be an hoax by itself).
Thank you for your post.
Ciao.


[edit on 3/3/2010 by internos]



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos
As i always say, the biggest fault is the one of those who try still desperately to give to him some credit.


Example?


I just find it interesting that we're all such experts about a field trip that not a single one of us have ever actually been on. Not you, not the ATS staff, not JohnnyA, nor Ritzmann or Biedny, no one.

And if anyone tries to say anything nice about Greer or CSETI, we attack them till they go away.

Oh except maybe for James Gilliland, who said that three or four big Triangles and a bunch of other UFOs showed up at the ECETI ranch when CSETI went there. And ATS said he (Gilliland) is actually a really decent dude. But I suppose his testimony doesn't count either...........

Oh well. People being followed around the world by gigantic Triangle crop circles and huge equilateral Triangle UFOs in the sky, that couldn't possibly be anything important anyway, right? And it would actually cost us a bit of money to find out for sure, so who cares!



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


You know what MajorDizzy,

After all the defending you have done of 'Steven & The Greerbots' (cool band name), I think he owes you a complimentary pass to one of his CSETI Kumbayah Field Trips!

Perhaps Steven can throw in a magical flash light and some free acupuncture as well!

IRM



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


I may go some day, just to satisfy my own curiosity.

But as for whether I'd be allowed to post any footage or pics or anything, I don't know.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


I may go some day, just to satisfy my own curiosity.

But as for whether I'd be allowed to post any footage or pics or anything, I don't know.


G'day MajorDisaster

Well.....you won't be allowed to post anything or make any comments because Greer will have you wrapped up in NDA's.

My advice....?

Don't waste the money on Greer.....go buy yourself s suit.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
Well.....you won't be allowed to post anything or make any comments because Greer will have you wrapped up in NDA's.


Actually, CSETI members are allowed to post/write about their experiences. I'm just not sure about posting photos or footage.

So I don't know how valuable that would be, if I were to attend and come back and say "yeah I attended and yeah I saw UFOs".

Would anybody even care? I don't know........



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
s914.photobucket.com... Just a final thought.....I saw these aliens at my house, i saw the same type beings taken by the Greer group in joshua tree. C0mpare the evidence.



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Steve Greer is a Illuminati puppet HOAX



posted on Mar, 6 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
Well.....you won't be allowed to post anything or make any comments because Greer will have you wrapped up in NDA's.

Actually, CSETI members are allowed to post/write about their experiences. I'm just not sure about posting photos or footage.
So I don't know how valuable that would be, if I were to attend and come back and say "yeah I attended and yeah I saw UFOs".
Would anybody even care? I don't know........


G'day MajorDisaster

I suggest you might find it interesting to read the NDA's & associated doc's.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Yes, I have read them MMN.

Members are allowed to go to sites like ATS and post about their experiences. A few years ago we had that guy Richard whats-his-face who was a CSETI member.

Also, it doesn't say that you cannot post photos or footage; it says that you can only do it with permission from CSETI. So there is actually some wiggle-room there.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 



How many people have posted cleared footage/images from CSETI? I'm struggling to think of any that haven't come officially through Greer.

Personally I think there's a big difference between wiggle room and perceived wiggle room. I'd like to see it tested.

IRM



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


Well the perceived wiggle room is that it says you can post photos or footage with permission from CSETI.

But no one ever talks to them or asks, you see.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


Perhaps they have nothing to release or the evidence isn't strong or free of ambiguity?


I find it odd that no one would ask. It seems a bit too convenient.

IRM



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Have you debunkers No imagination at all. Clearly these clever and elusive beings are quite good at disguising themselves as amorphous blobs.
I once saw one in my garden deviously disguised as a tree stump, lurking in the moonlight.

Wishful thinking.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Perhaps they have nothing to release or the evidence isn't strong or free of ambiguity?


I find it odd that no one would ask. It seems a bit too convenient.

IRM


Well, life is full of oddities, IRM.

It says right there in the docs, you can't post photos without written consent from CSETI. But has anyone ever tried to ask them or get written consent from them?

No.





top topics
 
23
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in

join