UFO outside airplane window

Originally posted by abcddcba

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
The second photo UFO was never given a zoom in yet and
the UFO look at an angle.
It might be a totally different craft.
And the third photo of little rain clouds is certainly harboring
a craft in an envelope of air radiating dark violet light.

in that 3rd picture i see a dirty window with white clouds, some landmass in the middle, a reflection of the guy taking the picture and what i beleive to be either the print on someones shirt in the background or a seat cushion with a design on a blue background.


i dont see any dark violet light that may be harboring a craft.
www.flickr.com...this pic
[edit on 8-7-2009 by abcddcba]

[edit on 8-7-2009 by abcddcba]

I only uploaded these because someone asked for more images of the flight. Personally i dont think there is anything of interest on them.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


EESH please explain to me ionized air clouds... it seems that was left out of my meteorology curriculum.

but then again...

Good photo Wobbly,

Just curious if you, or anyone has seen any of these types...:



Found in a small gallery here...:

www.futureofmankind.co.uk...


Peace
***

the sun is reflecting directly from the middle of the starboard engine indicating the sun at a position at the observers 12 o'clock, there is quite a lot of sheet cloud below the object, so really there should be a shadow.

Originally posted by JaRod7
Good photo Wobbly,

Just curious if you, or anyone has seen any of these types...:



Found in a small gallery here...:

www.futureofmankind.co.uk...


Peace
***

Ive heard of Billy myers, but i havnt seen that particular image.

OK then, here's a closer look at the larger craft in the center of the flight of three in the previous link...:



Peace

***

Originally posted by dan steely
the sun is reflecting directly from the middle of the starboard engine indicating the sun at a position at the observers 12 o'clock, there is quite a lot of sheet cloud below the object, so really there should be a shadow.

This has been mentioned a couple of times but the time of day was about 10.30am (give or take 15 mins). Also it was early May. We landed in Liverpool at 11.50am which was 15mins early.

Originally posted by JaRod7
OK then, here's a closer look at the larger craft in the center of the flight of three in the previous link...:



Peace

***

It's a pretty clear image (although i cant see it as the same craft from the middle of the 3), i guess Myers has said that it was the same craft......and now i know where they stole the design for patio heaters from !

reply to post by wx4caster


Those air ionizers you see blue sparks.
However under AC surrounding the craft the air becomes atomically
excited as electrons jump orbits and send out UV and the violet
light making a dark cloud comparable to a dark rain cloud.

I think its the oxygen response to electricity.
Tesla perhaps made the first air ionizer along the way to
making his perfect aircraft.

Just as high voltage makes oxygen combine to ozone think of all
the molecule combination the Tesla saucer makes as it speeds along.

Plus if the voltage makes a flame you have nitrogen burning in
high voltage giving off 12Mev to make very bright lights.

Some of this must is part of the legacy of Tesla which the holders
of his aircraft are well aware and do not disclose.

Perhaps the dark effect is only seen in photos as the craft might go
unnoticed under this effect to the naked eye and thus goes unnoticed
to the photographer at the time of taking the picture.

Well that's what I think is going on since I doubt anyone cares but
that's my ionized air story.

ED: Here is a bright object perhaps with a bright electrical - gas
interface undulating with waves giving off perhaps dark clouds
of ionized air:


[edit on 7/8/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

Just in passing, I would like to add my two cents worth.
look at the original picture:


[im][atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c4de05cd5ac8.jpg[/atsimg][/im]

Note: The vertical bars to the left and right of the supposed UFO!!!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c622f5c45c11.jpg[/atsimg]

Here it is in Deep Emboss.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9cd3346e

In Edge Detect.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/404c440c7fa1.jpg[/atsimg]

High pass Filtered.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5179e239e4cd.jpg[/atsimg]

In the last picture of just the object, the vertical lines preceeding and trailing the object can be clearly seen. Either artifacts of a cut and paste or definitely a piece of paper sticky taped to plane window.
Good try OP, close but no cigar.
Try not wasting our time in the future.

Thanks for your comments and work you've done , but i can assure you those lines are neither cut and paste nor sticky tape on the window. The window was very dirty as one of the other images i posted shows www.flickr.com...

I do appreciate your taking the time to look at the original image though, ive downloaded your altered versions of the pictures for my windows slide show. This whole thread as made a great addition to my holiday album

reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly


Yes sorry man for jumping to conclusions!!!!
Conas ata tu?
The plane's window is defo dirty and would account for the marks!!!
And it was a Ryan Air flight
Keep up the good work and keep us posted of any more sightings.

Originally posted by starwarp2000
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

 

Yes sorry man for jumping to conclusions!!!!
Conas ata tu?
The plane's window is defo dirty and would account for the marks!!!
And it was a Ryan Air flight

Keep up the good work and keep us posted of any more sightings.

