It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO buzzes Sydney - and here's the 'proof'

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   

UFO buzzes Sydney - and here


www.news.com.au

IT EMERGED from a blazing light in the clouds, descending on a busy street before zipping off silently into the sunset.

Just what - or who - propelled the strange flying disc across Sydney's skyline may never be known.

But while the close encounter was over in seconds, it was enough to convince mother-of-two Fiona Hartigan that she'd just seen a UFO.

And she has the photos to prove it.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 23/3/10 by Nventual]




posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
I find it interesting that the UFO stories and photos that get front-page news in Australia and really most places in the world are always the worst looking UFO photos and the ones where even UFO enthusiasts are like "what?".

Is it to discredit the belief in UFOs?

The women seems certain she saw something, but it doesn't say whether she was looking through the lens at the time or not. She doesn't look too smart and it wouldn't surprise me if she was zooming in on a speck of dust.

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Nventual
 


It doesn't matter. It could be a 30 min video tour of the inside of a UFO and it would still be denied.

I think she definitely saw something she cant explain and for what its worth she got a pic with her iphone to boot.



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Yeah crap on the windsheild is all that is.



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Once again, the object in question appears to be out of focus, though the trees, the clouds and everything else appears to be in focus. For it to be THAT fuzzy it seems like it would need to be moving pretty darned fast or capable of distorting its appearance.




posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Digital_Reality
reply to post by Nventual
 


It doesn't matter. It could be a 30 min video tour of the inside of a UFO and it would still be denied.

I think she definitely saw something she cant explain and for what its worth she got a pic with her iphone to boot.

No, I'm pretty sure if there was a 30 minute video tour of the inside of a UFO, and it wasn't CGI, most people would accept it



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
Yeah crap on the windsheild is all that is.


I dunno - in the story it says she got out of the car and snapped the photos. Your statement would only be true if she took the pics in the car.



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   
It's obvious the photo was taken inside the car- you can see reflections on the windscreen.



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
[edit on 3/23/2010 by Phage]



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


click on the link to the article and look at the picture. you can see that it is taken thorugh glass.



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by zaiger
Yeah crap on the windsheild is all that is.


I dunno - in the story it says she got out of the car and snapped the photos. Your statement would only be true if she took the pics in the car.

But she did take the pictures in the car, isn't that obvious?



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by zaiger
Yeah crap on the windsheild is all that is.


I dunno - in the story it says she got out of the car and snapped the photos. Your statement would only be true if she took the pics in the car.

But she did take the pictures in the car, isn't that obvious?


So she took some photo's, see my signature, nuff said



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I am willing to accept that this lady saw a UFO and did manage to take a photograph of it but I would also be keen to point out that this photograph is not proof to me that she did in fact take a photograph of a UFO. The dark smudge could be anything from a kicked ball to a thrown Frisbee or anything else you might care to throw up (into the sky).

However one thing it is not is proof that she took a photograph of a UFO buzzing Sidney.

This post is not the viewpoint of a sceptic, I am a strong believer in the visitation hypothesis and much more, however this photograph is proof of nothing to me other than to give me the sinking feeling that a camera is never going to proof the existence of UFO’s anymore.

What will prove it is probably something much more dramatic- like a vast ship sitting majestically above a major city and even then many of us will probably demand high definition, no clashing with favourite soaps, a comfortable sofa and a vast supply of soft drinks and popcorn



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by downunderET

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by zaiger
Yeah crap on the windsheild is all that is.


I dunno - in the story it says she got out of the car and snapped the photos. Your statement would only be true if she took the pics in the car.

But she did take the pictures in the car, isn't that obvious?


So she took some photo's, see my signature, nuff said

So someone forced her picture to be taken in the car? whats your point?



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
the pic in the news article was shot thru the windshield, you can see a reflection of a car in the tree on the right, even tho the article states she got out of the car and shot pics

woudn't be the first time a reporter made a mistake



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
The woman just did an interview in the studio with Kerri-anne. She seemed pretty sincere .. and admitted to being a skeptic previous to the 'encounter'. She also showed a few other photos in the sequence. There appears to be an orange orb in the sky in the other shots that is releasing smaller silver disks.

Also the main UFO that people are claiming to be crap on the windscreen is clearly in a different position and a slightly different shape in the subsequent images. Worth looking into further IMHO.

Of course, I won't put myself out on a limb and say that this story is 100% true but it looks eerily similar to what I experienced back in the 90's.

IRM



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


very unlikely. everybody would cry cgi and it would at best get labeled "one of the better cgi's"

then 2 or 3 "cgi professionals" would respond pointing out the various effects that were used to make it, and instantly become experts on UFO engineering and movement. And then they would tell us that the textures are all wrong (comparing it to the genuine craft they've got stored in the garage??)

hah, and those angles....they are too sharp, ive seen and dealt with hundreads of UFO's and by Golly their angles arent sharp!

::edit:: sarcasm

[edit on 23-3-2010 by LurkerMan]



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
I saw the interview as well - she did seem pretty sincere (for what it's worth)...



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 

Doesn't have to be a single crap.
I merged the two images to verify that they were taken from the same location (pretty close, if not).
The blobs are both out of focus to pretty much the same degree. The trees and clouds are in focus. That means the blobs are closer than the trees to the camera. There is no apparent motion blur. There is some streaking in the lower image which could be caused by a windscreen.



posted on Mar, 23 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nventual


She doesn't look too smart



That it a pretty ingnorant statement. How can you tell how smart someone is by looking at them?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join