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.

 

Hi, I may have proof that the foo fighters where Alien Aircraft

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odin2305

Originally posted by supermarket2012
I just want clarification on the purpose of this thread? I hope that isn't too much to ask.


The OP specifically said the PURPOSE of this entire thread was to ask others if they saw a UFO in his alterations of the image. When some say they don't, and there is nothing there, he seems to get offended and then posts more pictures, and goes on the defensive.


I just think you need to make it clear what the purpose of this thread is.


If you are just sharing these photos because you think it is interesting what YOU see in them, after editing them, that's cool. However, you shouldn't go on the defensive when A) people explain to you they don't see it, and B) people try and explain to you why editing the photos in the way you are doing isn't going to produce higher visibility of objects previously invisible.




Personally, I don't agree with your analysis of the photos you edited, and furthermore I think your OP was HIGHLY misleading. You claim this is PROOF, beyond a reasonable DOUBT, of alien presence/craftsmanship of the object in question in the photo.

You HAD to know that making such a claim would subject you and your "photo" to heavy scrutiny.


The photo is definitely interesting, and I'll even go as far as to say your editing, and analysis of the photo is interesting too! I'm just not sure what more you want. 1) it isn't proof of ANYTHING, and 2) it is just as likely , as others pointed out, that the "saucer" you are seeing is due to the editing of the photo + you wanting to see something there .


Just keep an open mind! Remember, you are asking others to keep an open mind regarding the photo, so try to keep an open mind yourself, and be mindful of the possibility that nothing is there.


Hi, I may have proof that the foo fighters where Alien Aircraft. (was what I said word for word.)

"You claim this is PROOF, beyond a reasonable DOUBT" (Can you highlight where I said these words? Because this seems like another attempt at trolls/bot to get ppl to look the other way) (And excuse me if I try to get the ego maniacs and know it all off my back..) What is one thing that brings us all here, whats the one questions we cant answer - are they real? And I believe very few people on this planet know the true answer to that question and none of them are here on this site. You come on here throwing more negativity and disinformation and putting words in ppls mouths and you dont want me to get defensive or offended..

Im offering more evidence with every picture that this is real, and you offer nothing to either prove or disprove.. just words of advice.. thanks, I'll go ahead and trade you in for a couple of fortune cookies.

I'm only interested in progress, so I wont reply to you again or argue on this post. This and everything you said isnt progress.. just your two cents.. gee thanks.

If you have evidence to contribute (good or bad) please do, otherwise take your little forum words of wisdom and get out.
edit on 04/24/2011 by Odin2305 because: revised



Odin2305 --- Interesting thread, and I like your avatar...because it reminds me of the foofighter that I personally witnessed one night in November of 1976, approx. 40 miles west of Washington D.C. No doubt in my mind...that they are alien starships with charged plasma shields --- out to literally shock and awe the entire civilization of our Earth --- into passive submission by aerial displays of "Top Gun" authority.

The World War 2 aerial photo's of foofighters...are just a classic example of their superiority over mankind --- along with many witnessed tales of fiery balled foofighter's recorded over at NUFORC. Obviously...their must be dozens of more pictures of foofighter sighting's --- recorded by the U.S. miltary and stored in Ultra Top Secret files --- because of the offensive and defensive nature of these beautiful flying machines from another star system.


Cheers,

Erno




posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odin2305
That means the colors were added by the processing.


When a silver halide crystal is exposed to light, a sensitivity speck on the surface of the crystal is turned into a small speck of metallic silver (these comprise the invisible or latent image). If the speck of silver contains approximately four or more atoms, it is rendered developable - meaning that it can undergo development which turns the entire crystal into metallic silver. Areas of the emulsion receiving larger amounts of light (reflected from a subject being photographed, for example) undergo the greatest development and therefore results in the highest optical density. >wiki


Guess what the negative is placed in an enlarger the light shines through the negative black on the negative BLOCKS light CLEAR lets it through and the shades in between let light through onto the photo paper.

Your strange energy BS it just you trying to cover YOUR total lack of knowledge it's that plain and it's that simple!!!

