O'Hare Airport UFO Sighting -- UPDATE: Photos & Analysis

Good find Lab Rat, I think that puts to rest the train issue....

Originally posted by d1k
I was just thinking this last night laying down in bed. Are cell phones even allowed in cockpits of commercial planes?

[edit on 25-1-2007 by d1k]

Good question!

And as sergejsh's picture shows, a drop of water CAN be darker on the bottom rather than the top, so the "UFO" could still just be water. I guess Jritzmann was wrong about this?

LabRat-Dude, I mean this in the most hetero way possible...I LOVE you.

Thats just about exactly what I been lookin for. Now if I'm not mistaken, isnt that this direction? Or even is it the same runway? I didnt jive with the way someone said it might have been shot, I saw it the other way, due to the lane off to the right hand side of congested shot. I've circled the lane and direction I was thinking.

external image

Am I wrong? Is this the same lane shown in LabRat's find? Because Rat's is the stuff.

Admin edit: Image was very large and distorting page layout, so changed to external link. Just click to view.

[edit on 25-1-2007 by SimonGray]

Originally posted by simon_alex0327
If it is indeed another elevation shot... how about the pictures being taken from "Hilton Hotel Chicago O'Hare Airport" ?
They could of been taken from different rooms... different floors?
Quote from their website...

O'Hare Hilton is the only hotel located directly inside O'Hare International Airport, connected to 3 terminals by underground walkways and the international terminal via airport transit or hotel shuttle.

Funny you should mention the O'Hare Hilton, because the Blogger from the website where the congestion photo came from said that the photo was taken from from outside his hotel. The Blog is in Japanese , so you'll have to use some kind of web translator (I rightclick on the page and chose "Translate page to English" from the menu...The translation stinks, but you can get the general idea.

Here's the link to a post regarding the blog with the congestion photo.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Although the location of the hilton doesn't seem to match the exact vantage point of the photo, it is very close to where jritzmann postulates the photo may have been snapped in this posting: www.abovetopsecret.com....

Even though the Japanese blogger/businessman implied he snapped the congestion photo from the hotel, he could have taken the photo from a plane sitting on a taxiway while arriving in Chicago (his blog said he arrived at noon the day earlier)...or maybe the photo isn't his at all.

Originally posted by Postal76

Originally posted by d1k
I was just thinking this last night laying down in bed. Are cell phones even allowed in cockpits of commercial planes?

[edit on 25-1-2007 by d1k]

Good question!

And as sergejsh's picture shows, a drop of water CAN be darker on the bottom rather than the top, so the "UFO" could still just be water. I guess Jritzmann was wrong about this?

I dont see how, I just did it on my own window and the sky is reflected in the bottom of the drop, ground in the top of the drop. I mean try it. Not a drip, a dot.

Someone wanted a better, large view of the "point" seen on the UO in the green channel.



Anyway, I cant get too dragged into this today but I did want to respond to a couple things:

Believe me, being the one who found and made the initial connection with the congestion shot, I agree with alot of the supposition that this is hoaxed from this photo. There is however some issues me, nor Biedny(dB) can get past. I'll explain one in the bottom of this post. dB did stress to me that he didnt see these two images being the same, due to:
-ocular distortions
-the presence of objects in the UFO photo that are not in the congestion shot. These are objects no one would add in...as there'd be no reason to. Theyre entirely too subtle, and meaningless to faking a UFO shot.
-no apparent alteration of the UFO shot to clone sky over the congestion's landing lights. (Even if this was shot through a monitor)

David is of the impression that we're looking at a real photo, not an altered one, due to these and some other issues. His opinion is that this is not the same shot as congestion, as far as he can tell at this point. And thats not some opinion from any goof with an image editor, we're talking about one of the foremost digital imaging experts in the world, and the man who wrote the first book on Photoshop, and is the author of other books on photoshop since. He's also a ex-ILM employee who specialized in digital compositing. His opinion holds alot of wieght with me, and truthfully it should with all of you too. (I'm not scolding anyone, I'm just saying lets not just dismiss that)

I cant make that leap yet to say I believe it's a real photo. David being my best friend is cool enough not to get pissed at me when I disagree with him. I see reflections lining up I cannot account, a perfectly level UO in a slanted orientation photo, and other stuff. I mean we've all seen it.

I dunno what to say guys, like I said, I personally am on the fence I have to be open to the idea that we're looking at a real photo. But I have a good amount to say it aint too.

I dunno what the hell it is, but it's no train. That blows that theory, and thats fine.

I think the shooter was in the 3rd-4th crossover lane in Labrat's shot. Now where is that on Google earth, I wanna see it from above. If ya find it, post a google earth link. I really wanna nail that down solid.

Jeff-

I just tried the water drop "experiment." I think depending on your vantage point, the dark part of the drop can appear to be the top or the bottom. If I viewed the drop from below, the bottom appeared dark, and the opposite was true when I viewed it from above.

