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.

 

Reader Submits Photographs from China: Too Good to be True?

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by predator0187
reply to post by MPad556
 


That's what I thought but they have untouched exif's or whatever.

I am not sure if they are fake or whatever, this subject just intrigued me and thought I would share it with the good people of ATS and see what I can get from here.


Pred...

Thanks for sharing: yes, they have untouched EXIF... but the one posted by UCB are a little bit incomplete:
EXIF data show the Photoshop CS2 tag, both as creator tool and software used, and it's also interesting that between create date and digitized date there are almost three years of difference




Image # 1


Color Mode 3
Create Date 2007:05:14 08:47:36+01:00
Creator Tool Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Date/Time Digitized 2010:02:27 10:10:19Z
Date/Time Original 2010:02:27 10:10:51Z



Image # 2


Color Mode 3
Create Date 2007:05:14 09:18:05+01:00
Creator Tool Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Date/Time Digitized 2010:02:27 10:10:51Z
Date/Time Original 2010:02:27 10:10:19Z


The REAL photos were taken three years ago, and someone seems to have tried to manipulate the "original date/time" tak with some exif tool.
Plus, photoshop.
You decide




posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by predator0187
reply to post by mckyle
 


Hey, I don't think anyone here was like 'look proof of aliens.' And as the person that brought it here I just wanted to see what other people thought of the subject as well. A discussion is a discussion, no need to insult people.

Pred...


My apologies mate,

I wasn't directing my previous comments at you. I'm more than happy that you brought this to our attention, as I always am with any poster.

So my apologies for coming across as a stab at you - it wasn't.

Whether material is good or bad, it's always of benefit to bring it out into the open and discuss it. That way we all get to learn how to tell a bad one from a potentially good one.

S&F'd.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by internos

Thanks for sharing: yes, they have untouched EXIF... but the one posted by UCB are a little bit incomplete:
EXIF data show the Photoshop CS2 tag, both as creator tool and software used, and it's also interesting that between create date and digitized date there are almost three years of difference




Image # 1


Color Mode 3
Create Date 2007:05:14 08:47:36+01:00
Creator Tool Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Date/Time Digitized 2010:02:27 10:10:19Z
Date/Time Original 2010:02:27 10:10:51Z



Image # 2


Color Mode 3
Create Date 2007:05:14 09:18:05+01:00
Creator Tool Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Date/Time Digitized 2010:02:27 10:10:51Z
Date/Time Original 2010:02:27 10:10:19Z


The REAL photos were taken three years ago, and someone seems to have tried to manipulate the "original date/time" tak with some exif tool.
Plus, photoshop.
You decide


Anyone who is new to ATS: let me introduce to you a guy who knows UFOlogy better than most!

Hey old friend. Long time no see.


I'm leaving China very soon, so if the gates of Sardinia are still open, I might sail that way



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by mckyle
My apologies mate,

I wasn't directing my previous comments at you. I'm more than happy that you brought this to our attention, as I always am with any poster.

So my apologies for coming across as a stab at you - it wasn't.

Whether material is good or bad, it's always of benefit to bring it out into the open and discuss it. That way we all get to learn how to tell a bad one from a potentially good one.

S&F'd.


No problem. Happy that you are here to discuss the events.


I agree with your last part. I might have taken your first statement out of context as well.

I just think for how fake this looks it almost makes it more amusing.


Pred...



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by serbsta
 


ha ha i was thinking the same thats funny



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by predator0187

I just think for how fake this looks it almost makes it more amusing.


Pred...


It does look fake, and that fact that is comes from China does matter - in my opinion.

I know another poster challenged me on that belief, but I feel it is still the case that there are certain countries where alarm bells should start going off, if a UFO report eminates from them. Reason being is that in the case of China, there is one disreputable "news" website - All News Webs dot com, that has been less than critical in the reports it sucks up from China (they get most of their UFO news feeds from there). In the process the UFO community end up getting a lot of rubbish.

I think you could raise the same caution level - or skeptical level against Russia, and Turkey. It's not the region itself that produces the fake reports, it's unfortunately just a few individuals who live there.

Does China have very compelling UFO incidents? Indeed they do - but they don't come from sources such as All News Webs.

I've got some pilot friends over here that have shared with me some truly remarkable cases that compare to some of the well-known ones in the west. They just don't get the coverage, or the backing of the authorities to publish the evidence. But there are some good ones, and I've seen the photos taken by some of the pilots involved in some of the incidents. Amazing stuff!