Before you do anything we all need to see the following software used settings(contrast hue saturation brightness etc) and how often you move things back and forth.

PS You have NO proof of any of your claims re energies or what it could do so please cut the BS and stick to what is repeatable!!!
edit on 26-4-2013 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-4-2013 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odin2305
I wonder how the brilliant FooFighter (that radiates unknown light spectrum frequencies, energies and radiations) might effect the Silver halide or other compounds that make up the film.....


Photos of the Sun have been taken for years, even in Black and White. I think it covers the light spectrum pretty well...



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Hi, I may have proof that the foo fighters where Alien Aircraft. (was what I said word for word.)

"You claim this is PROOF, beyond a reasonable DOUBT" (Can you highlight where I said these words? Because this seems like another attempt at trolls/bot to get ppl to look the other way) (And excuse me if I try to get the ego maniacs and know it all off my back..) What is one thing that brings us all here, whats the one questions we cant answer - are they real? And I believe very few people on this planet know the true answer to that question and none of them are here on this site. You come on here throwing more negativity and disinformation and putting words in ppls mouths and you dont want me to get defensive or offended..

Im offering more evidence with every picture that this is real, and you offer nothing to either prove or disprove.. just words of advice.. thanks, I'll go ahead and trade you in for a couple of fortune cookies.

I'm only interested in progress, so I wont reply to you again or argue on this post. This and everything you said isnt progress.. just your two cents.. gee thanks.

If you have evidence to contribute (good or bad) please do, otherwise take your little forum words of wisdom and get out.
edit on 04/24/2011 by Odin2305 because: revised



Odin2305 --- Interesting thread, and I like your avatar...because it reminds me of the foofighter that I personally witnessed one night in November of 1976, approx. 40 miles west of Washington D.C. No doubt in my mind...that they are alien starships with charged plasma shields --- out to literally shock and awe the entire civilization of our Earth --- into passive submission by aerial displays of "Top Gun" authority.

The World War 2 aerial photo's of foofighters...are just a classic example of their superiority over mankind --- along with many witnessed tales of fiery balled foofighter's recorded over at NUFORC. Obviously...their must be dozens of more pictures of foofighter sighting's --- recorded by the U.S. miltary and stored in Ultra Top Secret files --- because of the offensive and defensive nature of these beautiful flying machines from another star system.


Cheers,

Erno

Very interesting Erno.

Well, giving the growing evidence and testimonies of ufo's, and not only the US Government but all the governments extreme interest and vigilance on the subject, I think its safe to assume they believe that something, not of this world, is going on.

I haven't been doing this for 40+yrs or claim to know the first things about ufo's and how they work.. but if we continue to regurgitate old ideas and beliefs (with inside-the-box thinking) at new and advanced technologies or concepts.. then we can never hope to understand anything beyond what we already think we know... and that goes from when we thought the world was flat and found out otherwise - to us thinking we're the center of the universe - all the way to right now. Tomorrow is a new dawn and a new day.



full size:
www.imagebam.com...

Pictures are worth a thousand words, I'm goin to let these speak for themselves..



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron

Originally posted by Odin2305
I wonder how the brilliant FooFighter (that radiates unknown light spectrum frequencies, energies and radiations) might effect the Silver halide or other compounds that make up the film.....


Photos of the Sun have been taken for years, even in Black and White. I think it covers the light spectrum pretty well...
(another random statement - with no point.)

yeah and special filters are use to see through the light, and you cant say for sure that if covers all known and unknown light spectrum frequencies..

who's to say that my color filters aren't seeing through the light of the FooFighter in a similar way.. I'd guess that the different particles burned the film in a different way according to intensity/frequency. If nothing else, the hue adjustments may have allowed me to accentuate certain parts of the object according to these varying intensities, further separating it from the smoke/light/plasma that covers it.

Just as light bends around the sun, of course this object covered by some kind of hot plasma's and/or heated energies is not going to appear perfectly shaped and will show some distortion, however many of the large/hard shapes can still be seen. with or without hue adjustments. the window can still be seen and the trapezoidal shape, straight and curved lines are still visible....

