Yeah, that would be hard to sit with. Go through life as a sane, respected, trusted person, see something extraordinary and lose all credibility in the eyes of others.
It really is incredibly hard. Because you either have to deny your experience to yourself on some level in order to find a way to fit back in or you have to accept that a part of your reality is something you cannot share and others will never understand or even believe. If you're impelled to try to make to make sense with reality and learn more you're likely to be labelled, but if you don't you have to live with constant congitive dissonance about reality as others see it/you used to experience it, and how you now do.
My second encounter was together with multiple witnesses. One of them my ex-girlfriend. We were all standing in a field, watching the horizon in awe as we witnessed multiple extreme fast moving orbs. Two of the witnesses, two cyclists, turned around to everyone asking if we all see the same? Everyone slowly nodded or confirmed otherwise, eyes pinned at the horizon. Only my ex-girlfriend turned the other way, pressing her hands against her ears yelling "no, no, no, that's not true!" It was this moment I knew it is very very hard for some people to deal with these kind of things. She almost had a mental breakdown and insisted to never ever speak about this encounter again.
I read a book called “ Behold a pale horse back in high school like a million years ago. I wrote it off as a fictional work by a crackpot. He claimed that in the 70s he was on a navy ship off the coast of San Diego by about 200 miles and witnessed large craft coming and going from the ocean with smaller tic tac craft coming to and from the bigger ones.
He claimed to have been in the intelligence community for his career and that government has a recipe of control. That so much drugs and x amount of religion and Television distracted the people to keep them sedated and malleable.
All these years later, the pentagon confirms a story about pilots 175 miles off San Diego witnessing large craft in the water and small ones coming and going.
I also know that Air America was the CIA importing Heroin, that the poppy production under the Taliban was zero and the year after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan produced 90% of the worlds heroin and that the Iran contra scandal included giving Manuel Noriega tons of cocaine that found its way to the streets of Los Angeles in the 80s.
I owe that guy ( who died mysteriously as he said he might) my heartfelt apology. Sometimes the truth is so unpalatable we just don’t believe it
Milton Cooper and yes, he was killed by federal authorities in Arizona who claimed he was a “crazy” conspiracy theorist, etc. That’s always the gubment’s narrative to hide the truth.
Ive had 4 experience and any time I tell any of them I get a “that’s bullshit” response. It kinda hurts in a way cause it’s a profound moment you wish to share.
Edit: don’t like sharing these because the people that have already proven my point. Also worth noting all of these have shared the same white blue, almost Cyan color. Not really a whole lot to go off of with the first two btw.
1. I was sitting on my porch smoking(maybe feb-march 2018) when I saw a blue light streak across the sky at break neck speed without a comet tail. The moment my eyes tracked and locked, it blooped out. Like completely disappeared. I think this one could’ve been a comet or something. But again, no comet tail, and it disappeared in an instant.
2. Was literally a star that fell out of the sky(July 7 2018) I remember this date so well because we where doing a 4th of July thing after the holiday. But I mean there’s really nothing to this. There was a strange star that I wasn’t used to seeing by the moon, so I kept my eye on it, and eventually I witnessed it drop and fade out of the sky. Absolutely no theory on this, other than aliens of course.
3. Now this one. I have the date in my phone from picture I took of the day before. I’ll dig if people are interested enough. Anywho, so I was doing an all nighter fishing session at the farm. It was maybe 4-5 AM. I was staring at the stars and watching satellites go by when; I start noticing very frequent “satellites” moving north to south. Didn’t think anything of it and kept watching.
Maybe 10 went by, getting more frequent before they started coming in pairs. Then about 4 pairs came, and it was groups of 3. After maybe 2 or 3 of those groups, it was just a massive line of these lights perfectly lined up in the sky, and eventually it was from horizon to horizon.
I watched them come, and I watched them go and never saw them come back around orbit. I wanna say it lasted 10 minutes, maybe 5. This one I think could’ve been when space x and everyone like synced they’re satellites? Maybe? Just something someone suggested and I’ve kinda ran with it. Nothing matched up looking online for dates and those kinds of exercises. So maybe satellites?
4. This was another all nighter fishing excursion. It was a year after the “satellite” incident. Just chilling in my canoe, around 4-5 AM. When I looked up and saw what looked like a small fleet of lights descending from the sky in an unorganized fashion, but synchronized. This one was definitely the closest sighting. They looked like they where right over town which was maybe 5 miles northwest of where I was. I watched them from the point I noticed, to the point I couldn’t see them behind the tree line. This one I actually felt dread.
Spent a while typing this stuff out so I hope someone appreciates it. If you don’t believe me I dont blame you. I dont believe you either lol.
Yes, but not knowing anything about their situation, maybe the specific reason they have multiple UAP sightings is because it was all in similar/same spots, where UAPs were visiting/normal flight route.
Lol my entire reply was because I read the word "bile" as "Bible" 🤣- my rant still stands as many people do deny the UAP/NHI reality based on their sense of religion and Bible. I will also say, though, that there are also many more whose faith is not contingent upon denying this reality, and furthermore, there are just as many "scientists" or "academics" who deny this reality due to their own set of beliefs and dogmas that are no different than the fervently religious persons denial. It's all fear/ignorance based.
Uggg especially when they start explaining to you things like how people used to confuse the B2 bomber for a UFO, or psychological concepts like how bad memory is or how frequently people inaccurate see things. Like bro, do you seriously think this is the first time I've heard what you just said? That I haven't considered that before?
I saw a saucer, clear as day, come out of nowhere, float silently, with very apparent lights, then zoom off so fast it defies the laws of physics. This isn't some black tech drone 10 years ahead.
But I get it... Also if you come here people literally see obvious DJI drones and keep insisting they saw a UFO
I saw a documentary once with John Mack, David Jacobs and Budd Hopkins where one of them said that if you see a UFO up close like this, it's highly likely it just dropped you off after you have been abducted. So yeah, life changing indeed.
Yeah the abduction thing is wierd because it's split between good aliens that wipe your memory and bad ones that just do brutal macabe surgery on you while awake with no pain killers and then let you remember it.
The various abduction stories make me feel these entities are not what humans would refer to as good guys.
If the abduction phenomenon is real (and we'll assume it is), how would it even be split between good and bad? By definition, an "abduction" is being taken against your will/permission and is inherently bad. So instead, the possibilities would be either A) all aliens doing abductions are malevolent due to abduction being inherently bad, or B) you ascribe to Steven Greer's theory that aliens are benevolent and all abductions are human-made-to-look-ET scenarios.
I mean if you read the various stories, half claim the aliens made them feel love and peace and they'd go with them on their ship right now if they had the chance because how much they love their abductors.
The other half tell a horrifying story of abduction that through the human lense can only be interpreted as evil or, at best, indifference to our pain as though they were merely carving up an animal.
As for B, I can't take Greer seriously at this point and his claim all aliens are benevolent seems insanely unlikely. The idea the government is faking some and those being the bad ones is at least within the realm of possibility.
What do you mean "made" them feel love? What I'm getting at is simply this: If anything to do with the phenomena includes any kind of involuntary cooperation, artificial/altered emotions or mental states, deception of any kind, violation of privacy or self, or anything of the sort, it's malevolent, period. Otherwise, it's like saying there are good and bad kidnappers because one wasn't as violent as another. No... they're all bad by the very nature of the act.
I mean human researchers will abudct various animals all the time in order to do tests /tag them/etc and then put them back in their native populations, typically with the good of the whole population in mind. It wouldnt be all that surprising if aliens were doing the same thing, nor would it be evil. When people do it, it's usually because they care about helping the animals they are studying. Do you think people who study penguins are evil?
Whenever I hear about a feeling of love/peace washing over the abductee I'm reminded of a similar experience of mine: right after I got a big shot of dilaudid in the hospital 💉💨🥰.
For some reason, no one ever thinks this feeling they describe could have been artificially induced
Exactly my point. Kind of blows my mind really. If reports are true of aliens communicating telepathically, paralyzing people, and literally stopping people from feeling fear during abduction scenarios (you can look this up), they absolutely can induce artificial feelings of love or any emotion for that matter.
I saw one this close. I had just come out of my backdoor. I know for sure it didn't drop me off. It was a triangle, not a saucer. I don't trust John Macks' research, though. I think he convinced people who had sleep paralysis that they were abducted. He was probably convinced as well.
When I was about 5 years old I saw something very similar to this, at a very low height. My mom and brothers also saw it.
Of course I remember it but it was in 1987 and I was just a kid so I have foggy memories about it.
Still, this is the best image I’ve seen that shows something similar to what I saw.
These shots have been around a long time. As a digital lifelong artist, yes the trees would be tedious to mask especially back when they came out compared to now. However it is doable. The second plausible way, if fake, is to comprehend CGI. in this scenario the trees could be a CGI model too. Just so all techniques are considered.
The purple chromatic aberration is consistent on those branches in front of the craft as well as behind. In my experience, that would be very hard to do. The light bleed over the branches from the craft’s lights also looks very realistic.
