Best UFO triangle photos I have seen

These appear to date back to August 2003 and were emailed to www.iwasabducted.com.
















www.iwasabducted.com...

The details to these are in the email that has accompanied them and unfortunately does not contain any EXIF data, but that maybe because the camera was cannabilised for telescope mounting.

FROM: Jack
DATE: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 21:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
TO: Pictures
SUBJECT: First three of five triangle UFO pictures...

I forward these pictures from a friend (first three of five). Here is what he says about these pictures...

I had purchased a cheap digital camera and had cannibalized it to make an inexpensive CCD imaging system for my telescope.

That morning I had gotten up early in the AM to try and get some pictures of Mars - which was rising early in the morning that time of year. As I recall Mars was close to Venus and it was a very pretty morning. Anyway I took a few pictures but was not pleased with the results - Mars was very small. It was also very blurry because Mars was somewhat lower on the horizon than would be desired. It was very cold, and it was just starting to get light out (although the sun was about a half hour or so from rising). Also, although the sky was clearer than normal, there were still just too many clouds. So I decided to try just a few more and then pack up.

If you ever used a telescope you know that you have to constantly readjust the direction that it is pointing because as the earth turns the object that the telescope is pointing at quickly moves out of view. It was while doing this that I noticed a bright object passing slowly overhead. I assumed it was a satellite - but I thought it would be fun to try and point the telescope at it and take a picture. It took me a few moments to readjust the telescope. When I finally got it pointed at the object I was surprised to see on my LCD that through the telescope the camera picked up quite a bit of detail. I knew then that this wasn't an ordinary satellite. I was expecting just a fine point of light. However the sunlight on the object indicated (to me at least) that the object was quite high, since down on the ground it was still dark.

It was quite difficult to maintain the telescope so that it remained pointed at the moving object (as you can imagine). But I managed to take about 20 pictures and fill up the memory card on my camera. Most of the pictures did not turn out very well and are horribly blurred. What I sent you is the best few.

Thanks,

(I've deleted my friend's name per his request)

Thanks,
Jack

Source / Credit: iwasabducted.com

Very cool! has anyone tried to test these photo's to see if they are authentic? Im not well versed on what kind of tests would be needed but it would be great to have them analyzed.

nice

I hope they want to be friends an we can help each other out. Nice pics even if only for the artistic rendition.

Unfortunately there does not seem to be any mention of a follow up regarding analysis or provenance of these images on the website.

Direct communication with www.iwasabducted.com might answer the question of what was done if anything after they received them.

Ok, I have emailed the website asking if there has been any follow up regarding analysis once the images were received.

We will have to wait and see.

Pics looks good

Very difficult though to do any kind of validation on them, since there are no exif data, or any other objects in the picture for comparison.

The 'ufo' in those pictures had alot of rounded edges, now i dont know if that has something to do with the telescope.
I would gladly like to see the high-res pictures

But it does look interesting.

reply to post by sherpa


Have star & flag from me
I've been impressed by these photos since the first time i saw them:
All in the photos (at least apparently) suggests that it's an actual (moving) object, that's my opinion;
yes,there's the lack of exif data, and the lack of perspective.
The lack of exif data seems to have a valid explanation.
About the perspective, sadly not all the people knows that such shots should include even somehting on the ground (and he used a telescope): besides, if an object is on the vertical of the person who's taking the photo, there's no way to have a perspective;
another facet to clarify would be the one of the location: just in order to know if in that specific area other sightings have been reported in those days.
All in all, they're intriguing to say the least: yes, they're definately some of the best UFO triangle photos I have seen
Nice find, sherpa


[edit on 1/3/2008 by internos]

reply to post by internos


Thanks internos, as you say vertical or near vertical shots are difficult if not inpossible to include reference background, factor in the use of a telescope and you have no chance.

Location details would be nice I agree, it is a shame they were not included in the original email, I find it difficult to believe there have not been questions asked at the time the images were received.

The first thing that came to mind when I saw these pictures is an artists impression I had seen of the TR3B.

It looks pretty similiar to me.

reply to post by sherpa


Yea, these are great ones. Flagging star too!

I know you have a keen interest in these as I do Sherpa.

I would not waste time testing these now, as there are no earmarks for faking. Should we always test that we are sitting here looking at a web page and not under the influence of some illusory state of consciousness or dreaming? Silly to test everything for the sake of testing.

I've seen them, so know they exist. There is no reason to fake them, and those that do just do damage and make me sad.

That these are multiple views and the exposures are consistent, and that I have looked at them before and saw no problems as did many investigators, they to me represent some of the best actual shots of these object so far.

Nice grab. Might be interesting to discuss these, but I would not want to start assuming they are faked (glass half full). I would be more interested in citing the reasons for variations they are seen. Boomerangs, 3-4 lights, slow flying, fast flying and bursting in to multiple lights. High strange.

