UFO Updates
Thanks to everyone who commented on the original UFO find, although we’re still not sure what they are, there’s been some interesting developments.
Ian Pottinger and jher were the first to find that there are in fact eight of these UFOs over Florida, at the following points
One - Two - Three - Four - Five - Six - Seven - Eight
and Tensus used keyhole to map the points showing that they make a very neat grid.
Yoshino and jher later noticed that the UFOs are not limited to Florida but can also be found over L.A.
One - Two - Three - Four - Five - Six - Seven - Eight - Nine - Ten - Eleven - Twelve - Thirteen
and Tensus again mapped the points, which appear in an almost straight line.
Things the UFOs are definitely not…
Space debris or another satellite?
Derek & Tensus discovered that the close-up images of Florida are taken by AerialsExpress.com at an altitude of 17,500 feet so are aerial photos and not satellite images.
Marks added to obscure famous peoples homes?
While there’s no doubt the whitehouse photos were processed for security it is very unlikely these UFOs are intentional ‘cover-ups’ due to the neat grid layout.
Water towers?
The UFOs are just too big to be water towers (and there’s no shadow).
Anomaly produced by the stitching software?
Shi Ju says
Definitely they’re NOT marks for picture stitching. In most stitching software (like for making panoramas) the algorithm comes down to finding sharp and contrasting details and aligning those spots with each other.
Things the UFOs still could be…
An alien spacecraft?
It’s still possible!
A weather balloon?
Tm says
The “Grid” is centered around an airfield, common launch points for weather balloons.
Although Klem says
All currently used radiosonde devices (weather balloons) are latex, yellowish beige to transluscent
and Jello adds
The object in question here does not cast a ground effect, therefore does not exist in the air.
A ‘lenticular’ cloud?
Patrick was the first to float this idea and the images he posted do look similar to the UFOs, although it is unlikely clouds would form in neat grids.
Condensation on the lens?
Possibly the current forerunner for most likely explanation, Stuart said…
Condensation inside some sort of housing would be my guess. If the drop were directly on the lens it would be effectively invisible. Put it a few inches/feet away and have the camera shooting with a very deep depth of field (as you would with a small aperture) and it would look just like that anomaly.
Something else?
Possibly one of: Peppermint, baseball, Vogon ship, crop circle, planet, thumbtack, ballbearings, smoke, pond, swamp gas, golf ball, satellite, flying ninja, space junk or contact lens as others have suggested!
They are clearly software superimposed images, because the one at
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
has part of the word “Google” superimposed.
There’s parts of the word google super imposed on pieces of road, also.
It’s just a water mark.
Wonder why it seems soooo difficult for anyone to admit that it is definitely not a plane, a blimp, weather balloon, santa, easter bunny, when the only thing that really fits is a UFO. They are here whether you want to believe it or not. So there!
It seems that, due to the out of focus nature of the “object” and blue color refraction visible in just about every occurance, that this is a drop of water/condensation in the camera housing.
For the conspiracy theorists we should be a) happy to know that Google is not modifying their images to hide the truth from us and b) wary that they are modifying their images to hide the truth but left this in there to throw us off the track.
The choice… is yours
How come there hasn’t been any condensation before, especially, with SightSeeing? But just now? ???
So. Perfectly aligned condensation. Is one. No smaller or larger water condensations.
Zoom out of the picture and this “condensation”, gets smaller and smaller and smaller until you can’t see it. It should be the same size on the lens at all times.
Could they possibly be large Silver “Mylar Balloons”.I notice some “Diffusion” off the periphery of the object,inferring either “Heat” or some kind of a gaussing effect,either from some kind of on-board propulsion system effusing heat or some kind of Magnetic disturbance(Fluxing) again possibly from a propulsion effect.I’m assuming of these series of photos;no Radar echos were discerned by any local ATC’s? as “Artifact” or questionable “Blip”?
Interesting, sorry.
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
Seems to be the last picture for the L.A. one. And this one, the object seems to be not perfectly circular as if it took off and said “Bye bye!”.
