[HOAX]saw flying metallic disk in nashville... WITH PICS... and now my dog is sick[HOAX]

reply to post by Human_Alien


H-A, you seem to be willing to take everything at face value?
If we all did that there would be nothing to discuss at all?

Everyone has the right to judge for themselves what is true and what is not ..........

In their opinion.

You don't seem to like being doubted or having any other believer thread questioned.

Your even havening a go about how these threads are moderated, may be you should take a break from the boards for a spell.......... relax... have some tea

reply to post by Human_Alien


The whole thing really stinks. All this drama for what exactly?

I keep forgetting the best part... "and now my dog is sick"

Pure ATS gold.

If the Anunaki are looking for gold I know where it can be found.

reply to post by webpirate
Hey there, first off it's not ideal that the OP disappeared. Nor that he failed to upload the original size photos even though he offered to if requested, and was requested to do so.

At the same time, the man is not on trial here. He owes us nothing further in my opinion, and my advice to him was to not even field every question thrown his way for it would drive him mad, regardless of his truthfulness or hoaxfulness.

Originally posted by webpirate
It wasn't just the GPS positions. They were part of it, but the OP himself stated the images were all made with a single push of the cameras button. With that said, 3 pictures don't take 21 seconds to make. And certainly not with a 20 second gap between two of them. My point was if they WERE all made with a single click as he stated then they should have been blurred or it wouldn't have taken so long to make them.

Originally posted by RickyVelveeta
i literally grabbed the phone from my pocket, opened up camera and started mashing the shutter button as fast as i could, resulting in about 4 frames per second at a fairly regular rate. these are the only 3 in which the object appeared, from what i've looked through so far; i will check again though in case i missed anything.

Just quoting the OP here to clarify this detail. Average 4 FPS according to his account x 22 seconds = a possible 88 or so photos. Three contained the object. That is interesting.

If I recall from the exif data the shutter speed was very fast and those iPhone 4S are overall pretty fast, so not so sure I'd expect to see any blurriness. Of the three photos we do have though, the camera seemed to remain fairly stationary for someone who is mashing the capture button as fast as they can.

reply to post by esteay812


Short of a confession, how is anything proven beyond the shadow of a doubt on a 2D-forum?

Your UN ambassador thread for example. Who determined that? And...how? Did she confess? Or was it written in a publication that ATS disdains? I for one believe more that's written in Weekly World News than I do The Washington Post!

There are too many variables to sift through thoroughly to determine something is a hoax.

The 'well I read it' is hardly a sufficient argument. And the "he's a known hoaxer" (i.e. Ed Waltors) is a joke. By whose standards are we determining these things? Popular vote? Well that sure as hell didn't get the right President into office so..so much for democracy!

What happened to believing a person? How about integrity? Or has that too been taken over by computer?

And the follks who are publishing these photos with lines and numbers and math and prospective and impediments........... just give me an ATS headache.
This isn't Popular Science. And even if it were, where's the vetting to even say the person whose drawing these nifty lines knows what the hell he's even talking about?

I blame this thread on a Mod. She/he stated her/his opinion early on and it was downhill from there.

Question for all the photo experts.

I just was looking at the photos in Photoshop. When zoomed in, the "UFO" has the same pixel size as the the rest of the picture. If the "UFO" was added in digitally later, wouldn't the pixel size be different? Doesn't this basically eliminate evidence of digital forgery? Do "UFO" apps match pixel size? Would the OP go in and adjust the pixel size to match? Seems like a stretch, but I'm playing devil's advocate.

I'm guessing the logical answer is an object was thrown, and the 20 sec later photo was taken during a 2nd throw, but it's just odd. I mean, it looks like it was digitally added, but the pixel sizes match up. It doesn't really look like a frisbee or a hubcap (the shape doesn't match either when zoomed in on all three pictures, the top of the object is rounded (more so then any frisbee I've ever seen). One of the photos sort of looked like the Iphone UFO App (3 ufos ), but the other two photos where different angles of the same object...

What is the source for the Iphone APP Ufos? Seems strange that their picture is very similar to the first picture of the OP.

Just confused, because it looks digitally added, but again the pixels are the same as the rest of the photo. I'm not an expert, but how would one go about doing that?