When i have time to record and then post every single adjustment made to show the object, I will, until then deal with it, or just give it a shot on your own.



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odin2305

who's to say that my color filters aren't seeing through the light of the FooFighter in a similar way...
[snipped out all the nonsense]


Why are you even applying color to a black and white photo? A photo enlarged well past the point of detail, and enough artifacts in it to fill a warehouse like at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.


Plus applying filters to a photograph that took the image without those filters?


Me thinks you've been watching a little too much C.S.I.

The picture is speaking to us. It's saying "I'm just an old photo and people are trying to read more into my image than whats there".

edit on 26-4-2013 by gavron because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Everyone,

You DO realize he is asking that we analyze a screenshot he took from a video on Youtube, correct?

Not the original photo.

A screenshot....from a video on Youtube.

I think analyzing the image has been thrown right out the window.



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Everyone,

You DO realize he is asking that we analyze a screenshot he took from a video on Youtube, correct?

Not the original photo.

A screenshot....from a video on Youtube.

I think analyzing the image has been thrown right out the window.


And I quote:




posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odin2305
 

Hi, I may have proof that the foo fighters where Alien Aircraft. (was what I said word for word.)

Pictures are worth a thousand words, I'm goin to let these speak for themselves..


Hi Odin2305,

What you say in the above quote would be correct if the picture would actually speak for itself, but I'm afraid it doesn't. I'd have two remarks in this context:

1. Foofighters:
The idea to look through old WW2 photos is great, perhaps there's something on them that nobody ever discovered. Or there may even be aspects these objects have in common, important aspects that went unnoticed in the plethora of images ... further investigations in that direction are absolutely justified, IMHO!

2. Methodolgy:
You have to be careful with image-enhancing. What you did is basically 'destroying' the image. Anything that's of interest is visible in the original, sometimes just faintly, but visible. What you are presenting, is an accumulation of artifacts, which resulted from applying multiple filters and FX excessively.


I did a reconstruction of your result using PhotoFiltre 7 (freeware) in order to illustrate at which stages you actually add new information to the image that were not there in the original. Below you see the result of six modifications that I applied to the original image:



And these are the filters and parameters (incl. settings) that needed to be changed to get more or less what you presented:



And, finally, here goes a comparison between your image and the reconstructed version based on the settings above. The result features almost all the rectangular artifacts you referred to in various posts:



Summary:
The problem with this way of enhancing the original image is that you actually produce new image information throughout the sequence of modifications. The most dramatic distortion occurs when applying excessive parameters to contrast/brightness. You are changing the relation of colors to eachother (and color ranges) resulting in spots that form new surfaces. These gradually transform into rectangular shapes, which are again drastically emphasized when sharpening the image.

This means, your modifications don't show anything that was hidden in the image, it just shows the distortion effects of excessive image enhancing.

The original image only shows a ball of light, with a slightly darker silhouette inside and nothing more. It's perhaps something we can guess at, but far from being evidence for anything. Sorry, but I just had to post this for the sake of staying objective ... nevertheless: keep looking, there's a plethora of other foofighter pics out there!

P.S.: And please don't shoot the messenger ... !



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeep3r

Originally posted by Odin2305
 

Hi, I may have proof that the foo fighters where Alien Aircraft. (was what I said word for word.)

Pictures are worth a thousand words, I'm goin to let these speak for themselves..


Hi Odin2305,

What you say in the above quote would be correct if the picture would actually speak for itself, but I'm afraid it doesn't. I'd have two remarks in this context:

1. Foofighters:
The idea to look through old WW2 photos is great, perhaps there's something on them that nobody ever discovered. Or there may even be aspects these objects have in common, important aspects that went unnoticed in the plethora of images ... further investigations in that direction are absolutely justified, IMHO!

2. Methodolgy:
You have to be careful with image-enhancing. What you did is basically 'destroying' the image. Anything that's of interest is visible in the original, sometimes just faintly, but visible. What you are presenting, is an accumulation of artifacts, which resulted from applying multiple filters and FX excessively.


