[HOAX]saw flying metallic disk in nashville... WITH PICS... and now my dog is sick[HOAX]

Again,. I say the someone threw the dog's dish in the air...

reply to post by Jimbowsk


Mine is up to date but for arguments sake mine isn't instant it is fast but their is still a delay, now I don't have this guys phone to test out but I've tried different things as far as tossing a lid to a 5 gallon bucket and tried to photo it tried to switch to video and a few others now I'm also in an indoor setting and tried this from the draw, it was very difficult to do, then I tried it staged with a partner, that was too easy to do. If I were a hoaxer I would have thrown a glidable object at a low speed (hence the wobble) this is what I tried to do, but this still doesn't account for the quick procession time intervals. But then again I'm not a hoaxer and I was just trying to establish the difficulty of throwing an object I found it difficult for me to do. Maybe you could try the same experiment and we can post our results only I'm not giving exif data and getting traced just to get flamed about my horrible testable experiment. And maybe my camera is slower due to having a fuller memory ? Idk much about these things

Originally posted by studio500
I've overlaid all 3 images and matched them to the buildings as reference points.

I don't think I need to say much here but in my personal view I would think these images possibly may not have been taken in one straight short sequence of images.

edit on 11-4-2012 by studio500 because: (no reason given)

This ones got me.
At first I thought it could be some kind of frisbee thrown and the images taken in sequence but if you look at the angles this object tilts, it does not look like something simply being thrown and it coming back down.
Unless the object was thrown each time a picture was taken.

I'd also like to add that there are houses directly below the object.
You would think that this would be far more hastle to throw a frisbee over peoples houses and have to retrieve said frisbee then throw it again, and again, unless the neighbours are in on it too.
I would be much easier for a hoaxer to do this in an open field.

What I can't wrap my head around is why, if it were a deliberate hoax, would the OP reveal so much personal information?

If you were trying to pull a fast one, wouldn't you, you know, maybe keep as much anonymity as possible?

We'll likely never know now as it seems he's bolted, but I must chime in here and say that I wouldn't be surprised if his reception was the reason he left. If the OP had been me, with a genuine sighting that I saw, I would have left too. In fact, if I video taped an alien landing on my front lawn, I would tell exactly no one and delete the footage. Which is what I suspect we're all being conditioned to do.

Having read every response, this thread in large part made it abundantly clear that he was unwelcome, which in my opinion is unfortunate. If people feel that they are unwelcome to share UFO stuff on a forum designed to share UFO stuff, then I simply don't know what to say. If you think UFO stories in large part are all hoaxes, then, iunno, maybe avoid that specific forum?

There's a big difference between approaching any UFO OP with healthy skepticism and what I clearly saw here. There. No more UFO stuff. Now everyone's happy.

Just my .02 as if anyone cares.

Originally posted by guavas
What I can't wrap my head around is why, if it were a deliberate hoax, would the OP reveal so much personal information?

If you were trying to pull a fast one, wouldn't you, you know, maybe keep as much anonymity as possible?

Probably he was not aware that one can obtain so much of personal information from his photographs and username in this forum. That phone encoding GPS data into the image was news to me.

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


Having read the thread, seen the analysis, and counter analysis. It's staged,one person throws, another shoots. Also the reply when "busted" is a give away. I base this on 25 plus years of dealing with hoaxers (in the occult world) online and in real life. The response was a prepared one, the dog story was a distraction, to gain sympathy. Also its hard to confuse phosphorous for phosphor (luminescence) As a traind Biochemist and Chemist, it's easy for me. But they do not even sound the same. Hell if it was Iodine, Iodate, iodide, I could understand

So what one has here is a BS artist with a story (and no stories are not evidence, as they are subjective not objective). If that was a UFO the pilot was DUI. The "disk" is probably "metalic" but it is small, it is following in an arc, the photos have a time frame opposite to the story's chronology.

The dog is added as a distraction, like a stage magician (watch THIS hand while the other does something I do not want you to see)

QED fake/hoaxer/Troll/on something (take a pick as to which or all )

I am not in the middle.

it will be funny as # when somebody does have actual proof of aliens, bigfoot or santa claus and they post it first on one of the other conspiracy sites because everyone here is a dick

reply to post by SpaceMonkeys


I don't believe that to be the case IMO because of the second, second, 20second time delay Idk if this a hoax or not but I'm trying to critically think about it. It would be hard to throw this object and recreate that wobble I think since idk what the object is I can't throw one if it was in fact a thrown object. I'm puzzeld by this one

reply to post by Brotherman


I'm on the fence about it really (as I usually am to be honest!), I like to hope pics like these are real, but always try to think of it from a logical point of view - the use of pics instead of video being the illogical point in this case.

I think the only way this is going to go towards an answer is if the raw images are posted for examination, until then it's all just speculation as to whether it's real or not.

