The Problem with Greer

reply to post by The GUT


Hey The GUT - I appreciate you taking a look at that!

As for not finding more photos from CSETI events, I'm guessing there aren't many out there due to the non-disclosure agreement. I strongly suspect that this agreement has to do, at least in part, with protecting the privacy of the individuals attending, as Dr. Greer believes that he needs to protect that (and as he has hired some bodyguard types, he may believe people could be at risk themselves at some point??). People may be more reluctant to attend if they think their face will be plastered all over the internet, showing them at a UFO watching event. I don't think its about hypocritically not allowing 'disclosure.' I don't doubt Dr. Greer is collecting plenty of data he intends to use from the CSETI outings, but I'm guessing you won't see footage or photos from him of people that haven't signed off on that being okay. That is only my opinion, but I think it holds water.

peace to you,
AB

reply to post by fah0436


I am, as ever, "AboveBoard."


(And thanks, ReallyNiceGuy - That was ReallyNice!)

reply to post by AboveBoard


The problem with Greer, is that if he is correct, you will be a fool!

Ha! He may be a little crazy, but you are crazier thinking you will find any truth in ATS.

Don't you even know were you are writing? If yo are really serious about UFOs or aliens, this is NOT the place to ask.

Originally posted by fah0436
reply to post by torsion

 

If you think those photos are similar, than it doesn't take much to please you.

In the actual orb photo, you can see the islands just off the beach to the west as well as the mangrove,
NEITHER of these appear in the Hotel shot which was aimed SOUTH.

And as I've said before, the line of orbs looks nothing like the shape of the Hotels.
And the lights on the hotels are white. Do the orbs look white to you?

edit on 8/10/2012 by fah0436 because: (no reason given)

Really weird how the hotel lights appear orange. Just as weird as the faces of the participants being orange, too! It's amazing how cameras and software can manipulate reality.

Well, I guess if I'd paid $900-$2500 for that photo I'd be in denial, too!

Here's an example of how CSETI use double exposure to fabricate their photos
The Moth Man Proof Essay

Of course, Greer followers said the tree branch looked nothing like the extraterrestrial ambassador wearing helmet and space boots!

One noticeably odd thing about the photograph is the framing. What was the shooter attempting to frame if the orbs were invisible to the naked eye?

Certainly not fah and friends. That in itself suggests the possibility that the "orbs" might have been an effect managed through something on the lens or a double-exposure technique.

In the case of a double exposure, the hotel lights as the orbs would make a pretty good fit after all.

reply to post by torsion

Good job, mate. That's more like it. The orange color of the lights is as simple as changing a white balance preset.

Fah, isn't it starting to get pretty clear that Greer isn't above making some things up?

AboveBoard: Sorry, but I gotta calls 'em as I sees 'em.

I found this statement about the "Ambassador" photo to be rather odd as well:

“The photograph proves what I’m about to discuss,” states Greer while speaking about the tree branch on the World Puja Network. He can hardly contain his excitement claiming that “this photo has gone straight to the CIA”
anomalousculture.blogspot.co.uk...

Originally posted by The GUT

I found this statement about the "Ambassador" photo to be rather odd as well:

“The photograph proves what I’m about to discuss,” states Greer while speaking about the tree branch on the World Puja Network. He can hardly contain his excitement claiming that “this photo has gone straight to the CIA”
anomalousculture.blogspot.co.uk...

You can listen to Greer talking about the Joshua tree branch extraterrestrial ambassador here. It helps to be looking at the photo while Greer rambles on to assess the credibility of what he is saying. His reference to the CIA comes in around the 47 min mark. The rhetoric is over two years old and the other photos he claims to possess have, as is usual with CSETI, come to nothing.

It cant be proven with certainty one way or the other Greer is doing his Ufo Disclosure things for the money or not. It also cant be said with any certainty one way or other if Ufos exist. What appears certain gauging by the existance of Ats and other similar forums there are open conspiracies in place to convince people ufo exists. Of course everyone has their own opinions, and personally i think Greer is an Alien who is using Disclosure to cover his indentity. What we should ensure is that aleins on the planet making money are subject to taxation laws like evryone else.