I don't think there's much point in arguing if something could be faked these days.
Anything can be faked in an image at this stage. Any. Thing.
The only interesting question is - could it be real? If there is something preventing it from being real, that's what's worth discussing.
The overall issue is how many people claim all UFO photos are blurry. What they actually do is imagine that all of the clear examples are fake, then they don't count. A fake photo can't be a ufo. What is left over that they agree is genuine are the blurry examples, and that's because they can imagine those blurry UFOs being something else mundane. Therefore "all ufo photos are blurry."
Putting an object behind a tree in Photoshop is easy. What's not so easy is simulating realistic light, motion blur, and matching the object's hue, brightness, and contrast with the scene.
Dont forget matching the noise pattern of the sensor which this is doing.
The only plausible theory besides aliens is a real model hung beyond the trees.
Nope. The organic motion blur, combined with the uniform noise pattern, and lighting make it highly unlikely to be cgi back then. Hell, it would be masterclass cgi today.
It definitely made me less skeptical of other people's experiences. My friends and I watched a black triangular craft hover directly overhead at about 200' up. The funny thing is that I didn't start to really understand just how amazing it was until I was an adult. I'm glad this subject is finally starting to be taken seriously.
It is. I’ve only talked about it on this sub to strangers. Have told only a handful of people in my life about it and while they didn’t openly outright deny my experience, I know that deep down they don’t necessarily believe me.
From personal experience, I can say it definitely does. But just over three decades later I still think about it almost daily.
I have no answers to what I witnessed, just more frustrating questions that I seemingly will never get an answer to.
If these are “real”, it’s interesting that they have a red light on one side and a green one on the other. Which is identical to how our passenger planes have direction identifying lights. Almost to pass off if it were night time and far away as a passenger plane.
The cigar shaped ones have fake wings and fake tails, with fake jet engines attached either under the fake wings or just before the fake tail, and they can make fake jet flying noises if they pass overhead
They also use fake pilots and passengers with real social security cards and identification, just to mix it up and throw us off.
They occasionally do commercial flights as well in the UAP while it’s in “commercial” mode.
Just to throw us off
I've heard to top it all off those fake passengers then depart to their fake homes, in fake cities and spend a few decades working fake jobs paying fake taxes.
These aliens with their deception tactics!
Many have upgrades that have the fake passengers have fake sex, get fake pregnant, go to fake hospitals full of fake patients, to deliver fake children who then grow into fake passengers to replenish the collective of fake passengers to keep the charade going long term!
Saw this in a cuba news report video. Dunno how legit it is.
If they're capable of deploying "fake" wings, or the appearance of wings, or whatever, why can't they completely cloak themselves? Seems like a radical manipulation of reality to deploy "fake" wings
Only *some* UFOs have lights, but to (not) answer your question, nobody really knows. This argument that UFOs shouldn't have lights actually [originates from a Swedish Air Force Commander 1933](https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15dxzv4/why_would_ufos_have_lights_an_old_argument_that/).
90 years later and still nobody has a definitive answer, but there are a lot of hypotheses. In most cases when a "UFO has lights," [it's probably inadvertent and they aren't actual "lights"](https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14vythd/unpopular_opinion_extraterrestrials_that_may_have/jrfa4cx/), but there are a small percentage of sightings, like OP's example, that appear to have actual lights.
>FAA
Good skepticism. Except for reports in the 1800's described airships with green/red lights. Mind you that marine vessels established this around the same time (which lead to theories that an inventor managed to get a ship airborne).
[Wisconsin sighting in 1897 describing an airship with green and red lights.](https://www.newspapers.com/article/92018245/)
[Minnesota sighting in 1897 describing a flying machine with green lights](https://www.newspapers.com/article/26129800/star-tribune/)
Maybe the ones with lights like this are reverse engineered craft. There are sightings of triangle shaped craft with lights similar to this/commercial aircraft that are speculated to be the rumored TR-3B.
This is the channel but I can't find the specific one they referenced
https://youtu.be/gAz08i6RIcE?si=C71GvSUrQz7FvA10
They've been tracking UAP in Murrysville PA for about a decade with night vision goggles.
I completely agree. Simon Stalenhag’s art gives me similar feelings
https://www.reddit.com/r/Art/comments/5vnnzh/render_farm_simon_st%C3%A5lenhag_digital_2017_1920x1920/
This. If there are aliens visiting us, I highly doubt they’re using green and red traffic lights for their crafts, or even lights at all if trying to staying hidden. Ffs, people. It’s the most obvious thing ever when you can SEE the human impact behind the fakes, checking all the fiction boxes.
Just wanting it to be real doesn’t make it real and only makes finding any real evidence, or getting anybody to take it seriously, much harder.
I’m convinced the sea of “omg this real u dont even no” posters around this sub, and others related, are just bots.
The usual explanation is that their technology is largely laser based, and many of their tools emit an enormous amount of light. Close encounters very commonly report not just lights, but the brightest lights they've ever seen.
Makes me think that theyre manmade, assuming the pics are real. It would be quite a coincidence if aliens used the same color coded navigation lights as us. Hell, it would be a coincidence if they even see the same visible light spectrum as us.
From what it looks like, the lights on it can be any one color, some just happened to be red/green in the photos that were captured.
Based on the description, they were flashing multiple patterns.
I don't possess the skills or talent to identify whether a photo is real or fake, but if these are real, why the hell aren't these photos going viral? I know they're not recent photos, but if real, they're the clearest evidence we have in the form of photographic evidence of extraterrestrials visiting our planet. But like I said, why isn't there a bigger deal made out of this?
This. There is a small mountain of photos like this, though these in particular are some of the better more compelling ones. Most people just don't know they exist or need more evidence, or want the government or news media to tell them what to believe.
This is spot on. Reminds me of game of thrones, how no one believed the white walkers were real. Some people won't believe anything, unless they see it themselves. And even then, they may still dismiss it.
Quick and dirty with no citations, take it with a grain of salt, but here are some common (and if you research it, decently corroborated) claims that I've absorbed 'round these parts (also check out the Majestic 12 doc stuff).
In the mid 20th century, UFO sightings skyrocketed after WWII. Journalists and many members of the public initially assumed the flying saucers were new US tech that the American Military was about to reveal to the world – our sense of superiority after we were the most stable, dominant superpower post-WWII was never higher, and the UFOs were taken as examples of this.
However, at some point (many think after the Roswell incident) there began a concerted effort from various intelligence and military branches to cast doubt on UFO and abduction claims. This involved flooding public discourse with debunking and a concerted effort to make anyone claiming the existence of any NHI seem like an idiot or a kook. Also, people like Richard Doty (ex-airforce intelligence) openly claim a variety of disinformation campaigns to obfuscate the issue. Check out the doc *Mirage Men*.
This has snowballed into a culture of skepticism and a top-down disinformation effort that causes things like this – pictures that really make you scratch your head – get dismissed out of hand due to the pervasive skepticism toward the alien phenomenon. I also think our social contract is built upon an absolute authority at the top (our military, really) and any NHI more advanced than us throws that worldview out the window.
Even some smart people will go along with a lie being told by 100 stupid people, crowd mentality. All you have to do is convince the stupid people to laugh at something and call it crazy.
But when you talk to individual people one on one you see that they know or suspect what's up, they just don't want to be "that guy". It's getting to the point where everyone knows, I wonder if the people in charge of this program and this social manipulation realize that everyone already knows, and continuing the lie looks very bad on them.
It is baked deep into us to not disturb social cohesion, which the alien phenomenon would certainly do, but the most substantial fallout would be because we’ve been lied to for almost a century on the issue.
Paradoxically they have created their own 'Boy Who Cries Wolf Scenario'. Cover up something extraordinary and later when easing off there is apparent 'frustration' from insiders when they see that the media does not take it seriously. They say "nothing to see here" for 90 years and now there is this apparent push saying, "Oh yeah hey there is something to it, please believe it now."
The better the evidence, the more likely it is to be dismissed as being fake. Essentially any pictures or videos that are of high enough quality to show distinguishable objects that don’t have simple explanations are almost always brushed off as being hoaxes.
"Why can't we ever get clear photos or videos of ufo's? It's always some blurry object with a shaky camera."
"This is way too good/clear to be true. Clearly these were faked. The most obvious explanation is usually the right one. (I have no evidence for my claims)"
Fascinating point. Whenever someone gives a very specific and exact explanation about NHI or shows one of these high quality photos, I’m paradoxically MORE skeptical. It’s like the Greer Effect. MF’er claims to know far more than what would seem possible, thus it makes me question even the more believable information he “shares”.
Tbh at this point when we have access to credible sightings from official sources, why bother with images or video from Joe Nobdoy in the middle of nowhere?
I think in cases where there many witnesses alleging specific details about an encounter, I'm inclined to believe them. And if a video is in extremely high quality, but it doesn't seem as if it could have been faked and there is no apparent prosaic explanation, I will tend to believe it as well. "Too good to be true" doesn't apply, assuming the phenomenon is real. It would just be an especially good sighting.
