UFO
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.
Well we’re completely stumped. Any clues anyone?
Update: See the UFO Update entry.
My first idea was lenticular cloud. Google “lenticular cloud” and you will see many alleged “UFOs” of the right size, shape and positioning, plus a few discoid clouds that look more like clouds–often they will appear in the same photograph unless a hoaxer crops them out to strengthen the UFO case. Lenticular clouds can be UFO-shaped but also show strata, like layer cakes and seem to be fairly common in Florida. You can think of them as flattened storm clouds–you know the fireworks that were featured in an episode of SOUTH PARK–snakes. These clouds look like the before shot of a snake, while a thundercloud, hurricane, cyclone, tornado, what have you, is an after shot.
However, for these to be clouds, the camera artifact hypothesis would have to be drawn upon to explain their curiously non-random distribution, although I have noticed that clouds seem to form along fairly regularly spaced lines when cloud cover is about 50% and there is a good wind at cloud altitude (about a mile).
I have listed the FORTEAN TIMES Magazine website under Website (I found your discussion posted under Breaking News). You can find all sorts of phenomena such as UFOs discussed there in an open minded but often skeptical and tongue-in-cheek manner. Charles Hoy Fort (1874-1932) was a collector of stories which science would not or could not explain. He loved to mock the rational but unsatisfactory answers that scientists gave when pressed by journalists or the public to explain nine-day-wonders such as UFO flaps. Unfortunately, science catches up as old dogmatisms die and new theories get a fair hearing. Scientists err, and err, and err again, but less, and less, and less, as Piet Hien put it in one of his shorter epigrams.
Still, kudos to whoever spotted these. I can’t wait until Google maps the rest of the world down to the two or three metre resolution that allows us to count cars on the Golden Gate Bridge. Crop circles, we’ve got your crop circles right here!
And I forget who suggested that they were crop circles without the crops but hey, you’re hitting mighty close to the Vortex theory of crop circles–who knows? although you were joking, they MIGHT be crop circles caught before they hit the ground! Although they don’t stand much of a chance in the suburbs–houses and pools and pavement run their symettry. If they are crop circles, they are rather primative examples. Most crop circles nowadays qualify as landscape art or mathematical puzzles or both. Cristo, eat your heart out!
Horrible afterthought: product placement for the new WAR OF THE WORLDS movie!
Drat those web entrepreneurs! Drat them to Heck’s Canteena!
‘Tis the lighted beacon over the Castle Anthrax!
I find a new one near LA
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
Real alien UFO often use a 60 GHz beam of milimeter radiation to heat the surrounding air and ionize it. Thus they can ‘pry’ it apart with a magnetic field and fly through it at high speeds. For example, military jets seldom go anywhere near the speed of sound at low altitude or near houses as the sonic boom can break windows. Alien UFOs have been measured to go 3000 mph at low altitude (few thousand feet) without a sonic boom. The 60 GHz radiationi show they do this. For more details, see:
http://www.barry.warmkessel.com/barry/SAUCERS6.html
SLICK SAUCERS
This is a patented technique.
Patents #5,791,599 and #5,797,563.
Forgot to say that at night this GHzradiation makes them glow bluish at high altitudes at high altitudes at night, and reds, oranges, blues, greens at low altitudes where salts are present in the air. In day time, they have a whitish fog around them. That ‘fof’ appears in this image. People have been burned when they are near these UFOs when they take off with the radiation from this device active.
Distillation of facts leaves us with at least at list of facts stripped of accompanying hype and superstition.