I just wish the OP wasn't banned, so they could add the original photos. The initial disappearance of the OP isn't suspect as most people have lives outside of ATS (please people don't take that negatively, I'm on here all the time if that matters).

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

H-A, you seem to be willing to take everything at face value?
If we all did that there would be nothing to discuss at all?

Everyone has the right to judge for themselves what is true and what is not ..........

In their opinion.

You don't seem to like being doubted or having any other believer thread questioned.

Your even havening a go about how these threads are moderated, may be you should take a break from the boards for a spell.......... relax... have some tea

edit on 12-4-2012 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)

Yeah. You know what? You're right. I judge people by MY standards and that's being an honest and KIND person. I am NO fool. So do NOT take my kindness as ignorance.

But as soon as I make a UFO thread it's IMMEDIATELY attacked. It's not hovering. It's in the water with absolutely NO proof other than an opinion.
So when did a ATS members opinion outrank a YouTube presentation?

Maybe it takes being an experiencer to KNOW what it's like not to be believed. No one has ever called me a liar but I saw the expressions on certain people's faces when I first told my story. They have since changed their thoughts but.................

This whole subject is extremely personal to me and guess what?...I don't have to prove it to anyone. I will share it and those who are meant to hear it...will resonate with it.

But people who see things or experience controversial and anomalous things are NOT out to prove it. They're out to share it. This is not to say hoaxers aren't part of the picture either. But I think there are fewer of them than there are people who absolutely saw or video taped something odd.

You see....it's totally impossible to prove this realm. Photos are never good enough. And witnessing it without DNA samples or lie detector testing doesn't fly either so.....imagine trying to prove to me what you dreamed last night. Then make sure you're prepared to have me call you a liar. Frustrating ain't it?

Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by nenothtu

 

You say "thrown hubcap"???
What is this: Guess what's in the air?

Unreal!!!!!

He said a UFO. Why isn't that good enough? I really don't get it.

And the fact that this 'liar' thought long and hard enough to get his dog involved into this caper well.....he's not only a good liar, he's a creative one too.

Some of you do NOTHING but stroke your own egos by trying to trump another member with (what you think is) your wit!

Pathetic!!!!!!!!!!!

These threads shouldn't be thrown into the hoax bin (like I said, which is strictly for public humiliation) but some members should wear cyber dunce caps and be asked to sit in the corner for a week instead!

Atmospheric blueing.

Haze is always present in the atmosphere, some days more, some days less. The further an object is from the viewer, the more haze is present between the two, causing the object to be hazier and bluer.



This is a crop and a 2x size increase. Otherwise, it has not been enhanced in any way. No sharpening, no contrast enhancement, nothing. Look at the communications tower. There is significantly more haze between the observer and it than there is between the observer and the object, in the same frame. Therefore, the object is substantially closer. We know that the tower is 150 meters away, so that is an upper limit on the possible distance to the object. Look on the right edge of the photo. There is a power pole there, which is even yet closer. Even it exhibits more haze. the object is distant somewhere between the roof peak and the power pole, which is at the street immediately the other side of the house. using that distance range in combination with the object's angular diameter, it is possible to calculate a maximum and minimum size for the object.

Yessir, I may be pathetic, but I'm no fool to just swallow any story without checking it out as far as possible, and this one has a lot of possibilities that can be checked.

Originally posted by Human_Alien

But it's NEVER gets left there. It gets heighten into name calling. Then mocking. Then personal attacks.

Actually that's funny. Because in this example it was the believers who couldn't let it go. Then came the name calling. Then the mocking. Then the personal attacks.

See. It works both ways.

Lastly, If it was a thrown object (judging by the pixel size matching up in the pictures). The size of said object has to be pretty large. If it was a hubcap, the OP must be superman and an a-hole of a neighbor. I mean, in the third picture, he'd technically be throwing a hub cap almost 100 feet and it's about to crash into his neighbor's house. Just to hoax ATS... hmmmm

Cool pictures regardless, hoax or not. Personally, I feel they stand up to most other "UFO" photos I've seen here and elsewhere.

reply to post by Human_Alien


It is frustrating, of that there is no doubt, but If proof is forthcoming then i cant see how it won't be believed!

If you have seen the movie "independence Day" then you will remember the Giant saucer craft above
Earths City's.

Obviously that would be believed , if something like that happened, but one day proof that the masses will
believe may come to pass. Until then I am a confirmed skeptic, and you are most welcome to have the opposite view. I know that you are sincere in what you post.

