Beam of Light From Mayan Kukulkan Temple & UFO

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3bbc3ab4492b.jpg[/atsimg]

translate.google.com...

Here's the google translated link of the whole story.

On your Marks ....

Get Set .....

DEBUNK DEBUNK DEBUNK!

at the bottom of the page

Courtesy of Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan

Copyright © Jaime Maussan

Debunked i win

edit to add:
The only copy of this photo shown is the poorly cropped one that is obviously a screen cap of a picture already opened in some kind of photo editing software, see the measurements at the top of the photo in the left?

[edit on 9-3-2010 by zaiger]

I don't get it.. Are these people, Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan, not to be believed? I looked at the link..

Tis strange...

Originally posted by zaiger
at the bottom of the page

Courtesy of Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan

Copyright © Jaime Maussan

Debunked i win

[edit on 9-3-2010 by zaiger]

LOL!!!!!

Yes you did!

Maussan is a scam, and should be put in jail for being the worst con in Mexico.

The guy is a disgusting rat!

Originally posted by berkeleygal
I don't get it.. Are these people, Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan, not to be believed? I looked at the link..

Tis strange...

Well Jaime Maussan whom I guess is in question because his copyrighted image was what was framed...is Mexico's leading ufologist...

Take it for what you will...

Also a light coming out of the top of a pyramid is just what people expect after watching movies and pop culture contamination. Approach with caution.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/09a35d0e153c.jpg[/atsimg]

Oh yeah and i took this with my cam. You can clearly see the UFO and the Alien in the front. The alien kinda looks like the tree and lines up with the recent alien seen on the CSETI expedition.

/thread

[edit on 9-3-2010 by zaiger]

reply to post by jpvskyfreak


Guys, has anyone researched by details about these pics, before start bashing Maussan??? I mean, he didn't take these images. Who provided it? And just in case you haven't noticed, there's an UFO up ahead the pyramid.

[edit on 9-3-2010 by ucalien]

However I have to admit the fact these pics are NOT fully available on internet, totally prevents other investigations. Something like that, if real, provided by a guy like Maussan, won't get the due attention.

[edit on 9-3-2010 by ucalien]

Originally posted by Smell The Roses

Originally posted by berkeleygal
I don't get it.. Are these people, Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan, not to be believed? I looked at the link..

Tis strange...

Well Jaime Maussan whom I guess is in question because his copyrighted image was what was framed...is Mexico's leading ufologist...

Take it for what you will...

When on Wikipedia, don't forget to check the at least as interesting 'discussion' page:

Controversial claims

Jaime Maussan, due to Televisa sponsorship, is more or less untouchable by mexican TV. He has promoted several well known hoaxes as true evidence (as the infamous "alien autopsy" video), and even when proven wrong, he adamantly mantains his story. I think these controversies should be adressed [ip, snipped] 21:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Not Signed In. 27/04/07

More on topic: although the images are interesting, the thing that really bugs me is that the photos were taken in a 2048x1536 resolution but we get to view them in a crpped up can't-tell-a-fly-from-a-kite size (and a lot of weird post-processing too). Even if they don't want the family to be shown, it could've been easily solved with a simple big black rectangle.
If the photos are a case of forgery, it doesn't have to be Jaime Maussan who did the editing - it may even be more probable to have been forged by the person delivering the photos (or anyone who held them before that point). However, I don't think we can reach anything conclusive without the real pictures.

If you look at the bright line in the light path, you see that it's britgher where light is brither in the background and fade with the back ground. If this intensity of light would come from a source, it would be constant for longer then this few dozen meters..

for me 100% fake.

reply to post by scraze


Massimo Fratini, the webmaster of the page, where these pics were posted, definitely doesn't seems a hoaxer. Assuming that he took them, most likely he didn't provide the hi-res images to prevent competitiveness, I mean, he wanna avoid someone make an analysis better than him and get fame over his material.

[edit on 9-3-2010 by ucalien]

reply to post by Smell The Roses

You mean this Jaime Maussan?
www.youtube.com...

This one?
www.ufowatchdog.com...

reply to post by ucalien


Fratini's site segnidalcielo ("sign from heaven", poorly translated) is a place for all kind of ufology related subjects. Because he posts many videos and pictures of others, it doesn't seem plausible to assume the pictures are his. Apart from that, you can see in the screenshot of the exif extracting program that these were family photos, not photos of a researcher.

Furthermore, while not directly deserving the stamp of 'hoaxer', Fratini doesn't seem to apply much scrutiny to the kind of articles he posts. Articles are mainly copied from different sources, without much input from himself. It also seems like Jaime Maussan can post his own articles there (other articles have a link to the source, this one just a 'Courtesy of Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan').

