digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

California 'UFO' Pictures Create Online Buzz

nbc11.com — Could the quiet seaside town of Capitola end up challenging Roswell, N.M., as the country's capital for extraterrestrials? The city 90 minutes south of San Francisco is getting national attention after pictures of a strange flying object surface on the Web.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • macbth, on 03/28/2008, -79/+6How could it fly thru the atmosphere -
    • sonofblacula, on 03/28/2008, -12/+280With highly advanced Photoshop engines.
      • wedgemartin, on 03/28/2008, -6/+49Or an Infinite Improbability Drive
        • thcobbs, on 03/28/2008, -6/+5but then it would look like a couch. Bistromatics?
          • Trykt, on 03/28/2008, -0/+5If that's true it has to be aliens, humans haven't discovered mathematics complex enough to figure out how a Bistro restaurant works yet.
      • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -2/+11The "engine photos" are CG renders created with a 3D application like 3ds max and Maya. Those are not photos.
        • eddie72, on 03/28/2008, -9/+3How do you explain the photos from 1987? They aren't linked here but if you search long enough you will find them.
          • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+9You say they exist. Show them to us. I've been following this story since it surfaced and only stills/photos available are the ones that originally surfaced. All are new. If you say older "photos" exist please show them to us. And I'd also like to know how you would be able date the photos. Remember the age we live in.
        • knobtwiddler, on 03/28/2008, -2/+9thank you. i've been doing 3d graphics for 10 years and i can tell you without a doubt those are CGI.
          now we have to ask what the hell is NBC doing slinging this *****? what are they trying to distract us from?
      • danarama, on 03/28/2008, -0/+8yeah this is full on cg not photoshop... to be specific.
        • Frost9999, on 03/28/2008, -0/+8Photoshop can import 3d objects and place them in a 2d image... move them around, add light sources etc.
        • Verz, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2Photoshop doesn't render 3D realistically. 3D graphics applications like Maya make much more sense to use.
    • MadAce, on 03/28/2008, -10/+2Probably a program like Fusion. Or even (primitive this method) any 3D modeling program and After Effects.
    • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -4/+16Just this week I saw a show on the History or Discovery Channel, "UFO Hunters". Surprise, surprise, the same type of UFO were being debunked. Guess somebody else saw the show too.
      • KennMac, on 03/28/2008, -1/+13That show is great, by the way. Very scientific, and not theatrical like most UFO programs are.
        • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -3/+4Have you watched the UK episode? That ripped any shred of credibility they had away. They were going into baseless speculation about Stonehenge. the same stuff the hard core believers go into. While the show is entertaining and I do learn a bit more about the old cases they rehash, they are 100% believers. Objectivity is almost nonexistent. Their science guy seems to be the one who keeps them "honest" and grounded in reality. If it weren't for him this show wouldn't be worth watching for anything more than its entertainment value.
          • Gir53457, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3I thought they already declared that Stonehenge was just a celestial calender?
    • vinnythekidd, on 03/28/2008, -3/+16Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke.
      • 16x9, on 03/28/2008, -2/+14"There's a Sucker Born Every Minute" -P. T. Barnum
        • RealmDown, on 03/28/2008, -0/+12"A *carbon* based life-form? No way!" --Qyzllekic
          • twinklyJesus, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3"To the moon, Alice!" -- Ralph Kramden
          • moskaudancer, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2"Get your ass to Mars!" -- Hauser
          • Norris667, on 03/29/2008, -2/+1Sometimes people need to stop ***** quotes - anon
    • Elephant789, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3You guys are no fun.
  • scififan9009, on 03/28/2008, -27/+172These things are showing up everywhere. And they ARE NOT a publicity stunt for Halo 3. More photos at this link:
    http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1402&categor ...
    • jboitnott, on 03/28/2008, -11/+7Looks like the same thing. hmmmmm. I am noticing a geographical correlation. Northern California.
      • wedgemartin, on 03/28/2008, -8/+9*bong gurgling in SF* whaaa?
      • ehalasey, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3That's funny, I'm noticing a correlation here, too . . . Northern California gave you Digg.
    • DrDragun, on 03/28/2008, -10/+94Damn I gotta find the article on Digg when these pics were up about 1-2 years ago. They were debunked either as a Halo 3 viral marketing or as someone's prank. Much better than these photos was an incredibly detailed fake science report from a secret researcher at a government facility. Beautiful artwork.

      What gave it away, among other things, was the writing on the spacecraft. The writing is a mixture between Arabic and Halo covenant language.
    • Falldog, on 03/28/2008, -12/+3Why would anyone think this was a Halo 3 publicity stunt? They look like nothing in the games.
      • DrDragun, on 03/28/2008, -4/+5Hmm I lost my links to all the info, but about 2 years ago before Halo 3 came out there was a major insider leak of stuff related to Halo 3. And a super-miniature version of one of these UFO screenshots was used, tiled, as the background for the site. They also had these UFO things rendered with no backgrounds proving that they are CG models.
      • soot, on 03/28/2008, -2/+4I can't totally remember how it worked, but I think this same picture was found hidden in the page source of some viral page that popped up with Halo 3 clues all over it. "Society of the ancients" or something.
      • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1Aqua Teen Hunger Force......California Gold
      • ophello, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2THIS WAS NOT a halo viral campaign. that is TOTAL *****, you guys.

        jesus, you believe whatever crap the comments give you. one person used the image after it was posted by the Isacc dude. the relationship is circumstantial. Bungie was not behind it.
    • Cowboy1015, on 03/28/2008, -34/+3Exclusive live video! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0&feature ...
    • slicerace, on 03/28/2008, -14/+8Viral marketing for Halo 3:
      http://www.nowpublic.com/ufo_unmasked_marketing_ca ...