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
..... personally i think Greer is an Alien who is using Disclosure to cover his indentity. What we should ensure is that aleins on the planet making money are subject to taxation laws like evryone else.

edit on 11-8-2012 by AthlonSavage because: Mabey Greer is a member of the Brother hood of the Bell

If this were true, he could morph into his alien form, snap a few photos, morph back into his Dr Greer disguise and have some way better photos than the ones he's produced so far

there goes that theory. Looks like he human. Still its kinda funny the Disclosure movement in one sense because if Ufos are here and aliens walk amongst us they seem to be doing their best to avoid Steven and his group.

reply to post by The GUT


Me too, The GUT, me too...
peace,
AB

For whatever it's worth, Greer has refused to Dr. Rima as "the most evil person on Earth." Greer has a tendency to attack people vehemently, and is not above hyperbole or public attacks.

That said, to my eyes his patterns match that of a Con Man who may be getting conned himself; though I was initially impressed with his research.

reply to post by The GUT

I sure don't get what you guys are seeing. I read the mothman thing. So what. Not very conclusive to me as even the author says.

In the orb photo I presented, there are clearly WHITE stars all over the photo.
So somehow a color tinting was done and it affected the "hotel" lights and our faces, but not the white stars/celestial objects?

Can someone show me a photo of such selecting tinting?
And nobody has explained the fairly severe dichotomy between the shape of the orbs and the hotel background.

If your going to fake a picture, why worry about mapping it to other things in the vicinity. Just get it on a lense filter. get the filter on the camera and snap the photo like Drusilla has been saying. Occams razor, right? But I would submit that even in that case, there would be some kind of artifacts in the picture.

So until am impartial photo analysis expert says otherwise, I will still take the photo at face value.

AB, are you changing your mind? Do you now think that the orbs where pictures of hotel lights? If so, why the reversal?

Originally posted by fah0436
In the orb photo I presented, there are clearly WHITE stars all over the photo.
So somehow a color tinting was done and it affected the "hotel" lights and our faces, but not the white stars/celestial objects?

Can someone show me a photo of such selecting tinting?

I wont bother showing an example, but that's easy to do to with an image editor such as Gimp. You can tune color balance by primary colors, keeping white stars fairly white while making other colors completely whacked compared to the original, yes. Install it, find a star image and play. Gimp can be great fun

Originally posted by fah0436
In the orb photo I presented, there are clearly WHITE stars all over the photo.
So somehow a color tinting was done and it affected the "hotel" lights and our faces, but not the white stars/celestial objects?

Color balance preset snap lights. Color balance preset snap fah & friends.

My digital camera will take double exposures and I even have an iphone app that is dedicated to double exposures and makes them rather easily.

The "orange" of the faces had more to do with lowlight conditions/on-site lighting and probably isn't related to a change of white balance. I'm pretty sure the "orbs" aren't a lens technique because of how bright they are. A double exposure would be the easiest way to get that effect.

Whether your photo is a fraud or not, your refusal to recognize that Greer is not above playing fast and loose with the truth is quickly negating any credibility you might have still had as a critical observer. You can't see the total sham inherent in the moth pics? Truly?

AB, are you changing your mind? Do you now think that the orbs where pictures of hotel lights? If so, why the reversal?

I'm pretty sure AboveBoard was saying that he/she still tends to agree with you. AboveBoard is always AboveBoard. Gotta appreciate a community member like that.

Just wondering how much (approximately) that image set you back?

It's never nice to admit that you've been conned, but I'm afraid that's about the size of it.....Dru has already covered most of the hows & whys of your experience, so I won't go over it again.