I did a reconstruction of your result using PhotoFiltre 7 (freeware) in order to illustrate at which stages you actually add new information to the image that were not there in the original. Below you see the result of six modifications that I applied to the original image:



And these are the filters and parameters (incl. settings) that needed to be changed to get more or less what you presented:



And, finally, here goes a comparison between your image and the reconstructed version based on the settings above. The result features almost all the rectangular artifacts you referred to in various posts:



Summary:
The problem with this way of enhancing the original image is that you actually produce new image information throughout the sequence of modifications. The most dramatic distortion occurs when applying excessive parameters to contrast/brightness. You are changing the relation of colors to eachother (and color ranges) resulting in spots that form new surfaces. These gradually transform into rectangular shapes, which are again drastically emphasized when sharpening the image.

This means, your modifications don't show anything that was hidden in the image, it just shows the distortion effects of excessive image enhancing.

The original image only shows a ball of light, with a slightly darker silhouette inside and nothing more. It's perhaps something we can guess at, but far from being evidence for anything. Sorry, but I just had to post this for the sake of staying objective ... nevertheless: keep looking, there's a plethora of other foofighter pics out there!

P.S.: And please don't shoot the messenger ... !


Shoot the messenger? Not at all. This is good work. Great in fact. I like #2,3 + 4.

What would really put my mind at ease is proof a before and after on the effects of artifacts on a somewhat similar photo, only problem would be the 'light' source. I'm almost certain that the type and intensity of the light has an effect on the 'artifacts' that are generated. so showing me examples of artifact distortion is goin to be tricky because I'd imagine that the type of light would make a difference on an outcome. The same artifacts and shapes began to appear on a different program using a slightly different method.. so it has to be the contents of the photo that effects artifact generation.

The generating of artifacts must also be uniform because if it was random filling of hues.. we would get the same shapes/artifacts. I say this because I can still see the wondow in one of your reproductions.

If you do decide to try and get closer to one of my final adjustments, I have found that selecting and adjusting small areas at a time is necessary. in one of my pictures you can kinda see what looks like square patches and kinda see that the colors vary from one patch to another. Also, when increasing the numbers on hues or lighting and contrast its important that it be don't extremely slowly +1 at a time say ur hue is at 153 adjust slowly by adding or taking away 1 > 154 > 155 etc. curves and lines can be lost very quickly in a slider on this photo.

As I stated in another post, I've accepted that the hues are effecting the photo and, if nothing else, I'm using them to colorize and highlight this 3D object in a 2D photo..

This reproduction is a step in the right direction, imo. I appreciate you taking the time to thoroughly investigate the matter.

Please keep me informed on anything else you find.



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Sorry, all I see is this:




posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Odin2305
 





I think you are on to something here. Can you step up the processing a bit more? I'm really starting to see all kinds of things that are just unexplainable. I am certain that is Bart Simpson. And Homer?



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Fun inkblot test. To me, it looks like someone slightly looking down.

Here's what I see:




posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odin2305
How bored can you losers be to stick around and troll..? now I just feel kinda sad for you's
very,very bored. But I DO see Bart! I think this the new ink blot test. Just call it the over processed light blob test.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by Odin2305
How bored can you losers be to stick around and troll..? now I just feel kinda sad for you's
very,very bored. But I DO see Bart! I think this the new ink blot test. Just call it the over processed light blob test.


I can see Bart Simpson as well. To be honest, it is just like an ink blot test. People see what they want to see. Some people want to see UFOs....so that's what their mind tells them is there. They will "process" the image until it shows a UFO to them....when in reality it was nothing.

It's odd what people obsess over...



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Rather than just do personal attacks, Odin, why don't you actually find a source for the original image you posted? That way other forum users can analyze the actual image, and not a screenshot you took of a youtube video running on your monitor.

How do we know the artifacts in the image weren't created by Youtube (and it's wonderful compression format)? Or by your screenshot software? Without access to an original image, there are waaaaay too many variables out there.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   
It took all of a minute to find a black/white image of what you are talking about.



Seriously, trying to edit your screen captures from a Youtube video was bringing in too may artifacts. Perhaps this image will help others find your "ufo".



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join