Lost photo of UFO found

Originally posted by IAMTAT
...sometime around 1970...

Or in other words, only a few years after this...

Originally posted by IAMTAT

Originally posted by IAMTAT

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by IAMTAT

 

Nice photo OP, I can't help but feel I have seen it before or something similar, are you able to upload a higher definition copy of it? scanner maybe? something we can go town on.

On a side note: Your avatar looks very similar to a illustration of a book I read by Dolores Cannon is it by chance?

I'm not very technically savvy, but I am having my 20 year old son try to scan it for me now...from there I'll try to get it on here.

Okay...here is the scanned version from my son.

i55.photobucket.com...

One of Billy Meiers

Revealing a secret picture by picture...that's such a good pic it makes u think
We're getting closer.....

reply to post by IAMTAT


That phot is impressive, can you take your photo alittle closer to the original photo (macro)?

IAMTAT I think your photo is wonderful.. Why don't you get hold of MUFON in your area and have someone come out and take a look at your picture and analyze it they would know more about the photo then ATS and could direct you to were to go for the best person to look into this photo and see if its the real thing..S&F for you
Peace,sugarcookie1

Originally posted by alfa1
Or in other words, only a few years after this...

Yeah but that was science fiction.

We actually had real flying saucers circa 1970 or a little earlier, as seen here:

Source 1:20 in www.cbsnews.com...
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/05a9dd851630.png[/atsimg]
Avrocar

Source: 1:30 in www.cbsnews.com...
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c3b6cb4ffa1c.jpg[/atsimg]
Professor Paul Moller craft

Those aren't UFOs or Hollywood props, they are real manmade flying saucers from that era.

My actual first thought was some variation on this, with a smaller tail fin... at just the right angle it might looks similar. Start at 37:00

Prior to 1984, Konica Color Print Paper was manufactured as "SakuraColor PC Paper" (PC was a Konica process as is RC, which was a Kodak Process)

Konica Color long-life 100 print paper A2 was introduced after 1985, and only then was it marketed as "Konica Color Paper".

There is also a Konica 100 paper manufactured for ink jet printers.

Also, many papers used back then had watermarked emulsion numbers on the back, very light and small print, usually on the edge.

It is possible that this photo was re-printed from an original, if indeed the photo was circa 1970.
The photo needs to be examined by a professional.

Originally posted by imitator
I say fake!
No one is going to write "circa 1970" on a photograph like that....

They would if they were thumbing through old photos they had, were trying to remember when it was taken, and they wanted to write down what they managed to remember so as to not forget it in the future.

I've found old family photos that my mother did that too, heck I've even done that to old photos.

Now, if you are suggesting that no one would have taken a photo like that and NOT written down the date and time when they took it, you are probably correct, whereas if they knew it was a gag photo which was saved over the years, they might not have written down the date and time, and later tried to remember when they made the gag photo. But all of that is assuming the writer is the same as the photographer, and that the photo is not a reprint, copy, or was not originally accompanied by an entire set of photos, on which one or more had the date and time written. If any of the latter were the case, the OPs photo could have been passed off to someone else, or maybe found by someone's family and then found its way into a new home, etc.

Imagine for a second that the photo was taken by the OPs dad's best friend. This best frined originally had a set of photos and maybe even was into UFO investigations. Somehow the photo got separated from the set, then the best friend dies, and his wife finds the photo and recalls being with her husband when it was taken or the general time period that she knew he was into hunting UFOs, so she jots down the "circa 1970", then a few years later she sees the OPs dad and gives him the photo as a momento, or something. Anything like that could have occurred, so the "circa 1970" really means nothing evidence wise.

If anything the "circa 1970", to me anyways, likely means the photographer did not write the message, and that if the photographer did, then the photo is likely a fake and the photographer knew that, because why would you not know precisely when that photo was taken (at least within a window of a few days) if you were the one who took it?

Originally posted by tpg65
Fact is , this picture could have been taken yesterday for all we know .
We read the OP's account and automatically accepted the picture .

Try not to be so open minded that we allow our brains to fall out .

I'd say 99% of us looking at the photo have that in mind but I don't think stating it so abruptly would encourage more people to post their photo's. Its an interesting photo that we need more data on, from there our brains will either fall out or not.

I shall make sure I have some gaffer tape around my skull to retain what little grey matter I have

It looks cheap and 70's, probably one of the early reversed engineered type discs that they were working on at Area 51, this one should be in the history museum now.

