UFO in Sydney Australia

reply to post by TheMalefactor


ive no need to share anything because if you even bothered to read the thread properly instead of trying to argue with everyone you will see that it got taken to bits over and over again and i was in the thread for the long haul. try reading up.

thanks

rich

Of course its a ufo.. Ufo=unindentified flying object.- If you are wondering if it belongs to extra terrestials^? Well it most likely is IF its an aircraft

reply to post by TheMalefactor


TheMalefactor.....

I guess that's why Maybe Maybe Dude spent his time investigating the case with the witness. It was so obvious it begged his attention.

For the record, the "object" was initially strongly suggestive of something "non-technical" or if you like, something "organic".

However, I consider this area far too important to EVER treat such material flippantly.

Even when I appear to make a flippant remark about such material, I am never ever really being flippant regarding this extremely important area of research.

And clearly Bill Chalker doesn't have better things to do. Not only that, but he's even willing to say, "It's not 100 per cent." But you knew all along the oh-so blatant truth that it was an "obvious hoax."

I wasn't going to post this, however this has now been raised by a few people.

In addition to being a very intelligent & skilled scientist & researcher, Bill Chalker is an incredibly decent & nice guy.

Bill's commentary is strongly oriented to spare the witness any extra insult or embarassment.

I note I found myself taking that approach.....to the extent I was being accused of being too protective of the witness & subseqeuently biased against a negative finding in this case.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Archirvion
Of course its a ufo..

Ufo=unindentified flying object.- If you are wondering if it belongs to extra terrestials^? Well it most likely is IF its an aircraft

Archirvion.....

Please see my summary report on P55:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't think this object was "flying".

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

reply to post by Phage


I check it out throgh our science lab at work The first photo is inside the car- the second one is outside, the camera is some degrees higher up on the sky. At first it seemed like as you said, that she had ran some miles or walked at least to take a photo from a different direction, but she simply steps out of her own car and raise her camera between 8\20 cm in an upward direction. The tree lines has the same angles\ and cords.

Originally posted by Archirvion
reply to post by Phage

 

I check it out throgh our science lab at work

The first photo is inside the car- the second one is outside, the camera is some degrees higher up on the sky. At first it seemed like as you said, that she had ran some miles or walked at least to take a photo from a different direction, but she simply steps out of her own car and raise her camera between 8\20 cm in an upward direction. The tree lines has the same angles\ and cords.

Archirvion.....

That sounds very interesting.

Are you in a position to provide a more detailed report & commentary from "your science lab at work"?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Wow, we did some research at our science lab while we were having lunch breakbut you outmatched us you made alot of effort into this, we all like your examination. You are right, its a tough one. I KNOW per fact that ALIENS( extra terrestrials) exists, BUT this is a picture of "something"- It might be just a spot on a windshield as you say, or something similar. We simply hate when people post pictures of "fake" or unclear ufo shots, for us the UFO is no longer a mystery so its kind of a bugger getting adrenaline kick for nothing by all unclear photos over time-

reply to post by Archirvion


I'm curious if you were able to glean any valuable information from this image?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/b3675f4c659ef9ec.jpg[/atsimg]

I believe that within the pascal hues, the truth lies.

Oh yeah, How can the first photo be taken in the car and the second outside the car when they both show an identical reflective shape?

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


hope i reply right person now - Well ye i guess, i personal have no experience within the field but i guess some of the others can do some research, even though i believe the job you have done is probably what we actually outmost CAN do with this picture. If we had the original photo or the cell phone it would be easier to scan into a analyzer. The thing you CAN do, is actually ask polite at nasa.com. They are very helpfull at times we shall try-they have an analyzer

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Archirvion]

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

 

Wow, we did some research at our science lab while we were having lunch break

but you outmatched us

you made alot of effort into this, we all like your examination. You are right, its a tough one. I KNOW per fact that ALIENS( extra terrestrials) exists, BUT this is a picture of "something"- It might be just a spot on a windshield as you say, or something similar. We simply hate when people post pictures of "fake" or unclear ufo shots, for us the UFO is no longer a mystery so its kind of a bugger getting adrenaline kick for nothing by all unclear photos over time-

Archirvion.....

Thank you for your kind & positive words!

I wish I "KNEW" that aliens have visited Earth.

Presently I "HOPE" that is the case.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

reply to post by Chadwickus


Good point sir. We only ran it through the break or continuing break lol- I gotto ask my friends here, not my field at all

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Do not worry The government(+together with canada\mexico\netherlands\germany\china\japan\uk\france and more) has started the "public project", where they deal out information progressive at first,checking how the public responds, then taking a step further. The government with the aid from ofc Scientists\historians\Archaeologists have planned to inform the public fully within 18 months, the first month has gone and the events that has happened so far is.

* The world leaders have informed through public TV stations and newspapers,amongst them popular CNN-That they have been working with an special alien race for over 50 years. what race, Not yet informed

* History Channel have started in 2010 a NEW show, ( do not mix with earlier ancient astronauts ect)- The show reveals, proof in history,logical incidents,DNA proof ect.

- After the 18th Month if all works out well, we are in for a huge surprice am getting the goozebumbs allready

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Archirvion]

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

 

Do not worry

The government(+together with canada\mexico\netherlands\germany\china\japan\uk\france and more) has started the "public project", where they deal out information progressive at first,checking how the public responds, then taking a step further. The government with the aid from ofc Scientists\historians\Archaeologists have planned to inform the public fully within 18 months, the first month has gone and the events that has happened so far is.