As for the peculiarities of the photo, what objects are present that aren't there in the "congestion" shot? Can you point these out to us? And I'm not sure what the distortion means, other than a different camera was used, which still doesn't disprove that a picture was taken of a picture.

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
The Blog is in Japanese

, so you'll have to use some kind of web translator (I rightclick on the page and chose "Translate page to English" from the menu...The translation stinks, but you can get the general idea.

A couple pages back somebody in Japan responded to your post and said the guy was talking about eating too much and having to walk around the hotel to burn it off...

Postal-if ya go back some on my posts I talked about some of what Biedny pointed out that I didnt see. He and I will be gathering caps for ya'll soon. The pointed top on the UO I already showed, but there's also...look back and forth between the lined up congestion shot and the UFO photo. Just line them up in Photoshop and go back and forth between layers. Take note of the 4 lights on the horizon in congested, and then where they should be in the UO shot. You'll see between the first 2 from the left an distinct orange area thats only there in the UFO photo. Thats one point David made to me saying essentially who's gonna fake that in? For what reason? It's completely irrelevant. Thats only one instance. If ya look in, it's there.

On another note, ya'll think this is the runway shown in LabRat's found picture?




You can see where this falls in the grand scheme of the airport. Does this jive with where the witnesses said it was?

You can view the blog in Alta Vista Babel Fish...
Link
I just ran the blog page through this and here is the paragraph above the "congestion" picture...

2006/06/01
Chicago
As expected after by the fact that, the food to eat too much is, walking outside the hotel. It meaning that the number of arrivals and departures in the vicinity of the airport of the United States one, photographing the photograph of the airplane. As for the photograph, the line of the airplane of the waiting of landing which is connected to the sky and in the evening sun the airplane which takes off.

Emphasis mine.

So I can only presume that he took the pictures from outside the hotel, and that would more than likely be the Hilton as I stated earlier.

In the "Remark" section down below the photo I linked to earlier it says:

"An AA F100 departing 22L as we (N649PP) arrive on 27L"

So the original ufo/congestion photos must be looking down runway 22L.

I looked at some maps of o'hare and this appears to show the object in the wrong location- not anywhere near the C concourse unless I'm mistaken...

Originally posted by Postal76
Jeff-

I just tried the water drop "experiment." I think depending on your vantage point, the dark part of the drop can appear to be the top or the bottom. If I viewed the drop from below, the bottom appeared dark, and the opposite was true when I viewed it from above.

It's reversed like a mirror. I'm on a second floor and just did it. When I view it just above my eyeline, the top appears dark, which is reflecting the ground through the convex of the drop. Likewise the sky is seen in the bottom.

I mean it does depend on what ya have reflecting, I'm looking at it from the shooter's angle to lens. I mean I dont think it's that anyway, you'd certainly expect to see more then one droplet, I'd think. My wife has the cam or I'd shoot what I'm looking at. I'm definitely seeing the reverse of the UO of what water's doin for me.

Originally posted by Lab Rat
In the "Remark" section down below the photo I linked to earlier it says:

"An AA F100 departing 22L as we (N649PP) arrive on 27L"

So the original ufo/congestion photos must be looking down runway 22L.

I looked at some maps of o'hare and this appears to show the object in the wrong location- not anywhere near the C concourse unless I'm mistaken...

Lab-ya think the google area I showed is it? The shooter would be in that second 'rung" of the runways...or near about, shooting down towards the end, or top of the pic.

Yes?

I'm actually kind of surprised you're putting so much effort into this picture Jritz. I mean that's good and all but it almost matches the congestion picture you found to a tee.

It's the exact same picture IMO, with a few alterations. I'm surprised at all the hub-bub about this picture.

Peace

Lab Rat got it, I was wrong in fact the landing photo and ufo photo must be from 22L as it states, the background image fits perfectly

So nothing to do with 27L

I remembered one thing.

Does anyone owns or has access to a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator? It could be a good way to try to find the stop from where the photo was taken, if the detail of the game is as good as I heard it is.

You guys roll with it for a bit, I gotta get some appointments done and I'll be back later tonight. Whatever anyone can find out is great, I'm still half bleary eyed from yesterday and 3 hours sleep.

Here is a map showing the location of The Hilton Hotel... seems to be close to where you are looking at jritzmann? Looking at it on Google the only place to be able to view outside would be in front of the building (marked "A") Which would make the UO somewhere over the bottom left of the map I have showed above?




Wonder where concourse "C" is??

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
The Blog is in Japanese

, so you'll have to use some kind of web translator (I rightclick on the page and chose "Translate page to English" from the menu...The translation stinks, but you can get the general idea.

A couple pages back somebody in Japan responded to your post and said the guy was talking about eating too much and having to walk around the hotel to burn it off...

Yeah, I read that, thanks. But when I read simon_alex0327's post about the Hilton Hotel, I wondered if this was the same hotel...it could be. The Hilton is attached directly to the terminals and adjacent to the Airfield But like I said, it also looks as if the photo was taken from an airport taxiway or crossover.