SAME THING FOR THE FLORIDA ONE.
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
Uh. ?
I believe that was mentioned upstream. Even in the other photos there are examples of less obvious misalignement.
Why has no one mentioned that all the L.A. ones are in a relatively straight line? Interesting to note: I actually live 1/4 mile from L.A.-spot #1, and would like to let y’all know that the “path” of the L.A. anamolies is also a popular flight path for non-commercial aircraft. In fact I hear one going overhead now. Don’t know if that’s helpful, or not, but there it is.
Smoker - When you say non-commercial do you mean military or private non-commercial. I assume you mean military.
If these are in flight path for military traffic, could they be blotted out military aircraft of some kind?
I think that might be very possible, at least I’d like to know.
If so.
I’ve seen a stealth aircraft that bent stars “inside it” back in 1999, 20 yards above us all. Not “Natural Stealth” at all. We all saw it, not just myself. And it was quiet very silent also. Had a red light that blinked on the end of it though. It was going at a slow rate I didn’t see how it could be flying like a plane. It was perfectly circular, at least it seemed. Though, I don’t know why it would have a red light blinking on the back of it.
I wonder if these might be connected to that.
KairoAnnunaki: condensation drops wouldn’t get smaller upon zooming out since the zoomed-out view is just a composition of smaller pictures.
The fact that they occur in a straight line would tend to support the water-droplet theory, since that’s what you’d get if you were flying a plane in a straight line while taking pictures of the ground with a droplet on your lens.
I had found this http://joebardi.blogspot.com/2005/04/pappy-always-said-to-stay-out-of-river.htmlodd image a while ago in New Orleans. It could be a plane, but it looks really odd. And the fact there are two and they are in two different colors is quite odd also. I’d love to know what’s going on with all these odd images!
My only question about them being obscured military aircraft of some kind is that the images themselves were taken from 17,500 feet. The object would have to be flying considerably lower. I guess they could be landing or taking off but I don’t know….
If it is lens condensation, how come it disappears, and only appears in 10 spots on the east cost and 12 on the west. Shouldn’t it be consistently there for a signficant part of the east and west coast ( I assume that the picture next to the ones with the blobs were taken very soon after the ones with the blobs). Unless you’re gonna tell me there was some dude up there who noticed that the lens had some condensation and cleaned it off (maybe the same guys who cleaned off the mars rovers
)
Indeed. So then they would stay the same size.
OR, they get larger when zooming out. So it should be getting larger when zoomed out.
At least there should be some sort of water trail, or more droplets in other areas besides just L.A. and Florida. Perhaps like all across from L.A. to Florida. But that’s not the case.
At the rate the perfect lines are also going, must mean that those “droplets” should have been going so fast across the lens there should be no trace of it at all.
At the rate the pictures are also being taken, there is a steady line of a good number of them in the Florida chart. Yet, above that steady line that seems to be a stick figure pointing to the west, is only 1 droplet. Below the line, 3.
If the case of these water droplets leaving contrails, the one water droplet above the four droplets in
http://www.flickr.com/photos/48556057@N00/13647471/
Should also leave the same ammount of droplets for a trail.
Basically what J said also.
I think it’s quite interesting that Spielberg’s movie, “War of the Worlds” comes out in about a month. Hollywood propaganda?
The Earth has “Google” watermarks all over it? I didn’t know that. Does that mean Google hired white mice to build earth for them?
Here’s a topo map showing the relative location of the LA blobs.
http://home.supernet.com/~jacksmountain/images/mysteryblobs02A.jpg
That Guy,
I sent AerialsExpress an email this afternoon.
I just uploaded the Keyhole plot of all of the LA images from the last thread to flickr here - LA0-12
(let me know if I missed any)
After I mapped the locations, a grouping becomes apparent:
The Eastern Images(LA East) appear to follow along the x-axis as we are used too
But the western images introduce a new pattern as some commenters had alluded to earlier.
You can see it here - LA West.