Although I don't always agree with what your conclusions are..

Take care.

Wow!!...I missed a few pages since yesterday.

So, Is this trial by Jury or by Lynch Mob?

Seem thesedays any and Every Photograph, video etc can be debunked as cgi, fake, hoax.

So that means, we will NEVER again see a picture of a REAL Unidentified "Space/interdimensional craft/Alien/Reptoid/Bigfoot etc etc, EVER again.

Everything is fake??

All we have is the eyewitness account. "Believe or not believe"..that is the question.

Good on the OP for posting this thread, if its real, thankyou for making us aware.
If its a hoax, well its been entertaining, but frustrating...only the op truly knows.

If anyone is interested, I notice that Swedish chap, that everyone slaugthered, you know towing behind the atv in the snow, then videoed a UFO........
He has posted another video, explaining what happened, and that it was real, defending his account....He seems genuinely sincere.
BUT of course, he is getting flamed even on his personal eyewitness recollection.

Obviously You can NEVER get the truth on this subject...

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by MegaMind
So since your an expert was it a tossed disk or are the photos fake?

Given the proposed erratic behavior shown in the three images, tossed.

Well, considering your analysis was a fraudulent shadow indicating a faked picture, how can it be tossed?
Make the shoe fit.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Atmospheric blueing.

Haze is always present in the atmosphere, some days more, some days less. The further an object is from the viewer, the more haze is present between the two, causing the object to be hazier and bluer.

This is a crop and a 2x size increase. Otherwise, it has not been enhanced in any way. No sharpening, no contrast enhancement, nothing. Look at the communications tower. There is significantly more haze between the observer and it than there is between the observer and the object, in the same frame. Therefore, the object is substantially closer. We know that the tower is 150 meters away, so that is an upper limit on the possible distance to the object. Look on the right edge of the photo. There is a power pole there, which is even yet closer. Even it exhibits more haze. the object is distant somewhere between the roof peak and the power pole, which is at the street immediately the other side of the house. using that distance range in combination with the object's angular diameter, it is possible to calculate a maximum and minimum size for the object.

Nice analysis ...

Originally posted by Pilot
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

The whole thing really stinks. All this drama for what exactly?

that's why people need to move past the videos and eyewitness stories. you either believe they exist or don't for all kinds of reasons and pleasing people here is not a reason. the subject goes way beyond ATS or debunkers or whatever is going on here. I believe it has to be a personal thing based on your own experiences. Maybe what it will take is what is supposed to happen in Dec?

Originally posted by MegaMind
reply to post by elevenaugust

 

I thought you were on to interesting things before you got derailed. I thought it would be interesting if you calculated the height and size of the object if the object were right above the front of the house. Using the angle and distance from the camera you could get its height and using the height maybe you could estimate its size. Maybe 16" across?

edit on 12-4-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-4-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

Well, you can do that in theory using photogrammetry.
To be the most possible accurate, this have to be done using at least two photos taken according to a precise and very complex methodology that is fully explained here.

Extract:

The fundamental principle used by photogrammetry is triangulation. By taking photographs from at least two different locations, so-called "lines of sight" can be developed from each camera to points on the object. These lines of sight (sometimes called rays owing to their optical nature) are mathematically intersected to produce the 3-dimensional coordinates of the points of interest. Triangulation is also the principle used by theodolites for coordinate measurement. If you are familiar with these instruments, you will find many similarities (and some differences) between photogrammetry and theodolites. Even closer to home, triangulation is also the way your two eyes work together to gauge distance (called depth perception).

This primer is separated into two parts. Photography describes the photographic principles involved in photogrammetry, while Metrology describes the techniques for producing 3-dimensional coordinates from two-dimensional photographs.....

So, it can't be done here, as we haven't real reference points and as we don't know the exact distance of the OP between two shoots.

Another way to calculate the size of an object is to use the Depth Of Field properties that could give us good clues on object's distance. However , in our case, the 'main tower' (which is the most distant object in the photos) exhibit no DOF blur, so the object can be anywhere between the hyperfocale distance (2.09m according to the EXIFs datas) and the tower.

And another way is to use camera and photo properties (image size, focal length, field of view....) and do some maths calculation that will give a real size according to a given distance.
I'll detailed this point later.