Landed flying saucers from earlier today

OR



It's all in how you interpret it. That's why we need more to go on.

(By the way, the one object is likely a boat, and the yellow object behind it a gazebo, or shed, etc.) Of course, only Woodsy could verify that or not.

Care to explain what the opaque saucer shaped objects between them and the camera on the field are though?

Houses, plain and simple.

The outline of the houses is the saucer shaped objects.

The daytime pics seem abit different to be perfectly honest, but this could be caused by the way he used night vision in the first images.

There is absolutely no way those "supposedly" "saucer shapes" are ufo's landed in that field, i think anyone could take an image at night with NV on and outline certain parts of dark rooftops to make it look as if there are saucer shapes there.

I agree we need more to go on, but i also don't think they can be passed off as definate houses. Also although the night time and daytime pics are taken from different aspects I'm pretty sure their from the same site, perhaps nightime pics were taken from him sitting on bench a bit further away. One could argue the case for either, however i would like to add the sort of houses with pointed arches suggested arent very common in the UK in general, and in Harrow, next to a park like that....you wouldnt find houses like that. Basically it would be cool if woodsy could go back there fairly soon, if not tonight and snap some more pics if he sees/hears anything again.

I think we need somebody who works or worked in the CIA/NSA..and they must have contacts with persons who have permission to use goverment graphics analyser programs..just a thought..I read that the ATS-Member mate"jrsdls" is a former NSA member..

Here's the issue I have with the house hypothesis. Houses are pretty geometric in nature in that they come to points and have straight-edges. I can buy the car park theory moreso than this one because of the rounded edges in the original and composite photos. The points and edges in the drawn-in diagram look forced to fit. Just a thought.

The points and edges in the drawn-in diagram look forced to fit. Just a thought.

It wasn't meant to be exact, nor to scale, nor a true representation of how those homes may appear, it was simply to show that they could indeed be houses.

Originally posted by sre2f
I am not a skeptic.....but an avid believer.....but not a believer in ridiculous/obvious hoaxes........

Why is it an obvious hoax?

picard
could all the idiots who contribute to this thread with great one liners like 'its a hoax' sod off please or at least read the thread

Something need not be a photoshopped image in order to be a hoax. I am not saying i necessarilu think it is, but, clearly, there are other ways to hoax it. The photos could be from two different locations entirely, just under the same type of tree, for instance. We really have no way to establish that this stuff is authentic. Its possible to demonstrate that its a hoax if it was hoaxed in a certain way or two, but ultimately one has to either accept or reject the evidence on the face of it. I, again, see no reason to disbeleive the OP, but tht doesn't mean that their particular explanation, that the objects were UFOs, is correct.

saint
Is there a geometrist in the house?

Is a professional really required here? The objects in the nighttime images could be anything, anything at all really, the issue here is that they are not in the daylight image. Yes, there is one house, but not several.

The distant background shows multiple light sources. The OP is now saying one of them was the house. There are other light sources, one, to the far left, is very large, and I think there is consensus that its the setting sun or something like that? Yes or no? There is nothing in the daylight image that can account for the other objects. Another nighttime shot from underneat the same tree as the other shots so far would be nice, but I don't think its needed, I honestly don't see what else could be making those shapes, which really don't look, to me, like they are in the distand background, but are rather in the foreground.

Some other issues.

One the reported 'wobbling stars'. This is pretty meaningless. The fact that the OP came back after they were questioned and now said that they 'disappeared' is, well, an inconsistensy in the story. One must ask, why would the OP be bringing all this up if he/she doesn't want to have a discussion on the issue, so we will see if they are willing to communicate more on the topic. Perhaps it slipped their minds, perhaps they were having a clambake while they were posting, or maybe they were just 'nackered'. Anyway, the friends lights isn't a particularly good 'sighting', and could've been, say, some planes that passed behind a cloud.

The other photos are interesting, but I think everyone will have ot agree that they are just image artifacts of one type or another. This is the first I have heard of these focusing beams, i guess it makes sense, but are these things on camera phones too? Also, while a camera of anykind apparently can pick up uv light, can they penetrate alien cloaking devices? I mean, afterall, thats what we are talking about having happened no?

Yet ANOTHER admonition to refrain circumventing the censors.