Lets rule out ufos with this fact: All points in question are the same size, shape and rendering. This would assume the ufos in question were all captured flying at the same altitude or distance from earth. Also their spherical shape precludes having captured them ‘in motion’ as they are perfectly spherical–impossible shape for an object in motion, think about it. Next the blur factor. Given 17,000+ feet for a satellite in orbit and 5000+ feet for clouds also orbiting in their own way, see that the clouds are not blurred in the slightest…this gives us a “focal distance” of at least 5000+ feet, almost a full 1/3 the distance of the satellite to the earth. This is big as far as cameras are concerned, but not when talking satellite “focal distance”. The blur around the edges of the point suggest to a reasonably logical mind that the altitude of an “object” filmed in this manner be severely LESS than halfway between 17000ft and 5000ft due to the degree of “out of focus-ness”–at the very least well above 11000 ft with a probable range due to blur extent of 14800-16250ft–common sense and any photographer will tell you this. Given that the satellite that filmed these images (perhaps in sequence, perhaps not) with a ’spread pattern’ that show ’standard unit distances’ between identical objects over a vast ‘grid system’ would require some pretty punctuality on the part of the “spots” in question, or ufos with spot-on timing to the satellite. Recurring dust motes on the lens is foolish at best as regards the timing of the appearances again. Even the most well-behaved dust particles and condensation spots have an ‘appearance schedule’ that do not in any way in this universe conform to equidistant-spacing along a grid pattern. Also of note are the facts that at such a close proximity to the actual camera, dust motes do not have sufficient reflected light from the camera to be illuminated in this manner, they rather appear as negative spots more so than brightly lit fuzzy spheres, as well as the fact that given the distance to the object being filmed and the relatively small area covered by the “fuzzy points”, we would have to understand the object(s) to exhibit astronomical depth not to be rendered invisible. Simple calculation would demonstrate that these “points” or “objects” would have to have a ‘depth’ of just over 1/4 mile in order to even appear (given the distances involved). This would amount to the objects being a slender “pole” standing perfectly on end, with a diameter of approximately 300ft and a length of just under 1/4 mile! To allign these poles in a the symettrical grid we see proposes, with my limited math abilities, a chance that is 1 in 10 with 18 zeroes behind the 10. If you figure several weather balloons instead of one ‘ufo’ the chances are slightly reduced anywhere on the order of 750-2500 times. Still a lot of zeros…
The fact that ufos are seen frequently and more so as more people look for them and film them provides real credence and hard evidence of the fact that they are there. I don’t believe in ufos, I KNOW they are real. This is no ‘wishful thinking’ on my part. As regards google’s spots of infamy, I cannot say what they may be, but I can state what they are not. I would embrace some evidence that would give a real explanation as to the origin of these ’spots’, so I will wait…Bonkus
perhaps it’s the top of dick cheny’s bald head
barry, people who proclaim to know things like yoruself bore me. THe fact is you can make a theroy on that, but the truth is you do not know anything, and never will until the show themselves and talk about their crafts. For all you know it could very well be an airforce craft, and before you proclaim it is not any known airforce craft, that’s just it, the airforce has craft far more advanced than you wet dreams will show you
Now no one how do YOU know that airforce has craft far more advanced than our wet dreams will show us. Ain’t it your theory on that, but the truth is you do not know anything, and never will until the show themselves and talk about their crafts. Huh?
After 182 responses on that topic we’ve got more hints on what we think it is, than on your point of view.
BTW Yoshino has done some great work finding that thing in LA. Incredible man.
Same pattern in LA. Scroll due west of Yoshino’s link and you’ll find one more:
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
This one has an answer to the puzzle. Now we know it’s Google’s stuff
I’m amazed how many people don’t believe in spacecraft and extraterrestrial life, yet they have probably never travelled past their city boundaries.
its definetly something in close proximity to the lens of the camera. Moisture droplet ect…
I suspect that the use of weather balloons is exaggerated. They are not used as commonly as in the 60’s. Weather balloons were used to carry instruments to very high altitudes so metrics could be transmitted to various devices and subsequently, readings evaluated. Even if it were a balloon, the coloring is wrong and reflective qualities are off. It is, however, clearly in the atmosphere as the focus is not terribly off. Not a space object.
We do not know whether it’s an error in the lens or whether it’s a real object yet but since some of you mentioned UFO’s, then you might want to take a look at this…
Here is an image which the satellite Geos-8 took in 1992. http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo166.htm
Notice the part in the main article where it says “similar photo’s were taken by GEOS image servers around the world and erased very quickly in the U.S.A.”.
