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.

 

2 UFO photos daytime

page: 6
5
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
The sun has to be behind that cloud.
And what better position to move the Tesla ship.




And what do we see, black lights cousin purple lights in
dual vibrations just like the center of the oval rings.


Thanks EvilBat this was one heck of a sighting.


[edit on 8/27/2010 by TeslaandLyne]




posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
I can't resist one brief return... Some examples of 'newton's rings' in bokeh:

www.fredmiranda.com...
Scroll down to the third image - look carefully at the out-of-focus blobs.

www.the-digital-picture.com...
Check the image about a third of the way down.

photos.imageevent.com...

I can provide lots more... In fact here's a video of mine:

Note what happens at 2:00 onwards - the rings and 'gunk' are lens artefacts, and the video proves it by moving the 'blob' around in the lens - the patterns change, as they are created by the internal lens elements. If it was the object, they would not change in synch with the camera movement. Not rocket science, just basic optics - people who know their equipment well don't make such simplistic errors.

Spiro - it's great to see a Scot here that DOES know cameras and photography...



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
interesting photos but look like mabey just glare and camera tricks



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


The only problem with your pictures are there all at NIGHTTIME and hes using a FLASH.
In my picture its DAYTIME and with no FLASH.
so your proved nothing really.
Did someone give you a star for effort.

haha




[edit on 24/09/2008 by ufosbri]



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by CHRLZ

First, may I point out that I'm not disputing that the images are or are not edited. I suspect not.

But unless you had access to the original media (did you?), I sincerely doubt that you can verify that they are unedited. If you do claim to have some methodology of accessing a file on non-original media and verifying it is unedited, please provide the details of what you did to confirm that.

Happy to be proven wrong...



Start Offset: 0x00000000
*** Marker: SOI (xFFD8) ***
OFFSET: 0x00000000

*** Marker: APP1 (xFFE1) ***
OFFSET: 0x00000002
length = 844
Identifier = [Exif]
Identifier TIFF = 0x[49492A00 08000000]
Endian = Intel (little)
TAG Mark x002A = 0x002A

EXIF IFD0 @ Absolute 0x00000014
Dir Length = 0x0014
[Make ] = "Hewlett-Packard"
[Model ] = "HP Photosmart E330"
[XResolution ] = 102/1
[YResolution ] = 108/1
[ResolutionUnit ] = Inch
[Software ] = "Version 1.5100"
[DateTime ] = "2008:02:09 17:25:45"
[YCbCrPositioning ] = Co-sited
[ReferenceBlackWhite ] = 0/1, 255/1, 128/1, 255/1, 128/1, 255/1
[ExifOffset ] = @ 0x0186
[GPSOffset ] = @ 0x0308
[ExposureMode ] = Auto exposure
[WhiteBalance ] = Auto white balance
[SceneCaptureType ] = Standard
Offset to Next IFD = 0x00000000

EXIF SubIFD @ Absolute 0x00000192
Dir Length = 0x0017
[ExposureTime ] = 16667/1000000 s
[FNumber ] = F4.5
[ExposureProgram ] = Normal program
[ISOSpeedRatings ] = 200
[ExifVersion ] = 02.20
[DateTimeOriginal ] = "2008:02:09 17:25:45"
[DateTimeDigitized ] = "2008:02:09 17:25:45"
[ComponentsConfiguration ] = [Y Cb Cr .]
[ShutterSpeedValue ] = 590/100
[ApertureValue ] = 433/100
[BrightnessValue ] = 4243/1000
[ExposureBiasValue ] = 0.00 eV
[MaxApertureValue ] = 433/100
[MeteringMode ] = CenterWeightedAverage
[LightSource ] = Shade
[Flash ] = Flash fired
[FocalLength ] = 6 mm
[FlashPixVersion ] = 01.00
[ColorSpace ] = sRGB
[ExifImageWidth ] = 2576
[ExifImageHeight ] = 1920
[SensingMethod ] = One-chip color area sensor
[FileSource ] = DSC

