Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Kirtland AFB UFO: [HOAX]

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
The following image, which I received by email, was taken by personnel at Kirtland AFB. Do any of the researchers on ATS have any clue as to what it is?




edit on 15-8-2012 by SkepticOverlord because: added HOAX indication




posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 


It would help if we knew a little more about the photo.
What were the conditions?
How far away was it?
How did it act?
What's the story behind the photo?

From the photo alone it's difficult to say anything as it really could be anything blurred by motion, of any size with no reference points.

edit on 14-8-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
A big red blob?

Where's the confirmation that this was taken at Kirtland or taken by personnel on base? That could be taken anywhere by anyone.

And it is so blurry, it is just a big red blob.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla
It would help if we knew a little more about the photo.
What were the conditions?
How far away was it?
How did it act?
What's the story behind the photo?


I think that is why he is asking on ATS... to see if anyone knows?

awesome looking photo though sure is disc shaped
edit on 14-8-2012 by SkepticExterminator because: fixed typo



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
A big red blob?
And it is so blurry, it is just a big red blob.


I though all ufos were blurry?
something about the force field or gravity waves or something like that?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   
could be a street lamp.

some tree in the bottom ... seems to be in front of the tree?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 


that photo as is absolutely cannot be analyzed. it just cant.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
The only thing that came to mind for me was "Zodiacal Light", there's an example of a similar shade here.




However, that comes with a huge caveat as, I've never seen an example of it with that sort of focus and that genuinely seems, somehow to being "projected" from a "source". That of course, could be simply coincidental, it could be we are seeing the "shapes" path from distant object to closer. Would love to know how long the exposure was, the slightly blurred "stars" in the background could be down to simple camera shake or they could show evidence of a longer exposure.

As for size, yes would love to know just how large the "object" is, I'm guessing the dark shape in the lower foreground is bush, then again, it could be several closely packed tress further away. As others have pointed out, without somne kind of scale to work by, it really is hard to make any sort of judgement about the image,.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by Pimander
 


that photo as is absolutely cannot be analyzed. it just cant.
You sound so sure.


ETA: UFO research is more than image analysis. You all know that don't you?
edit on 14/8/12 by Pimander because: ETA....



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Pimander! My main brain. Good to see you, mate. GEL is spot on though as far as analysis goes. Intriguing photo nonetheless, and when coupled with the name 'Kirtland" it immediately perks up the ears.

If it could be determined that it was legitimately taken at Kirtland, it might explain what fired Bennewitz up so much initially.

Hope to hear more details. I know you usually have a purty good reason when you present something.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by Pimander
 


that photo as is absolutely cannot be analyzed. it just cant.
You sound so sure.


ETA: UFO research is more than image analysis. You all know that don't you?
edit on 14/8/12 by Pimander because: ETA....


I am sure. I analyze photos ALL the time here...

Please tell us how one can analyze this image.

For all we know its a blurred shot of a vehicle tail light....

It is not the original. It is edited......and you gave little to no information.

When was it taken? Date? Time? Exact location. Where is the original unedited straight from the camera photo? where is the story that surrounds this shot?

again...cannot be analyzed as presented.
edit on August 14th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by Pimander
 


that photo as is absolutely cannot be analyzed. it just cant.
You sound so sure.


ETA: UFO research is more than image analysis. You all know that don't you?
edit on 14/8/12 by Pimander because: ETA....


I am sure. I analyze photos ALL the time here...

Please tell us how one can analyze this image.
I didn't ask you to analyse the image. I asked whether anyone on ATS has an idea what the image might be..... Anything might be helpful.

As I said, there is more to UFO research than image analysis.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by Pimander
 


that photo as is absolutely cannot be analyzed. it just cant.
You sound so sure.


ETA: UFO research is more than image analysis. You all know that don't you?
edit on 14/8/12 by Pimander because: ETA....


I am sure. I analyze photos ALL the time here...

Please tell us how one can analyze this image.
I didn't ask you to analyse the image. I asked whether anyone on ATS has an idea what the image might be..... Anything might be helpful.

As I said, there is more to UFO research than image analysis.


So when dealing with a PHOTO w/ hardly any details (just one which means nothing really)....what type of analysis is there? Im really curious.....

edit on August 14th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 


Could you answer my question please?

Where's the confirmation this was taken at Kirtland or by personnel there?

Agian, all I see is a big red blob.

And how can we determine what it is if it isn't analyzed? Isn't that exactly what you're asking for...


know what it is


Yea?


As I said, there is more to UFO research than image analysis.


Like critical thinking?
edit on 14-8-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 


It is not the original. It is edited......and you gave little to no information.

When was it taken? Date? Time? Exact location. Where is the original unedited straight from the camera photo? where is the story that surrounds this shot?

again...cannot be analyzed as presented.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Oh lookie here...


www.afmc.af.mil...


A samarium cloud similar to the one that will be formed during the Metal Oxide Space Cloud experiment in the ionosphere above the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Two separate sounding rockets will propel canisters containing samarium powder following launch one day apart from U.S. Army’s Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, Kwajalein Atoll. Liftoff is tentatively scheduled for September 2012. (Courtesy photo)



Solved. The End.

Hows that for some analysis
edit on August 14th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)
edit on August 14th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 

Outstanding work!



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
wowo so its a space chemtrail cloud


FAR OUT!!!!!!!!



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Let's just for the sake of it, say it was taken on the claimed airbase. It's perfectly understandable why the person would send it "as is" in order to retain some anonymity for them self. Frustrating yes, however, curt and frankly, to many people's eyes, dismissive in tone posts, don't really encourage anyone to want to give more do they? The word moderator really encapsulates it all one should be moderate in tone when dealing with situations such as this. To, in effect, brow beat people for failing to divvy up who they are and where they were exactly were, right off the bat, given the supposed origin of the image seems a tad naive.

If it was taken with a phone and given the quality we see here, at the moment that would be my best guess right now, whilst someone was on duty, there's a reasonable chance said phone was not meant to be turned on and I'm sure there a dozen other considerations if it was taken by a serving member of the military.

Surely, the first thing to do , in this case, is allow the person to establish their own credibility without it affecting their job?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
I was too late.
edit on 2012/8/14 by C-JEAN because: Answer writen almost same time as I did.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join