[!HOAX!] Pic of UFO very close range. [!HOAX!]

I think the one thing that we can learn from this thread is that all of the people that make an immediate call for EXIF data as soon as anyone posts a picture actually have no idea how to interpret it when it is posted, apart from looking for a line that says "Photoshop CS4" somewhere.

Originally posted by L1U2C3I4F5E6R

Hey there,

Thanks for the comments. The pics you referred to that I posted on another thread are from 2.9 miles down the road the year before.

I just had to find out where from and then measure on google maps.

The person who took the photo is no longer alive as he passed away but he gave me those pics a day after he took them.

Hi Lucifer,
So, in 2005 a person who lives 3 miles away from you takes a photo of a ufo and gives it to you the next day yet you say of the photo in this thread that was taken some months later in 2006:

I have never believed in UFO till this came along and since then I have had some interest.

Can you explain why the deceased person gave you the 2005 photo and full description of the ufo's activity if you had no interest in the subject at that time?

It would also help clarify things if you could give us the Google Earth co ordinates of the locations that the photos were taken from.

cheers

Originally posted by davespanners
I think the one thing that we can learn from this thread is that all of the people that make an immediate call for EXIF data as soon as anyone posts a picture actually have no idea how to interpret it when it is posted, apart from looking for a line that says "Photoshop CS4" somewhere.

[thinks....]

Hey wait.. *I* often ask for exif!!!!

BTW, can I just reinforce a very important point. the rectangular area around the object ONLY appears in the reduced and resaved image. It is NOT, I repeat NOT in the original.

Even more importantly, there is a (very simple) technique that can be used to identify what is a jpeg boundary block (they are sometimes referred to as 'quantisation blocks', if you want to sound really impressive..). I have used that technique and it proves without a doubt that the rectangle that can be seen in the reduced image is indeed from jpeg compression - it is NOT in any way related to a cut and paste.

I am not going to broadcast here how the detection of jpeg compression block boundaries is done, but it can be researched and isn't exactly rocket science.. I'm sure there might be a moderator out there who might be willing to verify this.. ?

Anyway, the important thing is that the original image does NOT contain that rectangle, so those INCORRECTLY saying there was evidence of cut and paste, were working from a compressed, altered copy. Beginner's error. I do get a little annoyed at pseudo experts making such proclamations, especially when it is patently obvious it is not an original.

Readers will have to judge for themselves if I am another pseudo expert, I guess - but I stand on my record.



(And I'll never be able to play that LP again!!)

(Sorry, it's an old-person's joke..)

PS - thanks for the stars and kind comments, folks!

Just for the record, this UFO looks about the same height as my daylight sighting was AFTER I got my camera out. i.e. I saw the craft at chimney height and ran into the house to get camera. I run like a snail so it had risen a bit by the time I got out the front door. In the two seconds it took to get camera on it had risen again. That's how I got crap pics, camera wasn't too good either.

I like this photo.

Originally posted by DomCheetham
Great work CHRLZ, wish there were more like you. We would have these UFO pics done and dusted.

Thanks, mate! I still await the proverbial 'big one'.... Any day now... or maybe not! I do believe the universe is teeming with life, but I also acknowledge that distances are a big issue, and we may never see a visitation, or not for millenia yet...

That new picture clealy does not contain JPEG artifacts. So we are now waiting for some other pics from that camera to see if it is a camera malfunction.

Well, to be highly technical, yes it does! As soon as an image is saved in jpeg format, there are small losses, and when you magnify an image beyond 100% (and that one is) you begin to see false detail. So in that image, the detail is reasonably useful, but is certainly not perfectly accurate.

One of the 'arts' of image forensics is to realise that there is no free lunch, and that post-processing and enlargement are more likely to damage the image and add false detail, than they are to help uncover the real object beneath the pixellation. Especially if you don't know what you are doing. So a good investigator will very gently apply some techniques that are non-destructive (eg small 'levels' adjustments), and enlarge the image without interpolation, only to the point where pixels are beginning to become obvious. By default, image editors have interpolation turned on, and that means any enlargement is creating MORE false detail...

Good investigators take into account the quality of the original, and the fact that the camera has already probably applied sharpening and contrast adjustments. And they only work on the original or best possible copy, not some reduced and resaved copy.

Finally, they recognise the inevitable artefacts that come from jpeg compression, and all the other digital and optical artefacts that can contribute to (or ruin) an image.


Anyway, all that stuff is what I do...

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
So you are saying that can not possibly be a ship.

I said absolutely no such thing, and I do NOT appreciate people putting words into my mouth.

When you have something based on:
- reality
- things that people actually SAY
- something OTHER than your one-track-Tesla-solution-for-everything-that-ever-was

do come on back...

reply to post by torsion


I was given the pics as I have been given some 4000 pics over the last 5 years. I have been one of the biggest UFO non believers since forever. However, I collect and buy such things and store them. As you will of noticed from one of my other posts I said from my "file".