EXIF GPSIFD @ Absolute 0x00000314
Dir Length = 0x0001
[GPSVersionID ] = 2.2.0.0

*** Marker: APP4 (xFFE4) ***
OFFSET: 0x00000350
length = 120

*** Marker: APP4 (xFFE4) ***
OFFSET: 0x000003CA
length = 516

*** Marker: APP4 (xFFE4) ***
OFFSET: 0x000005D0
length = 29088

*** Marker: DQT (xFFDB) ***
Define a Quantization Table.
OFFSET: 0x00007772
Table length = 67
----
Precision=8 bits
Destination ID=0 (Luminance)
DQT, Row #0: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #1: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #2: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #3: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #4: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #5: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #6: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
DQT, Row #7: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Approx quality factor = 97.01 (scaling=5.99 variance=24.54)

*** Marker: DHT (Define Huffman Table) (xFFC4) ***
OFFSET: 0x000077B7
Huffman table length = 418
----
Destination ID = 0
Class = 0 (DC / Lossless Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (001 total): 00
Codes of length 03 bits (005 total): 01 02 03 04 05
Codes of length 04 bits (001 total): 06
Codes of length 05 bits (001 total): 07
Codes of length 06 bits (001 total): 08
Codes of length 07 bits (001 total): 09
Codes of length 08 bits (001 total): 0A
Codes of length 09 bits (001 total): 0B
Codes of length 10 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 11 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 12 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 15 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 16 bits (000 total):
Total number of codes: 012

----
Destination ID = 1
Class = 0 (DC / Lossless Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (003 total): 00 01 02
Codes of length 03 bits (001 total): 03
Codes of length 04 bits (001 total): 04
Codes of length 05 bits (001 total): 05
Codes of length 06 bits (001 total): 06
Codes of length 07 bits (001 total): 07
Codes of length 08 bits (001 total): 08
Codes of length 09 bits (001 total): 09
Codes of length 10 bits (001 total): 0A
Codes of length 11 bits (001 total): 0B
Codes of length 12 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 15 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 16 bits (000 total):
Total number of codes: 012

----
Destination ID = 0
Class = 1 (AC Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (002 total): 01 02
Codes of length 03 bits (001 total): 03
Codes of length 04 bits (003 total): 00 04 11
Codes of length 05 bits (003 total): 05 12 21
Codes of length 06 bits (002 total): 31 41
Codes of length 07 bits (004 total): 06 13 51 61
Codes of length 08 bits (003 total): 07 22 71
Codes of length 09 bits (005 total): 14 32 81 91 A1
Codes of length 10 bits (005 total): 08 23 42 B1 C1
Codes of length 11 bits (004 total): 15 52 D1 F0
Codes of length 12 bits (004 total): 24 33 62 72
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 15 bits (001 total): 82
Codes of length 16 bits (125 total): 09 0A 16 17 18 19 1A 25 26 27 28 29 2A 34 35 36
37 38 39 3A 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 4A 53 54 55 56
57 58 59 5A 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 6A 73 74 75 76
77 78 79 7A 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 8A 92 93 94 95
96 97 98 99 9A A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 AA B2 B3
B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 BA C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 CA
D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 DA E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7
E8 E9 EA F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 FA
Total number of codes: 162

----
Destination ID = 1
Class = 1 (AC Table)
Codes of length 01 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 02 bits (002 total): 00 01
Codes of length 03 bits (001 total): 02
Codes of length 04 bits (002 total): 03 11
Codes of length 05 bits (004 total): 04 05 21 31
Codes of length 06 bits (004 total): 06 12 41 51
Codes of length 07 bits (003 total): 07 61 71
Codes of length 08 bits (004 total): 13 22 32 81
Codes of length 09 bits (007 total): 08 14 42 91 A1 B1 C1
Codes of length 10 bits (005 total): 09 23 33 52 F0
Codes of length 11 bits (004 total): 15 62 72 D1
Codes of length 12 bits (004 total): 0A 16 24 34
Codes of length 13 bits (000 total):
Codes of length 14 bits (001 total): E1
Codes of length 15 bits (002 total): 25 F1
Codes of length 16 bits (119 total): 17 18 19 1A 26 27 28 29 2A 35 36 37 38 39 3A 43
44 45 46 47 48 49 4A 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 5A 63
64 65 66 67 68 69 6A 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 7A 82
83 84 85 86 87 88 89 8A 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
9A A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 AA B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7
B8 B9 BA C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 CA D2 D3 D4 D5
D6 D7 D8 D9 DA E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 EA F2 F3
F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 FA
Total number of codes: 162


