system — 2010-09-30T13:43:56-04:00 — #1
Today I took a photo of a UFO over Mia Mia.
What do you think?
I will also attach the original photo, because a lot of quality is lost with YouTube flash...
I cropped it a little, because if attachment size limits.
system — 2010-10-04T17:28:48-04:00 — #2
Yes that is obviously true.
The point I am making is that not everyone, deliberately or through no fault of their own, will necessarily have access to the explanation of whoever has managed to identify an "unidentified" object and so to them the object remains unidentified.
So when someone says an object is unidentified I take it to mean they are speaking on behalf of themseleves and not everyone else until I am sure no-one else on the planet has identified the object or is capable of identifying it.
system — 2010-10-04T19:51:17-04:00 — #3
The answers you seek are in a different thread...and a different forum:
system — 2010-10-03T23:01:15-04:00 — #4
So if someone wants to throw a spanner in the works they could argue that whether an object is "unidentified" or not is simply relative to the viewer of that object.
With 2 people looking at the same object on an image, one might have no idea what it is and so to them it is "unidentified" while the other one might know exactly what it is and so to them it is not "unidentified".
So when someone says there are 1000's (or whatever) of ufo photos out there that means they are unidentified only to the viewers of those photos who don't know what the objects are in reality.
I don't believe there are 1000's or whatever unexplainable objects (except to those who don't know what they are) buzzing around our skies as part of secret conspiracies or whatever because for every so called ufo there will be at least someone on this planet who knows exactly what it is.
I also believe that the vast majority of so called ufo images are not of flying objects at all but are some other natural phenomenon or fabrication.
felgall — 2010-10-03T19:49:55-04:00 — #5
A UFO (unidentified flying object) is by definition unidentified meaning that the person who saw it didn't know what it was. If they knew what it was then it wouldn't be unidentified, it would be a cloud, a weather balloon, a flock of geese, Jupiter, one of NASAs satellites, a flying saucer, or whatever it turned out to actually be.
There have been lots of UFOs recorded simply because the person who saw it never managed to gather enough information to tell what it actually was. UFOs are an extremely common occurrence because few people are familiar enough with everything that they are likely to see to be able to identify them all.
When someone does actually manage to identify what it actually was it is then no longer a UFO because it is no longer unidentified.
If someone has an actual picture of a flying saucer then it most definitely is not a UFO.
molona — 2010-10-03T12:35:42-04:00 — #6
I'm re-opning the thread so you can keep debating as usual. I accept the fact that maybe we have been too quick to close this thread and I apologize for all this confusion. I'm not perfect... yet
As always, keep it civil and remember that politics and/or religion are not allowed
And yes, you can use the word goverment as long as you don't speak about politics. Unfortunately for you, it is too easy to get confused... because it is a word that 99% of the itmes is associated with it
mittineague — 2010-10-03T00:00:52-04:00 — #7
I'm sorry if you disagree with my interpretation.
I did say please.
mittineague — 2010-10-02T23:47:23-04:00 — #8
.... Please, lets not bring Politics into this thread.
system — 2010-10-02T23:53:40-04:00 — #9
Don't go overboard. The mention of government has nothing to do with politics. The reason I said that above is that I believe a lot of the things in the sky are known by the government. Has absolutely nothing to do with politics whatsoever. It's not against sitepoint rules to mention the word "governments" or "corporations", where the words need to be used within a broader (and unrelated [to politics]) context.
system — 2010-10-02T23:53:53-04:00 — #10
If you sent the photo to NASA, the Air Force, airports or anyone else you can think of that might know and that you trust, they might be able to explain what the object is, if in fact it was actually there when you took the photo.
What evidence can you then post that proves the object was there in the sky when the photo was taken.
