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.
I see they called in the Marines. The others were just not up to the task
Phage
reply to post by Bilk22
Try telling me how far away the bird is from the camera. Then you can work on calculating the size.
Who claimed it was alien? You see that in any of my posts?
Krakatoa
Bilk22
Ah yes. The famous giant flying squirrel that needs no trees to jump from. Why didn't I think of that?
0bserver1
Bilk22
I'm not claiming it's ET, but it ain't no cloud or bird.
Case solved ... here it is lol
Maybe he jumped from the top of the turbine motor housing, out the back and got a boost from the wind to gain altitude while riding the thermals?
Is this explanation less plausible than some alien craft from a far off star system? After all, each of the elements in the above speculation actually are proven to exist in the world. It's the combination of the events that makes it less probable and questionable.
Also, it seems to large to be a bird.
but it ain't no cloud or bird.
Bilk22
You do have to laugh at some of the responses. Cloud? Bird? Giant pterodactyl maybe, but no bird. How many times have we seen someone post, "If it were from a reputable source, yadayadayada"? Now we have a professional photographer who has a career to risk if he's found trying to perpetrate a hoax, and it's not good enough. I'm not claiming it's ET, but it ain't no cloud or bird.
Bilk22
reply to post by Krakatoa
Maybe it's Richard Branson playing with a new toy. Better explanation than a bird. The photo in that area is enlarged. The wind turbine and the object are magnified at that same rate. The turbine is is probably close to 275' from the ground to the tip of the prop at the top. That gives a good idea os scale.
You're 2 pounds might be worth more than 2 cents but not in my book.
wmd_2008
Bilk22
reply to post by Krakatoa
Maybe it's Richard Branson playing with a new toy. Better explanation than a bird. The photo in that area is enlarged. The wind turbine and the object are magnified at that same rate. The turbine is is probably close to 275' from the ground to the tip of the prop at the top. That gives a good idea os scale.
YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF THE SIZE OR DISTANCE of the object so you cant tell anything from that picture compared to OTHER objects in the picture DOH!!!!
That object has been shown by others COULD easily be a bird we also have no exif data from the picture or a link to a full size unedited version!!!
That's my £0.02 worth after 30+ years taking picturesedit on 24-11-2013 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)
Bilk22
That's not a bird either, but nice try. Try calculating the size of the bird in your pic and let us know which species it is?
Phage
reply to post by Bilk22
Except that somehow the photographer didn't happen to see the UFO when he took the picture.
Maybe because it was a bird and he just didn't notice it.
A blurd. We've seen many.
I'd consider a bird or insect as a possible explanation, if it wasn't for the fact the reporter (Journal photographer) reported seeing the object "Hovering stationary above the wind turbines".
Perhaps it's good idea to respect the fact that other people have intellect and can judge for themselves what it is and is not.
smurfy
Bilk22
That's not a bird either, but nice try. Try calculating the size of the bird in your pic and let us know which species it is?
Phage
reply to post by Bilk22
Except that somehow the photographer didn't happen to see the UFO when he took the picture.
Maybe because it was a bird and he just didn't notice it.
A blurd. We've seen many.
It is more than likely a birdy. Perhaps a good idea is to use the ATS search, and use a few keywords like, Thames+UFO, that's not a UFO+bird, or Phage+blurd. All technically incorrect, but all serve a purpose. There is a possibility that Google, NSA and Co, May block some key keywords now, [probably a subject for a new thread] but give it a try anyway.
Phage's example is more than likely a bird too, To add is also the UK, and is Cornwall, next door to Devon in 2008.
ufos.about.com...edit on 24-11-2013 by smurfy because: Text.
Sometimes I wonder who exactly it is they are trying to convince of anything. We all have our own eyes and can make our own judgements. If there are sock puppets posting here do they think they really do any good for their cause (what ever that may be) or is it just to cause people to throw up their hands and leave a topic? They certainly don't change the minds of rational, thinking people who can walk and chew gum at the same time. IMO
dlbott
Bilk22
You do have to laugh at some of the responses. Cloud? Bird? Giant pterodactyl maybe, but no bird. How many times have we seen someone post, "If it were from a reputable source, yadayadayada"? Now we have a professional photographer who has a career to risk if he's found trying to perpetrate a hoax, and it's not good enough. I'm not claiming it's ET, but it ain't no cloud or bird.
Thank you, you quickly learn who the disinfo guys are and just skip over their posts lol. It is sad lol,
The Bot
Bilk22
smurfy
Perhaps it's good idea to respect the fact that other people have intellect and can judge for themselves what it is and is not.
Bilk22
It is more than likely a birdy. Perhaps a good idea is to use the ATS search, and use a few keywords like, Thames+UFO, that's not a UFO+bird, or Phage+blurd. All technically incorrect, but all serve a purpose. There is a possibility that Google, NSA and Co, May block some key keywords now, [probably a subject for a new thread] but give it a try anyway.
Phage's example is more than likely a bird too, To add is also the UK, and is Cornwall, next door to Devon in 2008.
ufos.about.com...edit on 24-11-2013 by smurfy because: Text.
Phage's example is foolhardy at best, but more likely a direct insult to everyone else's intelligence. To think he would use such an example diminishes my belief that he is as smart as I may have believed unless of course he actually has no respect for other's cognitive abilities.
If a birds wings are so difficult to capture, then how was the pic taken in his example? Why is the bird in his pic way out of scale with what it's trying to depict? The reason a birds wings would not be captured is because of speed vs distance from the camera. The object in the OP is obvious to all but those who come off as having some type of an agenda, well into the distance - in my estimation, more than a mile away.
Do you mean the object is in the background way beyond the wind farm? It could be, it could be not. Not much way of telling really in a 2d and singular picture, and not much of a story, which ironically has a certain honesty about it. Then again have a look at an older thread that Phage opined on and btw, I found it by doing just the advice that I mentioned to you in my last post, this one did have a story to it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...