Google Sightseeing takes you on tour of the world as seen from satellite, using the free Google Earth program, or Google Maps in your web browser. Each weekday your guides James and Alex present new weird and wonderful sights as suggested by readers.

The editors: James & Alex

UFO

Posted by Alex Turnbull, Thursday, 12th May 2005

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
Please note that some or all of the objects mentioned in this post are no longer visible on Google Earth or Google Maps.

Tensuns says:

I have no idea what this is. I can’t find anything similar on any google map referenced sites. It doesn’t show up on terraserver and I live nearby so I know there are no towers in that area. It has the same shadow as ground objects and when you zoom out it appears to be too small to be something really close to the satellite.

UFO

Well we’re completely stumped. Any clues anyone?

Update: See the UFO Update entry.

329 Responses to 'UFO'

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]

  1. 316. KairoAnnunaki says:

    “Were they taken on the same date using the same camera or are we seeing pictures taken at different times using different media?”

    Seems as if it was taken at the same time as you can zoom in and out and that sphere will still be there, smaller, zoomed out, and bigger zoomed in. The clouds remain the same as you zoom in and out, so that must mean it was taken all at once.

    Also, if you zoom out the “sphere” at some point becomes very clear as to what it is. It eventually disapates as you zoom out, meaning most possibly it must not be on the lens. If not, we must be viewing a atom of some molecule.

    “re-colouring will show it to not be a circle at all :)”

    Yeah, I did that except re-coloring doesn’t work with a monocromatic looking object very well for accuracy. Do a greyscale of the image, then an inversion. You can tell better.

  2. 317. Derek says:

    Given they’ve been found on the site owned by the company that shot the photos originally, who further state they were shot from an airplane, I think that is reasonable enough proof that they are not satellite photos.

    The “lens flare” theory (aka “a common atmospheric polar refractive prism convergence caused when high altitude lenses are aligned with the axial elongation of the sun’s rays”) is the first interesting argument in a while. The shape and positioning don’t seem to be consistent with commen lens flares. Granted we are not talking normal photographic optice, but don’t they normally occur in sets along those “axial elongations”?

  3. 318. Deepthroat Chakra says:

    Oh, lens flares, that’s what he was talking about. No, it doesn’t match shape of any I’ve seen, but it could be. If it is a lens flare there’s nothing at all common about its appearance.

  4. 319. popshot says:

    It looks like an aspirin. Maybe it fell out of the photographers mouth when he took the picture? Or it was placed there on purpose to try and fool the rest of the world, what with UFOgeeks already in the bag.

  5. 320. KairoAnnunaki says:

    Why would a lens flare be in several pictures, in difference sizes when you can zoom in and out. Shouldn’t the lense flare be the same size on all the pictures?

    A lense flare can get re sized?

  6. 321. Derek says:

    It would be in several places since these photos are assembled from several overlapping shots:

    This article has a good explaination of how it is done:
    http://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/1001/standup.html

  7. 322. KairoAnnunaki says:

    Then that is one tiny lens flare for that lens.

  8. 323. Deepthroat Chakra says:

    If you’re just zooming up on the same hires image that gets resampled/resized according to the zoom, yes, the flare will resize along with everything else. The thing that makes a lens flare seem unlikely to me is the uniformity of appearance; except for a few images, it’s a single circle. ‘axial elongation’ I believe, was the made up term. The sun does not appear to be low in the sky which would favor (methinks) a symmetric single flare in the center.

    A lens properly shrouded shouldn’t show a flare, anyway, right? Surely these setups do not generate lens flares - it would be a crappy product and scrapped in favor of something that does better than a dime store disposable digital.

    Never have I seen a lens flare in photography of this nature. Never. But to see a kind that I’ve never seen in ANY photos before and to have them be so similar across so many shots… I don’t think lens flare is it.

  9. 324. KairoAnnunaki says:

    I really honestly do not see how this can be a lens flare. At all. It doesn’t seem right, at all, that it is a lens flare. I will be honest, I do not understand the physics behind lens flares. But I have worked with cameras and cam corders that have recieved all kinds of lens flares.

    But for this metallic orb, with a defined shape, and illumination on that shape from the reflecting off the side of this object as the direction of where the sun is.

    I can only see this as a particle. Or something that was shot up in the sky.

    How long as googlesightseeing been doing this?

    Why has this not occured BEFORE. Until May.. 13th? Right?

    Why have we not seen a weather balloon like this. Or a lens flare, ever, like this. Given it being every day, also.

  10. 325. G W says:

    ok people, stop looking at these, we will not tolerate wild conspiracy theorys

    http://www.infowars.com

  11. 326. KairoAnnunaki says:

    Even though that’s not it. That site rocks to some degree, thanks G.W.!

  12. 327. Deepthroat Chakra says:

    Nice link Derek

  13. 328. Jeff Rubin says:

    I think it’s Glinda, the Good Witch of the North coming down to munchkin Land, to make sure that Dorthy will be not give up the Ruby slippers to the Wicked Witch Of The West.

  14. 329. James (admin) says:

    This thread is now closed as it is too large to manage!

    Please post new comments on the UFO Update thread:

    http://www.googlesightseeing.com/2005/05/18/ufo-update/

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]