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.

 

Crystal clear ufo pics must see

page: 7
36
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Every UFO pick is a Rorschach test. Fake, not fake, it doesn't matter. Bottom line is that believers will believe the fuzzy pictures as well as the crystal clear pictures. Non-believers will claim "fake" regardless. If it's fuzzy, they say it's obviously fake because it's fuzzy, and if it's crystal clear, they'll say it's obviously fake because it's too clear. In the end, none of it really matters much, and nobody is going to change anyone's opinion on the subject by photos and/or video alone.




posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I have never understood why aliens needed headlights on their crafts. You would think with such advanced knowledge they would of by know figured out a way to navigate without them.

BTW....the site has either been taken down or the host server is down. It wouldn't surprise me if the Chinese Gov. has somehow intervened.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I wish people could get away from the instant responses of "Looks real!" and "lol fake!" - they add nothing to the investigation of a sighting. "It just looks funny" isn't very good reasoning. Calling something fake (or real) just because you personally feel that way doesn't prove a thing.

As far as "headlights" goes, I still think that's a ridiculous viewpoint. They may well need lights on their craft. They may well not be lights at all, but some function that just produces light as a result. Assuming a craft wouldn't need lights is ridiculous.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
I wish people could get away from the instant responses of "Looks real!" and "lol fake!" - they add nothing to the investigation of a sighting. "It just looks funny" isn't very good reasoning. Calling something fake (or real) just because you personally feel that way doesn't prove a thing.

As far as "headlights" goes, I still think that's a ridiculous viewpoint. They may well need lights on their craft. They may well not be lights at all, but some function that just produces light as a result. Assuming a craft wouldn't need lights is ridiculous.


Errrr....ridiculous, I don't think so! It's about as ridiculous assuming they need them, that would be a slap in the face to them IMO. Now if this craft is from here, then sure they might need them.

You're to tell me that an advanced alien life, who has traveled millions of miles, or came here by other means, needs lights on their ship? If I were from another planet who traveled here, I wouldn't have lights for everyone to see. If they knew what was better for them, they would be in stealth mode, surely they would understand an aggressive species as us.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Errrr....ridiculous, I don't think so! It's about as ridiculous assuming they need them, that would be a slap in the face to them IMO. Now if this craft is from here, then sure they might need them.

You're to tell me that an advanced alien life, who has traveled millions of miles, or came here by other means, needs lights on their ship? If I were from another planet who traveled here, I wouldn't have lights for everyone to see. If they knew what was better for them, they would be in stealth mode, surely they would understand an aggressive species as us.


We have no idea what they may or may not need. But it's just as likely it's a result of something else. Maybe it's what their advanced version of a radar produces. Perhaps a product of their propulsion system. Maybe they do need visual lights for other reasons. Why people assume that advanced species suddenly has no need for light baffles me. Or that they care if they are seen or not by us. I seriously doubt they are very much worried about our stone-age technology as a threat, compared to them.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Were there photographs, really? All I'm getting is a "connection timed out" response, no photos.

Looks like it was a lively debate over whatever was there.




edit on 2011/12/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
I would really like to see this pix. Been trying for 5 hours now. The site times out. At first I thought it was heavy traffic, but now I'm beginning to suspect that it's being firewalled somewhere. I've tried two different computers, two completely different broadband connections (cable and ATT wireless) and four different browsers and three different sets of DNS servers.

Anyone else having this problem?

Any possibility one of you who has successfully downloaded the pix could upload them someplace else where they're readily accessible?



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Detergent
 


I'm having the same problem. Can't even proxy in, so I'm guessing the server is either offline or getting slammed hard with traffic. Of the two, I'm betting it's offline.

There are some crops and manipulations of the pictures on the first page, and I'm going through the thread reading and collecting what I find within the thread as I go. Hard to comment without being able to see the originals, though. What I can say so far is that the "ghost lights" beneath the object in the first picture looks like it was a real object, with the photo taken through a double-pane insulated window At least that's what it looks like to me so far - the reflection of the "running lights" in the secondary pane of the window.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Don't have to worry --- Those pictures on the first page of this thread are almost, but not quite identical to the op's first "link" pictures.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Here you go,these are the exact same images as originally shown on the Chinese website without any sort of manipulation,all the EXIF data should still be intact.Sorry but I didn't save the middle one because it wasn't as good as the other two.





posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagewerx
 


Thank you! That helps, and the EXIF data did come through.