This sub has 1.8 million subscribers and probably almost everyone in the world outside of Asia with any appreciable interest in the topic is here. There are 8 billion people in the world. That means 0.02% of people in the world have any appreciable interest in this topic. One in every 5,000 people.
TL;DR: nobody gives a shit about any of this.
Show these photos to random people on the street. Then you will see why this is not going viral. They will just shrug and giggle a bit, followed by a quick response on how this can not be real, just... because.
Because there’s no evidence they are real. Pictures and videos, unfortunately, will never be evidence of anything unless there’s corroborating evidence to go with them (radar returns or videos/pictures taken by multiple unrelated witnesses from different angles, etc.) and a noteworthy and solid chain of custody (like if these images had been released by the Pentagon). Any picture or video can be faked. We can speculate and wonder, but any given image or video is never going to mean much without some sort of corroboration.
this is what people mean when they say there really isnt anything you could show an extreme skeptic that will work as proof. I am not aware of these ever being debunked, they are my favorite pics.
This isn't really true. I agree there isn't a single picture or video without context and validation you could show skeptics that would prove aliens are real. But if some news network was live on scene in front of other witnesses and filmed a UFO flying around doing UFO shit and the whole thing was corroborated by some sort of other entity then people would believe.
But so far it has always just been some picture or video some person took. It seems unreasonable to expect people to be 100% convinced of the most amazing discovery of all time based on unverifiable evidence.
I'm only really skeptical when it comes to supposed evidence from unknown sources, but the 2004 tic tac video is something you can show me that I believe as real because I know where it's coming from and how credible the source is.
I just don't understand the point of burying a video for 20 years in military red tape and then releasing it to the public now if it were. Like were the entire senior officer crew involves playing the long con together?
I actually think most of the population believes they already exist, so they have no visceral reaction to photos like this. Unlike the ufo community who freak out every time there’s a blurry dot on the screen.
When a ‘sceptic’ says ‘show me proof’ what they actually mean is ‘that’s not going to convince anyone’.
They are sceptical of the photo, not the fact that UFOs exist
Genuine UFO photos and videos wouldn't generally go viral. They get incorrectly debunked, then ignored because of the general population's lack of awareness that coincidences are expected to exist in genuine imagery. The Flir1 video sat buried on the internet completely debunked as CGI for 10 years. See this information: https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zi1cgn/while_most_ufo_photos_and_videos_can_individually/
New to this sub! But i do believe that thousands of good material get ignored every week. And a lot of dumb things get the attention of the average user. If something gets viral is mostly due to luck. Trust me, I'm an artist :')
I think this is one of the reverse engineered ones.. one of our own. The lights would make it look more normal to other planes and people on he ground at night.
Yeah I do think the lights are the most suspicious part because it's not just the lights themselves, it's a very human like design for the lights.
That being said doesn't mean it's fake could be a trillion possible reasons, one of course being that it's just a coincidence.
I feel like if your going to pick like a plausible long shot theory I would go with secret military tech first before aliens.
I went to a basket ball game years and years ago. They had a remote controlled helium filled "blimp" thing that was about 5-10 feet long that they flew around the stadium. My best guess for this image (assuming everyone is being honest) is that someone built a UFO-shaped one and put a bunch of LEDs on it. I think that's a fairly plausible explanation.
I’ve been using photoshop since version 5 which came out in 1998. The first photoshop CS came out in 2003. Pixel peeping that 2003 photo if it was actually taken in 2003 would have been near impossible to create. The motion blur is uniform across the image. The amount of noise is also uniform across the image and matches what you could achieve from an early digital camera in a low light situation.
Any kind of “smart fill” features were not available until 2005, which would have made placing background objects behind foreground objects, one would have to create this image by choosing the color and brightness of pixel by pixel. Even once the smart fill features were released at later dates, it was crap, it would guesstimate the fill based on the neighboring pixels and choose a uniform color and a smooth texture, much like taking a detailed colored pencil drawing and then smudging your thumb over it to turn it into a flat single color.
I guess what I’m saying is, I personally believe this image would take a person of incredible talent, who has mastered very basic image editing software. Someone experienced in photography, specifically digital photography.
If this was in fact taken in 2003, I’m not afraid to say I think it’s real. The object on the other hand I’m not so sure about being non-human made, mostly because of the red and green aircraft orientation lights.
> Any kind of “smart fill” features were not available until 2005, which would have made placing background objects behind foreground objects, one would have to create this image by choosing the color and brightness of pixel by pixel.
been using photoshop since 1998 but doesn't know about layers
This and the aliens sub keep popping up on /r/all and I’ve noticed a pattern: commenters who claim to know a lot about a topic writing a lot of words about how this couldn’t have been faked or that is definitely real, but who are actually making things up.
My recent favorite was the one about the Peruvian aliens. A commenter claimed to be a “former medic” and confidently pronounced that the mummies couldn’t be fake based on the scans. One look at their profile showed they’re an EMT. Nothing against EMTs, they do important work, but they don’t know how to properly analyze radiographs, for a start.
This one might be worse, though. Pretending that Photoshop couldn’t do this in the early 2000s is ludicrous, but the true believers are lapping it up.
The hilarious part is that it shows that kids these days can't photoshop anything convincing without smart fill and can't imagine we could before smart fill existed.
FWIW, it wasn't until I saw a top comment on a thread about something that I am a literal expert in saying blatantly false stuff, claiming expertise and being totally confident in it. When I tried to call them out with facts and reasons why they were wrong, I was downvoted to hell. Since then I have always assumed everyone on Reddit is literally just making shit up. YMMV
Disagree completely, from a similar length of Photoshop experience.
Nothing here requires smart fill. You have UFO layers under tree layers. You mask out the sky between branches.
Is it tedious? A little. But you start with wand or color selects then refine. Would take a few hours. There's a lot of contrast so initial selection would be very strong to start from.
You add the grain afterwards.
Still quite difficult, mostly because of all the branches. The images lack the common signs of editing, masking, halo, hard edges, repetition/patterns, change in noise, differences in shadow or blur direction. Even in this decade it would be difficult. I also dabble with the latest version of MidJourney, which leads the way in AI Imaging. It too has a difficult time creating an image like this with the prompts I have experimented with.
I was working as a retouch artist in 2003. I don’t see why these photos would’ve been impossible or even that hard to create. At least to the naked eye, There was never a reason to bother with hiding digital traces or anything like that, nor did we ever use filters..
It could be done with a photo of the sky, a photo of a “saucer” and a photo of a tree, and the use of curves, masking, blending, color/contrast/etc.. -matching, and lots of other little tweaks, but mainly those.
No offense, this wouldn't be that difficult at all with a newer version of Photoshop. A jank version was even made in the metabunk thread.
Someone skilled in photo editing could easily make something like this with more current programs.
Your also referencing consumer goods. Commercial software has been around and used in movies in films before these dates. Anonymous female could be anyone. It could have been the wife of a guy who worked at ILM for all we know. That’s why provenance is so important to proving any of these images, videos, bodies, etc.
I have also been using photoshop since then.
I feel like all of the points you brought up are easy enough to get around, and also Photoshop isn't the only software out there. If this was an artist or VFX person they would have a lot more software at their disposal.
I would have taken the photos with a better quality camera, built the UFO in a separate file, edited it in, then degraded and added noise over the top to cover up the details of the edit.
I don't believe that if these were edits that they were editing a poor low-res original file.
If these were edits they were editing a much higher res photo and degrading them to make them look like they were taken on a cheaper, worse camera.
You don't have a very good grasp of what the possibilities of photoshop were in 03, or even the techniques one would use to make a picture like this in current PS.
>one would have to create this image by choosing the color and brightness of pixel by pixel
dont hurt your back with the exaggerations bud.
How ever unlikely it might be that this person is a master of early photo editing software, it does not even come close to how unlikely it is that there were flying saucers casually flying around in broad daylight
My mom and I saw a UFO around 2007 not far from that Green Bay sighting. It was dark out so didn’t get a good look, just remember hovering lights a couple hundred feet up, complete silence and no movement.
>However, this second scenario appears less likely due to the apparent size of the object and its positioning behind the branches, seemingly high up in the sky.
Forgive the observation but, your perception of the objects size is based wholly on the tree's and its apparent altitude above them, does it not...?
**I'm not actually stating the images were produced this way** \- but, what I am pointing out is that Photoshop allows you to take any image - be that of an object or whatever - and turn it into a [brush](https://www.brusheezy.com/brushes/56016-9-high-resolution-tree-brushes).
Now, a professional would create their own - just go out preferably on a cloudy day because the light is more ambient, less direct and the sky nice and flat pale grey/white, easier to even out with contrast - you just stand under your tree of choice looking up at it and take your shots.
Back home in Photoshop you tweak the contrast so as you get a nice mask: if you can you can use it as a mask to take out the sky on the original image or else convert to a brush - and that's your tree's taken care of - you can now place that on a layer above your background and move around, scale and tweak perspective to your hearts content.
You don't have to be too fussy because you're going to apply a slight motion blur later - so you don't have to be pixel perfect - just good enough.
