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.

 

[HOAX]Please help. I have evidence but I get laughed at.[HOAX]

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solasis

Originally posted by adam79

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by adam79
 


Nobody here is laughing at you. However, we are telling you facts of the evidence you presented.
Fact 1: you took long exposure photos at a light source - thus created the lines
Fact 2: Light writing, a common form of art, was done - thus the word s e x

As someone who chose the career of forensics....evidence speaks louder than testimony. The evidence says: no UFO.....results of camera setting and user holding the camera.

Just sayn'
edit on February 14th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)


These are not facts!!!


The first one is a fact. The EXIF data shows it to be so.


I'm not using any trickery, and if I WAS to be creative why not make fake alien symbols? Or a message from the ghost world?


Because 1) That would take a lot more work and 2) other than the EXIF data, this is a lot more plausible. Or maybe your'e not tricking us, and you thought you saw something that happened to coincide with you taking bad pictures of the moon.


I guess I can't prove my honesty here, but I refuse to feign stupidity, and seriously, a picture that says sex, a faux moon and one orb sounds seriously crazy to ME!!!! Thats why I posted here, because I can't turn anywhere else. I can only give you what I managed to get. Furthermore, if I am not believed here, I guess the next step is just giving up.


If you truly believe that this is what happened, then giving up is not the solution. Presenting your story in ways that don't seem to contradict your story is the next step -- because the photographic evidence obviously cannot be trusted, you have to remove that from your story.


This is all really embarrassing and I never wanted to do it, but I want to know 2 things: WHAT and WHY. I just hoped for insight on those two things by coming here.

I don't want attention or acceptance, just insight.


Then why are you screaming for acceptance and ignoring our insight?


If there is someone out there who would just open their mind to a real possibility, my ears and eyes are open.


They clearly aren't. Your story was approached by about a dozen people, most of whom desperately want to believe. Your shreds of evidence were revealed as unreliable and having the marks of a hoax. You are the one shutting your ears and eyes to truth and evidence.


I have no desire to make a fool of anyone here, get myself banned, or make enemies. But I'm not going to pretend all this never happened.


If it really happened --e ven if you just believe that it really happened -- then pretending it didn't would be wrong and dishonest. But you have to understand that your evidence has been analyzed here precisely as you shared it and precisely on its own merit, and has been found to be severely lacking.


I see what you mean. Put yourself in my shoes though for a second. You take the first photo of a still object, and you look at the digital screen that shows something moving around. Furthermore, it spells a word. Next shot, a symbol, then another. Then the clouds behave strangely, glittery stuff falls from the sky, dissappearing on contact with the grass. vid taping is hard in darkness, but things in yards of nearby houses move and create light although there is no reason for lights to be there, as they have no source during the day.

These pictures and vids are all I have to offer here right now.

And I do apologize, your insight concerning the details in the files ARE important to me.

Just wondering though, how do you veiw this data? Properties or something?




posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by adam79
I believe it was either friday or saturday, first week of november in 2010. I remember because I got paid that weekend


According to:

www.moonconnection.com...

That would place the moon phase right around New Moon. Was the moon visible the days prior or following? If it was, then your time frame is off.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   

[Camera]
Exposure Time = 2"
F Number = F8.7
Exposure Program = Creative program


For those tech geeks or camera geeks

www.olympusamerica.com...


www.olympusamerica.com...

Art Filters allow you to control various creative effects, transforming your photography into works of art. The best thing about Art Filters is that they are built right into the camera. With most other cameras, you would need to generate these effects on a computer with post-processing software. Another great benefit of in-camera Art Filters is that you can preview these effects on your camera's large Live View LCD even before you take the shot.



Very nice camera

edit on February 14th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy

Originally posted by adam79
I had the flash on, snapped, and kept snapping. No long exposure.


OH REALLY?

Not only does it say your FLASH DID NOT FIRE... but it also says you had it set to 2 SECOND EXPOSURE.

EXIF DATA:



ImageDescription : OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Make : OLYMPUS CORPORATION
Model : X400,D580Z,C460Z
Software : v759u-77
DateTime : 0000:00:00 00:00:00
ExposureTime : 2.00Sec
MaxApertureValue : F2.9
Flash : Not fired
FocalLength : 5.80(mm)


On this image:
s1105.photobucket.com...


edit on 14-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)


I'm sorry, you're right, some photos had flash while others didn't. I turned it on and off on different pics to try to get better pics. Some photos did have flash if you check the others.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Good photos Adam.....and as for the last paragraph of the cloud comment, I believe you because I saw the same exact thing here in Sydney some weeks back.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by adam79
 


I actually just did some reading and found that the next paycheck you would have received would have been on the full moon, which was in fact a Blue Moon, and according to what I'm reading was considered to be a very bright moon by people and quite amazing looking. It could be that the atmosphere was offering a surreal look at the moon, though I know I can't explain the sparks.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Obviously the EXIF date and time data was edited by this person. It is not possible for the date and time to say 0000:00:00 00:00:00 without someone purposefully editing it that way. They edited it out so we couldn't look up the moon phase for that date and time.

