Drone UFO pics on C2C

Originally posted by denythestatusquo

Originally posted by 10538

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
First off, I haven't posted on this site for some months now due to the large number of debunkers and agents that I used to see around here.

Thanks for coming forward. I don't blame you for being hesitant. About these agents you speak of. Who do they work for and what do they do?

They work for the 'brotherhood' either directly or indirectly, their job is to contain exposure to the true world order until the elected time arrives.

When that time comes they will not be needed any longer for that purpose.

Also, despite the desperate efforts to explain away the image I find the following after reading each subsequent post:

- poor representation of the object especially in detail
- poor justification for the composite image they claim exists
- furthermore, no attempt whatsoever to understand what the object could be except as a figment of somebody's imagination
- regards the images being worked with, what did C2C do with them? if anything? does anybody here know?
- there is a lot of discussion of shadows and size of the object but we are not in a perspective to see shadow from any of the images
- there is talk about focus but the main focus should always be on the chosen image in the picture
- in the image crafto506076b.jpg the one arm of the probe is in fact before the tips of the tree branches of the tree on the right. This is consistent from our angle of observance as I see no other area where the device is behind the branches of this tree.

Dude. I just spent 6 hours looking at these pictures. And trust me, I wanted to believe. In fact I was just about to post I was convinced it was an object in the sky when I sat down and tried to analyze my initial "gut" feeling. I just felt tired when I after 5 hours stumpled upon the final one below.

I went into it with a totally open mind, I would somehow been happier if it weren't such an obvious well played hoax.



Cheers



Edit to note: I love this forum

[edit on 7-5-2007 by lasse]

after finally reading through all the posts, i really dont see why this is still going on. Although everyone has their reasons, their "sources" and their own personal stories, images and facts speak louder that words. Xphiles and lasse both threw out massive amounts of factual evidence in support of their ideas, while other people say theyve seen the real thing and can tell, but have no support.

regarding the pictures, like many others, i felt that things were off. we all live in a 3d world, and when pictures are transfered into 2d, they still hold their aspects. One can determine relative depth and size by the surroundings, especially when given elements in the fore and background. With the looking at the images including the cell phone image the size seems to waiver a bit. The craft is entirely in focus, even though it appears quite long. If this was so, it would have the same attributes, the closest most focused area would be crisp, while the farthest wing/tail would be less crisp. The trees should also follow these rules. However both the trees in the foreground and background are out of focus, even when the craft transcends all these grounds. Light is one of the most difficult aspects to comprehend because it is so complex and has the ability to bend and refract. When looking at the craft, it does not have natural light play.

Lastly, the story is quite shakey. If one came across an object that was clearly just sitting there, one would take pictures if possible. The woman used her camera phone to take pictures. Knowing that she has a phone, and the object was just staying there, wouldnt one make a call to a friend or someone and tell them to bring some cameras/recorders? If you have enough time to walk around it and get various angles, there would be plenty of time for someone to come with more ways to capture the craft. Also, if the other photos are on actual film, why didnt the woman continue to take more phone pictures, theyre not great, but wouldnt you want to have multiple pictures to only further your evidence. They managed to get a handful of photos on a stationary craft, even after they visited the site 4 days later to have it remain. Wouldnt someone bring another camera to maybe get pictures of the environment, ground, trees, etc, let alone the craft?

IMHO its a really well played hoax, and the evidence that people are presenting only furthers this. Im not trying to close my mind to the events at hand. Ive seen some sh*t. But we also cant accept everything without scrutinizing it and taking things with a grain of salt. And if you read all this, thank you ^_^

Haha, this guy has a few days to get back to the spot and capture better evidence of the craft, and all he takes back with him is a friend's digital camera? You'd think that he'd take a video camera or something to capture this once...err...twice in a lifetime opportunity as best as he can, yet all he takes is a digital camera and takes 3 shots. 3 Shots!

Originally posted by Drexon
In the pic where you can see "it" from beneath you can make out some letters, right? Well one of them is the Japanese katakana letter fur "fu", shown here beneath. The rest of them aren't as far as I can say (then again, I'm an amateur at Japanese letters).

I know katakana, hiragana and a slew of kanji. Drexon, you are correct. The "fu" symbol (above) is the only Japanese character.