*** Marker: SOF0 (Baseline DCT) (xFFC0) ***
OFFSET: 0x0000795B
Frame header length = 17
Precision = 8
Number of Lines = 1920
Samples per Line = 2576
Image Size = 2576 x 1920
Raw Image Orientation = Landscape
Number of Img components = 3
Component[1]: ID=0x01, Samp Fac=0x21 (Subsamp 1 x 1), Quant Tbl Sel=0x00 (Lum: Y)
Component[2]: ID=0x02, Samp Fac=0x11 (Subsamp 2 x 1), Quant Tbl Sel=0x00 (Chrom: Cb)
Component[3]: ID=0x03, Samp Fac=0x11 (Subsamp 2 x 1), Quant Tbl Sel=0x00 (Chrom: Cr)

*** Marker: SOS (Start of Scan) (xFFDA) ***
OFFSET: 0x0000796E
Scan header length = 12
Number of img components = 3
Component[1]: selector=0x01, table=0x00
Component[2]: selector=0x02, table=0x11
Component[3]: selector=0x03, table=0x11
Spectral selection = 0 .. 63
Successive approximation = 0x00


*** Decoding SCAN Data ***
OFFSET: 0x0000797C
Scan Decode Mode: Full IDCT (AC + DC)

Scan Data encountered marker 0xFFD9 @ 0x0022E554.0

Compression stats:
Compression Ratio: 6.58:1
Bits per pixel: 3.65:1

Huffman code histogram stats:
Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 0, Class: DC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 3870 ( 5%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 70238 ( 91%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 1469 ( 2%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 979 ( 1%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 669 ( 1%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 53 ( 0%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 2 ( 0%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 0 ( 0%)

Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 1, Class: DC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 26250 ( 34%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 22149 ( 29%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 19592 ( 25%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 8228 ( 11%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 932 ( 1%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 86 ( 0%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 30 ( 0%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 13 ( 0%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 0 ( 0%)

Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 0, Class: AC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 1100454 ( 55%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 95233 ( 5%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 310911 ( 16%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 208772 ( 10%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 62948 ( 3%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 34219 ( 2%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 46833 ( 2%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 51230 ( 3%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 16706 ( 1%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 21890 ( 1%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 13043 ( 1%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 5508 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 20851 ( 1%)

Huffman Table: (Dest ID: 1, Class: AC)
# codes of length 01 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 02 bits: 325271 ( 29%)
# codes of length 03 bits: 217549 ( 19%)
# codes of length 04 bits: 190770 ( 17%)
# codes of length 05 bits: 106856 ( 9%)
# codes of length 06 bits: 77410 ( 7%)
# codes of length 07 bits: 24225 ( 2%)
# codes of length 08 bits: 49810 ( 4%)
# codes of length 09 bits: 69211 ( 6%)
# codes of length 10 bits: 32373 ( 3%)
# codes of length 11 bits: 14944 ( 1%)
# codes of length 12 bits: 269 ( 0%)
# codes of length 13 bits: 0 ( 0%)
# codes of length 14 bits: 4235 ( 0%)
# codes of length 15 bits: 1984 ( 0%)
# codes of length 16 bits: 11260 ( 1%)

YCC clipping in DC:
Y component: [255= 0]
Cb component: [255= 0]
Cr component: [255= 0]

RGB clipping in DC:
R component: [255= 0]
G component: [255= 0]
B component: [255= 0]

Brightest Pixel Search:
YCC=[ 1027, 0, 0] RGB=[255,255,255] @ MCU[110,207]

Finished Decoding SCAN Data
Number of RESTART markers decoded: 0
Next position in scan buffer: Offset 0x0022E554.0


