Chemtrail Central
Register
Login
Member's Area
Member List
What's Popular
Who's Linking
Image Database
Search Images
New Images
Gallery
Link Database
Search Links
New Links
Chemtrail Forum
Active Topics
Who's Online
Polls
Search
Research
Flight Explorer
Unidentifiable
FAQs
Phenomena
Disinformation
Silver Orbs
Transcripts
News Archive
Top Websites
Channelings
Etcetera
PSAs
Media
Vote
  Chemtrail Central Forum
  Chemtrails
  My Anomoly

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author
Topic:   My Anomoly

Topic page views:

Norrin Radd
Senior Member


92 posts, Nov 2000

posted 02-01-2001 12:06 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Norrin Radd     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I saw that Lulu said she was interested in anomolies in chemtrail photos. I have a really weird one. I have the anomoly on three frames, two from one roll of film and one frame from a different roll of film.

I did not see this weird anomoly while I was taking the pics. I never saw it until after I had the film developed. If it was only on one frame, or from one roll of film, I might be able to dismiss it, but since the image is on three frames from two rolls of film, I can't just dismiss it.

If anyone has any ideas on what this might be, please feel free to take a guess.

Brent

There are two enlargements at chemtrails.org
http://www.chemtrails.org/chemtrails/parker9.html

Here are scans I put here at Thermit's.....
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/cgi-bin/db-search.cgi?template=img-detail&dbname=img&key2=623&action=searchdbdisplay
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/cgi-bin/db-search.cgi?template=img-detail&dbname=img&key2=624&action=searchdbdisplay

IP Logged

Deborah
Take It To The Limit


Flagstaff, AZ
700 posts, Jul 2000

posted 02-01-2001 08:19 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deborah     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Brent -

Have just looked at your images. Questions:

How many shots, total, did you take of that one "X" configuration?

I take it that you "finished" one roll of film with the first of those shots and then "started" another roll of film with the rest of the shots of this one "X" configuration. Is this correct?

Of the total number of shots of this one "X" configuration, how many contained the anomaly pictured in the shots you have posted here?

Re: the shots that contained the anomaly - were these shots in direct sequence, i.e. one right after the other, or were they "scattered" among the total number of shots of that one "X" configuration?


This is a very interesting little situation here - thank you for posting it.

IP Logged

Lulu
ice behaving badly

right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000

posted 02-01-2001 10:33 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lulu   Visit Lulu's Homepage!   Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well Brent, you've got my brain going this morning! I love mysteries like this. When I looked at your close-up of the anomalous object I immediately saw the head of a fox/dog. You can see the eyes, snout and mouth; it's looking towards lower right of photo. Can you see it?

Of course the brain has a funny way of taking *obscure* images and *making sense* of them related to what we know...that's why we see faces in clouds. Actually Brent, I have no idea what it could be. You've stumped me good. Let me sleep on this.

IP Logged

sedona
Senior Member

Sedona, AZ 86339
149 posts, Oct 2000

posted 02-01-2001 11:41 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for sedona     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Lulu, this reminds me vaguely of that wildly interesting "insectoid" we found, which turned out to be a tiny fragment of a real one on the lens. Brent: could it be a piece of a leaf or something? Just wondering. Occam's Razor and all that.

IP Logged

Thermit
Tech


Houston, TX
2733 posts, Jul 2000

posted 02-01-2001 04:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Thermit   Visit Thermit's Homepage!   Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Looks very bug like...

IP Logged

sedona
Senior Member

Sedona, AZ 86339
149 posts, Oct 2000

posted 02-01-2001 04:55 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for sedona     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thermit, I didn't mean this photo looked insect-like but that I bamboozled myself once by not even thinking of the possibility of something on the lens. And you have to admit- this is so strange it's reasonable to try to eliminate lesser causes first. I've looked at a whole lot of strange photos, and this one's not in any category I have yet seen. Thus...the tendency to tippy toe through the obivous eliminative steps...

IP Logged

Lulu
ice behaving badly

right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000

posted 02-01-2001 06:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lulu   Visit Lulu's Homepage!   Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think Segment Man was on the housing/covering over the web cam, not on the lens itself, and is daily fading bit by brown bit. Brent's pic doesn't look like something on the lens or insectoid either. It reminds me of a holographic image.

IP Logged

Deborah
Take It To The Limit


Flagstaff, AZ
700 posts, Jul 2000

posted 02-01-2001 07:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deborah     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm still waiting to hear back from Brent but, frankly, it looks like some sort of combustion process to me.

IP Logged

Norrin Radd
Senior Member


92 posts, Nov 2000

posted 02-02-2001 04:08 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Norrin Radd     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
How many shots, total, did you take of that one "X" configuration?

