ufo's over pentagon 1949

reply to post by Givenmay


I think your embossed version shows what I'm seeing. The highlights appear to be from the right, while the building in the image is highlighted from the left.

And would the jpeg artifacting, shown as an irregular rectangular around the objects, be present in a scanned image?



[edit on 13-3-2008 by MrPenny]

Hi, I am Bobby Ricketts and I was invited to this post this morning. I saw where someone search and found the website on the Pentagon Attack Monument. My son Joey raised over $12,000 and built the monument here in Lynchburg. Donald Rumsfeld invited us to the Pentagon in 2006 and "loaned" Joey a chunk of the limestone facade from the 2001 attack to place on top of his monument. You'll probably also see Beaversmill.com about the discovery my Dad and I made in 2003.
Totally unrelated is the picture I reluctantly sent to Coast to Coast. I thought at first the slide had damage or dust on it, like so many of them do. When I look at the compressed image I sent to Lex to post on the C2C website I too see the pixels around the objects. Any of the slides I scan have this pixel look around darker objects which are in a light field when compressed.
I will upload a better image to this post, but it may be too large.
By the way, I use my Epson Perfection 3590 Photo scanner to scan slides. It is a long process to scan at superhigh resolution (3000dpi+), but it pays off in the end.
I love the color pictures of DC in the 40's since I have never seen any.
Thanks for your interest and I would be happy to join the discussion.
Bobby ---Ok, I am having trouble figuring out how to upload a picture. If you are interested in the picture email me and I will send it to you and maybe one of you guys can put it on the post. [email protected] Thanks

One thing that maybe worth highlighting is airships were still in service in 1949.

I am not saying that is definately what is in this photo but it might be worth finding out if any airships took part in the 4th july celebrations that year.

The Goodyear Aircraft Company of Akron, Ohio built the M-class blimp for the US Navy as the follow-on to the K-class anti-submarine warfare blimp used during World War II. It was a significantly larger airship. Four airships, designated M-1 through M-4, were delivered in early 1944. Operations of K-ships in tropical regions had shown a need for a blimp with greater volume to offset the loss of lift due to high ambient temperatures.

A contract was awarded to the Goodyear Aircraft Company for the prototype M-class blimp on August 16, 1943. This contract was followed by another contract on September 11, 1943 for 21 M-class blimps. These airships were given the Navy designation of ZNP-M, (Z = lighter-than-air; N = non-rigid; P = patrol; M = type/class.) However, on November 22, 1944, the quantity of blimps was reduced to four. These were delivered to the Navy in February, March, and April 1944. The M-Class airships were retired from service by 1956. The gondola of the M-4 was remained in the conservation area at Lakehurst until the mid-1970s,

The M-class blimps were three hundred and ten feet (94.49 m) long with a 117 foot (35.66 m) long control car. In order to maintain the proper loading on the catenary, the control car was built in three sections with universal joints between the sections. The catenary is the webbing internal to the envelope from which the control car is hung from the top of the envelope. Control of the weight distribution from the catenary is necessary to control wrinkling of the envelope. The capacity of the envelope of the M-1 was 625,000 cu ft (17,698 m³) with an increase in capacity to 647,000 cu ft (18,321 m³) for M-2 through M-4. These airships were powered by two Pratt & Whitney radial air-cooled engines.

en.wikipedia.org...

Here it is. Thanks for the help in uploading this. I had online storage and have stored the image there. The image had to be reduced a little in order for it not to take minutes to download, but it is in much better resolution than the C2C website.

thanks for that pic with the higher res did you realise there are 5 objects
in this pic theres the 4 in the high res pic and the in the pic from the CtoC site theres the other close to the flag pole on the right and could they be forming a pentagonal shape.

[edit on 13-3-2008 by ST SIR 86]

reply to post by beaversmill


This pic looked nothing like the one on C2C, it was much better!
I did'nt see any of the blotchy colors around the ufo's!

reply to post by beaversmill


Bobby, thank you for the hi-res versions! Why do these look artificially colored? Do you have any more info. on "how" these ships dissapeared? Can you upload the photo of the boy who got "Zapped" by a ship? Thanks again. Great post.

Looks really fake to me. Could be bad Photoshop work. Just my opinion. The "ufo's" don't have the same "noise" as the rest of the pic.

[edit on 13-3-2008 by mytquin]

the OP's original photo here enlarged look like this. IMHO it looks like it's "pressed" into the original photo with "dents" on the edges of the saucers, but...
i saw beavers photo and it looks more authentic.
now i say, pretty, pretty find. good luck.

Well since they were driving when the shot was taken heres my guess.

Mud on a window. And or spots that got on the picture after it was developed ..
I hate not being able to see the negativities . Without them it make things like this impossible to ever come to a real conclusion .
Thanks for posting tho. I do love to speculate

Originally posted by oLDWoRLDDiSoRDeR


Mud on a window. And or spots that got on the picture after it was developed ..