What this means is that I often buy and advertise for stuff that I think one day may be of value to someone. For instance, I collect stuff on Ghosts, UFO,s strange creatures, abduction cases, all that were not reported to the authorities - (I probably have the only recorded account from the abductee. (Not that I believe in it). I have collected numerous pics of so called Bigfoot, lake monsters, night walkers you name it, I have collected original accounts of people being harassed by spirit along with photos, it goes on and on.

I collect and own some 12,500 pieces of "evidence" which has gone unreported. People have their hobbies and people have their reasons. I came on this site to seek opinions, seek how people extrapolate information and then decipher it and I seek knowledge from those who I think may possess it.

Not everyone on here is a believer. I am certainly not a believer in some things. But if its Unreported, has photo evidence, has 2 witnesses and I like it. I make an offer. I take all and every piece of evidence (or believe I do) and I store it away in a lovely room. So, what I need is opinions. Where else can I get Mass Opinion on things which will be from people who look at this stuff in their spare time. Where else will I get people on both sides of the fence arguing their side. Where else can I get a range of opinions on matters that I like. I have read every piece on ATS on the above subjects. Some is good, most are questionable.

The stuff I have has never been seen my friend. I put a couple of things on here to gage how people react and how intelligent their thought processes are. There are some on here that have some knowledge I find admirable and some with no knowledge of anything except how to open their mouths. I want to see what people think to different stuff. So I started a few days ago. People get to see a few things and I get to make notes.

I truly believe that the most valuable collection of unseen information resides in private collections. I can't really afford priceless paintings, or multiple houses all over the world, But I can advertise and use contacts to see whats out there. Most people are only too willing to take hard cash for something they think is NUTS.

You should see some of the stuff I have. Not just UFOs but ghosts, creatures, tape recordings of some freaky stuff, pics of so called "fringe" science gone wrong. But you know how it goes. It could all be NOTHING at all.

I have put up a few vids off You tube which are not mine but to gage reactions and see who the credible people are, because some will believe no matter what and some will never believe no matter what. I have become quite accustom to seeing UFO pics that my opinions could be warped or biased. So the best way to see is to put up a few over time and see other peoples opinions. Its an excellent way to keep ones perspective. I am not a believer in UFO's in the sense of Alien Craft just yet. I think most we can look a lot closer to home for the answer. However, I have seen a few that are truly one I can not explain. And those are the ones I am grateful for.

Just a hobby.

reply to post by CHRLZ

I do believe the universe is teeming with life, but I also acknowledge that distances are a big issue, and we may never see a visitation, or not for millenia yet...

But the Universe is so old.
Why imagine this "travel" has not already been accomplished by some race more advanced, even one that preceded us here... and left already?
Why limit thinking to the human history time line?
There was time long before us.

Cheers!

Originally posted by rusethorcain
But the Universe is so old.
Why imagine this "travel" has not already been accomplished by some race more advanced, even one that preceded us here... and left already?
Why limit thinking to the human history time line?
There was time long before us.

Cheers!

Going off topic (perhaps we should start a thread on this...) but briefly, I accept that there has been a lot of time.. but has there *really*? Let me elaborate a little....

We have only one data point for human evolution, indeed, it is arguable that all life as we know it sprang from one very odd organic fluke, where some chemicals got together purely by chance, in a very complicated arrangement, and somehow managed to begin replication. That, plus evolution that eventually resulted in intelligence of a nature that developed technology, is the chain of events that led to us being capable of visualising life on another planet...

But other than the fact that we exist, we have to acknowledge that we haven't been able to duplicate that feat, nor did any other branch of evolution (so far) produce any other technology-using creature on our planet. So first we have absolutely no idea whether life's commencement is likely, nor that evolution from that is likely, or that evolution to technological races is likely. Perhaps it is much more likely that species simply wipe themselves out and extinguish intelligence, in favour of speed, big teeth, or any of the multiple other survival strategies...

Our entire basis for suggesting that sentient life is 'probable' is based on one data point! That's nonsense, as any scientist will tell you!

OK, I'm possibly exaggerating the issue, but this is why I have such a big problem with the 'Drake equation' - it doesn't adequately take into account the whole question of the likelihood of technology-savvy creatures actually being likely. How likely are they? If we are honest, we have absolutely no idea. And how much time do you need for a tech-race to develop, compared to the distances required to be overcome? It may simply be that our universe is expanding at a much greater rate than the required possibility that an alien, space faring race (or us!) manages to get to the point where they can travel quickly enough, or communicate, over those distances...

Anyway, that one is for another day..

reply to post by L1U2C3I4F5E6R


L1U2C3I4F5E6R.....

That is all very interesting.....

May I ask for the record.....

Did your sister take the photo that is the subject of this thread?