Most importantly, if it wasn't Fratini who took the pictures, then it doesn't matter how honest he is; for a hoaxer to be successful, he just needs to pass the pictures on to one honest and gullible person, who can subsequently present it as truth without being hindered by the fact that it is anything but. I understand they would want to protect the family's privacy, but they could at least described how they got hold of the photos.

About not releasing the full photo; it doesn't seem like the right thing to do. If there truly is something as special as a beam of light coming from an ancient temple going on, would you really care about personal gain? And even if so - would you not want to convince the public by at least providing a full-res portion of the beam of light? Maybe I'm being too demanding here, but that's what I would do.



[edit on 9-3-2010 by scraze]

Originally posted by berkeleygal
I don't get it.. Are these people, Joseph Garofalo and Jaime Maussan, not to be believed? I looked at the link..

Tis strange...

Well yes and no. In the practical circles of UFOlogy you have objective believers (or skeptics), these people are looking for proof to back up a theory a possibility that there may be something out there. You also get the outright skeptics who would deny a real UFO if they were inside it, and the open skulled belivers that will believe anything they see. a good example here . Jamie Maussan really sets the bar for UFOlogy, not only does he believe anything you show him he tries to get others to believe it to. So yes Jamie Maussan is often looked down upon which why this thread is getting little attention.
But keep in mind this is ATS, you could tell people you are from the future and have guns for feet and people would believe you.

Since this is the 1st post of this subject i'll duplicate what i've posted in the other one:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Some expert (Jonathon Hill, a research technician and mission planner at the Mars Space Flight Facility at Arizona State University) said that it was not photoshoped but had something to do with the lens and movement...

www.lifeslittlemysteries.com...

It is no mere coincidence, Hill said, that "of the three images, the 'light beam' only occurs in the image with a lightning bolt in the background. The intensity of the lightning flash likely caused the camera's CCD sensor to behave in an unusual way, either causing an entire column of pixels to offset their values or causing an internal reflection [off the] camera lens that was recorded by the sensor." In either case, extra brightness would have been added to the pixels in that column in addition to the light hitting them directly from the scene. [7 Things that Cause UFO Sightings] Evidence in favor of this explanation is the fact that the beam, when isolated in Photoshop or other image analysis software, runs perfectly vertical in the image. "That's a little suspicious since it's very unlikely that the gentleman who took this picture would have his handheld iPhone camera positioned exactly parallel to the 'light beam' down to the pixel level," Hill told Life's Little Mysteries. It's more likely that the "light beam" corresponds to a set of columns of pixels in the camera sensor that are electronically connected to each other, but not to other columns in the sensor, and that this set of connected pixels became oversaturated in the manner described above.

I have some video taken at the pyramids in Teotihuacan, Mexico.My brother in-law took a video of my wife and I on the top of the Pyramid Of The moon.It shows beams of light emanating from our bodies, and the bodies of other people who were on top of the pyramid. I am not sure if it is a light artifact from the camera or something truly mystical.I will post it when I hit the 20 post mark.And no! I don´t use photo shop.

I posted this on a different thread but here's a copy.

I am a digital artist and under 2 minutes did this.

If that beam is coming from the center of the top of that pyramid the perspective is off.
If that beam of light was sourced on the top of the pyramid the top and the rest of the pyramid show no effects of that light being there.
Is the beam a ribbon, a cylinder, or or a slab of light, it shows no thickness of any kind.
Why would a beam of light have a highlight side and a shadow side, a beam of light never has a shadow side of itself.
What is that funny grain to the image that is enlarged, looks like watercolor paper texture.

This is about as fake as I ever saw of one trying to pull off a beam of light originating from somewhere. It has no characteristics of a real beam of light whatsoever.

Originally posted by Illustronic
If that beam is coming from the center of the top of that pyramid the perspective is off.
If that beam of light was sourced on the top of the pyramid the top and the rest of the pyramid show no effects of that light being there.
Is the beam a ribbon, a cylinder, or or a slab of light, it shows no thickness of any kind.
Why would a beam of light have a highlight side and a shadow side, a beam of light never has a shadow side of itself.
What is that funny grain to the image that is enlarged, looks like watercolor paper texture.

This is about as fake as I ever saw of one trying to pull off a beam of light originating from somewhere. It has no characteristics of a real beam of light whatsoever.

edit on 28-2-2012 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)

Have you seen this one and if you have are your comments applicable to it as well?

Even though I copied this photo to My Pictures folder II cannot upload it to ATS so if you don't mind looking at it on the webpage. Scroll down until you see this, with the photo below: "And this photo was taken in 2000 and shows the Pyramid of the Moon in Teotihuacan in Mexico."



www.thetruthbehindthescenes.org...