Doing a brief search on UFO reports in the Uniontown Pennsylvania area around 1970, I came up with the following:

An incident on October 25, 1973 which was investigated by Stan Gordon:
www.ufomystic.com...

And apparently there was a major wave in 1973, so if the photo is real and it was taken over the Alleghenys, it would seem likely that it was taken some time around that year.

www.nicap.org...

Although October 25, would seem to be a bit late, as the photo does not appear to show any sort of fall foliage (which it should be doing at that time), so if the photo is real, it was probably not from that specific incident and probably not a fall photo, but it could still have been part of the 1973 UFO wave. Also, being someone who lives in Pennsylvania and who has basically his whole life, I don't even think the trees look like they are from Pennsylvania, but I could not be sure of such unless I was able to see the ground and how tall the trees really are. Of course, I've always lived in northeastern and central PA which is a little bit different, but not much.

Anyway, if there was such a major UFO wave around the general era of 1970 (with quite a few in PA) it might not be that odd to have a UFO pic which was not dated and labelled with a specific location when it was first taken.

I have read everyone's post up until this one of my own, and after reviewing the pics I still am skeptic, although I'm leaning towards the legit side. However, I only posted my useless opinion because I am tired, and can't figure out how to flag this thread.

Not to knock the credibility, but that picture isn't enough to provide evidence of anything. Especially in the format given in the OP. From here, it just appears to be a giant slab of floating granite. After all, these "beings" can traverse star systems, right? You'd think they'd at least take a little time to smooth the edges of their craft? I could be wrong.


Cheers,
Strype

Originally posted by Gizawski
I have read everyone's post up until this one of my own, and after reviewing the pics I still am skeptic, although I'm leaning towards the legit side. However, I only posted my useless opinion because I am tired, and can't figure out how to flag this thread.

Wow you must be tired. it's on the left side at both the top of page and bottom, but you've likely figured that out by now.

The photo needs to be analysed (damn it spellchecker, this is the correct spelling!)

It amazes me how most people are so polarised about these topics.
They either believe 100% or they do not 100%

Gotta make you wonder why the people who won't believe in ufo's (even if one landed in front of them and then proceeded to educate them on the entire history of their race before providing irrifutable evidence and exchanging mobile numbers and giving DNA samples) would even bother to comment.

It looks odd in strange way. Not sure if seen this before somewhere

Not at all like this one.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by IAMTAT


Thanks, I appreciate that you're so willing to accommodate our requests. I was actually going to reply yesterday, but it really got too late, and I see Blaine has voiced the same concern I had. But I'm a bit surprised it haven't been more discussion about it, as it is a fairly telling flaw.

It is a good picture, because you get some important information about the camera's focus. The trees in the background are out of focus, and the trees closer to the camera is not. The object doesn't seem to be affected by blur or anything indicative of lack of focus. This says to me, that the object is fairly small, and that it was stationary when the picture was taken. Kind of hints to the possibility that it is suspended with a string from a small branch. It was a fad back in the 70's to create these kinds of fake UFO sightings just for giggles.

Originally posted by Strype
Not to knock the credibility, but that picture isn't enough to provide evidence of anything. Especially in the format given in the OP. From here, it just appears to be a giant slab of floating granite. After all, these "beings" can traverse star systems, right? You'd think they'd at least take a little time to smooth the edges of their craft? I could be wrong.

Cheers,
Strype

You are forgetting the important thing. UFO does not necessarily mean Aliens.
Of course it could possibly be 'a giant slab of floating granite', but the odds are a piece of granite that big would be very hard to pick up let alone throw that high up...

Also the other thing, you are thinking as a human being in your post ;p
ET may not necessarily care about Lamborghini doors or carbon fiber spoilers as we do on our vehicles... they are probably more interested in the most efficient way to travel long distances, rather than what the paint job looks like.

The most likely explanation is a prototype or secret aircraft... some kind of military project. These things may be reverse engineered tech. But in all honestly its plausible that this is a man-made craft of some kind, and not a 'spinning top' suspended on a string as some will think.

Remember that even the Nazi's experimented with secret projects, with the disc shaped design (and actually flew them off the ground). Its highly likely the americans have been doing this for decades in secrecy.

I'm sorry, but this looks like a hoax to me, even though i'm a believer of UFO's, this doesn't look right.

|.SLO7H.|

This is a good pic, if you look close enough, you can see the tree's bending behind, under, side, front , you have a pic that need's to be looked at by a pro, just to have the verafacation.in my opinion, you have the real thing