I will add that the picture is pretty much worthless as evidence.....If it was taken on a digital camera and then provided to you as a hard-copy some time later, there is almost no limit to the amount of manipulation which may have taken place, The lack of a digital backup is in itself suspicious. Christ I'm no Photoshop specialist, but I reckon even I could have had the Death-Star rising on the horizon in about ten minutes flat.....So all that picture proves to me is that Greer's fakery is rather dull and unimaginative.

BTW - You appear to be in breach of your Disclosure Project non-disclosure agreement (that does make me laugh), so expect Mr. Greer's lawyers to be in touch.

reply to post by CovertHistory


Well, this is true. At least if you've read the OP. As long as Greer earns money, it's a well executed scam.I need to know where our free-energy device went, because I want to get poor or lose money while making it!

Originally posted by fah0436
reply to post by The GUT

 

AB, are you changing your mind? Do you now think that the orbs where pictures of hotel lights? If so, why the reversal?

edit on 8/11/2012 by fah0436 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/11/2012 by fah0436 because: (no reason given)

No, fah0436 - no such thing. I don't think the hotels are in the picture at all. And I agree, the tinting would be universal, but I am not a photography expert, so if someone wants to present a photo of selective tinting, and can explain the process with the camera you say was used that may be something. But I don't see the orb lights as being that closely mapped to the hotel lights.

There are also the distances involved - the "mapping" effect that shows a rough similarity between the top of the orb picture and the roofs/lights on the hotels, including the length of both the orb lights and the strip of hotels could not possibly be at the same distance in both pictures. They only appear to match if you claim the distances to be equal, which is impossible, as the distances are not equal. Does that make sense? Its hard to put into words, but really simple if you look at the comparison picture and keep the relative distances in mind. I just played around with the photos comparing building heights on that string of hotels to the picture you gave and while there are a couple of points that match if you eliminate the distance problem, once you try to match the distances it just doesn't work. The illusion is created because the "orbs" come off the edge of the photo and we can imagine that is the curve of a bay further up the horizon with hotel lights. If they had not been cut off, it would have been more obvious that they were hanging in the air, but such is life, no?

Anyway, the issue of comparison has become irrelevant, imo, as the picture was taken in the direction that had the barrier islands, mangroves and no hotels. I stand by my original thoughts - this photo, to the absolute best of my ability to research, was not taken with the hotels in the background.

As to a double exposure with a filter only on the first with the hotels visible and tinted red, well then the people wouldn't be red-ish either. If, as you indicated, the hotels are South from the Tiger Tail beach, which is on the eastern, ocean side of the island, wouldn't that put them on the right-hand side of the photo, and any errant hotel lights??? Just another thought... I have no idea where the comparison picture has been taken, or what direction, do you? Which makes trying to match them a moot point, but I tried...

Finally, to my eyes anyway, the lights in your picture seem to have a 'spread' to them that looks as if we are also seeing the underside of them - there is a slight upwards curve at the right hand end of the lights - do you see that? It does not follow the straight horizon line that the hotel picture indicates.

So, I really don't know what the string of lights are in your photo, fah0436, and as of right now, that's where I'm at. I hope some of that is helpful to the discussion, but if not, well, I've further satisfied myself.

peace,
AB

Originally posted by The Coward
reply to post by AboveBoard

 

The problem with Greer, is that if he is correct, you will be a fool!

Ha! He may be a little crazy, but you are crazier thinking you will find any truth in ATS.

Don't you even know were you are writing? If yo are really serious about UFOs or aliens, this is NOT the place to ask.

Hello The Coward,
Thanks for the response - ummmm. How would I be a fool if Greer is correct? I'm confused by this statement.
Where should I go if I am serious about UFO's or aliens? I'm not sure I'll find truth here, to be honest...

peace,
AB

AB, are you changing your mind? Do you now think that the orbs where pictures of hotel lights? If so, why the reversal?

I'm pretty sure AboveBoard was saying that he/she still tends to agree with you. AboveBoard is always AboveBoard. Gotta appreciate a community member like that.




Thanks, The GUT. I may not always be right, but I get there honestly. And I always appreciate the same in others.

peace,
AB