UFO photo.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
reply to post by backinblack

 

6 day discrepency in the data from the claim
10 hour discrepency from 1 of the images

You could chalk up the first to somethin as simple as a typo or the wrong date encoded on the camera,
but the second, I dont see how 1 image can be created 10 hours later than the other two, when the event was supposed to be 40mins to an hour.

I get that..But unless the data was altered it would mean the 3rd shot was taken in darkness which it obviously wasn't..
And all the times are listed as 00:00

reply to post by backinblack


I think we all are on the same page here.
The only thing remaining is for the OP to answer the questions to put this to rest.

Im guessing the OP wont be back.....
Dont get your hopes on that....

why would he have changed the last to nighttime???
was it just a typo... seems like a very silly slip up and wouldnt even make sense to do so...
maybe the clock on the cam was off?? and he forgot to change the third time, when editing ?

reply to post by antibren


I would say so he/she took the picture offline I think it was a joke

reply to post by EricLintScD


Photobucket is kaput- I have read 6 pages now trying to see these 2 pics.
Please direct me to where I can see them- Please- Thank you

I'm back, for some unknown reason I couldn't access the forums from my computer last night so i had to use a proxy serve to log in and send the 3rd photo to the mod, now I'm at work i can access it again but only limited (i am suppose to be working).

The camera is set up not to store time but only date, I don't know why and they are genuine images released ( i think ) under the freedom of information act but I'm not totally sure if I'm really allowed to post them or even have them, I didn't ask but I thought they were interesting, I personally thought it was a weather balloon reflecting sun??

I don't have the software required to analyze the photos or I would have tried to do it myself, so all I can do is take a wild guess at what it is and the most *logical* guess I can come to is a weather balloon reflecting sun.

I've probably missed some questions but it's early and I still feel half asleep so if you can post any questions you have here i will try to answer them today.

Kindest regards

Eric.

reply to post by EricLintScD

After clicking on the link you give, and looking very closely at this image I can see that the craft seems to actually be made of English Words! I can make out "403 FORBIDDEN" There seems to be smaller words below it that say something about a "file" having been removed, because of some sort of "ImageShack" "Terms of Service" breach, or by "user request".
A VERY interesting image! Normally I would jump to the conclusion that something like this was just done up in photoshop, but in this case I don't think that argument would work. Did anyone else see these strange words flying around in the air at the time? Were there any other reports, or perhaps even photos?

so the conclusion is someone testing their photoshop skills?

Originally posted by YourWrong
so the conclusion is someone testing their photoshop skills?

Starting to feel like someone's testing my sanity. Has he even mentioned anything about the MOD copyright? And the 10 hour gap is just bizarre. Then he can't access the site, and he's having image accounts getting shut down, etc. What the?

Eric, please try and answer what's going on with a) the 10 hour gap in one of the photo's, and b) the MOD copyright, please...

reply to post by JoseChung


I've already explained, read up.

Kind Regards

Eric.

Originally posted by EricLintScD
reply to post by JoseChung

 

I've already explained, read up.

Kind Regards

Eric.

Sorry, just realised you have, kind of. You first said they were your friends, then you're talking about the freedom of information act, so I guess your friend got them released? It's just confusing the way you're explaining things.

reply to post by JoseChung


The photos were from my friend, yes

Kind Regards

Eric.

Originally posted by EricLintScD
I'm back, for some unknown reason I couldn't access the forums from my computer last night so i had to use a proxy serve to log in and send the 3rd photo to the mod, now I'm at work i can access it again but only limited (i am suppose to be working).

The camera is set up not to store time but only date, I don't know why and they are genuine images released ( i think ) under the freedom of information act but I'm not totally sure if I'm really allowed to post them or even have them, I didn't ask but I thought they were interesting, I personally thought it was a weather balloon reflecting sun??

I don't have the software required to analyze the photos or I would have tried to do it myself, so all I can do is take a wild guess at what it is and the most *logical* guess I can come to is a weather balloon reflecting sun.

I've probably missed some questions but it's early and I still feel half asleep so if you can post any questions you have here i will try to answer them today.

Kindest regards

Eric.