I'm well, thanks

No problem, yours was one of the less bizzare critiques. Statistically speaking.

Thanks all for this truly was a amazing flight.
And those extra photos even strangler.
Well we got one of the floating triangles perhaps.
That saucer shape never was all that great.
So a flat top and bottom and vertical sides do just as well.
Good enough.
This might be all one can expect up in the air.
Low level and slow flight seem to be the best for witnesses and
then for graphic artists but the photos must be confiscated still
if the low flight show any detail.

Originally posted by Jim Scott
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

 

Looks real to me. I like that it's posted by "one of us." Helps a lot with credibility. Should show the original, tho. Lighting looks correct to me. I am a former international pilot with thousands of hours. I have flow that route, also. If the pic shows true, it is unidentified.

Or, ;-) maybe it's a suitcase falling out of another baggage compartment...part of the 1 million lost last year...

I agree, too bad the original isn't available though.

That does look a little like a bag I lost, but it's not mine, I wasn't in that part of the world when this happened

Originally posted by Wobbly Anomaly
Hi,

Just to answer a couple of points raised. I didnt 'accidentally' delete the original. I'm learning about photography and it is quite normal for 'photographers' to alter most of their images when they come off the camera as colours can look a little flat and a bit of sharpening often helps to bring the image to life. Sorry if this sounds like a photography lecture but it is my new hobby and i dont take snapshots (I dont mean that condescendingly, i mean i try to take photographs more technically than , for example, holiday snaps. Hope that makes sense !)

Once i have an image sharpened, or whatever, that becomes my original-from my point of view. I guess if i were taking scientific photos then i would consider original information to be of more value, but i'm not. To me it's just a photo that i took out of a plane window where my intention was to create an interesting composition of clouds and engine, the clouds being the most important aspect.

If your original is a jpeg, I can't understand why you would delete the original. If it was an uncompressed image and you needed to save some space, it would be easier to understand. Your whole argument about wanting to make photographs instead of snapshots sounds nice but it's actually more of an argument for keeping the original, instead of deleting it.

Originally posted by UKWO1Phot
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

 

Hi Ian, being a pro photographer the thing I was taught was never work on your original image, always work on a copy of your original. If your computer crashes or you make an irrepairable mistake the image is lost.

Just a tip..

Also never cut your images from your memory card, always copy. You can format the card once your images have transferred..

I think the pro is giving good advice here, never delete the original.

Originally posted by Wobbly Anomaly
reply to post by UKWO1Phot

 

The tip about copying from the memory card is really good, thanks. I usually open a window for the camera and drag them across to a new file on my pc. Once they are copied i delete everything on the camera and deal with the copies that are now on the pc. If the computer crashes during this, they are already saved in the file i copied them too.......I think !

Here you acknowledge that the "copy" idea is good, but don't comment on the pros suggestion to not delete the original? Have you given any thought to that? (For the future I mean, obviously this one is water under the bridge).

Your photo made for some interesting discussion though, thanks for sharing it.

Any one think the original might be recovered.
I copy the jpg from the digital camera to computer.
That my original.
Now I can send that anywhere.
This you say was reduced before posting and the large original deleted.
But you saw what looks like a disk and knew there was a great picture.

OK
I erase the images by the method in the camera and not by the
computer.
Anyone do this.
Thus images on the camera memory erased and not recoverable
as on a computer.
Any one think the original can be recovered.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

Thanks for your comments, I dont disagree with the comment about not deleting the original, but only if it holds that much value to you, i think it is a very interesting image, but thats it and i'm happy with this one. Its stored on flickr (and on here by the looks of it) and it's on my computer. I know it is'nt up to what people on here would like quality wise, theres not a lot i can say about other's expectations !

reply to post by TeslaandLyne

In Windows there is a recycle bin to recover deleted files. Then even if it's deleted from that there are recovery programs that can still recover deleted files, but I find they usually only work if I use them right after I deleted the file. Once it overwrites the space on the hard drive where the original file was located, it can no longer be recovered by any ordinary means.

Right, the same name gets over written.
I just thought of a real low possibility.
When looking a files in the browser.
The file attaches [1] or a [2] for even the same file at times.
This is in the IE catch.
The catch can be searched with the proper program.
As for FireFox I can't say where the catch is or how to check the files.
Interesting but looks hard to work at this point.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by TeslaandLyne

 

In Windows there is a recycle bin to recover deleted files. Then even if it's deleted from that there are recovery programs that can still recover deleted files, but I find they usually only work if I use them right after I deleted the file. Once it overwrites the space on the hard drive where the original file was located, it can no longer be recovered by any ordinary means.

Thats a really good idea, thanks. Ive looked and seen that there are free recovery programs, so i'll check them out.