It appears that it was in view for some time - the original time stamp on one is 2010-03-22 00:43:31, and the time stamp on the other is 2010-03-22 00:59:23, which is a difference of 15 minutes and 52 seconds.

they were manipulated in Photoshop 7 on May 25, 2011 around 3pm local time, which may have been just to re-size them, since the current sizes don't match what the EXIF says the original size was. (1181x787 vs. 1023x682). Both aspect ratios work out to around 1.5, so it more likely a resizing than a cropping. odd that it was only an 87% reduction, though.




edit on 2011/12/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by Violence
So the OP posts a thread yesterday stating that they wish people wouldn't put up stupid threads?

Yet posts this thread saying the pictures are crystal clear, when in fact they are not. They're blurry. You post them from a website which is in a different language. I didn't read all of the replies to this thread, so maybe someone translated it, but what if the website claims they are fakes and we're wasting our time here trying to debunk it?



This is one of the prime protocols of the Agency....even if something is real....and the vast majority are not....is posted on the net.....they never try to debunk, call attention to, delete or do ANYTHING that seems suspicious as since there is so much out there that is pure made up crap or even good CGI....the whole UFO community hangs itself on proclamations of PROOF! PROOF! PROOF!

Out of pure curiosity....and also the fact that I always get into trouble when visiting down under....why did you pick the name....VIOLENCE? Split Infinity


Why SPLITINFINITY ???
My long haired friend.
gravitor



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 

Not necessarily altered. If they were just viewed and saved with Photoshop they get the stamp.


100% correct. Photoshop is my default for opening any photos as I am an amateur photographer.

But I will often time only change the brightness or contrast of an image. Without the original exif information I would be very skeptical.

And even with the original data, still could be a myriad of things. I have such little faith in photos these days for proving the existence of extraterrestrials. I still believe there is life out there and may have visited us, but frankly until they land near my house (they could fake a white house landing LOL). I am very hard pressed to believe they are here…



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagewerx
 


Thanks for saving and posting the original images, it really helps now that the site in the OP appears to be down. Using your copies I was able to locate a mirror of the original site here:

www.ttufo.com...

Is that similar to what the original site contained?



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Crayfish
 


It is very similar if not the same.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I hesitate to jump into the UFO photo topic because it's not something that I normally can add anything of value too, but it's a slow day around here, so . . .

Here is the picture resized (larger) in IrfanView and using their "edge" effect. I see a series of vertical linear artifacts that make me very suspicious of this photo. I believe it has been manipulated. I know nothing about photo manipulation and don't know how to use Photoshop or Illustrator.



You may have to save the image to your hard drives and zoom in on it a few times to see what I mean. Or simply view the IE/fireFox/Opera/Chrome page at 200% and you will see a series of parallel vertical straight lines.
edit on 28-12-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by chrismicha77
I have never understood why aliens needed headlights on their crafts. You would think with such advanced knowledge they would of by know figured out a way to navigate without them.



I saw a disk and it had lights around the rim. However, it never occurred to me to flag it down and explain to the occupants that they didn't really need the lights. I just assumed they had a better idea what they were doing than I did.

I also didn't assume the occupants, given there were any, were alien.


Nice pics though OP. No idea if they're real or not. I'll be waiting to see what the really talented photo analysts on this site have to say.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Crayfish
 


Thanks for the mirror! I downloaded the pictures from there too, and found them to match the EXIF info for sizes - 1181x787 pixels. Apparently uploading them to ATS resized them to be under 1024 pixels wide for display. They were probably still resized in Photoshop, since the posted pictures are around 1 megapixel, and the camera takes pictures up to 18 MP.

ETA the date in the EXIF on the second picture is 2010-03-22 00:33:51, meaning it was actually the first in chronological sequence, and the time span from the first picture posted to the last (2010-03-22 00:59:23) was 25 minutes 28 seconds - a fairly long time to stay in view, considering that all that's been posted so far is 3 pictures.

Off to do some edge detection and the like.


edit on 2011/12/28 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 

Do you mean these directly over the object?


If so they just look like JPEG compression artefacts to me.



posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagewerx
 

No, I'm talking about vertical parallel lines, running from the top to the bottom of the picture, or thereabouts. View the image I embedded above in your browser but set the view to 200%. In IE the setting is at the bottom right of the page. The lines are clearly visible, though they are thin.

A tell-tale point here is that they only seem to run through the saucer portion of the image. I think that is a slam dunk that the image is fake.

You can see them most clearly above the saucer. They are about an inch apart at 200% zoom and are very thin.


edit on 28-12-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
36
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join