Thank you for your concern but I don't have any issues or concerns with the national government of my country.
system — 2010-10-02T23:59:26-04:00 — #11
Kalon, you do understand that you just contradicted yourself with the two responses above? You're amazing. I am not even going to answer... shakes head
Oh no, I spilled my tea...
eastcoast — 2010-10-02T15:04:46-04:00 — #12
If there was sufficient UFO activity that anybody could sight them regularly within the arc of sky visible from their normal location, and take large amounts of photos of phenomena, then it would hold true that considering the population of the earth, many millions of people would have similar opportunities.
Within those millions, 1000s would have access to high quality video or photographic equipment, and would have used such to record these phenomena. We would have many irrefutable, high resolution captures of UFO activity.
Except we don't. :lol:
UFO 'enthusiasts' only ever seem to have blurry low quality equipment. Perhaps they can't afford good kit because their condition precludes gainful employment, or perhaps large metal equipment isn't allowed in institutions where these enthusiasts conduct their 'research' from. Then again, perhaps they bought a DSLR with 1080p video and a zoom lens and found out they'd been taking photos of airliners, the ISS and sun dogs :rolleyes:
jjmcclure — 2010-10-02T07:38:50-04:00 — #13
Why even mention spaceships then? You could have mentioned photoshopping anything at all into the photo but you specifically mentioned a spaceship.
jjmcclure — 2010-10-04T04:02:23-04:00 — #14
Haha, don't often find myself agreeing with you Stephen but I like that!
system — 2010-10-01T17:58:11-04:00 — #15
:):) How much is he charging? :):)
I'll throw in a pig as well for free :lol:
system — 2010-10-01T04:58:15-04:00 — #16
I didn't ask you to "report" anything. I just asked if you sent your photos to NASA or teh CSIRO or any other authoritative agency that could verify whether the photos are genuine or not. Whether they can explain what the object is if they find the photos to be genuine is another issue.
In that case why are you saying you wouldn't send the photos to NASA or the CSIRO since you are implying that their photo experts are good enough?
I wouldn't fabricate ufo photos and then publish them.
I was just highlighting the fact that since it is very easy to create fabricated images containing an illusion of a ufo leads to many people being initially sceptical of any claims of photos displaying ufo's.
greatrates — 2010-10-01T04:13:13-04:00 — #17
It's definitely something, just don't know what it is. I wouldn't be surprised at whatever it is, there is so much more out there, but most of us only believe in what we can see.
system — 2010-10-01T00:03:40-04:00 — #18
no problem, good luck in your quest
Have you sent any of your photos or video to NASA or maybe the CSIRO in Australia for verification?
If they or any other authoritative agency can certify you have captured a genuine image of a non man made flying craft, it would be worth lots of $$$$$$.
system — 2010-09-30T23:56:35-04:00 — #19
I know, and I agree why, and I understand.. but it is still irritating, because I know I am not uploading fakes, or anything dodgy. I am not trying to convince you of my honestly, because as you've stated, that's not possible as I am a stranger. But for what ever it's worth -- anything I upload is 1). Sincerely unidentified 2). I don't upload anything where I know what it is, but try to pass it off as a UFO. I guess I just need to get better photos and footage. That will sort a slot of the people out who want to put me in with all the fake artist morons. Those are the people I am truly upset with. the LIARS. They make life difficult for honest people. Also, this is about the 5th camea I've been trough. So I know a bit about photography now, and I know the difference between dust or water on the lens, a bug, and something that's in the distance, within the depth of focus range. I know that when I upload something, it is most assuredly at least hundreds of feet away. If it is a blur, I know it is a fly something. I don't even upload those.
On the other hand, if I took video footage of a 300 meter wide disk, glowing with lights, leaving me in its shadow, I am sure that if I uploaded it to YouTube, 90% of the people would say:
I do have some pretty cool photos uploaded to YouTube, and they aren't even impressed with those (because they think they're fake). All I can say is: I have the originals and I am only too happy to hand them over to a photo expert.
system — 2010-10-02T08:01:59-04:00 — #20
next page →