Perhaps not many of you know but on October 30th, 1938, H.G. Wells’ book, “War of the Worlds” was being read on the radio and millions of radio listeners were shocked to hear of the arrival of Martians. Many took to the streets and others gathered in churches to pray. This happened because they thought what they heard on the radio was a news broadcast and that we were being invaded by aliens!
So it’s understandable that if we are being visited by some beings from elsewhere and the Government knows, they can’t just tell us like that. It has to come out gradually, over a period of years. Although since Roswell (1947), almost 60 years have gone by and we still get the “weather balloon” story.
The media will hardly cover this subject for fear of ridicule and yet this phenomenon has existed for thousands of years. (See http://www.ufoartwork.com for cave drawings to Renaissance paintings depicting saucer-like crafts and non-human entities.)
There is evidence that we have been visited by beings from elsewhere but the average person does not believe anything until it comes from the mouth of a higher authority, i.e. the Government. But how can the Government inform the public if there is a risk of global panic, like what happened in 1938? Do you get the picture now?
I believe Welles was forced to make a public apology on national television for that play the following day!
Clearly it is a mushroom cloud from a micro nuclear weapon.
Hate your neighbours? Deploy one of these babies!
First of all, all you folks who are adamant that the anomoly is a weather balloon, sorry, never been a silver or grey weather balloon. All currently used radoisonde devices are latex, yellowish beige to transluscent. Also, one has to take into account the actual height of the satellite when it took the photo. Weather balloons cannot ascend into space and the relative size in relation to the satellite shows that if it is small it’s very close to the camera and of course, if it is large, it is futher away and closer to the ground . In this case, the object is way too big, relatively, for any type of balloon. So, all you can call it is a classic “ufo”. No, this does not mean it is a spacecraft of alien design, it is as the acronym implies, an unidentified and most likely, unidentifiable.Sorry to let the hot air out of the balloon theorists but, no way, it’s impossible!!!.. Klem
This looks like an “orb”… the micro particles that when out of focus appear like spheres. No ufo, no ghost… just a dot out of focus.
Any chance there is a ball field near by? Definately a homer, and maybe even a grand slam (no, I don’t work for Dennys).
Thanks to Yoshino and Shi Ju, I have located 12 new points in L.A. Still looking around for more.
Placemark: One / Google Earth - Placemark: Two / Google Earth - Placemark: Three / Google Earth - Placemark: Four / Google Earth - Placemark: Five / Google Earth - Placemark: Six / Google Earth - Placemark: Seven / Google Earth - Placemark: Eight / Google Earth - Placemark: Nine / Google Earth - Placemark: Ten / Google Earth - Placemark: Eleven / Google Earth - Placemark: Twelve / Google Earth
Found a 13th point
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
Well OBVIOUSLY it is a UFO. You can see the gravity-bending force field around it even!
It’s ALIVE !!!
I’m guesing it’s a bug in the software that google uses to put the satellite images together into a map.
It appears slightly tilted thus supporting a type of disk shape. The slght signature of the pixals doesn’t support that of orbs. Can’t say if it’s faked or not until I get a copy of the original uncropped version to try and create a fake then compare the pixal signatures. Interesting image though. I’m keeping inmind the indigo shade as a clue to the answer.
A ‘rational’ explanation would be that it is a wheather balloon, at say, 20 miles altitude, and thus out of focus and fuzzy. However, if the satellite was at over a thousand miles altitude a balloon at that altitude should be in as sharp focus as the houses on the ground. If it’s a genuine UFO, the blurry region around it could result from some form of time or space distortion affecting the paths of photons in the background. See http://starflight1.freeyellow.com/page3.html
Dave
seems to me that one of the first questions to ask would be whether these are the same object at different time intervals, or whether it’s a bunch of different objects. looks like there’s quite a variety. if we were to assume a water droplet on a lens, that would make sense, ’cause it would change shape if the camera moved. but, would a water droplet really be that weird silvery blue color? i’d think it’d be slightly more transparent.
if you saturate the hell out of it in ps, you can see that the ‘blue’ extends out pretty far (no pic, sorry); it’s more of a blob than a spheroid. it’s best to do this with the montage of all the diskies. also, inverting ‘em seems to suggest that their density is variable. a variable density would explain why some of ‘em look spheroid and some look like discs. i’d bet that if one went to the intervals where there should be ufos but aren’t, and really saturated the heck out of ‘em, you’d find some trace blue elements
of course, the ‘droplet on the lens’ theory is pretty much moot considering there’re identical buggers in l.a. and florida. there’s no way a droplet would stay on a camera lens while crossing a continent . . . .
here’s a ufo sighting from la that looks creepily like our lil’ friends:
http://www.laufo.com/silverdisc.html
This could be an instance of ET marking something that he wants us to look at.
