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.

 

Really good black and white ufo pics...

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Its a sad fact as i stated on another thread, that a century on, these old black and white pics are more credible than `hd cameras ufo footage/pics` in 2010.

Here are some really good ones

What do you think?

December 6, 1968 - Sicuani, Peru



April 1, 1965 - Bernacillo, New Mexico, USA


1966 - Washtenaw County, Michigan, US




July 3, 1967 - Cumberland, Rhode Island, USA





For more incredible photos most of which ive not seen before.. check out

www.old-ufo-photos.tk...
www.old-ufo-photos.tk...


Its sad that the quality of these far surpasses the blurry stuff thats presented nowadays

Your thoughts?

edit on 3-12-2010 by rabbigoldstein because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I don't mean to be one of those sweeping skeptical discounters but...

If they are not models, clear fakes, deliberate hoaxes... My assumption is Nazi Germany technology.



They look ... clunky... like something we would build.



edit on 3-12-2010 by MavRck because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


I was just pointing out the other day on another thread this very same thing. All the videos or photographs these days are lights in the night sky that offer no perspective, or pale dots in the sky that could be anything. I guess it's like everything else: "They just don't make 'em like they used to."



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by MavRck
I don't mean to be one of those sweeping skeptical discounters but...

If they are not models, clear fakes, deliberate hoaxes... My assumption is Nazi Germany technology.



They look ... clunky... like something we would build.



edit on 3-12-2010 by MavRck because: (no reason given)


I dunno, we also make balloons but theyre all the rage these days..

And they dont do much more than what balloons would do.

hmm!



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I have info on the "Washtenaw County" photo. Please see this thread:

UFO Picture: The Paul Villa Case, Mexico 1963
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I have no info on the others.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by MavRck
 


If it is Nazi technology their flew better than the American ones did, if we are to believe disclosure on saucer shaped craft prototypes built in the 50s. I am not sure the Saucers of the Germans flew any better. I dont think they deployed any of them.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:05 PM
link   
I uploaded a number of photos of this ufo to page 2 and 3 of the thread I referenced above. Enjoy.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:09 PM
link   
They didn't have photoshop back in the 60's either. So if it was faked, it was either a model, or someone with a very steady hand.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   
have you noticed almost all the old ufo photos show
the nazi/bell/helmet style pictures

sometimes with an antenna

and occasionally cigar shape

theres barely any triangle or orb ones



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I remember reading something somewhere once [helpful, I know] that there were fakes back then as well. Just because there was no photoshop doesn't mean every photo taken was real, although they do look a lot more convincing. The overall quality of the pictures really aren't the best so it wouldn't be too hard to hide strings/distort props in those days. I think there was even an interview with a guy who admitted he had taken fakes and went through the process. I am going to try and find it.

Anyways, nice pictures either way. You are right, they look a lot better than the ones we get around nowadays. Weird for how far technology has gotten us



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Everybody says it was really harder to tamper pictures in those times, that each time they have been analysed by professionals that told "well, no doubt about that it's a solid objet on this picture"... I personnally think they are kinda right, this is not tampered, the object that is on the picture is "real" and was really "present" when it was taken.

BUT seriously, they could be ANYTHING with a cigar shape or a plate shape. Sure they are real object, but these objects could be a real cigare or plate thrown in the sky we couldn't realise it due to the poor(est) image quality.

Just look here, the penultimate photo you posted the link to, just look it upside down and dare to tell me it couldn't be a cake in a soup plate (try freeing your imagination from what you want it to be).

NB : I know we only said it was UFO, which doesn't mean they are "flying saucers", so I'm off board, blablabla. But honestly if the poster didn't think it was a little more probably a flying saucer than a plate, these pictures wouldn't be here.

edit on 3/12/10 by DAMOo because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/12/10 by DAMOo because: (no reason given)


Edit : the poster above was faster than me.
edit on 3/12/10 by DAMOo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cinquain
I remember reading something somewhere once [helpful, I know] that there were fakes back then as well. Just because there was no photoshop doesn't mean every photo taken was real, although they do look a lot more convincing. The overall quality of the pictures really aren't the best so it wouldn't be too hard to hide strings/distort props in those days. I think there was even an interview with a guy who admitted he had taken fakes and went through the process. I am going to try and find it.