Whats This? Are you implying penalty for someone suggesting a moderators comment may be premature?

Isnt a MODERATOR someone who is supposed to be looking at the whole picture?

Are you suggesting MODERATORS are now above making errors and anyone suggesting that will be scolded or diciplined?

You are right I do need to take a take a couple steps back... I thought this was ABOVETOPSECRET.COM not ABOVETOPSECRET.GOV

Originally posted by Iwunder
Yet ANOTHER admonition to refrain circumventing the censors.

Whats This? Are you implying penalty for someone suggesting a moderators comment may be premature?

No.

It means not to use intentionally misspelled cuss words.

Indeed, take a step back.

I�m rarely the one to join sides or post in favor of debunkers. Infact I can�t think one time I�ve ever posted a debunking theory. But as this popped my mind and I don�t think it�s been posted before Ill just let it out in the open.

Seeing as this is big park, is there a possibility these being pics of circus tents and lights coming from them?

I always give people the benefit of the doubt, so I always assume private people don�t lie when they report these type of stories. That�s why I still think they infact are UFO�s. But the circus tent theory just popped in...

Is there anyway to see from the hex code when the night pictures were taken? His story would have better proof if both night and day pictures could be verified as being taken when he claims they were.


[edit on 19-11-2004 by Dawnaj]

Heres what i see, it is possible that the objects are indeed just houses, but if you look at it long enough, i just cant see it. I realy want to see a pic pf this place on another night, i think this could realy conclude what we think. Also see if you can get pics of the houses so that we can see if they can make these shapes. I think i am the first one to say this to you, i feel a little sorry for telling you to do all this #, esspicaly for a stoner. Good luck keep up the pics

Originally posted by Dawnaj
Seeing as this is big park, is there a possibility these being pics of circus tents and lights coming from them? But the circus tent theory just popped in...

Is there anyway to see from the hex code when the night pictures were taken?

When I saw circus tents on your post I just had to look to see if you listed where you were from and had to chuckle a bit. Don�t ask me why, but Scandinavia just fit. BTW - I never met a Scandinavian that I didn�t like.

No, doubt they could be circus tents or some kind of special event that uses tents. That's kind of what I thought before I saw the daylight photos. At this point though it's clear to me that they are the houses in the backround, but because the originals were taken at night it creates the optical illusion that they are closer than they really are and with the abundance of plant life around them that hides the houses geometric frames at night as the plants become the lower edges in the night photos & the roofs to top edges.

I think the poster has become aware of this by now if he's gone to take more night photos. Either he will come back & confirm it or he might be embarrased & stay in hiding for a bit.

If you save the pics to your computer you can look at the hex yourself with any editor. I think if someone is going to take the time to fake photos - they will take the time to learn how to edit the file to make it appear original. I've even cheated on my photos to change the embeded date codes to make it look like the photo was taken at a different time than it was - funny thing was all I had to do was adjust the date on the camera before I took the picture & I wouldn't have had to bother. (no - not the file date if you're wondering). No this isn't about time travel either.


[edit on 19-11-2004 by outsider]

Hi all, I just stumbled onto this post today and wish I had seen it earlier. Totally absorbing!
IMHO Woodsy boy is not the type of person to go to the trouble of trying to fool you people with a hoax. He looks like a typical 16 y.o. bloke from England to me. And trust me when I say that they cant be arsed with that type of thing.
Woodsy boy, if you can be arsed to read this then please don`t be put off by the flamers in this thread, they are in every thread, it is tradition on this board after all.
What I really think should happen now is if one of our more mature friends on this site from London or Middlesex with some decent camera to get his or her arse over to Harrow and see if they can get some better photos.
I would go myself but I live in Essex and that blooming miles away and Ive got summat on this weekend. But there must be someone on here that lives in the vicinity. Either that or if Woodsy boy can get his hands on someones digital camera and get snapping. A hunderd photos should be enough!
Woodsy, wot you doing with a Nokia anyway, theyre asre! Lol

Can you believe this is the first time I've read this topic. Where have I been?