I predicted that if I asked this person the date, they would provide a date set on a "new moon". I was correct...



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

[Camera]
Exposure Time = 2"
F Number = F8.7
Exposure Program = Creative program


For those tech geeks

www.olympusamerica.com...


www.olympusamerica.com...

Art Filters allow you to control various creative effects, transforming your photography into works of art. The best thing about Art Filters is that they are built right into the camera. With most other cameras, you would need to generate these effects on a computer with post-processing software. Another great benefit of in-camera Art Filters is that you can preview these effects on your camera's large Live View LCD even before you take the shot.




edit on February 14th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)

Thats pretty cool, thought I had a pretty crappy camera. Havent located the setting for it yet though.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


That actually can happen if the little battery that records time and date on the camera is dead. My camera had that issue for a while until I figured out how to replace the thing.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
For what its worth , just a totally non teck reply here OP) I agree that the clouds around what may or may not be the moon(it does appear closer somehow than the moon to me) look very odd. I wish someone was there with you to see whatever you saw. Heck , I kinda wish I was there )



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


I have never seen a camera date and time read all zero even if the battery was dead. It would usually have some random default date.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
As others have mentioned, all I see is long exposure shots of the moon and other lights sans tripod. The blue orb is a lens artifact, the same you get with lens flares, just a moon flare really. And any fuzzy 'orb's in the images are the flash light reflected off dust particles or insects (mostly dust), I can replicate such images very easily on any typical night.

The object is behind the clouds and as such its far bigger, and much much further away than you indicate it was. As for the clouds moving into it to obscure it as you mentioned in one post... clouds do that, they move and at night often its extremely hard to judge cloud movement and direction and different cloud layers can move in opposite directions thanks to varying layers of temperature and the like in the atmosphere. Often when I star watch on a night with a bright moon and sparse clouds my mind can make it seem like the clouds are still but the stars are moving which is a neat effect... in actuality its the clouds that are moving but my minds anchored them in place giving the illusion of the stars movement... happens to me regularly and it only takes a quick mental realization to snap me out of the effect.

Must admit the pic that spells out 'sex' was a hoot if it wasnt deliberate its one of those 1 in a million random chaos events that happen all the time



Originally posted by bluemooone2
For what its worth , just a totally non teck reply here OP) I agree that the clouds around what may or may not be the moon(it does appear closer somehow than the moon to me) look very odd. I wish someone was there with you to see whatever you saw. Heck , I kinda wish I was there )


They arent odd at all... and yes ive seen clouds on brightly lite moon nights exactly like those caught in their pics before. I still frown at the OP making out that the clouds appeared to attempt to obscure the moon... as if it was on purpose, I guess anytime a cloud moves over the sun or moon its on purpose, and not just pure random chance and wind direction.


edit on 14-2-2011 by BigfootNZ because: sigh



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Well, it depends on the camera. If it was anything like mine, then when turning it on it prompts you with a date and time setup. If you were trying to take a picture quickly, you might leave it at all zeros.

Edit: Though, after some thought, even if the time was not set up, unless the time and date was turned off or something, it would still record how many seconds after the camera was powered up that the pictures were taken. I take back my attempts to support my argument.
edit on 14-2-2011 by Varemia because: edit



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


..but even if you set it at all zeros, it will still count up from zero as long as the camera is on. The battery is only to retain memory when you turn the camera off. But when you turn the camera on, and the time is set at all zero, it should still count upwards.

All his images say 0000:00:00 00:00:00, it should have counted up from zero at some point while the camera was on. Like this: 00:00:02 which means 2 seconds lapsed, like his 2 second exposure time should have shown.


-edit-

Ok, I just read your edit. You understand what I am saying now.
edit on 14-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Indeed, I just caught that myself and added an edit to my post.

No idea why then.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:25 PM
link   
I don't know if this helps at all, but I just went outside using the same camera and made a vid of the area of that night with tonight's moon. Notice the size and position.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
also the top of the plant near where the "moon" moved down to.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Well, as the posters above me said, the link to the pictures does not work, but I am excited to get a look at them.

As for the video... Hard to tell. I mean, could be a number of things.

Question though about the moon seeming to move. You said it was cloudy. Is it possible that the moon moving was just an illusion caused by the clouds going past it?

I will add more after I get to take a look at the pictures.


An illusion is the only other thing I'm willing to accept at this point. The clouds remained motionless until the thing started to glow brighter, and if you can imagine it, it was like the dead center of the "moon" was like a vacuum, sucking in the surrounding clouds from all sides toward its center.



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
OP , this video is very interesting and makes me not dismiss the photos as just being the moon as I normally would.


Especially at the 1:35 ish mark
edit on 14-2-2011 by bluemooone2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Here are two screenshots from the OP` s video






new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join