Anyways, nice pictures either way. You are right, they look a lot better than the ones we get around nowadays. Weird for how far technology has gotten us


hey
im not declaring them as genuine or the `holy grail footage`

im just saying how much more convincing and DETAILED the old footage is

the only thing lacking about it is the fact that they are, well, old.. and in black and white,

but those pics with a hd camera nowadays WOULD be the holy grail



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


Old yes, very grainy which in some ways makes them just as bad as the pictures provided today.

I understand you weren't trying to pass them off as any "Holy grail" of photo evidence, and I absolutely agree that they are much more interesting to look at than half of the videos and pictures out there these days. That comes more from the content of the photos though, and obviously not from the quality. I was just trying to point out that because the quality is so grainy and not properly focused, the close up captures of the UFOs could just as easily be faked.

But please don't be mistaken, I am totally on your side? I think? I am waiting patiently for the day when good, solid evidence comes out that we are certainly not alone. I'm tired of fighting and looking like a fool!

edit on 3-12-2010 by Cinquain because: I'm going with the "that darn keyboard" excuse...



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cinquain
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


Old yes, very grainy which in some ways makes them just as bad as the pictures provided today.

I understand you weren't trying to pass them off as any "Holy grail" of photo evidence, and I absolutely agree that they are much more interesting to look at than half of the videos and pictures out there these days. That comes more from the content of the photos though, and obviously not from the quality. I was just trying to point out that because the quality is so grainy and not properly focused, the close up captures of the UFOs could just as easily be faked.

But please don't be mistaken, I am totally on your side? I think? I am waiting patiently for the day when good, solid evidence comes out that we are certainly not alone. I'm tired of fighting and looking like a fool!

edit on 3-12-2010 by Cinquain because: I'm going with the "that darn keyboard" excuse...


dont worry i wasnt attacking you, i was just protecting myself before somebody goes `pfft is that your evidence`!

i find it laughable that theres VERY few of those annoying orb reports in the early years, i say annoying because im simply fed up with a light/orb/sphere in the sky, with no reference point whatsoever, and even if there is a point of reference, BIG DEAL ITS A LIGHT, DEAL WITH IT... who cares about orbs, WHO CARES ABOUT LIGHTS...



its where they are coming from and their purpose what matters




posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


It seems to me the saucer is a standard prototype due to the simplicity of just shelling the anti grav engine that has been said to resemble a doughnut filled with a revolving superfluid. I bet the triangle like the TR3-B is a later design and that might be why the nazi bell or saucers are in all the old photos.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by wingzero
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


It seems to me the saucer is a standard prototype due to the simplicity of just shelling the anti grav engine that has been said to resemble a doughnut filled with a revolving superfluid. I bet the triangle like the TR3-B is a later design and that might be why the nazi bell or saucers are in all the old photos.


you know the antenna on the old style ufos.. id LOVE TO KNOW what they are for :-)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


I see what you're saying. Very tiny, simple things today are completely sensationalized and blown out of proportion, either for monetary gain or attention/publicity. Even on the internet, everyone wants to be a 'star' or in the middle. Although I could be mistaken, back then I don't think people had that kind of agenda going on. UFOs were a lot more taboo and anything 'alternative' was frowned upon, so it was more believable when someone stepped up with a photo, claiming it to be of an alien spacecraft.

Whether these are or not though, even if I saw something like that hovering around today I would probably lose my sh*t. Literally.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by rabbigoldstein
 


As a pilot the antennas on the planes I fly are used for two things communication and navigation using radio waves and the technology has stayed pretty much the same from the start. That might be what they were used for. My guess is the crafts were still in there infancy and primarily designed to study antigravity propulsion so they keep the rest simple to the technology they had at the time.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Looking for more information about the so-called black spots yesterday
I found these black and white photos from the famous Russian geopathogenic
zone Molebka, something like the Skinwalker ranch:

foto.rambler.ru...



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by MavRck
I don't mean to be one of those sweeping skeptical discounters but...

If they are not models, clear fakes, deliberate hoaxes... My assumption is Nazi Germany technology.



They look ... clunky... like something we would build.



edit on 3-12-2010 by MavRck because: (no reason given)


They are as you said in your opening sentence. These old images were exposed decades ago. It shows that the OP is easily fooled. Must be a young'un.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join