Well if you would just go back again, which obviously you missed this past time you came around, and look at what has been brought to attention. A good place to start would be from there. Now you claim... "I don't have the software required to analyze the photos or I would have tried to do it myself, so all I can do is take a wild guess at what it is and the most *logical* guess I can come to is a weather balloon reflecting sun." You can see in your previous posts that you said... "I have more photos of it, i'm just testing the water to answer your question, the UFO was moving but very slowly." Now you acknowledge what you may have "logically" guessed here. Lame

reply to post by believerofgod


I dont get your point? I said it was a slow moving UFO, and I've come to the conclusion it could be a weather balloon, what's wrong with that? Weather balloons move slowly, I couldn't zoom in to the photo and use all the fancy tools like everyone else can, your point is totally invalid.

Kind regards

Eric.

i have been reading this thread for a few days now and i do not think anybody has brought up this point yet i hope not anyway here goes.

you say this object was observed for 40 minutes if so why in picture 1 and two does it look like the foreground is a bit blurred saying that the pictures where taken while moving? i might be wrong, i have not seen photo 3 yet but surely if this was observed by 24 people from 3 jeeps the jeeps would have stopped and people would of got out and took pictures wouldn't they? so my question is where are the pictures from a stationery view and out of the jeeps? and does your friend have friends that where there and also had taken photos? if so can he get in touch with them and get there photos?

reply to post by simples


ok i have just seen image three and yep sure enough again it was from a moving vehicle.

is it following the jeeps? is your friend following the object? but if i remember rightly you said it was observed for 40 minutes then disappeared behind a hill or mountain range or something like that which says to me your friend is stationary but obviously he/she isnt stationary.

am i completely wrong about all this? am i analyzing to much? am i thinking about this too much?
somebody please tell me

Originally posted by simples
reply to post by simples

 

ok i have just seen image three and yep sure enough again it was from a moving vehicle.

is it following the jeeps? is your friend following the object? but if i remember rightly you said it was observed for 40 minutes then disappeared behind a hill or mountain range or something like that which says to me your friend is stationary but obviously he/she isnt stationary.

am i completely wrong about all this? am i analyzing to much? am i thinking about this too much?
somebody please tell me

no yes and yes..
The OP is vague, all short replies.
The exif data does not fit the explanation given and some have mentioned altering on at least two of the 3 pics..

Originally posted by EricLintScD
reply to post by believerofgod

 

I dont get your point? I said it was a slow moving UFO, and I've come to the conclusion it could be a weather balloon, what's wrong with that? Weather balloons move slowly, I couldn't zoom in to the photo and use all the fancy tools like everyone else can, your point is totally invalid.

Kind regards

Eric.

edit on 11-1-2011 by EricLintScD because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-1-2011 by EricLintScD because: (no reason given)

Eric... look, why are you ignoring the evidence that has been placed in front of you on the previous pages of postings that have been given. Simply inquire of said postings and see for yourself. Now mind you, in case you are lost and playing dumb which it seems, that a complete dissection of your photos has already been performed. Now I have to admit that I am not one of expertise in these analysis, but if you read then the lack of knowledge that one may have of photo analysis may come to light. I myself didn't know that an exif is like a DNA for photos, however as stated by the MOD, it can now be manipulated. However, it was not manipulated enough; as it would appear for the different time frames from which you stated, as being fact, for the time the UFO was even visible. Go back and look, see for yourself.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


No, there's no such thing as time passed since the photo was taken in the EXIF data, the EXIF data only shows the date and time when the photo was taken, it's saved with the photo as part of the file.

I guess that information was added by the program used to read the EXIF data, and probably uses the "File Modification Date/Time" part of the EXIF data that is created when we save the photo to another disk.

Sorry...

I'm going to explain as clear as i can, it seems some people are not satisfied until they prove this as a fake which it isn't so we could be here all year arguing over something that isn't true and people trying to find errors in what i say which also doesn't exist.

Here we go...

1) The camera which was used was set up NOT to store time, only date.

2) These photos were obtained by a friend I know only online, not in real life, I don't know what his job title is and i've never had a reason to ask what it is, I've known him for about 4 years and he is a similar age as me (56).

3) I was not aware of the copyright, I didn't even bother looking for one if I'm honest.

4) I can only give you details which are available to me, I wasn't there so i cant be 100% sure on the specifics.

I think ive answered all the questions, I do not have an answer to every question. Sorry

Kind Regards

Eric.