Best UFO triangle photos I have seen

Heh Sherpa,
I've seen you are interested in UFO photos..You might enjoy checking out these photos >> www.abovetopsecret.com...

BP

Originally posted by BlackProjects
Heh Sherpa,
I've seen you are interested in UFO photos..You might enjoy checking out these photos >> www.abovetopsecret.com...

BP

Well I have to be honest and say my real interest is in FT's or flying triangles they seem to have more mileage in them to me, but thats just my opinion.

I do of course look at other photos but I don't feel as comfortable about about commenting on them.

Thanks for the link

Thanks for the image fix sherpa :-) I just dont know how to properly post an image.

reply to post by atsguy_106
ATSguy, your post contains what I'd call an example of confirmation bias. I don't see how anyone can conclude, based solely on the images, that they are fake, particularly on the basis of your perceived "direction" of what you characterize as motion blur. Your premise is that the object is moving in a certain direction, and because what you detect to be motion blur suggests movement in a direction opposite that assumed in your premise, these are fake. I've been a pro photographer for 20 years, and under the right conditions, I can make an F1 car moving at nearly 200 mph look like it's moving backward.

You also seem to be equating motion blur with what could quite possibly be camera shake. You do not consider what could conceivably be 30,000 feet (or more) between the camera sensor and object can do to magnify the most minute camera shake. You don't know anything about the shutter speed, and the interplay between it and camera shake. (My guess is that the shutter was open for a fairly long time, relatively speaking.) We would need to know so much more about the equipment and the conditions under which the images were created to deduce anything about what you detect to be motion blur.

And have you really considered your assertion that someone took the time to fake the images, and while doing so committed what you characterize as the mistake of a novice? I am a deeply skeptical person and don't believe for a minute that we're being visited by people from other worlds, but I think any fair minded person would look at these and allow that they may be images of a classified military aircraft. There is similarity between this object and those seen during the Belgian UFO flap -- an event that is awfully hard to explain, particularly with all of the military documentation -- and also in Dupo, Illinois -- another event that is awfully hard to explain, given all the police documentation. Plus, there's a very persuasive argument that the US is operating the Aurora aircraft (which seems to be different from the object in these images and those allegedly involved in the Belgian UFO flap), something which, if it exists, is unacknowledged (understandably) by the government.

I've never seen images like these. They should make you think. And hats off to anyone who faked them, because in my view, they are the best faked images of an unidentified flying object I've come across, and the description of how they were taken seems, to me, to be entirely plausible. Note also that the description is not a bit puffed up. It seems quite conservative to me and makes no conclusions about what the object might be.

reply to post by atsguy_106


It's hard to call motion blur as a selling point for photographs, we don't know how steady the photographer's hand is. Could easily have been the camera moving not the triangle.