Photo Analysis of an Aerial Disc Over Costa Rica 1971

nice pic!!, great story!! i too am very tired of the you tube stuff,
its pics like these that add credibility to the story, but all of us have only seen hi quality pics that have been released or leaked out, im sure there are tons of hi quality military pics that wont ever be released cuz they will prove that they exist!!!!


just imagine what is sitting in vaults locked up and "above top secret"!!LOL



be safe people

Truly awesome. I have never even seen this photo before. 1971. . .wow. Like I always say, there are actually clear enough pictures if the people will just look at them rather than waste time saying that there's no proof, ya know?

Ah, this is one of those older UFO's....funny how thier design changes over time, kinda like fashion I guess.

the pancakey blurred edge look is due to relative motion being greater than shutter speed is set for. You're actually looking at several of the object imperfectly superimposed. Which washes the crap out of shadows and sharpness for the MOVING object.... yet can have the rest of the picture looking to use a metaphor from the field "picture perfect"!!

I had my first experience with this in a film camera in 8th grade English class. We were asked to make a magazine format guide to one of our hobbies with how to step by step instructions on a portion of the hobby. I picked ROLLERBLADING specifically aggressive x games style skating. In the process of doing the How To article we had to take high speed pictures with a Nikon 35mm camera to get the step by step of me popping up to do a backside grind.

after a trip to the photomart we were dismayed to discover that each and every picture had me blurred and fuzzy because the relative motion was too much for shutter speeds. this resulted in some very serious manual reading for a 14 year old but suffice it to say after DOUBLING shutter speed from standard and two months worth of allowance in film developing I got non triple exposure me's doing a step by step backside grind....

Now this was in 1995 with good Kodak outdoor film and automated photo processing. And beyond that my relative speed was well under 180 degree per second rotational speed when popping up and less than 5 miles per hour "rolling speed"

So rewind to 1971 in South America the camera may or may not have had top shelf film and the relative speeds of the plane they were in and the speed alone of the object in question you could very easilly get the stacked pancake look...

Now as to the not visible to the naked eye part... the technologies most likely to allow submarine and aerial propulsion would also quite likely make visual spotting of said craft pretty difficult for a variety of reasons the simplest of which would be the "mirage" effect.

I would expect more disturbance in the water if this was indeed a UFO exiting or entering the sea.

reply to post by zorgon


Thank you Zorgon for posting this. I have seen the image before... but first... I want to thank you sincerely for helping stop the distractions of recent days. I cringed all through the last few days, I refused to post in any thread at all. I simply want to forget about October 10th through October 13th. As someone who prides himself upon critical analysis of unusual events, I find nothing more distracting than the desperate efforts of believers and bashers crashing away at each other over YouTube Clips of tiny dots... I am afraid that I cannot even justify giving ATS the page views for such stuff. It sickens me to the core and makes me question why I even bother...

Anyway... thank you, and you know why. Phew, that's out of my system!

A couple of critical points: Some have said that the object was described as being 10,000 feet away from the camera... when you have indicated that the altitude of the aircraft taking the picture was 10,000 feet... the object could be close or far away, and certainly does not look 10,000 feet away.

If this was indeed taken out of an aircraft as one can suppose, and with the limited (if any) capabilities of tampering with an image taken in 1971... then this is indeed an unusual object.

Again - as others have noted, there is some blurring on one side of the disc, and the several images that we see in this thread look to be different pictures / different angles... and yet still show the blurring...

Yet others describe another interesting thing relevant to images taken in the 1970's and that is that one can almost pinpoint the year by the shape... objects from the 1960s and 1970s have a distinct hub-cab flavor, whilst object from the 1990s and 2000s are usually much more of other forms (delta, triangles etc).

I'd love to see the original analysis - the drawing you include showing the angles of light and dark clearly show that people have gone to some extent in analyzing this image.

I would of course like to see the results of digital analysis of the original to determine the distance of the object from the camera... if it is indeed hundreds (or thousands) of feet away - then one can assume that one is looking at a large craft... but if analysis shows an object very close (tens of feet) then one assumes it is an object dangling or tossed in front of the camera...

That's my input... but again... my input is mainly by way of thanking you sincerely for helping us get back on topic, and some serious therapy against the madness of the past few ridiculous days.

Star and Flag in an effort to get rid of the other 100's of pages of c**p from October 10 through October 13...

askbaby - thanking you again and OUT.

reply to post by Silver Star


It was not entering or leaving the water at the time... it was postulated to be at a relatively high altitude.at the time of the photo being snapped.

The leaving the water story was another incident thrown in because it happened around the same time in the same area.

Good find, and a clear image from a reliable source.
So- they hide in the lakes!

Wow, I have realised with all of these threads showing more evidence, skeptics show up much less.

It made me realise that they are similar to bullies: harrasing others about their beliefs to compensate for their insecurities.

Many of these people try to make an 'identity' for themselves online, because real life just doesn't work out for them, so they try and act cool and smart on the internet.

Yet, I can only pity them, and hope that one day they will respect others for what they believe in, even if it doesn't match their views.

Personally I dont mind skeptics (I know an atheist in real life, who is EXTREMELY arrogant ,even though he has 'less than ordinary' grades) I guess I don't really like their attitudes. I might not want to be friends with them, but I dont label them as enemies and start an all out forum war with them.

