UFO Hoax Continues
I repeat: HA HA HA HA!
In spite of my earlier post bemoaning (and laughing at) these UFO pictures, there is a second installment up here. I also notice that there is buzz on other forums about the pics. Why do things have to be so transparent?
The poster is identified as “Dan B.” The only person this brings to mind is Dan Burisch, another whistleblowing “insider” who has no way to prove any of his claims, but is nevertheless a hero of the disclosure movement.
Because of the ridiculous nature of these images, and if this is another product of the same people who brought you Dulce, SERPO, and other stories, what would be the purpose? Is someone trying to pass information with them? Perhaps some of you can download the pictures and look for encoded messages, sort of like a “Where’s Waldo?” for spooks. Interestingly, all comments I’ve seen so far speculate on earthly/ military anti-gravity devices, and not aliens.
I believe the reason that we shouldn’t ignore this fraud is that it is so patently absurd. You and I and most people don’t even take it seriously, so what audience does this appeal to? I’ll leave you with that question for the comments.
Most likely, they are just someone’s poor attempt to get attention. We’ll have to wait and see if the stupid things begin to “appear” in other geographic locales besides Capitola, CA or they start beaming mind-control waves at the anonymous witnesses. I predict that this thing will not die a quiet death.
Of course, now I’ll probably see one from my backyard.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, May 22nd, 2007 at 1:30 pm and is filed under Breaking News, Government Projects, Hoaxes, UFOlogy, Wake Up Down There. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- Socorro: The Latest »
- Best UFO Pictures of 2007 »
- Greg’s Occasional Pic of the Moment #2 »
- Alien Photos »
- Socorro Hoaxed? »
- Pilot Sees UFO »
- Put UFOs In Your Cel Phone Pics…INSTANTLY! »
- 140 Years of UFO Photographs »
- Black “Egg-Shaped” UFO Photographed »
- Incredibly Dumb UFO pictures »
|
May 22 2007 
May 22nd, 2007 at 1:45 pm
Actually there are now 3 installments. The original and 2 others can be found at ufo casebook.
May 22nd, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Blimey, those spikes could do a man a mischief if he didn’t notice it on his chair!
May 22nd, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Minnesota mosquitoes could take that thing down.
May 22nd, 2007 at 3:41 pm
I’m thinkin’ maybe it’s some kind of “viral marketing” thing. This looks far too hollywood video-game-ish. Considering the campaign they set up for Halo 2, maybe it’s for the soon-to-be-released Halo 3?
May 22nd, 2007 at 4:11 pm
It’s probably a prototype British Police UFO drone knocked off course by an angry mob of stone-throwing Brits…
May 22nd, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Hi Greg,
Just quickly skipping around following links, it seems likely that ‘DanB’ is Bren(dan) Burton, admin of the Open Minds Forum? The name matches up (to a degree), and he’s cross-posting the same articles and linking to the Open Minds forum. Not sure why the pseudonym of DanB though (assuming I’m correct…I have better things to do than spend much time on this).
Note though that ‘DanB’ is simply posting the images found elsewhere, by ‘Chad’, and ‘Rajman’, not claiming to be the original source. He is though pointing traffic to the Open Minds Forum as the discussion area for the images.
Apart from that, there appear to be problems with one of the images, where the ‘craft’ is hovering over the power lines. Might be my colour blindness, but the power lines do seem to disappear here and there when crossing the craft. Again, I leave it to someone with more time than me…
Kind regards,
Greg
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:03 am
This was posted on conspiracy central or unexplained-mysteries and there was a good explanation based on car parts.
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:14 am
I’m sort of looking at it as a good way to see what sort of background work people are willing to do before they go posting things to their site. I wish I could say I’m impressed with Linda Howe’s work on this story, but alas…
May 25th, 2007 at 8:10 am
okay, i’m new here, but i’m a little surprised and confused.
i’ll admitt these photos will probably turn out to be a publicity stunt for some new movie.
i came here to see what you guys had to say, and found this- “HA HA HA HA HA!!
The sad thing is that some people will actually take this seriously.”
it seems only the very best cgi artists are able to speculate how it was probably created; using the latest cutting-edge software involving ligh sources, etc.
did “HA HA HA HA” mean that everyone that comes to this repectable, informative site is also a cutting-edge cgi expert?
are clear UFO photos only worth discussing if it is the typical silver flying saucer?
other “less credible” sites have analized the time stamp embedded into the photos, possibly backing up the story, as well as the speed of the craft. someone else was trying to measure the rotation speed, based on the timestamp. another person spotted some interesting artifacts in the photo, and discovered that Flickr alters the format and resolution for “free” accounts. someone else came up with a few things that pointed to cgi, something about software using incremenmts of 8 to render circles, and other patterns in the photo that were divisible by 8s. then the text; despite the klingon and matrix references, it turns out that it doesn’t match anything too well, except for the simple “i” and “o” type shapes.
on and on. pretty neat research, even if it’s not perfect. it seems the masses are getting better at playing detective, and discussing them in a forum is what sparked some of the deeper questions and possible results.
i came here for info. i don’t expect details about every bad photo hoax out there, but this is something that deserves more than “ha ha ha”.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Lesley,
Thanks for the info and the links from your site.