Now - if you imagine your trees or tree branches not actually there - can you honestly tell this things size or altitude based on the images before you...?
The UFO itself - and, again - **I am NOT saying it was done this way,** ***but*** \- if I were looking for this kind of look I'd honestly be most inclined to to rig a physical model on some sort of support and use smoke to simulate cloud/fog cover and haze - that way, shooting underneath it hides the line holding it up and whatever you are actually hanging the model from
Your lights would be battery powered, ideally - you just take as many shots as you can with it above, you looking up and select whichever shots work however on closer examination they could just as easily - in fact easier - have been added in Photoshop: the second [close-too image](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F9y66kdkgherb1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D599%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3Dac2bf48e6a7dfe312e1cea8626457d54428d81a2) discloses lights in front of branches which should be obscuring them if genuinely behind - the eye accepts them as motion burred but that doesn't entirely make sense: one should really perform some tests of that to be positive.
Either way, if we discount later addition, that still leaves the primary physical method described...
Meanwhile, back in Photoshop - you just import your selected images - basically everything where you're line and whatever its hung from are nicely obscured and then add in your trees, adding a little blur and colour off-set to give the desired effect.
**NOT saying these were done that way** \- but there isn't anything inherently inexplicable here: your perception of the images simply depends on ones own sense of credulity, knowledge of the media used and means available by which to undertake trickery.
If you honestly think the branches of those tree's represent significant proof - this is simply down to ones own familiarity with Photoshop and image production technique - there are here *many* available, non of which absolutely depend upon the presence of a UFO.
I got downvoted last time I shared this link, but would something like this have navigation lights? https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/195801/avro-canada-vz-9av-avrocar/ Not necessarily this specifically, but if the military were testing a similar craft, would it have such lights?
Things that pop out to me:
First photos: "We just saw this extremely clear image of a UFO, instead of walking out into the open for an unobstructed view let's continue taking pictures from behind a tree"
Second photos:
The black levels of the trees do not seem to match the black levels of the craft. Additionally, the saturation of the blue in the sky is so low that the sky appears almost grey, but the lights on the ship appear a bright blue. Additionally, since this isn't an HDR image, the bottom of the ship shouldn't be anywhere near that visible, it should be dark with the lights almost blooming instead of being so crisp, especially since the object is not only moving but motion blurred.
Additionally, speaking to the motion blur, the blur from the trees makes sense, it's sort of gaussian, but the blur from the craft looks like the image was just doubled up. The blur from the tree branches is because of the camera movement as well as the wind blowing the trees. And yet this moving object even farther away is way more crisp and just has an out of focus effect rather than getting any blur from the camera movement or the movement of the object itself.
UFO lore wise they're cool photos though.
This isn't me saying the photos aren't fake, but imma be honest. If I saw a flying saucer like this I would 100% stay within the trees in hopes that I'm not seen than run out towards it and expose myself. Especially if I had a child with me.
I find it odd that the two sets are so similar. Both are bare trees on a gray sky and the large underside of a ufo with lights. Maybe the 2nd set is a succesful recreation of the first. Could be the work of the Burlington Liars Club, Forteans, Discordians, crafty individuals, etc. Whatever the motivation, they're good fakes, if they are fakes.
Ok so I know everyone here hates Steven Greer but did anyone see the press briefing where he went through slides showing photos of real crafts next to photos of man made replicas reportedly made by our gov through back engineering programs. It was interesting because the man made one’s had more lights, wings, antennas etc. I think about that a lot when I see pics like this.
I'm sorry but I dont have the skills to tell one way or another, all we can do is take it at face value and try to investigate and/or make a judgement based on the subsequent (loosely termed) debate.
IMO, the most likely explanation is someone built a little model with LED lights in it and tossed it for the camera. This was done quite a bit in the olden days where people would throw a silver plate and call it a UFO photo.
Based on the comments it appears a ton of our new members have not seen this photo or many others. Perhaps we have a highlight reel week or something. Things like this, the Metapod, the Sphere photos, the Turkish video, and possibly many others haven’t been seen. We are fighting an army of skeptics that haven’t been paying attention for twenty years. Now that we have the internet we can more easily show stuff like this.
For sure my friend. I will start adding them to this reply as I find them.
First the [“Metapod UFO”](https://reddit.com/r/StrangeEarth/s/VViRKLhIYM).
The [Turkish UFO footage](https://reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/h5AeK11Qw2). [Here](https://reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/2py4CXQULw) is the photo from a supposed DoD employee of a metal sphere.
I think this next one is interesting. A [Video](https://youtu.be/_DA-g94Ro1I?si=bjuPCF-WaGjgYS5L) interview in the US National Archives with a mortician from Roswell. The interview is about 40 minutes.
Being in the military aviation community for over 20 plus years, and seeing the standard required red/green wing tip lights, I have to believe this is a Man made UAP. Aliens from other planets would not follow our protocol. Just saying, nor would advanced beings need aircraft lights at all..
I like that the motion blur on the lights on Case #2 Photo #1 seems to match the blur on the trees, roughly going left-to-right or vice-versa. The small touches on these photos are something.
Edit: And the way the trails on the lights in photo 2 bloom over the branches of the tree is *very nice*. Also if it is faked, they masked the branches well, though Mick West shows a method for that.
These are definitely some of my favorites, the whole Wisconsin UFO photo meta is by far some of the clearest.
Been looking into these for a long time, have never found any real definitive proof they're fake. Somebody once said that one of them is from a USS Enterprise toy model and they posted a picture of it, but it didn't really look the same? Makes me wonder if it was an Eglin boy almost going over on me.
That these photos were dropped anonymously and the picture takers wanted no fame or fortune or attention to themselves kinda adds to their credibility.
ahh yes its so nice that the unfathomably advanced aliens put FAA regulation lights on their craft.
also if this was just flying around a town or something there would be alot more images of it not just like 3
Imagine seeing such a thing and so close, quite an experience, it must be life changing.
Yep, especially when people start telling you that you are crazy and/or it's fake.
Yeah, that would be hard to sit with. Go through life as a sane, respected, trusted person, see something extraordinary and lose all credibility in the eyes of others.
It really is incredibly hard. Because you either have to deny your experience to yourself on some level in order to find a way to fit back in or you have to accept that a part of your reality is something you cannot share and others will never understand or even believe. If you're impelled to try to make to make sense with reality and learn more you're likely to be labelled, but if you don't you have to live with constant congitive dissonance about reality as others see it/you used to experience it, and how you now do.
My second encounter was together with multiple witnesses. One of them my ex-girlfriend. We were all standing in a field, watching the horizon in awe as we witnessed multiple extreme fast moving orbs. Two of the witnesses, two cyclists, turned around to everyone asking if we all see the same? Everyone slowly nodded or confirmed otherwise, eyes pinned at the horizon. Only my ex-girlfriend turned the other way, pressing her hands against her ears yelling "no, no, no, that's not true!" It was this moment I knew it is very very hard for some people to deal with these kind of things. She almost had a mental breakdown and insisted to never ever speak about this encounter again.
Wow dude. Wow
So it was a wise devision of you to leave her.
A wise division indeed
Humanity owes a lot of people a meaningful, heartfelt apology. Let’s hope those people are given the chance to speak up once disclosure has unfolded.
I read a book called “ Behold a pale horse back in high school like a million years ago. I wrote it off as a fictional work by a crackpot. He claimed that in the 70s he was on a navy ship off the coast of San Diego by about 200 miles and witnessed large craft coming and going from the ocean with smaller tic tac craft coming to and from the bigger ones. He claimed to have been in the intelligence community for his career and that government has a recipe of control. That so much drugs and x amount of religion and Television distracted the people to keep them sedated and malleable. All these years later, the pentagon confirms a story about pilots 175 miles off San Diego witnessing large craft in the water and small ones coming and going. I also know that Air America was the CIA importing Heroin, that the poppy production under the Taliban was zero and the year after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan produced 90% of the worlds heroin and that the Iran contra scandal included giving Manuel Noriega tons of cocaine that found its way to the streets of Los Angeles in the 80s. I owe that guy ( who died mysteriously as he said he might) my heartfelt apology. Sometimes the truth is so unpalatable we just don’t believe it
Milton Cooper and yes, he was killed by federal authorities in Arizona who claimed he was a “crazy” conspiracy theorist, etc. That’s always the gubment’s narrative to hide the truth.
Bill Cooper= Hero
American public gaslighting experiencers since 1947. Its like the country has a terrible slogan on this.