      Thank you and goodnight. Case closed.
      • Mawds, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Don't worry soon we will start seeing Norwegian Metallic Goblins popping up everywhere.
      • ophello, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2its not a ***** viral campaign, idiot.
    • 68024, on 03/28/2008, -3/+13April 1, anyone?
      • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -5/+3Better check your system clock, your apparently running a little early.
        • SSUK, on 03/28/2008, -1/+5April fools don't generally happen on April 1st for hoaxes. They release them early to get them spread around the internet and get everyone to believe them. Then, come April 1, "LOL FOOLED U!!!11".
      • raynar, on 03/28/2008, -2/+2March 28th...but close.
      • narcofiche, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1Maybe the answer will come out on April 1st. I think that's how April Fools is played these days.
      • GliTCH82, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2It just occurred to me that any country (or extraterrestrial civilization) really wanting to deal us a blow would attack us on April 1st, because with everything else going on most people wouldn't even believe it.
    • deuceswilde, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2And the earthfiles link really makes me believe all this. Especially when media "misinformation" has gone so far as to misspell someone's screenname, at that rate, how can I believe anything I hear!
      /sarcasm
    • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -2/+32Sorry but that's BS. These are the only ones. If you watch the video it's so obviously fake (CG). It's always disappointing how easily people are taken in by crap like this.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5glJ3X_Ufco
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xXdIJmjQFE&feature ...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIfr12XhrZE&feature ...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJiCxWUlgcY&feature ...
      • ZombieKiss, on 03/28/2008, -2/+4Well it obviously takes a lot of faith.

        It is amazing what hopeless people cling to ;)
        • m00kie, on 03/28/2008, -0/+5perhaps you are a bit too revealing in your post: "It is amazing what hopeless people cling to ;)"

          what is it that You hope for?
      • overtoke, on 03/28/2008, -5/+2... people, yes there are CG youtube videos. ALL of them were created after the original images were released. Lots of people have created CG version of the ships since then. They are simply saying "this is how easy it is to fake."
        • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3Have you bothered to look at the mountain of UFO photos and reports which date back to as early as 1870? If you had then you'd know that there has never been anything like these "drones" reported, filmed, or photographed. Where do we see things like the "drones?" In bad SciFi films and TV. I find it suspicious that in over 100 years of UFO reports no one has ever described anything which follows the structural design of these "drones." If you look at the stills/photos of the drones with a critical and objective eye you will see why we say they are CG. There are various mistakes in the lighting on the craft. Shadows which don't match the rest of the scene, missing shadows, and so on. Common mistakes when trying to match the natural lighting in a piece of live video or a photos in on a CG model you plan on compositing into the video or photo.
      • ophello, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1THESE WERE NOT presented as evidence. they are fan fictions inspired by the photos.
    • Elliuotatar, on 03/28/2008, -1/+16They may no be viral marketing, but they're fake. All you have to do is look at how the lighting on the ships differs from the lighting on their surroundings. The telephone pole for example has boards with very dark undersides. But the undersides of the ship are well lit. Also the lighting on the light colored things on the poles has a much harder edge to it with highlights that are more blown out. And then there's the fact that if the ship were huge, rather than a model, then it would have to be quite distant. Yet it is no more blurry than the power lines in the foreground.

      And why the color tint, and the red halos? And all the noise? This is clearly a bright day, the exposure time should be short enough not to have motion blur from camera shake. They can't be following the craft because the craft itself displays no motion blur other than that which is on the rest of the scene. So it must be still. So why is the camera moving at all?

      These photos are fake fake fake. I only had to glance at them for a moment to tell. Anyone who does graphics work would be able to spot it.
      • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -0/+2They could just use that program that premiered at DEFCON to show the drones being very different from their surroundings.
      • PoeticExplosion, on 03/28/2008, -0/+7So you're saying... you can tell by the pixels?
        • Elliuotatar, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Yes, I can tell by the pixels. This is totally 'shopped!
      • ophello, on 03/28/2008, -1/+1youre an idiot.
    • swrostmore, on 03/28/2008, -1/+15MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) reports that this is a fake.
      "Marc D’Antonio–CGI Expert –FX Models
      “Those of us in the (CGI) community can look at and immediately spot fakery. I have to say that this one is not actually even a GOOD fake.”
      “In one of the images, you can see that the faker used something called ‘radiosity’to render the images. The technique allows for more realistic images and makes things look very good, as if lit by the sun in this case. You can see classic radiosity render artifacts in the dark shadow areas of the CG craft. They show up as mottling in the shadows instead of smooth transitions.”
      • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+6That's saying a lot since MUFON is an organization of believers. But this will not dissuade the Drone believers.
        • Neiby, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3Yeah, they are believers, as you say, but I think they do a good job of trying to remain somewhat objective in their investigations. No one is perfect, but I think they make an effort at it.
    • archivist, on 03/28/2008, -8/+10THIS IS A VIRAL MARKETING CAMPAIGN FOR ALIENWARE
      http://www.dailygrail.com/node/5594

      Please, stop messing with our heads. I r angrey i usedz da capzlacks
      • scififan9009, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2I just read your article. There's no conclusive proof in it that states Alienware did this for publicity, just conjecture.
      • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Sorry but this is over a year old. It's not "viral marketing" but it sure is a hoax. Another to add to the many others we have seen over the years.
        From your own article:

        "Thank you for your email. It’s great to hear that our promotion has reach out to you and your Forum group regarding the CARET document. Alienware did NOT create the information regarding this phenomena or the CARAT linguistics. This is NOT an intellectual property of Alienware. The information has anonymously spread throughout the web for some time. We have taken the CARAT linguistics and have applied this as a marketing tool to draw attention to our promotion."