*** Marker: EOI (End of Image) (xFFD9) ***
OFFSET: 0x0022E554


*** Searching Compression Signatures ***

Signature: 01E4DEC5DF580F8461F51E4430A0C612
Signature (Rotated): 01E4DEC5DF580F8461F51E4430A0C612
File Offset: 0 bytes
Chroma subsampling: 2x1
EXIF Make/Model: OK [Hewlett-Packard] [HP Photosmart E330]
EXIF Makernotes: NONE
EXIF Software: OK [Version 1.5100]

Searching Compression Signatures: (3327 built-in, 0 user(*) )

EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
------------------------- ----------------------------------- ---------------- --------------
SW :[IMatch ] [098 ]
SW :[IMatch ] [099 ]
SW :[IMatch ] [100 ]

Based on the analysis of compression characteristics and EXIF metadata:

ASSESSMENT: Class 2 - Image has high probability of being processed/edited



*** Additional Info ***
NOTE: Data exists after EOF, range: 0x0022E556-0x0022E652 (252 bytes)



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   
If they were edited it would look like this :

The following IJG-based editors also match this signature:
SW :[GIMP ] [085 ]
SW :[IrfanView ] [085 ]
SW :[idImager ] [085 ]
SW :[FastStone Image Viewer ] [085 ]
SW :[NeatImage ] [085 ]
SW :[Paint.NET ] [085 ]
SW :[Photomatix ] [085 ]
SW :[XnView ] [085 ]

Based on the analysis of compression characteristics and EXIF metadata:

ASSESSMENT: Class 1 - Image is processed/edited


It will detect some signatures from some editing software.
And I checked the images from the link that the op provided.

And It will be class 1. Sure It isn't 100 % certain. There is a probability of being edited because maybe the camera used lighting method like the nikon's D-lighting. And edited the pic from the camera itself. Or something similar.



Heres a direct link to originals cheers img691.imageshack.us...


Posted by Ufosbri on the first page.

[edit on 27/8/10 by defiler]



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 03:19 AM
link   
defiler, rather than post reams of data (some of which seems to contradict you), why didn't you just name the program/plugin/s you used, and explain your methodology? Have you verified their accuracy yourself in a testable and repeatable fashion using the many programs available that allow you to process images and manipulate EXIF??

I note you have now backed away from the 100% certainty issue, yet you said this 2 pages back:

I can confirm that the photos aren't post edited. There aren't any digital signatures of programs of that kind. So the object or the phenomena is real but questionable.


I don't see any disclaimer there...

Again, I am NOT suggesting the images are manipulated. But I think it unwise to claim that you can eliminate any manipulation using software (especially unnamed software)...



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 05:20 AM
link   
Ok I made a mistake, there is no point denying that. I should have said, there is very high probability that the images aren't edited.

It says : ASSESSMENT: Class 2 - Image has high probability of being processed/edited Because nothing is absolute.

BTW the EXIF isn't important here, it just shows shooting information and sometimes it isn't correct.
When the picture is saved on the camera it is saved with some compression method. And if the compression method does not match with the one from the database for the specific camera it is edited.
If you have a database that has all of the camera signatures and all of the photo editing software signatures then there wouldn't be a any probability.

Every one has an opinion, but you should also consider other things.
And yes if you want to believe that this is edited it is your choice. You cant prove 100 % that it is fake either.

I love the ufo subject because there are a lot of uncertainties.

[edit on 28/8/10 by defiler]



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiro
My dear friend,

So, would you mind doing me, and everyone else, a HUGE BIG FAVOUR? Ya would? Aww thanks! Would you mind proving to us why you think this is some kind of UFO? Many thanks my friend.

Remember, we are all waiting. A few members have asked the very same question.

Be safe and be well







posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I have skipped a few pages
. I will read them to see what is it all about.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by defiler
 


The photos the real deal You take a photo it saves it to the camera you get the computer out you up load from camera Then I upload to ats thats about it theres No manipulation at all Its a plain photo with nothing dun to it
I gess yous just have to deal with it.
Thanks anyway.

ITS REAL ITS A UFO AND yous cant prove otherwize move on your just wasting your time.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 08:53 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

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


I have a Picture What do you have to prove your claim show me.