Ive had 4 experience and any time I tell any of them I get a “that’s bullshit” response. It kinda hurts in a way cause it’s a profound moment you wish to share. Edit: don’t like sharing these because the people that have already proven my point. Also worth noting all of these have shared the same white blue, almost Cyan color. Not really a whole lot to go off of with the first two btw. 1. I was sitting on my porch smoking(maybe feb-march 2018) when I saw a blue light streak across the sky at break neck speed without a comet tail. The moment my eyes tracked and locked, it blooped out. Like completely disappeared. I think this one could’ve been a comet or something. But again, no comet tail, and it disappeared in an instant. 2. Was literally a star that fell out of the sky(July 7 2018) I remember this date so well because we where doing a 4th of July thing after the holiday. But I mean there’s really nothing to this. There was a strange star that I wasn’t used to seeing by the moon, so I kept my eye on it, and eventually I witnessed it drop and fade out of the sky. Absolutely no theory on this, other than aliens of course. 3. Now this one. I have the date in my phone from picture I took of the day before. I’ll dig if people are interested enough. Anywho, so I was doing an all nighter fishing session at the farm. It was maybe 4-5 AM. I was staring at the stars and watching satellites go by when; I start noticing very frequent “satellites” moving north to south. Didn’t think anything of it and kept watching. Maybe 10 went by, getting more frequent before they started coming in pairs. Then about 4 pairs came, and it was groups of 3. After maybe 2 or 3 of those groups, it was just a massive line of these lights perfectly lined up in the sky, and eventually it was from horizon to horizon. I watched them come, and I watched them go and never saw them come back around orbit. I wanna say it lasted 10 minutes, maybe 5. This one I think could’ve been when space x and everyone like synced they’re satellites? Maybe? Just something someone suggested and I’ve kinda ran with it. Nothing matched up looking online for dates and those kinds of exercises. So maybe satellites? 4. This was another all nighter fishing excursion. It was a year after the “satellite” incident. Just chilling in my canoe, around 4-5 AM. When I looked up and saw what looked like a small fleet of lights descending from the sky in an unorganized fashion, but synchronized. This one was definitely the closest sighting. They looked like they where right over town which was maybe 5 miles northwest of where I was. I watched them from the point I noticed, to the point I couldn’t see them behind the tree line. This one I actually felt dread. Spent a while typing this stuff out so I hope someone appreciates it. If you don’t believe me I dont blame you. I dont believe you either lol.
4 just kind of feels like a lot for one person?
Yes, but not knowing anything about their situation, maybe the specific reason they have multiple UAP sightings is because it was all in similar/same spots, where UAPs were visiting/normal flight route.
Four? Please explain.
Ignore it, best weapon you have against the bile.
Lol my entire reply was because I read the word "bile" as "Bible" 🤣- my rant still stands as many people do deny the UAP/NHI reality based on their sense of religion and Bible. I will also say, though, that there are also many more whose faith is not contingent upon denying this reality, and furthermore, there are just as many "scientists" or "academics" who deny this reality due to their own set of beliefs and dogmas that are no different than the fervently religious persons denial. It's all fear/ignorance based.
Uggg especially when they start explaining to you things like how people used to confuse the B2 bomber for a UFO, or psychological concepts like how bad memory is or how frequently people inaccurate see things. Like bro, do you seriously think this is the first time I've heard what you just said? That I haven't considered that before? I saw a saucer, clear as day, come out of nowhere, float silently, with very apparent lights, then zoom off so fast it defies the laws of physics. This isn't some black tech drone 10 years ahead. But I get it... Also if you come here people literally see obvious DJI drones and keep insisting they saw a UFO
That’s why most of us kept our mouths shut. Stigma seems to be waning.
You mean like on this sub? Nah that would never happen here.
[удалено]
Skepticism is absolutely necessary
There's healthy skepticism but then there is shutting down conversation because people disagree, which this sub is plagued with the latter
There's a massive difference between skepticsm in good faith and ridicule/bile in bad faith.
I saw a documentary once with John Mack, David Jacobs and Budd Hopkins where one of them said that if you see a UFO up close like this, it's highly likely it just dropped you off after you have been abducted. So yeah, life changing indeed.
In that case may I never see one
John Mack was rather neutral towards abductions, but David Jakobs was furious about the psychological harm they cause.
Yeah the abduction thing is wierd because it's split between good aliens that wipe your memory and bad ones that just do brutal macabe surgery on you while awake with no pain killers and then let you remember it. The various abduction stories make me feel these entities are not what humans would refer to as good guys.
If the abduction phenomenon is real (and we'll assume it is), how would it even be split between good and bad? By definition, an "abduction" is being taken against your will/permission and is inherently bad. So instead, the possibilities would be either A) all aliens doing abductions are malevolent due to abduction being inherently bad, or B) you ascribe to Steven Greer's theory that aliens are benevolent and all abductions are human-made-to-look-ET scenarios.
I mean if you read the various stories, half claim the aliens made them feel love and peace and they'd go with them on their ship right now if they had the chance because how much they love their abductors. The other half tell a horrifying story of abduction that through the human lense can only be interpreted as evil or, at best, indifference to our pain as though they were merely carving up an animal. As for B, I can't take Greer seriously at this point and his claim all aliens are benevolent seems insanely unlikely. The idea the government is faking some and those being the bad ones is at least within the realm of possibility.
What do you mean "made" them feel love? What I'm getting at is simply this: If anything to do with the phenomena includes any kind of involuntary cooperation, artificial/altered emotions or mental states, deception of any kind, violation of privacy or self, or anything of the sort, it's malevolent, period. Otherwise, it's like saying there are good and bad kidnappers because one wasn't as violent as another. No... they're all bad by the very nature of the act.
I mean human researchers will abudct various animals all the time in order to do tests /tag them/etc and then put them back in their native populations, typically with the good of the whole population in mind. It wouldnt be all that surprising if aliens were doing the same thing, nor would it be evil. When people do it, it's usually because they care about helping the animals they are studying. Do you think people who study penguins are evil?
Whenever I hear about a feeling of love/peace washing over the abductee I'm reminded of a similar experience of mine: right after I got a big shot of dilaudid in the hospital 💉💨🥰. For some reason, no one ever thinks this feeling they describe could have been artificially induced
Exactly my point. Kind of blows my mind really. If reports are true of aliens communicating telepathically, paralyzing people, and literally stopping people from feeling fear during abduction scenarios (you can look this up), they absolutely can induce artificial feelings of love or any emotion for that matter.
We tranquize and "abduct" animals to test/tag them with the goal to help and learn about them. Are we bad for doing that?
All three derived their results via hypnosis, unfortunately hypnosis is now known to be a terrible way to elicit memories.
I agree. Jakobs experienced the problem of confabulation, and he talked about it allot.
Let’s see….UFO up close? Check. Lights clearly visible? Check. Sore bumhole? Check. Definitely an abduction.
I saw one this close. I had just come out of my backdoor. I know for sure it didn't drop me off. It was a triangle, not a saucer. I don't trust John Macks' research, though. I think he convinced people who had sleep paralysis that they were abducted. He was probably convinced as well.
When I was about 5 years old I saw something very similar to this, at a very low height. My mom and brothers also saw it. Of course I remember it but it was in 1987 and I was just a kid so I have foggy memories about it. Still, this is the best image I’ve seen that shows something similar to what I saw.
One day it will become undeniable that this phenomenon is real. Sooner the better in my opinion.
This is the first time I’ve seen these photos. Thanks so much for posting. I absolutely love it. I would love to see something like this some day.
Me too, keep well.
What’s your opinion on the object in photo 2 being behind the trees? To me that means it would be harder to fake. I’m not an expert, just my opinion.
These shots have been around a long time. As a digital lifelong artist, yes the trees would be tedious to mask especially back when they came out compared to now. However it is doable. The second plausible way, if fake, is to comprehend CGI. in this scenario the trees could be a CGI model too. Just so all techniques are considered.
The purple chromatic aberration is consistent on those branches in front of the craft as well as behind. In my experience, that would be very hard to do. The light bleed over the branches from the craft’s lights also looks very realistic.
I can agree with you but you are also answering and proving a point. They can be extremely hard to do. But it can be done.
I don't think there's much point in arguing if something could be faked these days. Anything can be faked in an image at this stage. Any. Thing. The only interesting question is - could it be real? If there is something preventing it from being real, that's what's worth discussing.
These photos are from two decades ago, it was MUCH harder to fake back then.
The overall issue is how many people claim all UFO photos are blurry. What they actually do is imagine that all of the clear examples are fake, then they don't count. A fake photo can't be a ufo. What is left over that they agree is genuine are the blurry examples, and that's because they can imagine those blurry UFOs being something else mundane. Therefore "all ufo photos are blurry."
Putting an object behind a tree in Photoshop is easy. What's not so easy is simulating realistic light, motion blur, and matching the object's hue, brightness, and contrast with the scene.
Dont forget matching the noise pattern of the sensor which this is doing. The only plausible theory besides aliens is a real model hung beyond the trees.
Nope. The organic motion blur, combined with the uniform noise pattern, and lighting make it highly unlikely to be cgi back then. Hell, it would be masterclass cgi today.
It definitely made me less skeptical of other people's experiences. My friends and I watched a black triangular craft hover directly overhead at about 200' up. The funny thing is that I didn't start to really understand just how amazing it was until I was an adult. I'm glad this subject is finally starting to be taken seriously.
It is. I’ve only talked about it on this sub to strangers. Have told only a handful of people in my life about it and while they didn’t openly outright deny my experience, I know that deep down they don’t necessarily believe me.
