UFO in Sydney Australia

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


I think your numbers a a bit off. Here's the GE picture I promised.


Right-click the pic and open it in a new window or tab to see it in its entirety.

The first shot is 215 ft from the remaining three. She would have had to run 215ft, (about 66 meters) take a picture, then run 215ft and take three more. This took 28 second. That's pretty fast. The World Record for the womens 100m dash is 10.78 seconds. ...without taking a single picture. Based on this, and the idea I posited earlier, I think we can throw out the GPS data for the 1st picture. The data for the remaining three shows she was in the exact same location for each of them.

T.
Mod edit: image tag changed to show the scroll bar.

[edit on 27/3/2010 by ArMaP]

i just have to apologise for my wall of text !. lol. its not that im too dumb to use paragraphs and spaces.

my problem at the moment is that im only able to use a playstation 3 web browser and its very restricted in the amount i can write.

@MMN great job and a big thanks for the effort you've made to help everyone.

thanks

rich

Originally posted by internos

Originally posted by TwoPhish

Honestly.............in my deepest level of love and acceptance, what ARE you both getting at???
It's too technical (for me anyways)
Did she or did she not, hoax this event?
I think it took less for the 9-11 (bogus) committee to render their thoughts than this!

Data says that basically the GPS data indicate that the witness covered 184.8 feet (56.33 meters) towards east within 11 seconds, try by yourself to do the same, and you'll get what exactly it means. And 9/11 has nothing to do with it.

Once again, maybe it's just me (probably is, given the lack of others chiming in with confusion but) what does this indicate?

What does traveling eastward, within 11 seconds yield me? The impossibility of snapping a photo?
(just sighting an example)

But please. Stop with this assumption that we're all 'getting what you're putting out"
Please, break it down (for us elementary students) and then, finalize your findings thus far, please! (I am getting old here! *smile)

reply to post by Triangulum


G'day Triangulum

I stated there is no GPS data available for photo 1.

The GPS data for the movement between photo 2 & photo 3 is at variance with your own.

Can you please show your methodology?

I also note I am very familiar with the site.....I spent approx 1 1/2 hours there yesterday with the witness.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by TwoPhish


Some freaky things have been happening that girl lately check out the her Facebook Wall & the part about the bathroom experience by two different people. Related? I can't say as I am still pulling splinters out from sitting on the fence!

Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by TwoPhish

 

Some freaky things have been happening that girl lately check out the her Facebook Wall & the part about the bathroom experience by two different people. Related? I can't say as I am still pulling splinters out from sitting on the fence!

I don't see any such thing but then again, I don't really know how to navigate around on that site (thank gwad!) Here's her FB (if permissible by ATS that is)
www.facebook.com...#!/fiona.hartigan?v=wall&ref=ts

reply to post by TwoPhish


If we throw out the GPS data from the first picture, what remains says that she was stationary when she took the photos. She was not moving forward in her car and the perspective of the photos should be roughly the same. What's left is to find out for certain if she was in her car or not. She adamantly claims she was not. If she was however, all bets are off and I'd go with the skeptics that this is a downright hoax. If she wasn't in her car then speculation on what the various objects are might mean something.

That's my .02 anyway...

T.

reply to post by Triangulum


hi triangulum, i know this is a bit of a longshot bearing in mind the gps data is not really that accurate but would it show the hight of if she was sat in a car or stood up taking the photos as the gps data would show maybe a 1 metre difference in altitude

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

 

G'day Triangulum

I stated there is no GPS data available for photo 1.

The GPS data for the movement between photo 2 & photo 3 is at variance with your own.

Can you please show your methodology?

I also note I am very familiar with the site.....I spent approx 1 1/2 hours there yesterday with the witness.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

I'd be happy to double check. I may not post again until tomorrow though. I'm going go out and get a little time in behind the eyepiece.

T.