        Your article does nto claim to know anything. They are guessing. The person calling himself "Chad" is the only person who has come forward and is the source of the CARAT "documents" and "photos." The stills are simply CG models composited into a photo and/or video. The "engine" photos in the CARAT documents are your basic CG test renders. the artists didn't do much, if any, photoshop work on them. I do 3D modeling, animation, and composite CG into live action video and know a CG shot when I see it.
    • junaru, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Oh ffs http://www.kaptive.co.uk/video.cfm here, look, i thought that coast to coast am were tools for believeing in this crap, but seeing this on nbc and front page makes me angry
    • digjam, on 03/28/2008, -2/+2I bet they heard about USA granting citizenships to ILLEGAL ALIENS!
      • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1That Alien Nation movie and TV show had it right!
    • whyufail, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1These have been on the internet forever. It's already been mentioned by the guy who made the damn things that they were just an art project for something. I can't believe they're actually reporting these as news. Do they even do any research?
    • x0mb13, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1this is old ass news anyways, these drone sightings were proved a hoax long ago.
      • ophello, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1no, no they werent. 600 people didnt believe it, and you read their comments and believed them. you havent done a scrap of research.
    • NCSUspoon, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Dont probe me bro!!!!!!
    • Mikhail101, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Lol you listen to coast to coast AM, how do i know, thats linda molton's site.
    • diggingaround, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Welcome to 1999 HDRI rendering technology... http://www.debevec.org/FiatLux/technology/
    • Fritzed, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1This was on digg a long time ago and just as fake then. I made a composite of 2 images then that show how they had clearly been faked.

      http://digg.com/space/Clearest_UFO_Pics_ever?t=681 ...
      http://img513.imageshack.us/my.php?image=chadrajma ...
    • lobsterxcore, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I expected to be Rick Roll'd
    • EpsilonEX, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1It's the Star Wars alphabet.
      http://www.erikstormtrooper.com/ed_galbasic1.htm
      • EpsilonEX, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1I'm sure it's viral marketing for the Star Wars series that is supposed to be revealed soon.
  • NateDog, on 03/28/2008, -13/+255Some nifty photoshop skills I'm sure, but still, it's always fun to imagine ... "what if it's real!?" :)
    • 1town, on 03/28/2008, -11/+24If by nifty you mean *****, then you are correct, sir.
    • Harabeck, on 03/28/2008, -5/+21The entire object is always the same focus in every pic, even if some of the craft should extend outside of the focus.
      • viruz, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3No if your aperture is set pretty darn high f22 would kee it all in focus
      • Iwantawii, on 03/28/2008, -1/+6the reflections are all wrong
      • thirty6chambers, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1do you know anything about aperture? it's a bright day and you're pointing at the sky so you'd need a really high f stop.
      • quomen, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Umm.. if you're not familiar w/ photography, the camera should be focused to infinity at that distance. Everything will be in focus.
    • lolcoderer, on 03/28/2008, -12/+6People. Before jumping to photoshop/CGI conclusions, please read the many forums where discussions concerning the validity of these photos have been scrutinized for the past year... and at this point no critical evidence has been found to prove these FAKE or REAL. I am not saying these are real, or these are fake, just that lots of work has been done by people more talented than yourselves in trying to determine this, and well, there is no simple conclusion. Which is why these things are back in the news.

      If the photos themselves can't be proved fake, then we need to find the witnesses. If the witnesses (photographers) can't be found, then you may wan't to start drawing your own conclusions.

      http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board ...

      http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=d ...
      • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -5/+6I don't have to jump to conclusion, they're obviously fake.

        Look at it like this. Why in the 50+ years of UFO sightings have we never had reports of a craft even vaguely similar to this. They're always saucer / cigar / triangular shaped. Nothing like this.

        What happened, did the Aliens trick out their ride suddenly.

        Is there life out there? Most surely. Are they visiting us? No. You really think aliens would come billions of miles and then not bother to make real and lasting contact? Why would they sneak around?
        • ZombieKiss, on 03/28/2008, -0/+7Its an MTV stunt for Pimp My Saucer.
        • mccune, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Yeah, I mean if you consider the mind-numbing vastness of space, it just doesn't make any sense that there might be a space-faring civilization that could possibly design a craft that looks different from the other crafts reported. I mean, c'mon people!

          /sarcasm
          • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3So an obviously highly advanced species travels billions of miles to our planet, but rather than establish contact they play peek-a-boo?

            When Columbus sailed across the ocean blue did he hide behind the trees when he finally arrived in the Americas?
          • dpazar2, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1No, he made sex slaves and horses out of people!!!
          • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -1/+1@unreg:

            Only human ego would assume an advanced alien race would make the trip out here to have a meet and greet with the natives. this may be a blow to your ego but there are all kinds of reasons, which have nothing to do with us, for such a race to come here.

