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 Triangulum
Originally posted by TwoPhish
Is it at all possible that this bone of contention; this 'glare, was caused by light reflecting back UPWARDS into the camera's lens (causing a prism-like anomoly) from the grounds surface???
It's also possible they are the street lights reflecting off the hood of her car. She did say she was leaning on the hood when she snapped the photos.
T.
Originally posted by Triangulum
Originally posted by TwoPhish
Is it at all possible that this bone of contention; this 'glare, was caused by light reflecting back UPWARDS into the camera's lens (causing a prism-like anomoly) from the grounds surface???
It's also possible they are the street lights reflecting off the hood of her car. She did say she was leaning on the hood when she snapped the photos.
T.
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
G'day Triangulum
As per my previous posts, the witness told me she was leaning on the front of the hood, with her back to the hood facing forward toward the "objects".
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
Originally posted by TwoPhish
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
G'day Triangulum
As per my previous posts, the witness told me she was leaning on the front of the hood, with her back to the hood facing forward toward the "objects".
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
If I am understanding and visualizing this correctly then, there was no source to be reflecting light on. (seeing her iPhone was facing AWAY from the hood) Correct?
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
Originally posted by TwoPhish
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
G'day Triangulum
As per my previous posts, the witness told me she was leaning on the front of the hood, with her back to the hood facing forward toward the "objects".
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
If I am understanding and visualizing this correctly then, there was no source to be reflecting light on. (seeing her iPhone was facing AWAY from the hood) Correct?
G'day TwoPhish
That is correct.
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
Originally posted by Triangulum
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
G'day MMN
That makes a bit more sense. Depending on where she was leaning you could very well get stray light. Was she right in the middle of the hood or off to the left/right. If she was off to the left she could capture diffracted or reflected light resembling the patterns indicated.
Nice field work by the way. You are a credit to this subject.
T.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by internos
Two questions if I may internos?
What are your thoughts on the two small orbs?
Do you believe these were taken from behind glass?
If you are going to cover this in your analysis I can wait.
Oh and is it possible to share the 5th hires image with us?
(Yes I have a theory lol)
Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
Thanks for replies & going easy on me missfee & maybe. I had to ask as the analysis says things like "close match for “dirt” on the windscreen of the car" but she still says she was outside the car. Both seem like decent credible people who have generously donated their time & resource to resolve this.
Still not convinced either way as I don't doubt the integrity of the analysis & missfee has stuck her neck out a long way for someone who is ill (all this cannot be helping her with that) & not taking any money. It is because of this I believe whatever the true result of this case is she has acted honestly & has innocently ended up being in the spotlight for reporting something she genuinly believed she witnessed. I don't think she could have imagined where this would all lead. I can see why people who witness things like this never go public.
I find the person in the early stages of the thread who judged her honesty based on physical appearance rude & way out of line.
Wow just don't know!
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FireMoon
Right, it isn't a direct quote.
So the writer (or editor) invented the statement about getting out of her car to take pictures of the sunset? Possible of course, but likely? I don't think so.
Originally posted by TwoPhish
May I ask something (which I would've thought be mentioned before but just the same.....) was the road wet? I ask because I can't help but notice the headlight reflection from the on-coming vehicle on the street:
Is it at all possible that this bone of contention; this 'glare, was caused by light reflecting back UPWARDS into the camera's lens (causing a prism-like anomoly) from the grounds surface???
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by TwoPhish
G'day TwoPhish
Regarding your questions about the dryness / wetness of the road:
I will get met info for you.
I also note a dry road will show relections such as those in the pic's.
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
They appear to be lens flare.
Originally posted by TwoPhish
I would like to clear one thing up (then, go back to the topic at hand). Yes, she admits to not getting money for her photos. But she surely received money for her public appearances on TV, radio and for newspaper interviews.
That being said.....back to the main event.
Please.....was the ROAD WET THAT DAY?