3 TOTAL SHOTS OF "X" CONFIGURATION. I WAS SHOOTING IN THE EAST AND THE "X" WAS THE ONLY CHEMS IN THE WEST.

I take it that you "finished" one roll of film with the first of those shots and then "started" another roll of film with the rest of the shots of this one "X" configuration. Is this correct?

FIRST SHOT WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF ONE ROLL. ANOMOLY WAS FAR TO THE LEFT OF THE "X". SECOND AND THIRD SHOTS I ONLY TOOK BECAUSE I WAS BORED, A LULL IN CHEMTRAIL ACTIVITY TO THE EAST INDUCED ME TO TAKE TWO MORE PICS OF THE "X". I REMEMBER QUESTIONING WHETHER I NEEDED ANY MORE STINKING PICTURES OF AN "X" BUT I TOOK THE PICS ANYWAYS. PIC 2 AND THREE WERE IN DIRECT SEQUENCE.

Of the total number of shots of this one "X" configuration, how many contained the anomaly pictured in the shots you have posted here?

ALL 3.

Re: the shots that contained the anomaly - were these shots in direct sequence, i.e. one right after the other, or were they "scattered" among the total number of shots of that one "X" configuration?

THE LAST TWO WERE IN DIRECT SEQUENCE, THE FIRST WAS ON A DIFFERENT ROLL, CLOSE TO THE MIDDLE OF THE ROLL.

LULU,

I also thought of the holographic image idea. I am truly baffled by this and I truly doubt it was anything on the lens. If it hadn't been in one frame from a second roll of film, I might be able to dismiss it, but I believe there was something captured on film that I couldn't see with the naked eye.

Brent

IP Logged

Rt
New Member


9 posts, Feb 2001

posted 02-02-2001 09:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rt     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It definitely is not something on the lens, because of the way it is lit.
It appears to be some kind of kite. Looking closely you will see tethering lines diverge to the right to a nearly transparent 'ring'

IP Logged

Thermit
Tech


Houston, TX
2733 posts, Jul 2000

posted 02-02-2001 10:05 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Thermit   Visit Thermit's Homepage!   Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Interesting observation Rt.
The other enlargement also shows these lines, but no "ring". I think the ring is a film artifact.

IP Logged

Lulu
ice behaving badly

right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000

posted 02-02-2001 10:15 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lulu   Visit Lulu's Homepage!   Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If it was a kite why didn't Brent see it before he took the picture?

IP Logged

defender
TELEVISION IS MIND CONTROL


Level 64
1115 posts, Oct 2000

posted 02-02-2001 10:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for defender     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
That is strange. In the top photo, looks like 2 objects, the one on the left with what appear to be 2 lines(?) pointed at it with the wide end attached to the 'rim' of the object on the right. Looks like it may be a kind of funnel or 'force field'?

Maybe you can submit it to some objective photo analysts in the ufology profession who can explain it, or categorize it?

I have seen a UFO photo similar to the object on the left, but it was more defined, like an art-deco structure or ancient piece of jewelry, it had a similar gold color to it and appeared very un-aerodynamic, though it was more symetric than your object on the left. If I had the photo, I'd post it. That photo fell into the category of unexplained and was very unlike any oval/disc/tube shaped UFO.

The object on the right though, seems like it may be a more traditional or "conventional" oval shape for a UFO, but hard to see if its solid. You may have caught some kind of interdimensional transformation taking place, unless it is some kind of explosion or a natural object.

The 2 objects together and 'funnel' are not like anything I've seen before..

[Edited 4 times, lastly by defender on 02-03-2001]

IP Logged

Rt
New Member


9 posts, Feb 2001

posted 02-02-2001 12:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rt     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Lulu:
If it was a kite why didn't Brent see it before he took the picture?

The photo is quite enlarged.

However, Defender raises points I can not dismiss.
If we allow the 'ufo' aspect to be temporarily accepted for discussion purposes, what is the association to the 'chemtrails'?

[Edited 3 times, lastly by Rt on 02-02-2001]

IP Logged

Lulu
ice behaving badly

right here
2553 posts, Dec 2000

posted 02-02-2001 12:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lulu   Visit Lulu's Homepage!   Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Rt...in the original photos (see links above: right under >>Here are scans I put here at Thermit's<<) the object is clearly visible...even without the close-up.

IP Logged

Rt
New Member


9 posts, Feb 2001

posted 02-03-2001 08:42 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rt     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
OK

IP Logged

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:








Money Forum | The Web Hosting Forum | Papa Guru
Contact Us | Chemtrail Central


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.45c