I don't mind so much if she didn't.....

It's just that I like to try to "gauge" the person with whom I am communicating, albeit even if just a little.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not



Mr Maybe,

Yes my sister did take the photo in THIS thread. This particular photo has caused me some headaches as to how to go about placing it in a pile so to speak. Its one of a few taken in the Sussex area since 2004, that to me can go either way.

She told me her story, I listened and recorded it on my laptop and download the pics (which i would normally do) or just take the pics and negatives from people when I buy them.

She and her husband relayed the story to me. I was neither here nor there but it being family has caused me some indecision as my head says one thing and my heart says another. It needs to be cataloged but its difficult to write of the word of a close family member.

Everything I have said about this photo is true to my knowledge. Like all my pics NO one else has a copy (except for those I have allowed to become public as in this one) and I have no reason not to believe my sister. She is more of a absolute NON believer.

I hope this answers you question.

reply to post by L1U2C3I4F5E6R


L1U2C3I4F5E6R.....

Thank you.....

That anwers my question.

I'll be very interested to see how our discussion develops, particularly if you are able to assist CHRLZ with that extra material.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

i think there is life out there in the unaverse not because of the movies and the only reason i say this is that movie fire in the sky my brother favrite movie also i watched the xfile`s as a kid and the outer limits and i say some prety strange thing but those show were make beleave but did look real because it on tv.


the truth is out there do we beleave.

reply to post by CHRLZ


The EXIF comment wasn't specifically at you, it's just funny that I've seen a million threads that say "This picture is useless without EXIF data" and then when it's posted it's instantly pointed out that it can be easily edited and faked. and lets be honest here even if you could know that the data had 100% not been faked knowing the focal length, exposure time etc of the camera that took the picture does nothing to prove if something is a UFO or a dust bin lid as we have seen in this thread.

I just don't like the way this data it is trotted out all the time as being important when someone posts a picture when most people don't actually know what to do with it

Originally posted by davespanners
reply to post by CHRLZ

 

The EXIF comment wasn't specifically at you, it's just funny that I've seen a million threads that say "This picture is useless without EXIF data" and then when it's posted it's instantly pointed out that it can be easily edited and faked. and lets be honest here even if you could know that the data had 100% not been faked knowing the focal length, exposure time etc of the camera that took the picture does nothing to prove if something is a UFO or a dust bin lid as we have seen in this thread.

I just don't like the way this data it is trotted out all the time as being important when someone posts a picture when most people don't actually know what to do with it

Well said, Dave. It's nice to see quite a few folk 'get it'!

Exif *can* be useful, but we really need to look at the whole context of the claim, and simply accept that almost everything can be faked... In fact, as far as 99.99% of claims are concerned, *everything* can be faked. It would only be by a full forensic examination of the original media upon which the images were recorded, that we can begin to accept that the image and the associated exif data are real.

At some point, one of these sightings may get to that stage. I hope the original media is still available, if it does.

But to be perfectly honest, my very strong belief is that proof of alien visitation won't be a small blurry blob on an image. If it ever happens, it will be a huge global event, witnessed by millions on the media. It makes absolutely zero sense to me that aliens would zip furtively around offering tiny fleeting images on a few carefully selected cameras, the vast majority of which look exactly like other things, like garbage cans and sensor dust... And that the real professionals out there with huge telescopes and superb camera equipment, somehow just.. aren't as 'lucky' as those with much lesser cameras.

I'm not having a go at the OP, but really, does the general blurry blob scenario make any sense??? Would we do this if we visited another life-bearing planet?

i was expecting in means of something 'closer'

reply to post by CHRLZ


I wonder if digital photography hasn't done more harm then good to people hunting UFOS with cameras, before the last 5 years more or less the whole goal of photography was to learn how to manipulate your camera to get rid of the strange anomalous objects and effects that would appear on photographs because of lighting conditions or exposure times or aperture settings, or at least to learn how to manipulate these effects to make the photo look better.

Now the anomalous effects have almost become the point of the photograph.

I remember getting quite a few ghosts and things on pictures I used to take and they would usually come back from the developers with a big sticker over them explaining why I sucked at photography and warning me not to do it again or the Dark Room police would confiscate my light meter

Originally posted by davespanners
reply to post by CHRLZ

 

I wonder if digital photography hasn't done more harm then good to people hunting UFOS with cameras, before the last 5 years more or less the whole goal of photography was to learn how to manipulate your camera to get rid of the strange anomalous objects and effects that would appear on photographs because of lighting conditions or exposure times or aperture settings, or at least to learn how to manipulate these effects to make the photo look better.

Now the anomalous effects have almost become the point of the photograph.

I remember getting quite a few ghosts and things on pictures I used to take and they would usually come back from the developers with a big sticker over them explaining why I sucked at photography and warning me not to do it again or the Dark Room police would confiscate my light meter

You should post them - you have clearly captured aliens and supernatural phenomena!!!

