More "Anonymous" Chicago UFO images

Anyone know which nuclear plant this was supposed to be near? Looks rural - horse fencing - maybe Byron IL?

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Springer
I look at this as simply more data, the more the merrier, until Jeff Ritzmann and David Biedny have had a chance to tear these down to the pixel I am standing by on these, but wow they are impressive in appearence.

Biedny never posted anything about the photos and Ritzmann didn't post his analysis in the thread, he posted it somewhere else on ATS and the link is dead. What happened to his analysis board and is there anyway to read his conclusions?

Originally posted by jritzmann
I'm putting a write up on these photos on my ATS Analysis board in 2 minutes that includes a 4th shot that no one has yet seen.
My ATS Analysis Board

Have a look, the 4th shot is very interesting.

Originally posted by draknoir2
Anyone know which nuclear plant this was supposed to be near? Looks rural - horse fencing - maybe Byron IL?

I think it's this one:

41°15'03.31" N 88°39'20.67" W

About 60 miles SW of Chicago

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist


I alos, would like to know if there has been any follow up to this. I would encourage the witnesses' son to contact an investigating organization like Aerial Phenomenon:

www.aerial-phenomenon.org...

person who took this photo i believe must be inside this corridor or atleast around it(directions not exact).

originally posted by: vor78

I'm no photographic expert and I do believe the images are real and unaltered, but there's one problem with the image that's a function of the camera itself. Looking at the tree tops, there is a large degree of chromatic abberation visible. For those that don't know, CA is caused by achromatic lenses that cannot bring all wavelengths of the visible spectrum of light to the same focus. Usually, the blue/purple end of the spectrum is what ends up unfocused and is most apparent in areas of high contrast (for example, the full moon will usually exhibit neon blue halo in cheap binoculars).

Why is this a problem? Look at the bottom of the object in question. Its the same hue as the CA being exhibited in the top of the treeline. There's probably a significant loss of detail there, and what looks like the smooth bottom of a UFO may simply be an artifact of unfocused blue wavelengths of light.

I'm not saying that there's nothing of interest here. It definitely seems to exhibit the classic flying disc shape. I'm simply pointing out a potential argument that could be made against the image.

It's also a plus because at least it shows that the photo is of a real object out there in the sky. If it was perfectly focused and the trees were out of focus - CA - there'd be problems.