"We were all born unique, So don't die a copy" - Chinese proverb

Skeptics most likely share the same attitudes because they learned it from other skeptics.
When you were born, you were curious. You believed in something moving, you were free. children are so active compared to the average adult. the average child laughs 400 times a day. The average adult laughs... 5 times a day (obviously adults lost something along the way). when you grow older, you learn the values of others, what other people believe, because they label what you do as wrong (similar to what many skeptics try and do). You become less creative, and you forget what you originally believed in.

RESPECT.
PEACE.
HUMILITY.
UBUNTU.

Originally posted by roguetechie
reply to post by Silver Star

 

it was postulated to be at a relatively high altitude.at the time of the photo being snapped.

The leaving the water story was another incident thrown in because it happened around the same time in the same area.

Sorry, wrong, on both counts.

I must say Zorgon you never cease to impress with your threads. Keep them coming can't wait to see whats next.;

Originally posted by Tribble

Good find, and a clear image from a reliable source.
So- they hide in the lakes!

Yeah I have a couple Russian stories on that. I will try to dig them out later

This definetly reminds me of all the pictures that I saw as a kid. I'm just entering my thirties and became interested in ufology, paranormal, and like studies very early in elementary school. i can remmeber having nightmares about my little league baseball field being a landing zone for these craft haha. This image being from a survey plane definetly is interesting as well. Very hard to fake an image like that, especially during the early 70's. Good call on this one.

Interesting image and analysis. It would be nice if the original negatives were available for further processing... Older images from the past like this one are valuable as they are from a time when image manipulation wasn't as wide spread and easy as it is today. I'm with you Zorgon, I'm getting sick of all the youtube and other junk threads on ATS these days. It's as if a whole new generation of simpletons want instant gratification rather than reading and doing some investigative work themselves.

Ah, this is one of those older UFO's....funny how thier design changes over time, kinda like fashion I guess.

It's quite sad and pathetic that this is the best you could come up with for this image and it's documentation. However it's quite apparent how over time your tactic of ignoring certain incidents and topics never changes; that when you can't come up with any kind of logical debate you resort to short arrogant cheap shots.

It's quite sad and pathetic that this is the best you could come up with for this image and it's documentation. However it's quite apparent how over time your tactic of ignoring certain incidents and topics never changes; that when you can't come up with any kind of logical debate you resort to short arrogant cheap shots

reply to post by Jocko Flocko


You have to remember that these kind of people don't give a crap about what ufo videos/photos are real or not. All they care about is the de-bunking. Thats why when a thread pops up that is easy to de-bunk, they will jump on it. The reason why they will mostly leave this one alone is because they don't have an answer.

Makes me laugh that some of these people seem to think they only have to use the phrase "critical thinking" to come across as intelligent lol So sad.

That being said, there are decent skeptics out there, just like there are decent believers, and i hope they do find this thread, and the de-bunkers stay out.

This is much better than the crap that has been on here for the past couple of day S and F Z

I do have a question though. Are there any color images of this shot or was every image in black and white?
I find it hard to believe that they would only take images in black and white. even if it didnt show up in the color images that doesnt mean that somebody couldnt have airbrushed this object out...and why not NASA has been doing that for years

reply to post by zorgon


Very interesting!

I was curious, and went looking in google earth to see if I could narrow down the location.
It located a Lago Cote but my google did'nt have any good orbital views of the lake.



It's north and a little east of Guadalajara. The area is teaming with volcanic activity and lush vegitation.




There are also caverns nearby, and presumably dotting the countryside...

Seems to have all the best qualities I would want, if I were an ET visiting..

Interseting, if you could go back in time, would you study your ancestors? Do you think you desendants would study you?

What if millions of years of human evolution passed? would you be curious as to what they would be like? They would be curious of you, not you in general, but generally seeing how we developed, an exellent way of teaching the youth would be to show them the hidious nature of thier ancestors.

Nice picture, but don't look too far into something, if you don't want the answer.

WOW.... so if you just want to contradict people and don't BOTHER To read even the readers digest type synopsis PROVIDED in THE THREAD then why are you here silver star?

AS STATED in the basic summary in thread the story about something emerging from the water from the SAME LAKE was a row of periscope type protrusions which at another point popped up and then folded inward... the PICTURE was analyzed and guessed to be at pretty major altitude...

So how am I wrong on both counts? I posted in depth commentary and REASONING behind EVERY SINGLE assertion I made in my posts... you popped on rudely asked questions which I took MY TIME to answer wrongly believing you actually had an interest in a viewpoint other than what you came into the thread with.

SILLY ME won't make that mistake again.

Edit: As a side note class this is a good example of why READING COMPREHENSION and the ability to logically extrapolate and envision a 3 dimensional multi object scenario from words on a page is So important.... ANd why people should be asking why they do everything they can to teach a bare minimum of BOTH skills in schools these days.

YOUTUBE and CGI computer animation is the BANE of children. and creates adults with the attention span of gnats and the spatial orientation of a drunk with shattered ear drums and a blind fold on.

This was an excellent case and welcome relief from all the ridiculousness. It was such a good case it was featured on the front page of the amazing COMETA report in which the french military concluded that the extraterrestrial explanation for UFO's could not be ruled out and was probably the most feasible solution in certain cases. The photo is excellent quality and in its full glory which i have not yet seen posted in this thread. Would be great if someone could post the front cover of the report as i can't figure out how to embed images (way to complicated imo).

Hope someone can help out here.

Sean.