Ufosbri.....

I have a picture.

What do you have to prove your claim?

Show me.





Regards
Maybe...maybe not


[edit on 27-8-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



That does look like sun light shining through a ring in the clouds.
A cloud ring was evident in EvilBat's

here


lens flare discovery by the light pole but look up to the circle
in the clouds caused buy sound waves in the ether.


Lets not ignore the further EVIDENCE.

We'll call this UFO Ringo.
ED: The rings are oval shaped being deflected by two dark
objects in the center.
The sound waves but ether bound that exhibit the physical
property of making rings.
The famous sound/pressure waves in the ether, or medium
as Tesla would kindly say to experimenters, as mentioned
by Tesla are emanating from an aircraft of his design.


[edit on 8/28/2010 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Never mind.

[edit on 28/8/10 by defiler]



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
So lets recap

1 The photos been analyzed All data scrutinized to the tiniest detail.

2 All information given up by me without any argument.

3 what is it to me its a unidentified flying object.

4 Other ATS members think mabe Sun Glare but with NO Evidence to back there claim no pictures or video that looks anything like it.

5 What does it look like Its a circle inside a circle Donut shape bright luminus color with a hint of blue around the edge.

6 ATS members have tryed to undermine who I am.wind me up discredit manipulate me. thats just how it goes on here.

7 If anyone wants to send this photo to any expert, news paper go right ahead noprobs.
Have a good Day



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

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


I have a Picture What do you have to prove your claim show me.


Ufosbri.....

I have a picture.

What do you have to prove your claim?

Show me.





Regards
Maybe...maybe not


[edit on 27-8-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



That does look like sun light shining through a ring in the clouds.
A cloud ring was evident in EvilBat's

here


lens flare discovery by the light pole but look up to the circle
in the clouds caused buy sound waves in the ether.


Lets not ignore the further EVIDENCE.

We'll call this UFO Ringo.
ED: The rings are oval shaped being deflected by two dark
objects in the center.
The sound waves but ether bound that exhibit the physical
property of making rings.
The famous sound/pressure waves in the ether, or medium
as Tesla would kindly say to experimenters, as mentioned
by Tesla are emanating from an aircraft of his design.


[edit on 8/28/2010 by TeslaandLyne]



Does anyone else think this looks like the Norway Spiral?



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by YarlanZey
 


No, it looks like lens flare.

If it was an "object" it would be dark (i.e. in shadow) as the sun is almost directly behind "it" and "it" is supposed to be between the sun and the camera.

If it was a spiral (I'm no expert as to their causes, nature etc and I was going to write something technical here but got bored,) the main thing is that they tend to beF*** ME BIG and far away. This "thing" is below the cloud level. BTW, the pic you are referencing is an enhancement of the original on P1.

How about we call it an Unidentified Flying Lens Flare and keep everyone happy.

Personally, one day I hope to film a "something" and I hope I get slagged off/flamed/dissed for it until all avenues of explanation are exhausted and the consensous goes "this bloke might actually have something here" otherwise what's the point of this site.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


If you are correct, that is an amazingly perfect circle and one big bird.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Those are quite good pictures, i bet alot of people will say the 2nd one is just a glare, but the reality is that you were there and you saw the "object", overall i think they are very good photos, and in the day, you can't beat that. Very impressive, and i really hope they keep coming



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by YarlanZey


Does anyone else think this looks like the Norway Spiral?


Sure does.
And ufosbri has it.
Is the light coming from the Sun or is the air iridescent.
Still the formation of the rings calls for a vibration of some sort.
Vibrations will cause air to become iridescent.
Heck the vibrations on the Sun cause its light.
I'd say some Sun light and some caused by the ship vibrations.
ED: Any one follow the lens on the Cloud above the lens flare
around the light pole. That flare goes away but the cloud has
the circle in all the remaining photos.
Lets hear it for the Ringo UFOs.
The tilted T flash in the sky is definitely two ships.
So 4 UFOs altogether.




[edit on 8/29/2010 by TeslaandLyne]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join