UFO over South Africa on Google Earth, very clear picture

reply to post by Chadwickus


I 2nd this objection, it IS too good. And NO one is looking in that direction..AT ALL! So with the info provided;
it is NOT hovering, it IS moving. With moving objects come some sort of blur. Idk about you guys but the photoshop pics show some OBVIOUS signs of cut and paste.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by stanats

 

The article wasn't posted on the 16th July 2011.

This was reported months ago, the comments show that. I don't know why it says the 16th.

Forgive me for interpreting "Posted on Saturday, July 16th, 2011 as meaning it was posted on the 16th. Perhaps it was just the cut and pasted photo.
"

reply to post by stanats


Like I said, I don't know why it says that but I remember reading this same article back when it was big news here and if you go and check the oldest comments at the bottom, the oldest is 28 weeks old.

Originally posted by imawlinn
Cracks me up! Every single piece of evidence brought forth is immediately called photosopped or cgi. At this rate even genuine evidence will be discarded. Until people open their minds to what is possible, disclosure will never happen. Besides, unless you have seen an actual alien craft first hand, please don't comment with "it looks to good" or " looks too obvious". Those comments just make people look ignorant, imo.

I've seen some very good, genuine looking UFO videos, and images. This one isn't. Why should we close our mind off to the possibility that something is hoaxed? In my opinion you aren't doing yourself or UFOlogy any favors by simply immediately saying a photo is genuine....A genuine flying saucer is not as likely as a hoax......period. By putting on your blinders and just jumping to the conclusion that it's real, you are being truly ignorant of all the other possibilities.....One should always try to disprove an image like this...and when you can't...that's when you can believe it. Believing it on it's own merit with no supporting evidence is not only illogical...but it is in fact quite ignorant imho.

I haven't read the entire thread. But, I saw enough "hoax" and "photoshop" posts without any explanation whatsoever to go ahead and make a comment without a total review of the thread.

For those that are claiming a hoax or saying it's photoshop .. you need to offer up your reasons why ... or remain silent because you're not adding anything to the discussion ... other than senseless noise.

I'm a graphic designer. I live and breath photoshop everyday. I've debunked dozens of images posted here on ATS from my knowledge of photoshop. This isn't one of them.

I'm not saying I believe the photo is real. But, certainly nothing stands out for me to automatically say it's a fake. ESPECIALLY without some sort of explanation as to why.

The shadows are correct. The reflection in the metallic material is correct. There is no artifact pixelzsation easily discernible from other parts of the image.

If it is photoshoped ... it's a clever one.

I'm remaining neutral on this image because I can offer no reason why it's been faked ... and I wasn't there to witness it to say that it's real.

reply to post by AussieAmandaC


Yes. That is the exact same "UFO".

The one on Google Earth has been "squished" a bit using a Free Transform tool in a photo editing program, the the edges were blurred and saved at a lower DPI to match the surrounding image it was pasted into.

If you look at photo's others have posted there seems to be a few things in the sky! For example:

www.360cities.net...,-0.33,27.5




and this...

imageshack.us...

Interesting...

On second thoughts, object 2 might be a bird.

Originally posted by smurfy
Well it is the classic UFO shape, Billy Mier did not invent that anyway

There is noticeable colour bleed around the UFO although that alone does not make it fake, but it does make it look like the picture has been messed with.

Since you appear to be the first "expert" to chime in with your "obvious bleed" comment, please enlighten the non-experts with a little more information to support your opinion which I find unsubstantiated.

I find the edges very natural. Who knows what shutter rate the photographer used? Who knows what speed the object was traveling? What lens was it shot on? Was he at the end of a 300 mm zoom? Was it a 55 mm?

How can you make any claims about the socalled bleed? Another instant expert. Just add hubris.

and because this COULD be faked means it HAS to have been faked? wtf...so via that logic, it is not possible to take a photograph of a flying saucer. thank you science.

I just decided it's real. Nobody can stop me from knowing it's real and it feels really good to know it's real. I've been waiting a long time to finally get a clear picture. I've always wanted to know what they look like in the mid afternoon south African sun. Now I know and it's cooler than I thought.

I can go to bed with a big grin on my face. Good night everybody. This has been a momentous day! You debunkers shouldn't stay up too late and waste any more time

reply to post by frugal


Something funny struck me. I baked a banana blueberry bread tonight and took a photo of it also...the ufo reminds me of one of the blueberries that has a flour spot on it as the sun glinting off the vehicle in question has a similar white spot...I found that most interesting to be honest. Also I could see that it looked a bit like a gyroscope also in motion...ufo's resemble gyroscopes a lot as they rotate like one as well...at least the closeup one that I saw did that and so I sensed that right away. It is amazing at how clear it is, as he has an excellent camera with great pixels to get this shot. Liked it. What is it? Not a blueberry that is for sure, but the similarity is amusing to me...My photo is on facebook advertising banana blueberry bread.