Alright, my impressions for what they are worth:

1. These pictured have not been manipulated
2. Woodsy does sound like an average British teenager to me, and the average British teenager, could not be "arsed" to formulate a hoax like this.
3. A lot of the debunking attempts are unjustified
4. They are not outlines of houses - the outlines of the objects do not match the outlines of the houses in the daytime pictures, and neither would the outlines of the houses, which are fairly distant, register on a puny camera-phone in low light conditions. The objects seem closer than the houses.

We must also consider woodsys stories, because so far there is no indication of hoaxing. If he indeed saw lights, and wobbling stars, and heard the characteristic humming sound of the UFO. Then, coupled with the photographs, there is reason to believe there are objects there, that could possibly be ETV's.

Now what could they be?

1. 4 UFO's parked next to each other in a public park
2. 4 cars parked next to each other in a public park

I think both are inconclusive, and personally,both sound silly to me. So what are they? They are UO's; unidentified objects. I know there is a divide here, where some of us are inclined to either ends of the explanation spectrum; from prosaic to fantastic, but all that is speculation, and whichever way it is spun, it is just that, speculation.

So let's leave it at the actual facts, that they are unidentified objects, until we have further proof to tilt the balance to either end of the spectrum.

I agree with the person who recommended woodsy take another such picture from exactly the same location at night. This will at least put the house explanation to rest.

[edit on 19-11-2004 by Indigo_Child]

Man if I had an extra I would Overnight it to the lad!

1. I do not believe the pictures to be faked or manipluated in any way.
2. I do not think the poster is deliberately attempting a hoax.
3. It is inconclusive as to whether the daytime shot and the night shot are from the same exact vantage point.
4. The objects in the night shot seem to be at about the right place on the horizon line as the house/s in the day shot.
5. The silhouette is such that it could be houses, and a boat, instead of flying saucers.

So, we've either got:
A) A picture of multiple landed flying saucers, of varying types, in the same exact place.
B) The silhouette of houses off in the treeline.
C) Some other objects entirely.

My vote is for B. Sorry. I seriously feel that if other night pics were taken of the same area, you'd see the same houses and lights. Another good question that remains unanswered is whether or not there is a baseball, football field, etc. behind the houses (indicating bright lights). As is, the night picture simply isn't good enough to make a conclusive decision one way or the other, by itself, but factoring in the day pics, makes houses the likely bet to me anyhow....

For those of you who still think this is credible......What the hell is wrong with you? Really, come on....

They are obviously houses in the "ufo" picture

The pictures taken in the day time are obviosly at a different place at a different angle.....

how in the hell can so many people be so stupid.....Its dumbasses like you people who give the UFO community a bad name.

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Can you believe this is the first time I've read this topic. Where have I been?

Alright, my impressions for what they are worth:

1. These pictured have not been manipulated
2. Woodsy does sound like an average British teenager to me, and the average British teenager, could not be "arsed" to formulate a hoax like this.
3. A lot of the debunking attempts are unjustified
4. They are not outlines of houses - the outlines of the objects do not match the outlines of the houses in the daytime pictures, and neither would the outlines of the houses, which are fairly distant, register on a puny camera-phone in low light conditions. The objects seem closer than the houses.


.......light. This will at least put the house explanation to rest.

[edit on 19-11-2004 by Indigo_Child]

1. There wan not anything to manipulate....its a #ty picture.
2. He sounds like an average british teenager.....let me guess, when you go into a lesbian chatroom on IRC, do you think you are really talking to a 18 year old woman, or a 35 year old man...
3. They are unjustified because it doesnt go with what you believe...
4. Lets forget the fact that its a terible picture camera, that has no focus, taking in nigt time settings.....

Originally posted by sre2f
how in the hell can so many people be so stupid.....Its dumbasses like you people who give the UFO community a bad name.

No mate, its you that give us open-minded free thinkers a bad name. Stop flaming, grow up and think before you post.

What is the motivation to post here, if people like you constantly flame, insist they are correct and anyone that believes what you do not is stupid.

Everyone has opinions, and they are welcomed to them. But don`t you dare call people who have opened their minds to extreme posibilities stupid, because my friend it is you that is stupid for being so omnipotent.

Originally posted by sre2f
how in the hell can so many people be so stupid.....Its dumbasses like you people who give the UFO community a bad name.

Well, I think we've had our fill of this type of post. Please refrain from this.