Thank you Lasse, bra jobbat! Now let's leave this hoax behind us and head on to the next one

I am personally convinced the original post of this is genuine, and he has stumbled upon an advanced flying vehicle.
I would tend to think the vehicle is of this planet, possibly a secret military or scientific project. My reasons for saying this: the vehicle or object has writing on it that looked at first glance to me to be Hebrew or similar. Secondly, the vehicle was found again some time later, which made me think that it was of local origin, as it had not disappeared into space or another time portal. As for the debate over fuzzy or clear pics, I do not consider that to be relevant. Cameras are taking ever faster and faster photo images, early cameras would tend to be slower, and would return unclear or blurred/fuzzy pics.
I read the book by Corso, and do believe he passed onto us some very interesting and relevant information about the existance of equipment gathered from alien technologies that have and are being reverse engineered and introduced to us over time. I do believe we are being visited and conditioned to eventually accept that there are alien races who are more advanced than us. We may eventually find alien races among the stars that are significantly inferior to us, as we are not the most advanced creature around, in fact we are pretty primative in a lot of respect.
My Feelings, but open to opinion.

[edit on 7/5/2007 by Mukiwa]

[edit on 7/5/2007 by Mukiwa]

These are really great pics a little different than the usual fare: really eye-popping, to be forever known as the "Egg Beaters" I hope to see them in the next coffee-table UFO book as a fine example.

Absolutely great! But real?

Originally posted by davidbiedny
Springer,

Don't bother blasting this to Jeff, I promise you that he'll concur with my assessment. It's a so-so rendered ship composited on photographic backgrounds. The Photoshop tags are meaningless. EOS.

dB

Then reproduce it if it's so easy. I'm sick of comments like this.

Again, do it if its so easy. I challenge ANYONE here in ATS to come half as close as these original pictures.

It's easy to sit back and say fake, easy to make but most are all talk and no action. Reproduce it or your claims are moot.

And to Lasse saying he can see a smiley face...you must be kidding me....The mouth of your "smiley face does not even line up. You're really reaching man. If you're going to try to debunk it at least try to look like you know what you're talking about.

"No pixel variation, tells me its either object in sky or cgi" lmao What a definitive and mind blowing comment...and he got points for this debunk? I'm sorry but I don't know why half the people here even try to debunk something when they have no clue what they are talking about. Most of these debunks are as crazy as most of these UFO posts.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by d1k]

Originally posted by lasse
Edit: I got some points

I humbly take a bow for the ops.

You deserve it. Good work!

Originally posted by d1k

Originally posted by davidbiedny
Springer,

Don't bother blasting this to Jeff, I promise you that he'll concur with my assessment. It's a so-so rendered ship composited on photographic backgrounds. The Photoshop tags are meaningless. EOS.

dB

Then reproduce it if it's so easy. I'm sick of comments like this.

Again, do it if its so easy. I challenge ANYONE here in ATS to come half as close as these original pictures.

It's easy to sit back and say fake, easy to make but most are all talk and no action. Reproduce it or your claims are moot.

And to Lasse saying he can see a smiley face...you must be kidding me....The mouth of your "smiley face does not even line up. You're really reaching man. If you're going to try to debunk it at least try to look like you know what you're talking about.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by d1k]

sigh. why don't you go a page back in the conversation?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

i had to add the smiley since appearantly it was hard to catch. why not catch up on the conversation before getting all hostile and acting a fool?

i don't care for people spouting fake this or fake that either without substance.

relax.

Originally posted by lasse

sigh. why don't you go a page back in the conversation?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

i had to add the smiley since appearantly it was hard to catch. why not catch up on the conversation before getting all hostile and acting a fool?

i don't care for people spouting fake this or fake that either without substance.

relax.

Why are you assuming I need to catch up on the conversation. I've read every single post in this thread so far. Do you honestly think I think your red animated smiely face was in the picture???

As I said. You're reaching and if anthing is foolish it's your debunk.

My point is people here on ATS will take a "less then educated" debunk like that as valid and that is truly a sad thing. Yes there is a freedom of speech and people can voice their opinion but debunks like yours are what causes 99.9% of ATS to claim 99.9% of every UFO picture fake and it's anything but intelligent let alone factual.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by d1k]

Ahem.