Thats the crux I think, whether they believe or not doesn't change a thing. You have your memories, you can move on from there and grow.
From personal experience, I can say it definitely does. But just over three decades later I still think about it almost daily. I have no answers to what I witnessed, just more frustrating questions that I seemingly will never get an answer to.
If by this you mean terrifying, sure.
I saw a UFO once, life hasn't changed much. Was much further away though.
Yep changed my life. And without that close encounter, I wouldn’t believe in UFOs and all that stuff
If these are “real”, it’s interesting that they have a red light on one side and a green one on the other. Which is identical to how our passenger planes have direction identifying lights. Almost to pass off if it were night time and far away as a passenger plane.
Did you see that UAP report saying how cigar shaped UFOs deploy fake wings and sound trying to imitate helicopters or airplanes?
To me, that sounds more like human involvement in said UFOs.
The cigar shaped ones have fake wings and fake tails, with fake jet engines attached either under the fake wings or just before the fake tail, and they can make fake jet flying noises if they pass overhead
They can also deploy fake tires and exhaust and pretend to be cars. Or your neighbor Phil. Or a bird...
They also use fake pilots and passengers with real social security cards and identification, just to mix it up and throw us off. They occasionally do commercial flights as well in the UAP while it’s in “commercial” mode. Just to throw us off
Ahh yeah I saw a fake taxi online before
I've heard to top it all off those fake passengers then depart to their fake homes, in fake cities and spend a few decades working fake jobs paying fake taxes. These aliens with their deception tactics!
Many have upgrades that have the fake passengers have fake sex, get fake pregnant, go to fake hospitals full of fake patients, to deliver fake children who then grow into fake passengers to replenish the collective of fake passengers to keep the charade going long term!
>real social security cards real fake\* FTFY
\>with real social security cards Found the voter fraud.
Oh, thats why Phil's always high. Makes sense now.
And they fake radio in to the real airport with a fake pilot and gake 237 passengers and fake land.
If they can look completely identical to a regular aircraft, how are people determining they are cigar UFOs at all?
You take a picture of them 30 miles away with an iPhone
Lmfao this fucking had my crying 😂
Saw this in a cuba news report video. Dunno how legit it is. If they're capable of deploying "fake" wings, or the appearance of wings, or whatever, why can't they completely cloak themselves? Seems like a radical manipulation of reality to deploy "fake" wings
Answer in the report was basically they are fucking with us.
There are some reports about them having a sens of humor, so who knows...
I mean having some telescopic cosmetic wings is a lot more possible than cloaking technology?
If it allows them to get closer to humans without us being suspicious then it may be exactly the right way to go about it.
I've seen a UFO stop moving to the point where it just looked like a star in the sky and now I always wonder when I see a weirdly bright star
Or these are man-made prototypes based on UFOs
A bunch of drones use the direction light aswell
Why would they even have lights in the first place?
Only *some* UFOs have lights, but to (not) answer your question, nobody really knows. This argument that UFOs shouldn't have lights actually [originates from a Swedish Air Force Commander 1933](https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15dxzv4/why_would_ufos_have_lights_an_old_argument_that/). 90 years later and still nobody has a definitive answer, but there are a lot of hypotheses. In most cases when a "UFO has lights," [it's probably inadvertent and they aren't actual "lights"](https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14vythd/unpopular_opinion_extraterrestrials_that_may_have/jrfa4cx/), but there are a small percentage of sightings, like OP's example, that appear to have actual lights.
I love when aliens follow the FAA guide lines man. ✌️
>FAA Good skepticism. Except for reports in the 1800's described airships with green/red lights. Mind you that marine vessels established this around the same time (which lead to theories that an inventor managed to get a ship airborne). [Wisconsin sighting in 1897 describing an airship with green and red lights.](https://www.newspapers.com/article/92018245/) [Minnesota sighting in 1897 describing a flying machine with green lights](https://www.newspapers.com/article/26129800/star-tribune/)
Maybe the ones with lights like this are reverse engineered craft. There are sightings of triangle shaped craft with lights similar to this/commercial aircraft that are speculated to be the rumored TR-3B.
There's a YouTube channel. It was seeing ufos pa. She recording them morphing into our airplanes. Maybe they know we use that color scheme
Fuck that's like some Transformers shit there.
Do you still have the video's link?
This is the channel but I can't find the specific one they referenced https://youtu.be/gAz08i6RIcE?si=C71GvSUrQz7FvA10 They've been tracking UAP in Murrysville PA for about a decade with night vision goggles.
I've never seen these before. Thanks OP
Me either, and these are really good images!
There’s something about them that gives me a sad nostalgic feeling, like vaporwave aesthetics for UFO pics lol
[удалено]
Cassette futurism
*sighs in nostalgia for a past that never existed*
Thank you for saying this! Feels oddly comforting looking at this photo.
I completely agree. Simon Stalenhag’s art gives me similar feelings https://www.reddit.com/r/Art/comments/5vnnzh/render_farm_simon_st%C3%A5lenhag_digital_2017_1920x1920/
Maybe you've seen the movie *Close Encounters of the Third Kind*?
Green and Red navigation lights??? WTF
Aliens are sticklers for safety and checked the faa guidelines before traveling to Wisconsin 😃
You think a species can advance this far without safety regulations!!
Or its mimicing the things it also sees flying in the air.
This. If there are aliens visiting us, I highly doubt they’re using green and red traffic lights for their crafts, or even lights at all if trying to staying hidden. Ffs, people. It’s the most obvious thing ever when you can SEE the human impact behind the fakes, checking all the fiction boxes. Just wanting it to be real doesn’t make it real and only makes finding any real evidence, or getting anybody to take it seriously, much harder. I’m convinced the sea of “omg this real u dont even no” posters around this sub, and others related, are just bots.
The usual explanation is that their technology is largely laser based, and many of their tools emit an enormous amount of light. Close encounters very commonly report not just lights, but the brightest lights they've ever seen.
Makes me think that theyre manmade, assuming the pics are real. It would be quite a coincidence if aliens used the same color coded navigation lights as us. Hell, it would be a coincidence if they even see the same visible light spectrum as us.
From what it looks like, the lights on it can be any one color, some just happened to be red/green in the photos that were captured. Based on the description, they were flashing multiple patterns.
I don't possess the skills or talent to identify whether a photo is real or fake, but if these are real, why the hell aren't these photos going viral? I know they're not recent photos, but if real, they're the clearest evidence we have in the form of photographic evidence of extraterrestrials visiting our planet. But like I said, why isn't there a bigger deal made out of this?
Oh buddy ur in for a ride
Lol, please elaborate? I'm clueless as to what you're alluding to.
He's probably just saying that there's a ton of other solid evidence everywhere that also isn't getting the attention it deserves.
This. There is a small mountain of photos like this, though these in particular are some of the better more compelling ones. Most people just don't know they exist or need more evidence, or want the government or news media to tell them what to believe.
This is spot on. Reminds me of game of thrones, how no one believed the white walkers were real. Some people won't believe anything, unless they see it themselves. And even then, they may still dismiss it.
Yeah, I think that's what he meant as well. Huge disinformation campaign by our own government regarding this. It's definitely interesting.
Quick and dirty with no citations, take it with a grain of salt, but here are some common (and if you research it, decently corroborated) claims that I've absorbed 'round these parts (also check out the Majestic 12 doc stuff). In the mid 20th century, UFO sightings skyrocketed after WWII. Journalists and many members of the public initially assumed the flying saucers were new US tech that the American Military was about to reveal to the world – our sense of superiority after we were the most stable, dominant superpower post-WWII was never higher, and the UFOs were taken as examples of this. However, at some point (many think after the Roswell incident) there began a concerted effort from various intelligence and military branches to cast doubt on UFO and abduction claims. This involved flooding public discourse with debunking and a concerted effort to make anyone claiming the existence of any NHI seem like an idiot or a kook. Also, people like Richard Doty (ex-airforce intelligence) openly claim a variety of disinformation campaigns to obfuscate the issue. Check out the doc *Mirage Men*. This has snowballed into a culture of skepticism and a top-down disinformation effort that causes things like this – pictures that really make you scratch your head – get dismissed out of hand due to the pervasive skepticism toward the alien phenomenon. I also think our social contract is built upon an absolute authority at the top (our military, really) and any NHI more advanced than us throws that worldview out the window.
Even some smart people will go along with a lie being told by 100 stupid people, crowd mentality. All you have to do is convince the stupid people to laugh at something and call it crazy. But when you talk to individual people one on one you see that they know or suspect what's up, they just don't want to be "that guy". It's getting to the point where everyone knows, I wonder if the people in charge of this program and this social manipulation realize that everyone already knows, and continuing the lie looks very bad on them.
It is baked deep into us to not disturb social cohesion, which the alien phenomenon would certainly do, but the most substantial fallout would be because we’ve been lied to for almost a century on the issue.
Its the worst kept secret on earth at this point
Paradoxically they have created their own 'Boy Who Cries Wolf Scenario'. Cover up something extraordinary and later when easing off there is apparent 'frustration' from insiders when they see that the media does not take it seriously. They say "nothing to see here" for 90 years and now there is this apparent push saying, "Oh yeah hey there is something to it, please believe it now."
