The Best UFO Picture... This Could Be The Smoking Gun !!!

Nice pictures....But why was it reffered to as an FS-143 Saucer? What, do we have names for different production models? And if so, they obviously must have been known about for a LONG time to be catagorized as such. Kind of odd for so,eone in the military to let that one slip.

You know what I find interesting......All it takes is for one person to call some photos a hoax, and there goes the domino effect.

Did you ever think that this could be the scenario:

The photos of a real ufo were somehow leaked to the public. Now the military has to come up with a story to make anyone who believes in these photos seem foolish. So, a "hoax" story is put out by someone in the military or government who got scared. I'll tell ya what....these look like NO disco lights I've ever seen.

Looks like it should be on the cover of a Boston album...

I'll tell ya what....these look like NO disco lights I've ever seen.

But i,ll tell you what. they do look like a disco lighting rig i HAVE see

Hey, in keeping with the theme of this thread, I have another "smoking gun" UFO!

Can't debunk da funk!



[edit on 15-5-2006 by Hermes Trismegitus]

Originally posted by Dialsoap
Looks like it should be on the cover of a Boston album...

Ha Ha...I cant look at it and get "More Than A Feeling" out my head.

I thought it like looked like an illuminated Sombrero for night time festivals

The main problem I have (other than the chicken or the egg argument about alleged UFO and Disco light rig) is the lack of other objects to bring the alleged UFO into context.

I would have thought any decent photographer (and the originator appears to have had decent gear for the day, so is it reasonably safe to say hes no Muppet....photographically anyway?) would have taken shots other than maxed out zoom of "any" event, to frame it in context IMHO.

OK now it's the late 70's and it's in the Pontiac Silver Dome just north of Detroit and the band is ELO !!!!! Does that ring a bell with ANYBODY. Google ELO not UFO. I may have been a bit of a mess but the light show was GREAT!!!!


mikell

congrats to longhairedcowboy, the field needs more experts like you. wayabove from me!


@croaker013


is this your age 13? i hope you get banned soon untill then you are on ignore from me. (not for starting the thread but for your lame response to longhairedcowboy!)


i really think there should be some kind of iq-test at least for threadstarters, nuff said.




[edit on 15-5-2006 by hoeon]

I stand corrected Agent_T. Now I HAVE seen a disco light like that! hehe

Originally posted by MrChipps
You know what I find interesting......All it takes is for one person to call some photos a hoax, and there goes the domino effect.

Did you ever think that this could be the scenario:

The photos of a real ufo were somehow leaked to the public. Now the military has to come up with a story to make anyone who believes in these photos seem foolish. So, a "hoax" story is put out by someone in the military or government who got scared. I'll tell ya what....these look like NO disco lights I've ever seen.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Mix in a little bit of 50% rubbish and 50% true story to throw the punters off the scent. Plausible deniability in action.

Originally posted by croaker013
I found this out about the camera and the film used.

The Canon T-9- was set up with a spacer, two 2-2 X multipliers and 500 mm mirror lens with five filters. The lens package was 2000 mm plus. The speed of the film using the film push process is close to 3000. The camera was set up to take scenery at a distance. The computerized camera with computer chips was set to open the aperture as wide as possible.

Commander Bethune was told by Bill Sherwood of Kodak that the object photographed with this package used on the camera was about five miles distant and would be 100 feet in diameter.ASA Kodak 400 or above film was used. Push processing was ordered when developing the film.

That should tell you all you need to know to figure out it's bogus

a 500mm mirror lens back then had a f-stop of around f/8, each 2x multipliers would add 2 f-stops so we end up with an f/32. Shooting an image at night with a f/32 would require a loooong exposure. Using a long exposure while hand holding the camera would just get you a blurry squiggle, and not an in focus shot. Even pushing the film to 3200 (2 stops) will not help in this case. Not to mention a 2000mm lens is gona shake like Shakira's hips even in the best lighting conditions.

Second pushing the film 2 stops (3200, not 3,000 as stated) would leave you with a very very grainy image.

Thirdly, the Canon T-90 exposure system will not work with 2 multipliers installed. So fiddling with he buttons on the back wont do you much good.

To be honest it wasn't a particularly convincing photo, what with it being suspiciously dark and all. I've seen far better, more convincing video footage. Besides, no right minded rational person would say that any one photo/video could be deemed "The Smoking Gun", it can only be judged as good evidence - nothing more.

I've already come to my own conclusion about UFOs, or more specifically the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis: I believe that some UFOs do indeed belong to extraterrestrial civilisation(s) and that the United States government at least knows this.

However, UFOs will never become "reality" in the hearts and minds of the general public unless George W Bush or one of his successors decides to go public with everything they know.

is it just me or does that look like it could have been a shot from a movie?

The craft is NOT real. I know who built it, and what it was used for. The bottom blue specked ball is called a Jet-Eye, the rest is aluminum and plexi. It sat in a warehouse in Baltimore for years. I believe it's been dismantled some time ago.

The spotlights are seen volumetrically because of the use of a hazer, and on board smoke machine, which is the same apparatus used to do laser shows and make spotlight beam effects.

I met Bethune many years ago when he sold these pictures at a MUFON meeting. I bought them just to show/tell the builder his craft was photographed obviously by a stage hand, and somehow Bethune got ahold of them. We laughed for a long while about that. It almost became a running joke in the shop. The craft according to the builder was used by Judas Priest (among others over the years) one night when playing in Baltimore. It was originally built for an indoor sports event team entrance.

Bethune at the time I spoke to him was an avid proponent of Venusians, and other way out 1960's sounding sci-fi stories.

No smoking gun here.

reply to post by croaker013

well i opened this in photoshop and used the "sharpen edges" tool on it and i hope i'm losing it but it looks like two figures on the right in the lower portion on the right side in the "beam"..better get this professionally anazlyed..

kinda reminds me of an old earth,wind and fire set..

If there are any aliens here you should phone home and tell the folks to put lots of lights and some smoke on their vehicles. As you see, we humans are attracted to such things.

Yes, we chase flying objects with lights like dogs chase cars.

And this little tip should save you a great deal of time in your hunt and your anal probes should stay warm. Something we can both appreciate.

Full story on this here

The photos are from an old Hungarian B movie, sci-fi, with terrible acting. I watched it at a hotel in Budapest in 1983. The story was like an X-Files episode, and followed a man trying to make contact with them. In the end it was never explained what they were, and the 'ufo' appeared towards the end, at the climax to the movie. I don't recall the movie title and did not understand the language at them time.

Originally posted by denythestatusquo

Originally posted by free_spirit
The unfamous 1989 Nashville, Tennessee photos were exposed in the 90's as a hoax. The " saucer craft " was just a light show device from a disco and the smoke just a smoke machine very popular among disco clubs.

www.rense.com...

Case closed.

quote of first post in thread:

"These photographs were allegedly taken on September 27, 1989, near Nashville, Tennessee and used to build a model for theatrical events. The photographs show columns of light shining down from the craft. Our spotlights do not function in this manner."

what I wanna know is this: which came first, the copy or the real deal?

Also, you were eager to say these were fakes and then post that link but why did not not take into consideration the statement I copied from the first post in this thread?

the second i saw those pics, the 'columns of light' looked exactly like illuminated columns of smoke. the kind you might see at a concert, club, lazer/fireworks show at the amusement park. and besides does that make sense to you?
"hey we have pics of a real UFO here. undeniable proof, what should we do with this?"
"i know, use it to model our opreyland set and then just put them away."