Keep it civil.

has no one said anything about this looking like a modded ceiling fan...

i mean come on. stick some wire or something in fan before its been put up. you you've got a ufo.

its kinda obvious this is a hoax

I only have one thing to post for this...



Yeah, its BS. Proven in this thread, too crisp, photoshop, not only that it looks terrestrial. So it was a bad job.

Originally posted by d1k

Originally posted by lasse

sigh. why don't you go a page back in the conversation?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

i had to add the smiley since appearantly it was hard to catch. why not catch up on the conversation before getting all hostile and acting a fool?

i don't care for people spouting fake this or fake that either without substance.

relax.

Why are you assuming I need to catch up on the conversation. I've read every single post in this thread so far. Do you honestly think I think your red animated smiely face was in the picture???

As I said. You're reaching and if anthing is foolish it's your debunk.

My point is people here on ATS will take a "less then educated" debunk like that as valid and that is truly a sad thing. Yes there is a freedom of speech and people can voice their opinion but debunks like yours are what causes 99.9% of ATS to claim 99.9% of every UFO picture fake and it's anything but intelligent let alone factual.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by d1k]

Geez. No I didn't think you thought the animation was in the picture. Insecure are we? When you spoke of "my smiley" I though you were talking about the red i scribbled on there (which is mine..the other one is credit of whoever did the pic).The smiley in the picture is in a bubble, like a cute little 3d oval.

I assumed you had not read the thread because it sounded like you thought I had spent no time on this. Also I would expect you to bring something to the table other than moaning if you had read it and didn't agree? Like what was wrong with the other "findings" or whatever to call it.

I honestly don't get what your so upset about, peoples difference in opinion?
I sat down with these images because I wanted to prove to myself they were real, then I became upset when I started finding (to me) rather obvious errors.

Oh man this could go on and on but I'm tired..so nevermind and take care! End of this thread for me, cheerios.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by lasse]

Wait so the first photos are with a cellphone (thus bad quality) and then the craft stayed around or reappeared a few days later for the poster to take BETTER pictures? Yea fake. Looks to me to be a scale model rather than cgi photoshopped.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by greatlakes]

So when pictures have too much pixels in them they are sure fakes but when they have no pixels in them they are fakes too?

Haha, that's pretty funny.

The only one who can see a smiley face out of that spot in the photo is the one who looked at this picture for hours bias-Ly trying to prove it was a hoax.

After hours of looking and unable to find any evidence it was a hoax he turns to madness and interprets the cause of his misery coming from the person who took the photo.

And then when his mind can't take it anymore he sees a smiley face due to the sheer madness and denial that the picture could very well be real.

Madman:But no it can't be real, it just cant!!! the smiley look !!! oh there it is!!!! It can't be real i can see a smiley face!!!! "shaking intensely and bitting his nails'' sheer madness of denial if you ask me.

(I'm exaggerating and making jokes but i think to see a smiley face in that spot is pushing it too far)

Sorry but no one was able to prove this was a hoax so far.

The possibility remains that it could be real.

Dig deeper.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by selfless]

This is funny... really.

To most sensible people, it has been shown considerably by several people that it could easily be a fake set of images. Not to say it is easy to do, but saying that there is enough evidence to show that it can be done. (look at some of the WIP 3D models for instance... a nice, hi-res skin and there you have it).

It seems that some people need these photos to be real. Regardless of what is presented, we are all disinformants or desperate to prove it a hoax. Come on. Be serious here, there is nothing wrong with fair skepticism. You all complain about how hardline the skeptics are, look at yourselves.

Originally posted by greatlakes
Wait so the first photos are with a cellphone (thus bad quality) and then the craft stayed around or reappeared a few days later for the poster to take BETTER pictures? Yea fake. Looks to me to be a scale model rather than cgi photoshopped.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by greatlakes]

Why is it not possible that the ufo has a task to accomplish in that area?

Yes it could be a photos shopped job but it could also be a real photo.

There's really no way to prove either yet.

*sigh* ill just always have my video camera, digital camera, portable news crew and alien writing dictionary with me at all times so i can prove myself when i finally see a ufo. lol (haven't seen on yet which sucks) oh yeah and ill get a lasso so i can wrestle that sucker down to earth and have a webcam chat with it on the ats forums come on guys this isn't worth getting angry at... we all have our opinions and just need to respect different ideas.