            Oh and the Drones are 100% CG. Fake.
          • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Sorry Norman619, you miss the point. It's not about our ego, its about the fact that somebody/thing from another planet would waste the time and energy visiting the planet just to fool around.
          • LucidHawk, on 03/28/2008, -2/+2Your an idiot. By many credible appearing accounts some of the craft visiting earth can go lightyears in seconds.
            Even if it took a lot of time and energy for them, all the more reason they wouldn't mess around.
            The biggest messiest of messing around would be a worldwide contact.
            They would study us from afar and probably take many years studying our plant an animal life.
            Interfering with world affairs would be unpredictable and dangerous. Contact would only be on small levels.
            Like on a nature show the scientist/explorer/naturalist very, very rarely introduce themselves directly into the environment to see what happens, they already know what happens. They stand back and watch the creatures in their environment. Exposing themselves changes the way the creatures behave.
          • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1@unreg:

            That would imply you know what they are doing. Unless they paid you a visit and told you what they are doing you really haven't a clue. That is the point you are missing.
        • LucidHawk, on 03/28/2008, -3/+2"You really think aliens would come billions of miles and then not bother to make real and lasting contact? Why would they sneak around?"
          Because you can't understand that such a motive can exist in a being outside our comprehension, from another world, evolved perhaps in an entirely different way, you think it's obvious aliens aren't visiting earth?

          Of all reasons cited for why aliens couldn't be here that is the most retarded of them all.
          You sir are a idiot.

          ALIEN motivations aside, it's fairly obvious to me that humans would do the same. If NASA scientists were to visit a privative civilization they most likely wouldn't want to make contact, they would study that civilization from afar probably for many years. And why would they care to make contact on a massive scale? It is surely just as gratifying to make contact with individuals (as those beings visiting us do) and far less dangerously unpredictable than scaring the ***** out of the masses appearing on every tv or in front of every government at once. And this privative planet just like our own may have many governments therefore making the notion of contact extremely chaotic and the notion of giving them advanced technology even more chaotic. They would surely make war over the technologies or possibly pervert them for war.
          • unreg, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Right. Here we are sending signals out into space, assuming others are doing the same and listening for them. And when we finally do find them, we're going to abduct people and conduct ritualistic anal probing on them. And for ***** and giggles we'll also do crop circles.

            Then again, the aliens probably don't go around calling each other idiots.
        • LucidHawk, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1All other reasoning aside.. yes it's obvious the drones are fake , because a trained eye can see all of them are computer generated.
          • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1All one needs to do is compare the lighing in the scene with that of the craft.
        • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1"Is there life out there? Most surely. Are they visiting us? No. You really think aliens would come billions of miles and then not bother to make real and lasting contact? Why would they sneak around?"

          This is cute. You try to apply human rationale to what is supposedly an ALIEN intelligence. As I said to unreg, only human ego would assume an advanced alien race would make the trip out here to have a meet and greet with the natives. There couldn't be anything else on this planet they'd be interested in or even need. It always amazes me how egocentric the arguments are against intelligent and technologically advanced aliens visiting our planet.
      • narcofiche, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2Not to sound all "conspiracy theorist" - but people shouldn't rule out the fact that it's possible fake photos were planted to take out all credibility of the case. Just saying.
        • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1The oroginal stuff is CG as well. So the case never had much cred to begin with.
      • FireXtol, on 03/28/2008, -1/+1Please research: burden of proof.
        Note: there is no burden of disproof.
        Example:
        Man1) There is a god.
        Man2) Prove it.
        Man1) Prove me wrong.
        Man2) That burden of proof is on you! Not me.
        Man1) I don't understand.. or Begin: God is because God is, and other horribly flawed logic
        Man2 gives up.
        • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Your premise lacks logic. How does one prove or disprove the existence of something that does not reside in our physical universe? God is supposed to exist outside of time and space. It's impossible to prove either side of the argument.
          • Frost9999, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1You're mistaken. There are not 2 sides of an argument. There is a single hypothesis - "There is a god."
          • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1@Frost

            Wrong one side claims there is and the other claims there is not. The truth is a 3 edged sword.
          • rilus, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1So, I'm guessing you're on the "unicorns exist side of the argument?"

            Like Frost said: there is no argument. The hypothesis is: "Unicorns exist." OK. Now, prove it. A hypothesis which cannot be demonstrated or proven scientifically is not a scientific hypothesis but merely an academic exercise of "what ifs."
          • xsuite, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1Not really, the existence of a God is in question. If Man 2 started off the argument by saying "there is no God" it wold run the same way as the one above did.

            The existence of a God is unprovable and unknowable, why do people care about it?
          • norman619, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1@xsuite:

            Sounds like you are smart enough to figure that one out on your own. It gives people comfort. For many people not having an all knowing all seeing being watching over you is creepy.
          • norman619, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1@rilus:

            "So, I'm guessing you're on the "unicorns exist side of the argument?"

            You'd assume wrong. I don't waste my time with questions that can never be truly answered. I'm agnostic which means I feel some things are simply impossible to know. Any notion of life outside our physical universe falls firmly into that category.
          • rilus, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1You can be both, agnostic and atheist, like I am.
        • crazyhorse13, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1What he's saying is that because man made up rules about arguments, God doesn't exist.
        • lolcoderer, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1I was not trying to prove or disprove any arguments about UFOs. If these images are fake, then there certainly should be some verifiable evidence that "proves" they have been manufactured. Many people quickly jump to the conclusion of these images being fake, however, there is no hard proof one way or the other. If there is, then show me.
    • AndreiOttawa, on 03/28/2008, -0/+7I think that it's time to abandon a picture as an evidence in seeing UFO. It has to be accompanied by something else.
      • unreg, on 03/28/2008, -1/+7It ain't ***** without some Alien poop.
      • narcofiche, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1So if a camera is the only thing around in case something like this did happen, we should immediately say it's fake and be done with it? And regardless of whether or not it's fake, it's interesting to think about. I think most people get caught up in their lives too much to consider the possibilities. Imagine for a second that we're the only intelligent beings in space. It's a lonely thought.