To be honest with this being the age of CGI and such, many of us probably won't believe it until it lands on our front lawn

reply to post by oohay


He shared an awful lot of information willingly before the EXIF data came into the picture. (no pun intended there)

reply to post by studio500


Just to point out, the animation should be going in reverse.

The time stamps are posted in the wrong order, the object seems to be he coming in towards the roof, not away from it.

April 11, 2012 1:41:15PM --> dark angle close to tree
April 11, 2012 1:41:16PM --> mid between tree and roof
April 11, 2012 1:41:36PM --> closer look over roof

It does appear different seeing it 'coming in' however. Perhaps intended so.

Interesting stuff. But I'm not convinced personally.

it's just sitting there in the sky, then in an almost comically cliche'd fashion it sort of rolled/turned on it's side and zips upwards and to the left and out of sight at a pretty rapid pace.

This isn't backed up by the photos. The photos do not show it 'sitting' in the sky, it's moving if anything to the left, moves up, then down (if I've got the sequence right*) in much the same arc as you'd expect of a thrown object. Statement differing from what's seen in the photos is never a good sign.

I also agree about the dog missing from photos, all that space at the top of each image, could the op not have lowered the camera and proved his dog was there frozen and amazed? That surely is as important as the 'object' itself. Animal reactions and their sensitivity to these kind of things are very important - but the fact alone it's not in the photo isn't what would make me question the legitimacy, I just liked that comment!

Maybe he did experience it. But there is nothing cliche here. Can't think of any other cases where objects have moved as if they're being thrown (on an arc) - it's certainly not what true UFOs do. So perhaps he just saw some kids toy being thrown about. The object looks small and close to me, definitely not large and far away.

The OP is too concerned about the photos and some co-incidence about his dog that he's completely forgotten to explain his own feelings about the sighting, not mentioned once. Legitimate witnesses who experience something 'real' are most often emotionally affected by a sighting. Especially if you were looking at a clear, defined silver disc. People who just see a light get emotionally affected, but this guy seems completely un-affected, and I think it's that reason that makes me feel "it's not as genuine as made out to be".

It could really be there (despite looking like an app image) but I'd say to op if they are convinced - I think you were fooled by something terrestrial. Still, it's made for a massive debate

* Poster above suggests the sequence goes in reverse

reply to post by Jimbowsk


I agree with you on that, I hope the raw images get posted for others to check out I'm not qualified for all of that. I'm just going off what I got but I still remain undecided

reply to post by Mathoryn


I rarely give out stars but I just couldn't help my self!

I need not say any more as you have said enough already.

Regards to the OP, I am not even going to bother giving my 2 cents as it worthless. I will let the experts tell me what it is I am seeing in the photos.

reply to post by Jimbowsk


I think you're more correct than you realize...the only way the world "at large" would believe in any intelligent alien life is if the aliens cracked our planet in half, with their spaceships in broad daylight, and even then I really wonder.

Pics or it didn't happen, then, that pic is too fuzzy, so it's obviously mis-identification, to finally, this pic is too good, CGI hoax. All else 100% is a lens flare, dirty lens, or image processing artifact. Anything can always be relegated to an image processing artifact 100% of the time with digital media. It's like there's no point in UFO forums anywhere anymore, and I genuinely fear that UFOlogy itself is in grave danger and treating people who share their experiences like crap isn't helping.

Your dog was hearing what you could not. A very high pitched sound and obviously at great strength.....that could easily account for his conditions..dizzyness ..weekness ect. I bet if you ask around the neighborhood...you will find other dogs that acted strangly that day. That ship was emitting a very stong high pitched noise resonation to Earth...for some experimental reason or just apart of its propulsion system and it was strong enough to make your dog sick. The symptoms will go away and he will return to normal..in a couple of days...he wasen't the only dog that picked up that sound...garenteed...!!!

Originally posted by mainidh
reply to post by studio500

 

Just to point out, the animation should be going in reverse.

The time stamps are posted in the wrong order, the object seems to be he coming in towards the roof, not away from it.

April 11, 2012 1:41:15PM --> dark angle close to tree
April 11, 2012 1:41:16PM --> mid between tree and roof
April 11, 2012 1:41:36PM --> closer look over roof

It does appear different seeing it 'coming in' however. Perhaps intended so.

edit on 12-4-2012 by mainidh because: holy buckets, look how big this tread got... *backs out slowly*

Here you go, reversed

Hope the pooch is alright. Those are some of the clearest pics that I have seen on here. I am no expert on these things so i wont try to decode it haha thanks for shareing tho.

When we look at the first two images in a moving gif they do appear to be pretty credible and just as the OP describes as in the object appears to twist.

The object does indeed appear to twist.

The image that the OP has named image one, ie the closer view of the object is the one that foxes me together with the missing frames that the OP states showed nothing of the object.

These frames could be very useful if not for the reference point of the buildings alone to give a better idea of the direction of travel for the object and the panning motion of the camera.

I hope your dog gets better.
Also did the UFO stay longer than 1 minute ?