I guess I might as well let you guys in on a 60-year-old secret. Back in ‘42, when the War wasn’t going too good, the Army Air Corps got into the civil defense racket by floating aloft a series of aerial mines in case of bombardment by the Nazis or Japanese. Naturally the entire enterprise, dubbed Project Kumquat, was of the very highest level of secrecy. In fact even today, most people have never heard of Project Kumquat. Initially the most desirable tourist locales were placed under Kumquat’s protective umbrella, since the generals understood that after the war tourism would become a mainstay of the economy (and that they would have to retire somewhere). At war’s end, construction of the system came to a halt and the existing units were put into standby mode, but every time the powers that be considered dismantling the system, somebody would decide to leave it be, for the same reason I can never get rid of anything: “It might come in handy someday.” So that’s why even today over Florida and parts of California, these little floating kumquats are still to be found, by those who know where to look.
Are there any pictures of them from the ground?
i don’t know if this is related. here is an oddity to the west of all the other LA spots. this one is about the right size, but blurry and more transparent:
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
checkpoint10 - that kinda looks like a sun reflecting back off of something shiny.
I think it is either solor reflection causing overexposure, or a heat pocket causing lenticular distortion.
Thank you for your praise, Shi Ju and jher.
It was quite by chance that I discoverd it.
I found soon after I started searching “UFO” at random.
It was quite luckï½™.
tensuns and mountain jack - very much appreciate your efforts.
As far as what the Smoker said, I wouldn’t pay it much mind. There’s nothing especially “non-commerical” about that corridor - quite the contrary. Jets take off and land from Ontario airport near there - all commerical. Even many of the nearby military bases have been closed.
From the top of the page:
Things the UFOs still could be…
..Weather balloon
..Lenticular cloud
No and no. How can these things be claimed? These spots are all the same size and in a regular grid pattern in two states with a continent in between. I cannot believe it would be necessary to spell out yet again why these are absurd explanations in light of the material available.
Then the new thread starts out with posts from people who just dart in for a second to throw in their (frankly useless) two cents and then leave, never to return. Things like how there’s a watermark, could they be Mylar balloons, blah blah schmack schmack. Not even the decency to check the evidence before making a pronouncement. Like a bull in f–n china shop, blundering about clueless.
This topic keeps going around in circles, almost 400 posts, and it just keeps going back to the beginning like no one’s learned anything. It puts a new spin on the word ’spin.’
Seems to me if someone wanted to ensure that no one paid any serious attention to this at all, they’d have some moron GS-3 sitting at a computer all day making up naturally moronic stuff and posting it under a variety of names to clog the thread with noise. Including making posts under names of people already involved, as happened to me earlier today but was quickly erased by the moderator.
Or this really could be the double-digit IQ, ADD state of the majority of my fellow human beings, I suppose.
Thanks tensuns for the map, greatly appreciated as it kind of gives me a explanation to myself. I don’t know about anyone else.
As tensuns showed in his map, the object appears to bounce back and forth, in the L.A. images. There are gaps also, where it didn’t bounce back and forth in a diagonal manner. To me, it is alive. Alive and well.
Pretty intelligent water droplet or sun flare.
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
Placemark: Google Maps / Google Earth
First link, the lower orb is dark, top is light.
Second link the lower orb is light, the top is dark
I’m still studying it.
Everytime it “appears” to accelerate very fast it turns really bright. When it stops it turns dark. That maps can prove that.
KairoAnnunaki, that is really interesting. Haven’t noticed it before you paid attention to those swapped colors. Things become more and more weird with time.
Wow. Are you guys really taking this seriously?
Isn’t the new Star Wars moving opening soon?
Seriously, though, it’s probably just a water spot. Like someone above said, when you zoom out it’ll get smaller — it’s all just a composite of a number of shots, not a separate picture.
Anyway, if it IS a UFO, wouldn’t you all be better off just leaving it alone? Don’t you all understand how powerful thier lasers would be?
Corey, I don’t worry actully
I live in Moscow, Russia. FL and LA are kinda way too far away from here. When They start beaming with their lasers I’ll be prepared 