OK the "chinese" guy to the left of the lighthouse could be looking at "it" as could the younger "chinese" guy to the right of the lighthouse or they could be looking at the sky. I don't know why "whoever" between the wall and the lighthouse has been removed from the picture unless he was shy and specifically asked to be removed, but again why all of him and not just his face?

The wall going down the steps is part solarised and there are many artifacts in the sky, so the picture has "issues" whether it had a ufo in it or not.

The thing that's getting me going though is the location. Of all the bits of turf on all the planet, a ufo shows up in this location in broad daylight, in the middle of the panorama shot and framed between that mast and the promontory. A location that just happens to be a tourist hot spot and one that a good few folks will track down on Google Earth.

IMHO, this is as smelly as 20 day old prawns in a trashcan.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be wrong, but "that" isn't real.

from that distance will it be possible to judge the size of the craft or see any windows?

Originally posted by AussieAmandaC
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy

 

The picture was not the reason I posted it...did you read the article?

thewatchers.adorraeli.com...


“Three giant spaceships are heading toward Earth. The largest one of them is 200 miles wide. Two others are slightly smaller. At present, the objects are just moving past Jupiter. Judging by their speed, they should be on Earth by the fall of 2011,” said John Malley, the lead extraterrestrial expert at SETI."

and...

"Wikileaks recently released many classified documents that prove that NASA and high-level U.S. official are aware of the three spaceships and are making plans to battle the spaceships. They have been concealing information from the U.S. public for decades. Wikileaks also confirms that the UFO sightings over the last three months prove that the alien invasions (long predicted by SETI) has begun. The three spaceships will mark the official beginning of the alien invasion."

any thoughts...?!

that will change thing if there is any truth in what u are saying

Originally posted by mjleonid12

Originally posted by AussieAmandaC
I'm sorry I haven't read the entire thread just wanted to jump in and include this link to a wtf!?!?
(Since this thread is about a possible ufo, and I didn't want to start a thread myself.)

thewatchers.adorraeli.com...
What the....!?

This is just one of my regular sites (mostly for earth quakes, sun, and general global environmental issues information) and the most harmless in terms of conspiracy theories imo. Have a look for yourself.
Are they being serious? Bazaar totally! Maybe I've had too much coffee this morning....

WTF the UFO looks almost IDENTICAL to the one on Google Earth.

You're right:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1aeea90c01d6.jpg[/atsimg]
Top: Photo from your link
Bottom: Photo from OP Google Earth 360 Image

Now your linked image made semi-transparent and superimposed over OP's Google Earth image using Paint.net:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/65f1659111d7.jpg[/atsimg]

Score another one for the "It's fake" side.



Bonus prize for our lovely departing contestant:
"One and the Same"

Thank you all for extra work ..

Now we see how easy all can manipulate with photo ..

Peace to all

Hmmm Interesting, I'd be the first one to dis-miss this as fake or Photo-shopped, but i notice as you zoom in it blurs with the scenery, so this adds to it's authenticity, who knows maybe it's just a stunt by whoever supplied the photo's for google earth. But i "could" believe this, but seeing as it's the iconic flying saucer, the same one as seen in Mars Attacks, i can't bring myself to believe this.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
360 panoramic photos have a unique problem, namely moving objects tend to blur or show up in different places.

Case in Point, recognise this guy?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ef8f7b1b6a06.png[/atsimg]

The UFO, in theory should turn up elsewhere.

It is possible that it was moving too fast to be captured twice but if this was the case, it should exhibit motion blur and it doesn't.

Odds are it was added by Vasiliy Nikitenko.

edit on 16/7/11 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)

Comparative assumption.

Assuming there is an error in another image, because there was one in another? You can rationalize anything if you try long and hard enough. What ever happened to Occam's Razor? Google obviously does not playfully allow these types of things with any regularity, and although it's a possibility, it's not a likely one.

Try to remember that being a skeptic does not mean that you have to discredit every thread made. At some point you lose credibility for appearing too obviously closed-minded.

A true skeptic looks for answers, not excuses. Keep that in mind, Chadwickus.

There is no way to know if they are fake or real without proper investigations because of computer and camera technology.No one knows if it is fake or real on here.They just scream fake or real.