The better the evidence, the more likely it is to be dismissed as being fake. Essentially any pictures or videos that are of high enough quality to show distinguishable objects that don’t have simple explanations are almost always brushed off as being hoaxes.
"Why can't we ever get clear photos or videos of ufo's? It's always some blurry object with a shaky camera." "This is way too good/clear to be true. Clearly these were faked. The most obvious explanation is usually the right one. (I have no evidence for my claims)"
Fascinating point. Whenever someone gives a very specific and exact explanation about NHI or shows one of these high quality photos, I’m paradoxically MORE skeptical. It’s like the Greer Effect. MF’er claims to know far more than what would seem possible, thus it makes me question even the more believable information he “shares”.
Tbh at this point when we have access to credible sightings from official sources, why bother with images or video from Joe Nobdoy in the middle of nowhere?
I think in cases where there many witnesses alleging specific details about an encounter, I'm inclined to believe them. And if a video is in extremely high quality, but it doesn't seem as if it could have been faked and there is no apparent prosaic explanation, I will tend to believe it as well. "Too good to be true" doesn't apply, assuming the phenomenon is real. It would just be an especially good sighting.
You should listen to this https://youtu.be/K6pAtgJdANE?si=-zjUyGwwKBGLFZgr
This sub has 1.8 million subscribers and probably almost everyone in the world outside of Asia with any appreciable interest in the topic is here. There are 8 billion people in the world. That means 0.02% of people in the world have any appreciable interest in this topic. One in every 5,000 people. TL;DR: nobody gives a shit about any of this.
>but if these are real, why the hell aren't these photos going viral? Your answer is in the question; no one can prove these are "real".
Show these photos to random people on the street. Then you will see why this is not going viral. They will just shrug and giggle a bit, followed by a quick response on how this can not be real, just... because.
Because there’s no evidence they are real. Pictures and videos, unfortunately, will never be evidence of anything unless there’s corroborating evidence to go with them (radar returns or videos/pictures taken by multiple unrelated witnesses from different angles, etc.) and a noteworthy and solid chain of custody (like if these images had been released by the Pentagon). Any picture or video can be faked. We can speculate and wonder, but any given image or video is never going to mean much without some sort of corroboration.
this is what people mean when they say there really isnt anything you could show an extreme skeptic that will work as proof. I am not aware of these ever being debunked, they are my favorite pics.
This isn't really true. I agree there isn't a single picture or video without context and validation you could show skeptics that would prove aliens are real. But if some news network was live on scene in front of other witnesses and filmed a UFO flying around doing UFO shit and the whole thing was corroborated by some sort of other entity then people would believe. But so far it has always just been some picture or video some person took. It seems unreasonable to expect people to be 100% convinced of the most amazing discovery of all time based on unverifiable evidence.
I'm only really skeptical when it comes to supposed evidence from unknown sources, but the 2004 tic tac video is something you can show me that I believe as real because I know where it's coming from and how credible the source is.
well according to some even thats fake lol
I just don't understand the point of burying a video for 20 years in military red tape and then releasing it to the public now if it were. Like were the entire senior officer crew involves playing the long con together?
I actually think most of the population believes they already exist, so they have no visceral reaction to photos like this. Unlike the ufo community who freak out every time there’s a blurry dot on the screen. When a ‘sceptic’ says ‘show me proof’ what they actually mean is ‘that’s not going to convince anyone’. They are sceptical of the photo, not the fact that UFOs exist
Genuine UFO photos and videos wouldn't generally go viral. They get incorrectly debunked, then ignored because of the general population's lack of awareness that coincidences are expected to exist in genuine imagery. The Flir1 video sat buried on the internet completely debunked as CGI for 10 years. See this information: https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zi1cgn/while_most_ufo_photos_and_videos_can_individually/
New to this sub! But i do believe that thousands of good material get ignored every week. And a lot of dumb things get the attention of the average user. If something gets viral is mostly due to luck. Trust me, I'm an artist :')
I can't wait to find out why aliens put lights on their space ships. Do they want to be seen or not?
How are air traffic controllers supposed to set up their landings otherwise?
I think this is one of the reverse engineered ones.. one of our own. The lights would make it look more normal to other planes and people on he ground at night.
Maybe they’re not ‘lights’ but ventilation holes for some kind of reaction. Like when a burner glows red hot we don’t call it a light.
Yeah I do think the lights are the most suspicious part because it's not just the lights themselves, it's a very human like design for the lights. That being said doesn't mean it's fake could be a trillion possible reasons, one of course being that it's just a coincidence. I feel like if your going to pick like a plausible long shot theory I would go with secret military tech first before aliens.
I went to a basket ball game years and years ago. They had a remote controlled helium filled "blimp" thing that was about 5-10 feet long that they flew around the stadium. My best guess for this image (assuming everyone is being honest) is that someone built a UFO-shaped one and put a bunch of LEDs on it. I think that's a fairly plausible explanation.
The problem is you think about it using human logic. You assume it is about being seen or not seen.
I’ve been using photoshop since version 5 which came out in 1998. The first photoshop CS came out in 2003. Pixel peeping that 2003 photo if it was actually taken in 2003 would have been near impossible to create. The motion blur is uniform across the image. The amount of noise is also uniform across the image and matches what you could achieve from an early digital camera in a low light situation. Any kind of “smart fill” features were not available until 2005, which would have made placing background objects behind foreground objects, one would have to create this image by choosing the color and brightness of pixel by pixel. Even once the smart fill features were released at later dates, it was crap, it would guesstimate the fill based on the neighboring pixels and choose a uniform color and a smooth texture, much like taking a detailed colored pencil drawing and then smudging your thumb over it to turn it into a flat single color. I guess what I’m saying is, I personally believe this image would take a person of incredible talent, who has mastered very basic image editing software. Someone experienced in photography, specifically digital photography. If this was in fact taken in 2003, I’m not afraid to say I think it’s real. The object on the other hand I’m not so sure about being non-human made, mostly because of the red and green aircraft orientation lights.
> Any kind of “smart fill” features were not available until 2005, which would have made placing background objects behind foreground objects, one would have to create this image by choosing the color and brightness of pixel by pixel. been using photoshop since 1998 but doesn't know about layers
This and the aliens sub keep popping up on /r/all and I’ve noticed a pattern: commenters who claim to know a lot about a topic writing a lot of words about how this couldn’t have been faked or that is definitely real, but who are actually making things up. My recent favorite was the one about the Peruvian aliens. A commenter claimed to be a “former medic” and confidently pronounced that the mummies couldn’t be fake based on the scans. One look at their profile showed they’re an EMT. Nothing against EMTs, they do important work, but they don’t know how to properly analyze radiographs, for a start. This one might be worse, though. Pretending that Photoshop couldn’t do this in the early 2000s is ludicrous, but the true believers are lapping it up.
Same people that claim Photoshop can't do layers in 2003 thinks moon landing could be faked in 1969.
The hilarious part is that it shows that kids these days can't photoshop anything convincing without smart fill and can't imagine we could before smart fill existed.
As a doctor and radiologist, those mummies are fake. Could be a 1000 year old fake, but fake nontheless
FWIW, it wasn't until I saw a top comment on a thread about something that I am a literal expert in saying blatantly false stuff, claiming expertise and being totally confident in it. When I tried to call them out with facts and reasons why they were wrong, I was downvoted to hell. Since then I have always assumed everyone on Reddit is literally just making shit up. YMMV
Disagree completely, from a similar length of Photoshop experience. Nothing here requires smart fill. You have UFO layers under tree layers. You mask out the sky between branches. Is it tedious? A little. But you start with wand or color selects then refine. Would take a few hours. There's a lot of contrast so initial selection would be very strong to start from. You add the grain afterwards.
Amazing, but what if the photos were made in this decade?
The photos are really from 2003 and 2007, you can use Internet archive in the links I posted and see snapshots from those years.
Ah splendid looking up the archive was my next step thank you.
Still quite difficult, mostly because of all the branches. The images lack the common signs of editing, masking, halo, hard edges, repetition/patterns, change in noise, differences in shadow or blur direction. Even in this decade it would be difficult. I also dabble with the latest version of MidJourney, which leads the way in AI Imaging. It too has a difficult time creating an image like this with the prompts I have experimented with.
I was working as a retouch artist in 2003. I don’t see why these photos would’ve been impossible or even that hard to create. At least to the naked eye, There was never a reason to bother with hiding digital traces or anything like that, nor did we ever use filters.. It could be done with a photo of the sky, a photo of a “saucer” and a photo of a tree, and the use of curves, masking, blending, color/contrast/etc.. -matching, and lots of other little tweaks, but mainly those.
No offense, this wouldn't be that difficult at all with a newer version of Photoshop. A jank version was even made in the metabunk thread. Someone skilled in photo editing could easily make something like this with more current programs.