I'm not saying those are ufo's, but mud to me is out of the question. If you've seen the hi-res images, they are clearly saucer shaped and yellowish. If you have any photos of yellow saucer mud, I would be interested in seeing them.

i love the appearance of yellow streak on the rightmost UFO (yeah let me call it that). a streak after an object for me means movement. so it might scratch a lot of possibilities like photoshop, double exposure, image painted or drawn. the photographer found something odd flying in the pentagon fly zone and took photographs of them.
there should be millions of radar recon that day...

[edit on 13-3-2008 by beastamerica]

reply to post by beastamerica


How come it looks like the same streak a cartoon character might make. Kinda' cartoonish? It isn't the same dimensions as the object.

And I still think the highlight is on the wrong side.

The camera is a small 35mm which produced a slide half the size of the usual 35mm. The film was inserted in the cardboard holder in 1949 and has not been removed. The ragged edge is the cardboard which partially overlaps the film.

reply to post by beastamerica


The images blown up on here like the one from beastamerica seem to also have been blurred out further because the images I saw when I blew the photo up ( with even a simple paint program) showed incredible distortion around the images. Predominately the ufo's.....actually ONLY the ufo's everything else in the photos seem to be seamless. This photo (IMHO of doing lot's of graphics work for webpages) can only lead me to one conclusion,...this is unequivocally and categorically a fake. You can even simply blow it up in the default 'Windows' image viewer and see the distortion. It just seems odd, that everything is seamless in the photo except the "anomalies" in question. I'm sorry, but this isn't even a decent fake. I believe there is something weird out there. What is in the skies is invariably ostensible, however, I don't know if it's a product of government imagination brought to fruition or if, indeed, we have reverse engineered gravity distorting, reality embellishing craft from outside of our solar system/parallel universe. I know something is flying in our skies ....I have seen them. I do know one thing, THIS is not an event that we should even be discussing. What are those skittles? They are orange.......if these things rely on stealth these particular craft are about as stealth as a stumped toe. The might be overlooked in candyland or something, but this photo is undeniably faked.

reply to post by VisionQuest


Still looks like dirt . If there were moving the "mud" would be exactly like that , Small yellow streaks and all . Definitely looks like a splatter to me . But i dont have the negatives like i said . Who does?

Actually, without actually analyzing the slide itself, first person by an expert, we have no way to tell from that image. It would be one of the easier digital hoaxes to do by 'framing' your image with a slide. Also, it is not hard to make slides yourself from a direct computer to film transfer.

Do it yourself...
Printing 35mm Slides on the Polaroid ProPalette 7000 pdf instructions

or commercially...
Replicolor: Slides from Digital, Digital to Slides

I imagine that you could run older 35mm film through the film recorder so that the age is close to 'right', but I am a bit worried about the date of 1949.

It would have been a novelty, especially shooting slides, because it destroys your negative. I would think that not too many individuals would just happen to have color 35mm slide film in 1949, but it was a holiday.

Either way, upon close examination, the objects look a bit fudged or not of the scene.
DocMoreau

“We were out for the 4th of July celebration that day when we saw cars in front of us slowing down and looking out their window. Joan (2 year-old daughter) was in the back seat and Mary (wife) was sitting beside me. I remember Mary gasping for air as if she spotted a ghost. It scared me, so I slowed down and asked her what was the matter. She said, “Look!” I looked in the direction she was pointing and was amazed at what I saw. There were several objects flying over the vicinity of the Pentagon. We had not seen many aircraft at all that 4th of July so even if they had been earthly aircraft I would have been surprised. But they weren’t! They were shaped different than anything I had seen flying in the area. They had the ability to slow down and speed up like no aircraft the Air Force had. I quickly told Mary to get my camera out of her purse, where she had been carrying it during our picnic on the mall in DC that day. The camera took great color pictures you know."

www.coasttocoastam.com...

As i said, IMHO it would be useless every attempt to "analyze" the scans of a slide.
Anyway, since there's a story, since the owner of the slide joined ats and already shared a better scan of the slide, and since we have a great resident expert, i hope that we'll be so nice to put the words "fake" and "hoax" to rest unless we're able to provide evidences


[edit on 13/3/2008 by internos]

I'm not a photo/slide expert but I zoomed in at 1,000%,3,000% and 5,000% and didn't see anything abnormal.All the pixels seemed homogenous.
From my perspective, it doesn't look like the ufos were pasted on.
I'll still be waiting to hear from our experts though.
Good find!Welcome to ATS beaversmill.

Star & Flag

Originally posted by citizen truth

Good find!Welcome to ATS beaversmill.

Oooops!
And yes:
Welcome to ATS, beaversmill

[edit on 13/3/2008 by internos]