        It seems with all these sites like youtube going up, the more we rely on video for proof. I wish instead of getting into such heated debates about these kinds of things, people should consider the possibilities and think about what it means. I think some people would be a lot happier because of it.
    • JettaMan, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3I agree. These pictures are a load of *****. Every generation has people who will perpetrate hoaxes.
    • paradexes, on 03/28/2008, -2/+3People are talking about this around there and a few saw this thing. http://isaaccaret.fortunecity.com/ here in case you are too lazy to look it up.
      This guy claims to have worked on this. It is not an Alien craft per se but one based on Alien tech. Which seems to me alot more plausible in some ways. Altho why they would allow it to fly out in full view is beyond me. I am keeping an open mind, but with some room for doubt on this.
      • Evil5, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1That article supposes problems with the device causes them to be visible for short periods of time.
    • ParaSwarm, on 03/28/2008, -0/+10Everything's photoshopped. Everything. Take a picture of yourself in the mirror. Photoshopped.
    • Chordinator, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1In some shots the light source is off, or the shadows are too light too...

      Not to mention, everyone has a camera, and you can pick up an 8 megapixel point and shoot for under $100 these days. We'd be seeing multiple angles of high-resolution stills if this was visible in broad daylight.
      • Iwantawii, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1this is very true, a few people even got the first plane attack on 9/11 on their own cameras
      • crazyhorse13, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Especially considering it seems to be standing still.
    • Berkana, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1The biggest detractor to this story and many others is that the "UFO" in question always looks futuristic according to the fashion of the times. UFOs from the 60's and 70's look like things out of the Jetsons: smooth disks, maybe an antenna or two. UFO photos from later periods appear to be influenced by the science fiction of the time (Star Trek, Starwars, etc.) And those diagrams with the Japanese Katakana looking text and swirly lines are unnecessarily elaborate and would get in the way of conveying information clearly like a table or a line diagram would. (My opinion as one who has dabbled in graphic design and information architecture.) The diagram would be far more convincing if it were more mundane and user-oriented. If these are the work of aliens, they must value art and aesthetics over functionality.

      More likely, the entire series of photos was probably designed and made by an artist. This would account for the artsy look better than appealing to extra terrestrial origins.
      • Kyan, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2" If these are the work of aliens, they must value art and aesthetics over functionality."
        Soooo...
        these aliens are from Cupertino, and that UFO is a damn expensive piece of handiwork?
  • iehova, on 03/28/2008, -6/+161This picture was analyzed on the History Channel show "UFO Hunters." They couldn't prove it was a UFO, more likely a Photoshop job.
    • Waiting2awake, on 03/28/2008, -5/+30how do you prove something is unidentified?

      Agreed it is probably a photoshop(Physics FTW) but I can't see how you can prove that it is something we don't know? You know?
      • LLLSecretChimp, on 03/28/2008, -1/+14"how do you prove something is unidentified? " Easy, by failing to identify it. Proving something is unidentifiable is a lot harder.
      • supreme0armor, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3We don't know what we don't know.
    • KenSPT, on 03/28/2008, -2/+42Not for nothing, UFO Hunters almost always comes to "no conclusion". That show is the epitome of "researchers" running on a treadmill.
      • Mnevis, on 03/28/2008, -1/+5Yea, UFO Hunters is pretty stupid. I watched it a few times and honestly could not believe some of the crazy ***** they say and do. They leave so much hanging then say, "Oh well, we couldn't prove it was an alien... BUT we couldn't prove it wasn't! SO THERE!" I mean, I fully understand budget and time issues, but the amount of time and money they spend doing completely retarded and useless ***** is absurd.
        For example: They're looking for a plane that went down 30 years ago whose pilot claims it was taken down by a USO (submerged object). Well we can't find the plane, but we know the floor of the ocean is significantly inclined here. Let's go use our basement "science lab" and determine if a heavy object under the effects of gravity and currents will move downslope! HURRAH! Time well spent, let's go search some more! Oh... we can't find it? Well now what? Maybe it washed ashore... eh... Maybe we're looking in the wrong spot... eh... Maybe the aliens have a hidden UFO base underwater and stole it to conceal the evidence... YEA! That sounds right! But we couldn't prove anything and we didn't search all the possible areas and the primary source of evidence this entire episode was based on was never found. But we didn't prove USOs DON'T exist so clearly the aliens are ***** with us.
      • firebirdx01, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1They wouldn't have a show if they actually disproved it.
    • slicerace, on 03/28/2008, -8/+2Uhm - I really wonder about that considering this is a marketing campaign for Halo 3 from June of 2007.
    • S3Captain, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Yeah, they pointed out that the "vehicles" were all kind of alike, but it looks like bits and pieces just get added onto them. They pointed out that it looks like someone has decided that they can continually do a little more with the design and add a few more spikes here, a few circles there, etc.

      If they are real, they're camaflouge sucks pretty badly.
      • Lyph5, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1That's like saying Hummers don't exist because some have machine guns, some have missile launchers, and some have intelligence gathering suites.
        Different tools for different jobs.