Yes, that's a really good point. One only has to look at the ridiculous 'orbs' and 'rods' fiascos. And nowadays with use of digital cameras offering such a cheap way to take innumerable images, of course there will be loads of anomalies, some of which can be quite difficult to explain to the layperson who just sees a weird thing on their camera. Even more difficult if they *want* them to be aliens/ghosts/whatever...

But I think the problem is more to do with the fact that there are those who see an opportunity in all this - the snake oil merchants are constantly looking for stuff to exploit to make a buck from the gullible. As sites like ATS and GLP demonstrate, there are plenty of new gullible folk born every minute, so that means the snakeoilers can make a living. All they need is a complete lack of morals. Hi, Jose, Santiago and Jaime, to name just a few..

It's just the way of the world.. and I try to fight for da Force, not teh Dark Side..

Originally posted by noisemedia

Come on guys...based on the EXIF data provided it does not appear that photoshop was used to paste that thing in there.

That doesnt mean that it's not a hoax, it just means they didnt photoshop it in.

***Note it is possible to alter EXIF data these days. Then again Im no expert, so dont take my word for it.

Ever heard of Photoshopping the picture of the EXIF data?

Originally posted by CHRLZ


I'm not having a go at the OP, but really, does the general blurry blob scenario make any sense??? Would we do this if we visited another life-bearing planet?

Does the general blurry blob make any sense? That depends on what you call sense. You are now talking about how you think a possible Alien species might act. Which does not make any sense.

We as a human species are incapable of telling lie from truth in this day and age. We speculate and assume but we do not understand the exact concepts of the two in terms expression. We know when someone is happy, angry or sad and yet they do not have to tell us. We as a human species are not smart or clever, we have no technology that can travel the stars like these so called Aliens.

You can not go on to presume what an alien culture if one existed would do once here. You for instance do not know what sort of technology they have or how it works that might lead it to have to show itself after a certain period of time within the Earths Atmosphere. You don't know that it may of malfunctioned. After all its technology that is complicated more than likely, so it may be prone to more errors. Again I am just speculating based on Zero fact. But for you too sit there and think nothing like this would make sense shows me that as a human species we are limited by our thought and imagination.

I came on to ATS to seek some form of knowledge that I may not possess. However this has been a fruitless exercise as of yet but I still hold very high hopes. I have played dumb, played ignorant over matters, commented on my beliefs, asked for opinion and yet I find that there is little that can not be founded from a few books at the local library. I have stepped over both sides of the fence since being on ATS to see how people react to judgment and question and persuasion.

We can not be so quick to judge what other present with so called "educated guessing" or such things as EXIF data. Data which I can manipulate anytime and you would be none the wiser. Even someone with your knowledge. I chose this pic for a reason. It does show something but also shows nothing. After reading the comments on this thread and other threads I can conclude that people are not ready to see "real" proof because they are too concerned with little things to which they have no idea of what they are talking about. I have read many times on here that if you can see a UFO clearly then it must be a fake. The old "if its too good to be true" saying quickly dribbles out of their mouths. With no knowledge of what they are looking at but only some vague knowledge of EXIF and CGi data.

I possess photos (many in number) that would fall into the old saying category and therefor are wasted on such sites as these for people do not see what is there but argue and bicker about why it cannot be real. Not really understanding what they are saying so much as saying it because it sounds right. Its why the Government will not disclose the UFO data and "evidence" till the last moment. I used to work in Biochemistry. Our first rule of publication was "leave out the details that will baffle and confuse the "general" public, and present only quantifiable easily explainable facts or thereabouts". Meaning if it sounds like something that can be open to vast questions and time consuming details then the public need not know the full story.

The same goes for UFO's. To many people want to ask questions they know nothing of. Using what they understand of aircraft here on earth they try to transfer that to aircraft from elsewhere. Nothing from elsewhere will make sense unless humans discover it here for themselves. The Ancient Aliens (if they did come here) may of lent a tool or two and some basic understanding of structures to the Egyptians but let them figure out the way and then build it.
Its partly why the Pyramids are what they are and not nice high rises and condos.

People will only believe what they have been told or what they have learnt. Neither are solid measuring devises when it comes understanding things that may be other worldly.

I am a non believer in so much as I do not believe what people say about thing that are not quite explainable. I do though know that some things in this category are true. I can not presume that others know what they have seen but some people also do not know what they had. Da Vinci dreamed of flying till the day he died. He never stopped designing (on paper) what he thinks it would take to fly. People on here do not take that same motivation and transfer it to what would it take to travel the stars. All this anti gravity stuff is way to complicated for it to be practical. Maybe the BHAGAVAD GITA does more to explain what it takes then what we are led to believe by our science community. I have read it, twice in some parts.