If anyone wants even more links and info on UFOs and the paranormal, visit Lesley’s site at http://thedebrisfield.blogspot.com/
May 25th, 2007 at 9:49 am
jpuma,
Very interesting. Alienating the portion of the UFO community that believes just about anything would apparently be a small price to pay.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Greg (T),
Thanks for the heads-up. I saw the discussion at Open Minds. Strangely, some of the SERPO researchers are urging people to take these photos seriously.
Maybe that’s not so strange.
May 25th, 2007 at 9:52 am
Jeff,
I didn’t think I needed to do much background work, considering the fairly obvious nature of the pictures. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
May 25th, 2007 at 10:01 am
notasoul,
I’m sorry if you took offense to to my gut reaction. In contrast to your accusation that I simply made fun of the pictures, you should notice that the majority of the post was a speculation on the use of the pictures as a disinfo ploy, with a suggestion that the images may be hiding references to something besides themselves. Also, I asked readers with good photo analysis software to take a closer look.
So in reality, my reaction was much more than laughter. I hope that you notice this and keep coming back to the site. There is plenty of information here from Nick and myself that has nothing to do with pictures that are considered fakes.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
greg,
thanks for the reply. i wasn’t trying to accuse anyone, i simply cut and pasted the only text i found on that page-
““HA HA HA HA HA!!
The sad thing is that some people will actually take this seriously.””
it sounds like there is an earlier post that explains the reasoning behind it. i must have missed it. i apologize.
this does make me wonder what will happen if someday some AUTHENTIC close-up, clear photos are taken.
i also do not understand a couple of the “some people believe anything” comments. this is no silver frisbee stuck into photoshop. this is probably one of the most elaborate cgi hoaxes to ever hit UFO circles. how is falling for that sad?
it’ll be intersting to see what happens next.
May 25th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
notasoul,
The earlier post was a “haha.” In this one, I tried to look at it as something more than a simple hoax. What I was lamenting is that many people look at this series of photos as some sort of path to revelation in the UFO subject. The best UFO pictures make at least a partial case to the skeptical (at least true skeptics) that there is something that deserves our attention.
To me, these “Chad” images are a distraction from more interesting matters, but possibly an example of disinfo muddying up things. If we weren’t supposed to see any experimental craft, there is little chance that we would have ever seen these pictures, let alone a whole new set a few weeks later. If they are faked, why would anyone do this, apart from a need for attention? The post addressed these matters.
Anything people don’t expect to see in a photo will have a tough time as an example of “proof.” The fact that now, almost any image can be faked makes it less likely that we will ever get an “authentic” picture.
I am impressed and excited, however, when these same technologies can be used to examine old UFO pictures. See the recent analysis of the Rex Heflin photos for one example. Heflin never hid behind an anonymous persona, which is a problem when we are presented with any photographic or video images.
Once again, thanks for reading and commenting!
May 25th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
After speeding reading the Heflin photo analysis I can be glad that the Chad UFO is not “hoola hoop” in appearance but problematically there is no “blurriness” or fuzzy ionized air around the image….
May 25th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Oh wait — we haven’t posted the 2nd of the 3rd photo installment. The 1st is “somewhere in Cali,” 2nd is Lake Tahoe and 3rd is Capitola….
The 2nd photo series from Lake Tahoe indeed shows the “blurriness” required to indicate some sort of speculated electrogravitic ionization mechanism, as indeed the poster mentions.
http://www.nowpublic.com/ufo_over_lake_tahoe_same_as_chads_c2c_flying_cross
May 26th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Drew,
That sort of “force field” appears around objects in lots of digital pictures when they are enlarged, epecially near sharp transitions from light to dark. They could also be artifacts of digital manipulaiton.
Do we have any pictures of “ionized force fields” from known objects that produce this effect to compare it to? That would be nice.
Why do the Heflin photos need this feature? No one ever claimed that it ran on “ionizing” principles, at least not as far as I know, so why is this “problematic?”
April 24th, 2008 at 7:28 am
I just saw this on UFO-Hunters. My first reaction was to laugh hysterically, as it seems so obviously a model.
I studied the photographs, there are some flaws (why don’t we see these craft behind complex objects like clusters of leaves?).
My photoshop skills are pretty good, and with little patience, I’m sure this could be reproduced quite easily.
It stinks of disinformation. If it has ANYTHING to do with gov’t (and it may not, it may just be some idiot) - it could be some clever hoax to divert attention from whatever they’re really working on. As is always the case.
I have to hand credit to whomever perpetrated this; they have a lot of time on their hands.
April 24th, 2008 at 7:30 am
Drew, the “blurriness” is very likely a photoshop motion blur filter. Nothing more.
April 24th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Does anyone have the original full-scale images available?
I’ve looked at what I can find on the net, and I still think it’s a Photoshop (or other image manipulation) job.
May 5th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Alien technology has sure come a long way from the flying hubcaps of yesteryear. Pretty soon, they’ll be invisible. Then what will we do?
May 5th, 2008 at 8:16 am
reezunblee,
If UFOs become invisible I suppose only the hoaxes will be left!
Actually, I think the phenomenon wants us to see it, so there is probably little danger of disappearance.