Originally posted by Triangulum
reply to post by TwoPhish

 

If we throw out the GPS data from the first picture, what remains says that she was stationary when she took the photos. She was not moving forward in her car and the perspective of the photos should be roughly the same. What's left is to find out for certain if she was in her car or not. She adamantly claims she was not. If she was however, all bets are off and I'd go with the skeptics that this is a downright hoax. If she wasn't in her car then speculation on what the various objects are might mean something.
That's my .02 anyway...
T.

G'day Triangulum

Internos & I are not in agreement with your conclusions from the GPS data.

You state the iPhone was stationary between photo's 2-5.

We do not believe the iPhone was stationary between photo's 2-5.

We believe the iPhone was moving between photo 2 & photo 3 as per the distance (184.5 feet), time (11 secs) & height (29.52 feet) calcs in my post.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by RICH-ENGLAND
reply to post by Triangulum

 

hi triangulum, i know this is a bit of a longshot bearing in mind the gps data is not really that accurate but would it show the hight of if she was sat in a car or stood up taking the photos as the gps data would show maybe a 1 metre difference in altitude

G'day RICH-ENGLAND

Please see my posts.

The difference in height between photo 2 & photo 3 is 29.52 feet.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by TwoPhish


the road wasent wet and i was a bit to the left of the bonet not centered if i rember right

Yeah she was not in a car as she said.
Lots of people take photos in the car and say so.
However I wonder if she walked as the angle or
something changes picture to picture.

Also the size of the object looks too small for the
littlest of little green men.

And as in other UFO photos, the other orb sizes
can not be determined.

If not a craft it might only be a artifact of some
ufo not even in the photo as a generated visual
image.

Catching a giant UFO would have solved our problems.

reply to post by TwoPhish


Hi TwoPhish,

you said "At this point, the best way to 'break the case' is to go into her personal history!" (I agree with you on that), well FB is a pretty good place to start.

These from FB sound freaky to me

"Fiona Hartigan Is freaking out just got in the bath and the tape turned it self on at the basin while I was laying in the bath I got out to turn it off and it stopes just as I was reaching for it f....en scared the crap out of me u no when u feel some one looking at u and u get goose bumps my little Jessy went crazy at the door so I ...let him in and he went crazy it's not often u hear me say I wish Sam and the girls"

"Fiona Hartigan Thanks both of u Im freacked out enough familys home n Eliza went for a bath went to open the door and io glid open easly she got half way in the door got cold chills and ran out of ther like lightning she came skreaking down stairs mummmm she freaked her self out now she's showering down stairs "

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


yes i read that but thats not quite what i meant sorry for not being clear,

when the photos that are taken sat in a car and stood up there should be about a 1 metre difference in altitude, so my point is, from any of the gps data, can it be worked out if she was standing or sat down going off the altitude of the gps in relation to the road? not the difference in altitude between pictures unless there are pictures with differing altitude but at the same spot?

hope that was a bit clearer! lol

thanks

rich

reply to post by RICH-ENGLAND


G'day RICH-ENGLAND

I understand your point exactly.

The height data is as follows:

- P1: No data

- P2: 0 meters

- P3: 9 meters

- P4: 8 meters

- P5: No data

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


You have to take into account that the iPhone isn't a dedicated GPS and may not be as accurate. MMN, snap a couple of shots with your iPhone and test it.

reply to post by TwoPhish


i have said this before i recived no money for the photos and i recived no moneys for the tv interviews imagine what people would say (she scamed of money )iv got enough on my plate with out coments like that so once again their was no money exchanged for any of the media appearences or the papers,or the radio

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

It should be pointed out that the accuracy of GPS location data, and in particular elevation data, are highly dependent on the satellite geometry. A poor configuration will yield a range of variation well within the discrepancies you have found. I would not consider the data reliable without knowing what the geometry and signal quality was. Even under ideal conditions 1 or 2 meter elevation differences are to be expected from moment to moment.


[edit on 3/26/2010 by Phage]

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

 

You have to take into account that the iPhone isn't a dedicated GPS and may not be as accurate. MMN, snap a couple of shots with your iPhone and test it.

G'day cripmeister

Internos feels the iPhone GPS accuracy is appropriate for the purposes for which we are using it.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not