I think the occupants have our psychology down and can mess with our heads and eyes at will. Might be different species or different time origin also that define differences.

For all I know, when we had our experience I was on one. Memory erased.

These photos bring back the feelings of wonder. Thanks!

ZG

I tend to think these triangles are man made and piloted, but I don't believe that helps much with the really big ships, often cited at a mile wide, that are seen.

The variably vectored rocket engines don't make sense to me, because these ships are usually described as silent, even when they are hovering low. What kind of jet runs silently. It seems more likely that directional thrusters would also be smaller anti-grav units.

I'm not an aeronitic smart guy, though, or an engineer, so my speculation is merely speculation.

reply to post by ZeroGhost


Thanks for the post ZG,

I am of course aware of some of the things you have seen but I did not know they were triangles in there too.

Other examples or sightings by other witnesses would be nice for collaberative puposes, I agree.

By the way I like the new avatar and I am sure I recognise your work there

I'm pretty sure most triangles are ARV's

They are military craft. I don't say they all are

Its rounded angles recall me the one spotted in Puerto Rico on 2005 too.

"I saw an immense triangular object... I can tell you [and compare it] to the size of a ball park or two enormous ball parks. It was going very slowly and passed directly over me... It made no noise whatsoever and was going slowly, very slowly, and thats when the van's engine and lights went out completely... I managed to capture the craft and photograph it.

www.ufoevidence.org...
www.ufocasebook.com...
rense.com...


[edit on 1/3/2008 by internos]

Fake. Assuming the point of the triangle is the direction of travel..the motion blur seems to PRECEED its direction of travel. Someone did a sloppy job of it with the motion blur filter in CS3.
And also the conveniant lack of any other background info, exif data & such its another fake guys. The hoaxer is sittin back laughing at us discuss this..and if your reading this now dude..GET A LIFE.

Im sure you will all decry "OHH BUT ITS NOT MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF THE POINT" and say Im talkin crap. But it seems like a dead give away to me. What do I know though I only work in CGI since 1994..(and when I say CGI Im not talking about using excell spread sheets like most of you do..I mean graphics, animation & photoshop work.)

[edit on 1-3-2008 by atsguy_106]

[edit on 1-3-2008 by atsguy_106]

reply to post by internos


Your right it is not hard to make comparisons of these craft because of ther shape, much more distinctive than saucers whose profile can be ambigous from any angle.

Here is a youtube video from a couple of years ago, I have no idea if it has been debunked though.

reply to post by atsguy_106


If you have used a telescope for imaging you might concede that motion blur can easily be attributed to tracking the object, constant readjustment is needed at high magnification.

I would suggest this guy did not have any equatorial mount for the scope and even if he did I doubt if there was time to calibrate it.

It seems this was a target of opportunity so grab what you can when you can.

reply to post by sherpa

Sherpa, there's this video from Belgium too:



As you can see, for example this one is moving in a "swinging" way: for example, if something moving like this one would have been caught in a photo, its appearance could have been more or less like the ones of the pics that you have posted at the start, no matter wat are claiming the self proclaimed experts, certain posts are just good for a laugh: it would be a great idea to introduce, after ATS, BTS and PTS points, even BS points, or BS counter or something like that ...


[edit on 1/3/2008 by internos]

Internos,

The belgium ufo flap of November 1989 is a good example and probably defines the triangle ufo phenomena.

Of all the reports of UFO sightings, some of the most intriguing ones are those which come in flaps, or waves, have multiple witnesses, and photographs. One of the most heralded cases of this type was the Belgian flap which began in November of 1989. The events of November 29 would be documented by no less than thirty different groups of witnesses, and three separate groups of police officers. All of the reports related a large object flying at low altitude. The craft was of a flat, triangular shape, with lights underneath. This giant craft made not a sound as it slowly, fearlessly, moved across the landscape of Belgium. There was free sharing of information as the Belgian populace tracked this craft as it moved from the town of Liege to the border of the Netherlands and Germany.

www.ufocasebook.com...



[edit on 1-3-2008 by sherpa]

Here is an interesting titbit from Wiki.

Unknown to many, triangular-shaped UFOs have been reported since the 1940s. Accounts of flying triangles, wedges, or boomerangs have increased dramatically since the 1990s. The sightings report clearly visible objects over densely populated areas and highways, many over the United States and England, as well as other parts of the world. A geographic distribution of U.S. sightings has been correlated by a currently inactive American-based investigative organization, the National Institute for Discovery Science, which led to a July, 2002 report that suggested that the craft may belong to the U.S. Air Force (David, L. 2004, Sept.‘Flying Triangle’ sightings on the rise, MSNBC, www.msnbc.msn.com...); however, a subsequent report in August, 2004 by the same organization (NIDS) found that the rash of sightings did not conform to previous deployment of black project aircraft and that the objects' origins and agendas were unknown