        But I do believe that this is some of the worst photochopping I've ever seen.
    • masgrada, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3Well duh.
      If not; Those pictures have IMMACULATE focus. Whoever took them should be working for sports illustrated.
      • rezist, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2autofocus
        • TheSuperunknown, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Autofocus is irrelevant here.
          Its the hyperfocal distance that matters. A smaller aperture is needed to bring near and far objects into focus simultaneously. That varies by focal length, subject distance, and sensor/film size.
          See: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
      • Jimmeeee, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Just to be that guy, people used to complain that pictures of UFO's and such were always grainy. Now that someone has excellent-quality pictures of some, they're faked too?
    • harusp3x, on 03/28/2008, -0/+6They apparently COULD prove it was a UFO by being unable to identify whether or not the object was identifiable.
    • ceruleanocte, on 03/28/2008, -0/+4HA! Photoshop.... that's what the aliens want you to think.
    • crazyhorse13, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3I'll be convinced when the aliens hold a press conference.
    • brundlefly76, on 03/29/2008, -1/+3Their biggest boo-boo was making the markings look so much like the fictional Klingon alphabet.
    • joegibes, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Honestly, Photoshop is readily available (either a trial version or a .torrent) and it's not that difficult to make (or pay/"convince" someone to make) a composite like this.
  • StickyStar, on 03/28/2008, -32/+9UFO's again... haha :)
    • topace3000, on 03/29/2008, -1/+1Dugg down by a multitude of True Believers. I must say, digg sure has an idiotic love of the implausible.
  • djt137, on 03/28/2008, -30/+5It's just ET trying to phone home again... crazy aliens.
    • kcdstudios, on 03/28/2008, -3/+8can you hear me now?
    • Hockey37, on 03/28/2008, -1/+1No, that was his ship leaving. He's finally given up on phoning home after he lost the FCC auction for C Block.
  • aki009, on 03/28/2008, -32/+10Capitola -- hmm -- a bit too much "medical" marijuana, I'd say.
    • shadeofgreen, on 03/28/2008, -2/+10you're a tool
      • saintdesy, on 03/28/2008, -1/+4Well, if 40% of the people in that county weren't stoned, I'd agree with you.
    • Tonorific, on 03/29/2008, -1/+0No, he's probably just been to Capitola. It i sonly a few miles from Santa Cruz.
  • rexona, on 03/28/2008, -15/+8Sounds like another tourism campaign, mustn't be much else going on in that city!
  • PowerSellingMom, on 03/28/2008, -16/+4Interesting stuff!
    • m0nte, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Yes this one is fake. BUT If you are so ignorant to think that there isn't any form of life beyond Earth you are sadly mistaken.
      • meropealcyone, on 03/28/2008, -3/+1I believe there is, but I also believe that there's no proof beyond statistical analysis based on the Drake equation. People who think aliens crash in our deserts and kidnap our less intelligent members never stop to wonder why a civilization with the technology and energy sources needed to cross interstellar space would do such a thing.
      • raynar, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Right..because of all the alien proof we've seen.
    • gtank92, on 03/28/2008, -1/+1yeah...great comment...
  • nahsrocketeer75, on 03/28/2008, -9/+97Just stop already. I love a good UFO yarn as much as the next skeptic, but they shouldn't get one second's worth of mainstream press attention without a gap-toothed farmer claiming credit for the photos.
    • had3l, on 03/28/2008, -1/+36It's also very interesting how the design of UFOs get cooler and more modern as time goes by...
    • KennMac, on 03/28/2008, -3/+8The problem with the believability of UFO phenomenons is that they are usually surrounded by a lot of *****. Most "abduction" reportings are *****, and I agree, are created by crackpots. Photoshop jobs and falsified hoax footage don't help either. However there's a lot of validity to the reports of military personnel, airline pilots, and law enforcement who have had sightings and even 'up-close-and-personal' events with crafts.

      It's unfortunate that the ***** surrounding plausible events completely wipes the credibility from these types of discussions. People need to realize that this isn't black or white, true or false only. There's a lot of real information, and an abundant amount of *****.
  • kinseyincanada, on 03/28/2008, -23/+59wasn't this just a PR stunt for the release of Halo 3 a while back?
    • jmas9, on 03/28/2008, -1/+5I thought it was for the Transformers movie actually.
    • archivist, on 03/28/2008, -7/+2it was for alienware: http://www.dailygrail.com/node/5594
      • ophello, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Youre an idiot. did you actually read the article?
        "Thank you for your email. It’s great to hear that our promotion has reach out to you and your Forum group regarding the CARET document. Alienware did NOT create the information regarding this phenomena or the CARAT linguistics. This is NOT an intellectual property of Alienware. The information has anonymously spread throughout the web for some time. We have taken the CARAT linguistics and have applied this as a marketing tool to draw attention to our promotion."
    • SSUK, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3There was quite a bit of confusion regarding this. Idiots were posting these pictures around as "Halo 3 IRIS" pictures, even though they had no connection what so ever to Halo 3... Other than the fact Halo 3 has spaceships in it.
    • digjam, on 03/28/2008, -2/+8I BET THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS WITH FAKE DRIVING LICENSES!
    • AmICoolNow, on 03/28/2008, -0/+4Wow, there's an entirely separate conspiracy theory about who faked it...
  • JusticeFriend, on 03/28/2008, -21/+8PHOTOSHOPPED!
  • filemeaway, on 03/28/2008, -27/+46These sightings have been identified as technology reverse engineered in the eighties, part of the DoD CARET program. more pics and documentation..
    http://isaaccaret.fortunecity.com/
    • Shogi, on 03/28/2008, -5/+29Those "photos" of the alien technology are obvious 3d renders, albeit damn good ones.
      • neurobox, on 03/28/2008, -3/+3Indeed... I first saw those photos posted somewhere almost 10 years ago, before most techies knew the word "radiosity." Even the surface reflection scattering looks perfect. It could be actual photographs of a model.. Anyone with a machine shop and some spare time could pull this off... Looks like a whole lot of black anodized aluminum. A video demonstrating any of the behaviours claimed in the documents would be far more compelling.
      • lolcoderer, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Can you prove these are 3d renders. If these are indeed 3d renders, there should be some evidence left by the renderings. Do an FFT on a 3D render and on these images. You can usually easily tell the difference between 3D renders and real objects. In this case, things aren't so clear.
        • Shogi, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2It's obvious because it's too perfect. Look at the lighting in the object, no flaws, no scratches, perfectly smooth light. No background reflections, nothing, and the biggest giveaway is the shopped photocopied look.
    • CATSCEO, on 03/28/2008, -4/+23That is fake. Viral marketing for Alienware.
      • overtoke, on 03/28/2008, -0/+9A query by a member of the Open Minds Forum to Alienware, about their use of the glyphs, received this response from their PR Director:

        Thank you for your email. It’s great to hear that our promotion has reach out to you and your Forum group regarding the CARET document. Alienware did NOT create the information regarding this phenomena or the CARAT linguistics. This is NOT an intellectual property of Alienware. The information has anonymously spread throughout the web for some time. We have taken the CARAT linguistics and have applied this as a marketing tool to draw attention to our promotion.

    • mac0Fd00m, on 03/28/2008, -3/+14"I am not interested in making myself vulnerable to the consequences of betraying the trust of my superiors and will not divulge any personal information that could determine my identity." Extremely convenient that we are unable to track him down and ask him questions directly. This also absolves him from having to go to the media about this. I don't know about you, but I need someone who isn't anonymous to 'identify' this 'technology'. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
      • ophello, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2extraordinary evidence WAS presented, but you dont want to believe it because it is too inconvenient for you.
    • vex67, on 03/28/2008, -4/+3Someone forgot to take his crazy pills today.
    • postalblowfish7, on 03/28/2008, -3/+2Right, all the inscriptions are in freakin Klingon. Never trust a UFO story that looks like something you saw on an early 90's sci-fi show.
    • HonestAbe, on 03/28/2008, -2/+10When the real aliens come, we'll be so saturated with fake ones we'll just brush it off as viral marketing. :)
      • jimmy17, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2Why would aliens want to use viral marketing?
    • dapark, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2i thought it was a very interesting read. i'm not 100% convinced, but why would someone go through the trouble of writing multiple pages of a fake government report. seems like a bit much even for a marketing campaign...
    • KennMac, on 03/28/2008, -2/+3Did anyone read that page? That information is incredible and mind-boggling. I'm doing my best to verify its integrity, but there's nothing that makes me think it's made up.
      • delmar14, on 03/28/2008, -4/+3Nothing in your mind says this might be made up? C'mon, people make this ***** up all the time. They're usually anonymous, and never present any provable evidence. Until Popular Mechanics, or some other respected scientific publication can speak to the voracity of these pictures, I will remain a skeptic.
      • spaceman77, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2people do make things up and then there are the other kinds of events ....
        The public as a whole will not believe in ET presence until they flood the skies with their craft. That may happen one day, maybe not.
    • wordglue, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Pics and it didn't happen.........what what?
    • nydwarf, on 03/28/2008, -0/+5Anyone who's website is hosted on Fortunecity has to be legit.
  • filemeaway, on 03/28/2008, -3/+46Original observer pics:
    http://www.paranormalfiles.co.uk/rajman1977_photos ...
    • ehrlich, on 03/28/2008, -3/+21These say in their matadata:
      Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
      • ophello, on 03/29/2008, -1/+2THAT DOESNT MEAN THEY WERE PHOTOSHOPPED.

        if you use PS to resize a photo, the metadata is affected. stop trying to be a detective.
    • raynar, on 03/28/2008, -7/+8Except that "1977" photo has the 'Date Taken' field as May 5th 2007. FAIL.
      • mordea, on 03/28/2008, -0/+5Er...I'm guessing the 1977 is just part of the username.
    • rilus, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Whether or not the original pictures did show a UFO, these photos have been opened and saved in Photoshop.
      If the photos are opened in Photoshop, you can find that they have Photoshop XMP data including the following:
      Adobe Photoshop Properties (photoshop, http://ns.adobe.com/photoshop/1.0/) : photoshop ColorMode: 3
      among other properties... this is an obvious giveaway.
    • BruceDude, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Maybe the pics were cropped in photoshop. That doesn't mean they were made in Photoshop.

