It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If we had the original photo or the cell phone it would be easier to scan into a analyzer.
I read your post on p55 with interest, and to be totally honest, and without trying to be a dick, I find your conclusions to be at best speculative
again because it can be done, does not mean it was.
I find it upsetting that instead of using the alleged sighting and that incident alone, that every aspect it seems of this woman's history is being used to debunk one event, there are many members on here who are interested and follow different phenomena with interest, more than casual interest in some cases.
The claims made by the woman while being a little over the top it seems should not allow any investigation be soured into being called a hoax without definitive proof of it being so.
How many times have we seen a member comment they would love to see something for themselves?
some of us are lucky enough to have been in such a position, being into a subject and living it are totally different
for instance in one of your comparison pictures you can clearly see the front of the car
if the camera moved up I guess you would see the interior roof of the car
that is not seen in her images, no wipers nothing to show it was inside a car apart
from some lighting anomalies, which cant be explained away with 100% certainty.
I have total respect for the lengths you have gone in this case, you have done what many others should do before offering up some of the crazy explanations they do, you have offered some very good results for the work you have carried out
but I have to ask, is any of it 100% conclusive, or is there still a % that she could be right and did as she has said?
I have found in the past that some witnesses have changed their stories, not however to cover something up, but because at the time they felt they needed to give an explanation of how they reacted and what they did, so changed some of the story so as not to look foolish, but by doing so have cast doubt over their story, yet when an investigation was carried out, the only part of the story that did not fit was the change of their version of events, then other witnesses where found and interviewed, and that is all it was, a version of events which had them worried if they spoke up would make them seem crazy, so they changed some details.
I doubt there is a single person on this site who has something in their closet they would not want it going into the public domain things which to the rest of us are nothing, its just a shame that changing a story over rules the evidence presented, which IMO seems to be what has happened here, wanting to witness something, then seeing something, you can never prepare for that moment ever.
I so need a break from ATS, its making me feel like Im going insane, as well as recent anger issues.
Kudos for your work
Originally posted by keepureye2thesky
Originally posted by One Moment
You can be his disciple all you want. Follow the Shepherd of pseudoscience!
Your attitude is so poor. You should respect people on here and not show
such reactive behavior and comments. This is unintelligible bickering on beliefs
and not a critical overview of the evidence in this thread.
This is so off topic and childish right now.
There are 70 pages on here and you mean to tell me the same 3 people only respond? I just don't understand why others can't just discuss this without those same people chiming in with their redundancy.
Originally posted by RICH-ENGLAND
reply to post by TheMalefactor
wow. you really are bordeline insane!
i have not reversed anything whatsoever!
you cant compare apples to oranges yet you compare 3 blobs of stationary fixed mud to birds and the blue angels!
three intelligently controlled and related craft as in blue angels with a practiced and pre determined flight path can obviously stay in formation ... three totally unrelated blobs two of which are definitely mud spots on a windscreen and not under intelligent control are showing that the other blob is also not moving because they stay where they are relative to each other showing that they must all be stationary!
ive spelled it out about 4 times and you still cannot understand a very very very simple stetement
earlier you said you didn't believe it was alien but now your making out it is! thats two major contradictions youve made on yourself
how did aliens get brought into it?
i didn't even mention them and im quite sure they could stay in formation if intelligent space fairing aliens exist,
i think your freudian slip has given away your blind believer quest so now i know what your motivation is!
im definitely not going to answer you again,
goodbye and enjoy your reality.
... PROVE ME WRONG, TAKE A SERIES OF THREE PICTURES OF 3 BIRDS OR FORMATION AEROPLANES, TAKE THE PICTURES WITH THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME BETWEEN THEM AS FIONAS PICTURES AND KEEP THEM ALL IN SHOT, WITH THE SAME RELATIVE DISTANCE AND FORMATION AND WITH THE BACKGROUND STAYING THE SAME IN EACH PICTURE?
Originally posted by CHRLZ
Originally posted by One Moment
Originally posted by TheMalefactor
Listen....... Why/ WHY NOT/Maybe/Maybe Not (or whatever confused Being you are.....)
Please include the proper quotes. None of those were mine.
You m'friend are way too full of yourself!
im suprised this is still a topic i thought m &m debunked me a long time ago i still stand by what i seen & said its as if it happend yesterday and some one has comented on my history or past whats that all about
I don't want to hear from you. Please ,move along please. (peace?)
Fiona? Are you here?
Oh, that's a CLASSIC!!!
One Moment, you replied to a post by MALEFACTOR, not Maybe...
It's even more funny, when you say "Please include the proper quotes..", and refer to "confused beings".. How positively apt.