Is there some nuclear military weapons sitting nearby?
ET is waiting for this big dumb idiot herd to awaken to the threat of these nuclear weapons, that the criminal classes have planned all along to use on us. If James Carville were to describe it, he might say, “its the nuclear weapons stupid!”
This nuclear threat to us explains the politics of ET. http://politicsofet.com
Why would UFO’s be so afraid of we insignificant humans? If we went to another populated planet, we would do so to communicate with other worlds, no? I don’t believe it till I see it!! It’s all bunk!
***For all of you that missed it***
THESE WERE TAKEN FROM AN AIRPLANE, NOT A SATTELITE.
Amazing finds in LA. Later I’ll try to determine if the relative distances are the same as the ones in Florida.
Unfortunately it seems that there is no meta data for the LA images. Which means that we don’t yet know if they came from the same company (Although they don’t seem to show up on AerialsExpress.com’s web viewer).
(Hey Derek, you still out there? Any tricks up your sleeve for finding that info?)
First off, these are not satellite photos. While some of Google Maps “satellite” imagery is indeed from satellite, these photos along with most others in the denser urban areas are aerial photos taken from an airplane. As previously noted, most are taken at an altitude of 15k-20k ft (well short of the previously mentioned 20mi height of a weather balloon).
Additionally, these photos are not from Google. In terms of data, Google’s product is nothing new. Microsoft had it’s TerraServer since the mid-to-late 90’s and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) has been cataloging Aerial photos for decades. The USGS even offers the same data, and then some on it’s website http://seamless.usgs.gov. On that site you can overlay further imagery from other aerial photo survey’s, various satellite imagery, topographical renderings, streets, etc. To be sure, Google does seem to have the best interface to this data, and they definitely have done a great job “mapping” a street map rendering of the entire US to this aerial photo data.
In terms of the lens defect theory, these photos are taken with highly specialized equipment. If you find the same anomalies on the USGS site and inspect the metadata for the aerial photo layer, you’ll see that Aerials Express of Tempe Arizona is the source for both the Florida and California images (which was previously mentioned). They also list the equipment used to take these photos:
Number of Tiles 139
Sq Miles 1,442
Scale 1:30000
Flight Date January - March 2003
Datum NAD 83
Projection UTM 11
Units Meters
Pixel Size 0.65 Meter
Format Geotiff
Rectification Method Orthorectify using Ground Control Points
DEM 30-meter DEMS (Level 1, Level 2)
Contol Image USGS DOQs
Camera Type Zeiss Top 15
Focal Length 153 mm
Film Type 9″ Color Roll Film
Scanning 21 Microns
Sampling Method Cubic Convolution
This site shows a picture of this camera (from a different aerial photo company) along with it calibration records:
http://www.kam-az.com/cameras.htm
I have a longer comment awaiting moderation. Yes, the source is still Aerials Express. If you browse the USGS site, they list two orthoimagery sources for that area. The later of the two contain the points.
Con el paso tiempo creo que veremos cosas aún más sorprendentes…
Todo esto es a cuenta-gotas, pues aún no estamos preparados para enfrentar la existencia de vida y tecnologÃa “super-avanzada”…
En fin… yo procuro tener mi mente abierta aunque un tanto esceptica, pero sin cerrarme ante esa posibilidad…
…:::: Nada® 2005 ::::…
ich verstehe nicht!
I think it might be a weather type baloon used to launch a reflective sphere used in radar calibration and test. Possibly from Jonathan Dickinson Instrumentation Facility (JDIF) located just north of the county line near Jupiter Inlet.