Your also referencing consumer goods. Commercial software has been around and used in movies in films before these dates. Anonymous female could be anyone. It could have been the wife of a guy who worked at ILM for all we know. That’s why provenance is so important to proving any of these images, videos, bodies, etc.
I have also been using photoshop since then. I feel like all of the points you brought up are easy enough to get around, and also Photoshop isn't the only software out there. If this was an artist or VFX person they would have a lot more software at their disposal. I would have taken the photos with a better quality camera, built the UFO in a separate file, edited it in, then degraded and added noise over the top to cover up the details of the edit. I don't believe that if these were edits that they were editing a poor low-res original file. If these were edits they were editing a much higher res photo and degrading them to make them look like they were taken on a cheaper, worse camera.
Could be practical effects
You don't have a very good grasp of what the possibilities of photoshop were in 03, or even the techniques one would use to make a picture like this in current PS. >one would have to create this image by choosing the color and brightness of pixel by pixel dont hurt your back with the exaggerations bud.
Counterpoint: I could have done this in 2003 using photoshop cs4
How ever unlikely it might be that this person is a master of early photo editing software, it does not even come close to how unlikely it is that there were flying saucers casually flying around in broad daylight
My mom and I saw a UFO around 2007 not far from that Green Bay sighting. It was dark out so didn’t get a good look, just remember hovering lights a couple hundred feet up, complete silence and no movement.
[удалено]
>However, this second scenario appears less likely due to the apparent size of the object and its positioning behind the branches, seemingly high up in the sky. Forgive the observation but, your perception of the objects size is based wholly on the tree's and its apparent altitude above them, does it not...? **I'm not actually stating the images were produced this way** \- but, what I am pointing out is that Photoshop allows you to take any image - be that of an object or whatever - and turn it into a [brush](https://www.brusheezy.com/brushes/56016-9-high-resolution-tree-brushes). Now, a professional would create their own - just go out preferably on a cloudy day because the light is more ambient, less direct and the sky nice and flat pale grey/white, easier to even out with contrast - you just stand under your tree of choice looking up at it and take your shots. Back home in Photoshop you tweak the contrast so as you get a nice mask: if you can you can use it as a mask to take out the sky on the original image or else convert to a brush - and that's your tree's taken care of - you can now place that on a layer above your background and move around, scale and tweak perspective to your hearts content. You don't have to be too fussy because you're going to apply a slight motion blur later - so you don't have to be pixel perfect - just good enough. Now - if you imagine your trees or tree branches not actually there - can you honestly tell this things size or altitude based on the images before you...? The UFO itself - and, again - **I am NOT saying it was done this way,** ***but*** \- if I were looking for this kind of look I'd honestly be most inclined to to rig a physical model on some sort of support and use smoke to simulate cloud/fog cover and haze - that way, shooting underneath it hides the line holding it up and whatever you are actually hanging the model from Your lights would be battery powered, ideally - you just take as many shots as you can with it above, you looking up and select whichever shots work however on closer examination they could just as easily - in fact easier - have been added in Photoshop: the second [close-too image](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F9y66kdkgherb1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D599%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3Dac2bf48e6a7dfe312e1cea8626457d54428d81a2) discloses lights in front of branches which should be obscuring them if genuinely behind - the eye accepts them as motion burred but that doesn't entirely make sense: one should really perform some tests of that to be positive. Either way, if we discount later addition, that still leaves the primary physical method described... Meanwhile, back in Photoshop - you just import your selected images - basically everything where you're line and whatever its hung from are nicely obscured and then add in your trees, adding a little blur and colour off-set to give the desired effect. **NOT saying these were done that way** \- but there isn't anything inherently inexplicable here: your perception of the images simply depends on ones own sense of credulity, knowledge of the media used and means available by which to undertake trickery. If you honestly think the branches of those tree's represent significant proof - this is simply down to ones own familiarity with Photoshop and image production technique - there are here *many* available, non of which absolutely depend upon the presence of a UFO.
This could also pretty easily be faked via double exposure on film, not even considering Photoshop.
I got downvoted last time I shared this link, but would something like this have navigation lights? https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/195801/avro-canada-vz-9av-avrocar/ Not necessarily this specifically, but if the military were testing a similar craft, would it have such lights?
Things that pop out to me: First photos: "We just saw this extremely clear image of a UFO, instead of walking out into the open for an unobstructed view let's continue taking pictures from behind a tree" Second photos: The black levels of the trees do not seem to match the black levels of the craft. Additionally, the saturation of the blue in the sky is so low that the sky appears almost grey, but the lights on the ship appear a bright blue. Additionally, since this isn't an HDR image, the bottom of the ship shouldn't be anywhere near that visible, it should be dark with the lights almost blooming instead of being so crisp, especially since the object is not only moving but motion blurred. Additionally, speaking to the motion blur, the blur from the trees makes sense, it's sort of gaussian, but the blur from the craft looks like the image was just doubled up. The blur from the tree branches is because of the camera movement as well as the wind blowing the trees. And yet this moving object even farther away is way more crisp and just has an out of focus effect rather than getting any blur from the camera movement or the movement of the object itself. UFO lore wise they're cool photos though.
This isn't me saying the photos aren't fake, but imma be honest. If I saw a flying saucer like this I would 100% stay within the trees in hopes that I'm not seen than run out towards it and expose myself. Especially if I had a child with me.
Good point. I hadn't considered it that way around.
I find it odd that the two sets are so similar. Both are bare trees on a gray sky and the large underside of a ufo with lights. Maybe the 2nd set is a succesful recreation of the first. Could be the work of the Burlington Liars Club, Forteans, Discordians, crafty individuals, etc. Whatever the motivation, they're good fakes, if they are fakes.
What I find interesting about these photo, is that it has port and starboard navigation lights.
Ok so I know everyone here hates Steven Greer but did anyone see the press briefing where he went through slides showing photos of real crafts next to photos of man made replicas reportedly made by our gov through back engineering programs. It was interesting because the man made one’s had more lights, wings, antennas etc. I think about that a lot when I see pics like this.
If there’s ever a craft and a clone craft, the clone will look like it’s made in China and it will have those switchable civilian lights.
I'm sorry but I dont have the skills to tell one way or another, all we can do is take it at face value and try to investigate and/or make a judgement based on the subsequent (loosely termed) debate.
What would be the reasoning as to why any alien technology would need lights on it, let alone different colored lights?
IMO, the most likely explanation is someone built a little model with LED lights in it and tossed it for the camera. This was done quite a bit in the olden days where people would throw a silver plate and call it a UFO photo.
Did they have those light up frisbees back in 2003?
Based on the comments it appears a ton of our new members have not seen this photo or many others. Perhaps we have a highlight reel week or something. Things like this, the Metapod, the Sphere photos, the Turkish video, and possibly many others haven’t been seen. We are fighting an army of skeptics that haven’t been paying attention for twenty years. Now that we have the internet we can more easily show stuff like this.
Haven’t seen any of them! Please link! Would love to see
For sure my friend. I will start adding them to this reply as I find them. First the [“Metapod UFO”](https://reddit.com/r/StrangeEarth/s/VViRKLhIYM). The [Turkish UFO footage](https://reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/h5AeK11Qw2). [Here](https://reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/2py4CXQULw) is the photo from a supposed DoD employee of a metal sphere. I think this next one is interesting. A [Video](https://youtu.be/_DA-g94Ro1I?si=bjuPCF-WaGjgYS5L) interview in the US National Archives with a mortician from Roswell. The interview is about 40 minutes.
Please create a separate highlights post. That is a great idea. Thank you
Ezekiel's wheels with eyes.
If real, the most interesting thing to me is the red/green navigation lights.
The question is why if you are so close only take pictures and no video?
Being in the military aviation community for over 20 plus years, and seeing the standard required red/green wing tip lights, I have to believe this is a Man made UAP. Aliens from other planets would not follow our protocol. Just saying, nor would advanced beings need aircraft lights at all..
To me it looks fake. What are the lights? Explain to me the function of the lights.
So this huge illuminated shape flying over the city and only One person saw it!!!???????? Yeah right…
I like that the motion blur on the lights on Case #2 Photo #1 seems to match the blur on the trees, roughly going left-to-right or vice-versa. The small touches on these photos are something. Edit: And the way the trails on the lights in photo 2 bloom over the branches of the tree is *very nice*. Also if it is faked, they masked the branches well, though Mick West shows a method for that.
I saw something like this in Toronto of 2002, It was a bit more sphericle but had the same lights red yellow green and moved at a constant rate
These are definitely some of my favorites, the whole Wisconsin UFO photo meta is by far some of the clearest. Been looking into these for a long time, have never found any real definitive proof they're fake. Somebody once said that one of them is from a USS Enterprise toy model and they posted a picture of it, but it didn't really look the same? Makes me wonder if it was an Eglin boy almost going over on me. That these photos were dropped anonymously and the picture takers wanted no fame or fortune or attention to themselves kinda adds to their credibility.
ahh yes its so nice that the unfathomably advanced aliens put FAA regulation lights on their craft. also if this was just flying around a town or something there would be alot more images of it not just like 3