If only someone could make a good documentary with the blessing of the Chinese authorities, I think it would really blow Ufologists away!

[edit on 5-4-2010 by mckyle]



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Maybe something like this:

remote-control-ufo




posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by hande
 


Yes i was thinking that it could be a remote controlled toy hence the antennas, could be wrong tho.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Well, this saucer seems really campy
, so my gut says fake. For analysis, the unedited raw pictures would be needed. And I doubt these are forthcoming.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jclmavg
 


agreed. I have seen multiple ufo's in my lifetime and NONE of them EVER looked like these rediculous 50s scifi movie saucers.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Anyone care to use a translation software to read the following articles and info? (Just use Baidu.com and use keywords CCTV & UFO)

news.cctv.com...

Let's say that China is trying to open up even on Ufology, when even CCTV is making articles and broadcasting UFO related program series, then you can imagine that UFO & ET related stuff is gaining the interests of the Chinese population.

In this CCTV article it discussed 2 famous Chinese UFO incidents, which are supposed to have over millions of witnesses! Anyhow, what the article stated very openly and clearly is that although Ufology starting from the 47 in USA has 60 years history, in China it is merely in the beginning phase of serious research.


我国对于不明飞行物的研究,从1947年6月24日美国的阿罗德发现不明飞行物开始。尽管对于UFO的研究已经过去 60年,但是仍然处于“初级阶段”,原因主要还是UFO实在是太难得一见。


Other CCTV & UFO related links, some Chinese version's Youtube clones posted CCTV video about UFO!:
www.cctv.com...
news.cctv.com...
v.youku.com...
www.cctv.com...

Ps. before anyone wonders, yes I am currently in Shenzhen (China).
Pss. awful UFO picture, but in response to another poster, I did see these kinds of houses in China's sub-urbans towns.

[edit on 5-4-2010 by yiersan]



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I think I see a string centered and above the second photo. Add the fact that the UFO looks odd for occupants and as such, I would have to say that these photos are suspect at best and most likely a big hoax.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by MaxBlack
 


But that is why this is so amusing to me. Why would someone fake photographs with these pictures. Why not make it look like district nine is landing on my front lawn? I just find it amusing that someone, might be trying to pull this off. I use might because they might be too good to be true.


Pred...



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jaden_x
 


WHERE did you get that from????


I do gotta point out a few things, tho like the uneven 'dome' seal around the top, and portholes around the bottom- gotta be a ***** when they have to go faster than hover... And the bottom edge- the bottom edge is ANYTHING but even! Somehow, this doesn't scream 'advanced technology from another planet' at me.

Almost makes me wanna make a simple 3d model and make a 'better' version.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by MPad556
 





This is sort of off topic I suppose but, how hard would it be to fake the exfil data? Anybody know?


I know a VERY quick, dirty, and easy method:

Fiddle with Ufo pic

Put fiddled and made to look nice UFO pic on a GOOD LCD monitor with hysterical resolution (like 1920x1080- My 22" monitor for an example)

Take pic of screen. Voila'! you have an 'original, untouched' UFO pic!



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
It looks like an Radio Controlled toy or balloon to me. It also looks a bit like these...




Edited to add extra photo and add word balloon.


[edit on 5/4/10 by Lebowski achiever]



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Lebowski achiever
 


Definitely does look similar to the OP UFO.

I personally would think their technology would be a little more advanced to be able to travel star systems. But hey maybe their from another dimension and just need a basic craft.


Pred...

[edit on 5-4-2010 by predator0187]



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Pretty sure Internos just closed this case showing the full EXIF data. The file was created in 2007 and then 'digitized' in 2010 via Photoshop CS2.

What I want to know is why UFOCaseBook doesn't show the full exif data clearly marking Photoshop CS2 as the creator tool in 2010? Doesnt that automatically throw the case in the trash in today's age?



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
looking at the second picture the angle of the ufo is totally off/ if taking a picture frm the ground looking up and the ufo is directly straight to u it wud mean the ufo is sideways.

it just looks sketchy anyways

:/



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by samureyed
 


You would think, hey? I think the people on ATS have done an awesome job at discrediting the picture to me anyway. I wonder why UFO casebook did not do the same. Or are we just that good over here?


Pred...



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join