* The world leaders have informed through public TV stations and newspapers,amongst them popular CNN-That they have been working with an special alien race for over 50 years.

what race, Not yet informed

* History Channel have started in 2010 a NEW show, ( do not mix with earlier ancient astronauts ect)- The show reveals, proof in history,logical incidents,DNA proof ect.

- After the 18th Month if all works out well, we are in for a huge surprice

am getting the goozebumbs allready

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Archirvion]

Interesting...

Not your field you say?

I've tried to read as much as I can, there are many pages to rifle through so I might've missed something but I don't see where Fiona said "....the objects were life forms from another planet" as the article claims.

Can someone point this out? Because if she did say that then that sheds a new light on her possible predetermined mindset.

A UFO is obviously not automatically deemed 'alien' as many( if not all of us) know.
So? Where did she state that please?

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

 

hope i reply right person now

- Well ye i guess, i personal have no experience within the field but i guess some of the others can do some research, even though i believe the job you have done is probably what we actually outmost CAN do with this picture. If we had the original photo or the cell phone it would be easier to scan into a analyzer. The thing you CAN do, is actually ask polite at nasa.com. They are very helpfull at times

we shall try-they have an analyzer

Archirvion.....

If we had the original photo or the cell phone it would be easier to scan into a analyzer.

If you are serious about that, I have all the original files as downloaded straight from the witness iPhone to my laptop inclusive of all advanced EXIF data (GPS, etc...)

If you U2U me with your e-mail address, I will e-mail the files to you.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by One Moment
I've tried to read as much as I can, there are many pages to rifle through so I might've missed something but I don't see where Fiona said "....the objects were life forms from another planet" as the article claims.
Can someone point this out? Because if she did say that then that sheds a new light on her possible predetermined mindset.
A UFO is obviously not automatically deemed 'alien' as many( if not all of us) know.
So? Where did she state that please?

One Moment....

If you have not seen it, please see my summary report on P55:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I cannot recall the witness stating the objects were life forms from another planet, either when I met her in person & discussed all this at length, or in any written material.

I note I posted that article on the previous page.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

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

 

Do not worry

The government(+together with canada\mexico\netherlands\germany\china\japan\uk\france and more) has started the "public project", where they deal out information progressive at first,checking how the public responds, then taking a step further. The government with the aid from ofc Scientists\historians\Archaeologists have planned to inform the public fully within 18 months, the first month has gone and the events that has happened so far is.
* The world leaders have informed through public TV stations and newspapers,amongst them popular CNN-That they have been working with an special alien race for over 50 years.

what race, Not yet informed

* History Channel have started in 2010 a NEW show, ( do not mix with earlier ancient astronauts ect)- The show reveals, proof in history,logical incidents,DNA proof ect.
- After the 18th Month if all works out well, we are in for a huge surprice

am getting the goozebumbs allready

Archirvion.....

Yes.....

As per Chadwickus.....

Can you back up ANY of that?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by One Moment
I've tried to read as much as I can, there are many pages to rifle through so I might've missed something but I don't see where Fiona said "....the objects were life forms from another planet" as the article claims.
Can someone point this out? Because if she did say that then that sheds a new light on her possible predetermined mindset.
A UFO is obviously not automatically deemed 'alien' as many( if not all of us) know.
So? Where did she state that please?

One Moment....

If you have not seen it, please see my summary report on P55:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I cannot recall the witness stating the objects were life forms from another planet, either when I met her in person & discussed all this at length, or in any written material.

I note I posted that article on the previous page.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

In all due respect, I am not interested in your summary report. Reports can be wrong. Not saying yours is but as a third person removed from everything (being a forum reader only) I am interested in seeing where this woman said this.
Because that is just my point. "Reports" (being a newspaper article or an analysis) can be wrong. I trust someone's eyes before I do what someone claims. So I am just trying to determine whether Fiona had a preconceive notion about this 'thing being from another planet'....before going public.

I have a feeling she did not say that rather, it's another attempt to drive in the 'hoax' nail into this story.

And why ATS categorized this a hoax also, is not fair either.
They should have a grey (like a pending) area to stick this or better yet, just let it be another thread. There is no proof what-so-ever from what I've read.

Tests are wrong some times. People are wrong sometimes too. But usually someone is not wrong in where they were (inside/outside) a car for example.

I have to believe someone who said they were out of their car, knows whether they were out of their car or not. I just don't see/read this is being a hoax, not from what I've read anyway.


edit to add: 'thing from another planet"

[edit on 12-6-2010 by One Moment]

reply to post by One Moment


oh dear!

reply to post by One Moment


One Moment.....

In all due respect, I am not interested in your summary report.

On the one hand.....

It makes some level of sense to read my report & debate it, criticise it, etc....

On the other hand.....

It makes no sense at all to totally disregard & thereby ignore the information therein.

You should also realise that to spend time pursuing a possible misquote in an extremely minor local newspaper is a waste of time. I've dealt with the press regarding complex topics & they can get things wrong.....everybody knows that.

You also don't know if the witness has decided to further embellish her story by saying the objects represented life from another planet.

All in all..... from what I can see, your approach to this is inefficient & obtuse & will lead to your further confoundment.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]