It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
This is another fake... a really bad one...
The object in question isn't more than 7 feet away from the photographer, and the object itself is only about 12 inches long, in picture stormclouds014.
These hoaxers are really making me mad.
[edit on 11-6-2009 by 0nce 0nce]
Originally posted by Bspiracy
Is that so? care to explain a little better?
It's so useless to have your kind of posts floating around..
b
Originally posted by Xtraeme
Since a lot of people are having a hard time negotiating the size differences of the foreground and background objects, I threw together a very rough guide. I expect my approximations are correct within an error margin of about ±1' - 2' for the height of the lamp post and ±6" for the bulb. Note however that this is compounded when you factor in scaling. So I could easily be as far off as ± 20' for the depth & height of the tree. As a rough guide, I didn't account for perspective scaling / distortion ( assuming anyone cares about this level of precision ).
[snipped photo]
Image
My guess is the object is several hundred if not a thousand+ feet behind the tree. Making it fairly large. Though I admit I could be completely wrong.
Edit: Note the reason I think this, is because if it was an RC we would likely see more details on the craft. However we don't. All of the finer features are at the edge of visibility.
[edit on 11-6-2009 by Xtraeme]
Originally posted by Bspiracy
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
Originally posted by Bspiracy
Originally posted by defcon2
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/65d3aa78eb0d.jpg[/atsimg]
The "noise" is also around the trees...and I'm pretty sure the trees are really there.
However, even though I think the craft was really there (not CGI), I also think it was just an RC toy or something. As I said before, I think it is too close to the camera -- and thus too small -- to be an "actual" craft.
[edit on 6/10/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]
Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
Either I am psychic, or you have some type of involvement with this hoax.
I'm leaning more towards you being involved in some way. Other than that I can't understand why you would defend fake images.
Originally posted by TailoredVagabond
reply to post by Xtraeme
I'm not sure I agree. Did Nasa ever make different variants of this particular scramjet model???
The back of the craft in these images is tapered, whereas the Nasascramjet in the pic you showed was 'flat'/'squared' (straight).
Ergo if they didn't, though similar looking, these arent the same (type of) craft.
Originally posted by NightVision
May I make a suggestion? You 'could' spend your time wisely and try contributing to this forum, rather than spending it igniting feuds.
Originally posted by JustAThought
Anyone who've worked with photography will tell you this is a tear in the negative straight away!
Sorry but that's my 2 cents.
Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
You know what is even more funny?
After looking at the EXIF data of these HOAX images, I found that the camera used to take the pictures was a "MINOLTA DiMAGE Z5".
My first thought was WOW, that is almost the same type of camera they used in the C2C California Drone HOAX, a "MINOLTA DiMAGE X". (rare cameras)
It turns out, back in 2007 YOU, Bspiracy, made a thread regarding the California Drone HOAX.... that is a very weird coincidence.
If my memory serves me right, you also spent a lot of time defending that HOAX too.....
Bspiracy's blind defence of a CGI hoax.
fishy fishy fishy
---edit---
LOL, turns out the person who started this thread also made a Drone thread....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
....hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Page 11, at 6/11, by 11 11.
[edit on 11-6-2009 by 0nce 0nce]
Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
reply to post by Bspiracy
because half of your posts make you look like you are involved.
--
About this HOAX, well, you people need to prove that images are real. We don't need to prove they are fake. All UFO digital images are FAKE until proven real. It's not the 90's anymore...
--
Also, I wasn't attacking you, I was milking you for information. It's good to know you still think the drones are real, and that you have some type of information that you promise not to share because of privacy.
My ways are mysterious... you'll think I'm doing exactly what I'm not.
--
Back on topic... THIS SIGHTING IS A HOAX. The object is CGI. The devil is in the details.
Not only does the object appear to "pop out" of the image because of false depth of field, but the edges lack any type of silhouette light distortion.
PROVE IT IS REAL. It is FAKE until then.
I don't see any proof that it is real.
[edit on 11-6-2009 by 0nce 0nce]
Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
On this account, I have 7 applause out of 88 posts. You have 5 applause out of 997 posts... I think I win.
Originally posted by 0nce 0nceNot only does the object appear to "pop out" of the image because of false depth of field, but the edges lack any type of silhouette light distortion.
I did receive this information today from him [C. Salvo].
I would say the sighting lasted 30 seconds, the 3 photos taken about 14 seconds.
(according to the time stamp on each photo. How fast? I couldn't even take a guess.
From an earlier statement, I can conclude that the object was far enough away to not be over any ground objects, trees, etc.