      It looks like a 3D rendering to me. Maybe MAYA or 3DS MAX.
    • Mistaxe, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Compression - 6 (JPG)
      ImageDescription - MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA
      Make - MINOLTA CO.,LTD
      Model - DiMAGE X
      Orientation - Top left
      XResolution - 72
      YResolution - 72
      ResolutionUnit - Inch
      Software - V100-02
      DateTime - 2007:05:16 17:41:11
      YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
      ExifOffset - 250
      ExposureProgram - Normal program
      ISOSpeedRatings - 100
      ExifVersion - 0220
      DateTimeOriginal - 2007:05:16 17:41:11
      DateTimeDigitized - 2007:05:16 17:41:11
      ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
      CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
      MeteringMode - Multi-segment
      LightSource - Auto
      Flash - Not fired
      FlashPixVersion - 0100
      ColorSpace - sRGB
      ExifImageWidth - 1600
      ExifImageHeight - 1200
      FileSource - Other
      SceneType - Other

      Thumbnail: -
      Compression - 6 (JPG)
      XResolution - 72
      YResolution - 72
      JpegIFOffset - 578
      JpegIFByteCount - 3473
  • dildoolielly, on 03/28/2008, -2/+58---------"Some UFO researchers believe the pictures show an extraterrestrial drone hovering over the city of Capitola."---------

    Yeah, and what "UFO researchers" would those be? Names? Credentials?

    ---------"However, no one has taken credit for snapping the photographs."------------------

    Oh, Nevermind!
    • BEloftyIRONS, on 03/28/2008, -0/+12I believe the researcher went to the university of Ooo-WEE-ooo.
      • SlamShut, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Does he look just like Buddy Holly?
    • LinusTheLim, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3UFO researchers have credentials?
    • SchmuckofNI, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1This was on UFO Hunters a few weeks ago. They came to the same conclusion as they always do by neither proving nor disproving that the pictures are real.
  • dildoolielly, on 03/28/2008, -14/+5"Intelligent Design"
  • caponumen, on 03/28/2008, -13/+51So clearly faked......
    • Bizarrkley, on 03/28/2008, -9/+5Clearly you are an expert.
      • nekochan, on 03/28/2008, -1/+15he is. because he can tell by the pixels and he's seen a lot of photoshops in his time.
      • Bizarrkley, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1So can I, doesn't make me an "expert".
    • dimebags, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3i don't have a good eye for this kind of thing. can you explain how you know?
      • raynar, on 03/28/2008, -3/+5Its an "alien" ship flying around. Thats fake enough.
    • Aharoni, on 03/28/2008, -1/+8The shadows are all wrong.
      • Bilabrin, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2Yeah, the light sourcing is off.
      • PoopStick, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2Look at the telephone pole see that Bar that sticks out and how dark it is on the bottom? the UFO should be the same shadows go on the bottom.
    • ursername180, on 03/28/2008, -3/+3Yep. There's a pixel THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS big!
    • delmar14, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2Haha, half of the letters are japanese katakana. Like this: シチ
  • Dropperbr, on 03/28/2008, -11/+5At least is not those pictures with round shape spacecraft... blurry image... black and white..(can't see *****)big head aliens!
    First pimp UFO! haha
  • coffee200am, on 03/28/2008, -13/+37Omg.....this is so fake...
    • dimebags, on 03/28/2008, -6/+2probably but how do you know?
      • mcbarron, on 03/28/2008, -4/+7Cause UFOs aren't real?
        • directive0, on 03/28/2008, -1/+15UFOs are TOTALLY real. Yesterday I saw some kind of plane flying by at a high altitude... but I couldn't really make out what kind or who it belonged to. I was totally unable to identify that flying object.
    • jbettineski, on 03/28/2008, -6/+1if it helps you sleep better at night....
    • RealHyperX, on 03/28/2008, -3/+1The liberals here will believe these photos because they stir emotion!
      • GhostyBoy, on 03/29/2008, -0/+3You just made a ridiculous generalization based on irrelevant partisan politics.

        I can now call you an ***** retard with confidence and certainty.
  • coffee200am, on 03/28/2008, -10/+3Somebody got a hold of the cracked version of CS3 that's been going around...and is having fun.
  • BruisedGhost, on 03/28/2008, -4/+61dugg for steampunk UFO's
  • Falldog, on 03/28/2008, -1/+90Ah, remember the days before photoshop?

    http://www.hufos.net/images/maybe_a_fake_ufo.jpg
    http://www.imgdump.info/img7697.search.htm
    • 1town, on 03/28/2008, -2/+10They had photoshop in 1992 -.-
      • Logicexe, on 03/28/2008, -0/+7Yeah but how many people had it (or any other image program capable of faking a UFO sighting) installed on their computer compared to today?
      • SSUK, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Yeah, did you ever USE photoshop in 1992? It took half a day to do what takes half a second in modern photoshop.
        • j3one, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1that was the year we finaly got it on pc.
    • halobender, on 03/28/2008, -0/+10Put that cow down!
    • crashingechelon, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1Photo editing like that has been around since before photoshop. People have been making manipulated images ever photography was started, heck like all the photoshop terms are taken from darkroom photography.
      Plus in old photographs the sky didn't show up in the negatives so that have to photograph the landscape and sky separately and then later splice them together.
  • KevinRWright, on 03/28/2008, -2/+60I can't wait for the new X-Files film!
    • leerayIG88, on 03/28/2008, -1/+3Yeah I know!! Agent Scully is so hot. Omg I feel so hot just thinking about her.
  • KenSPT, on 03/28/2008, -1/+165I miss the days when I was a kid and "UFO Pictures" were nothing more than bulbs of lights in the sky.

    Now we get close up, clear, images of hovering crafts. Kids these days don't know how good they have it.
    • S3Captain, on 03/28/2008, -1/+8Ken, this is REALLY it! These outaspace muthas have uttered the actual, official, request. "Take me to your leader." Word is that they were immediately taken to meet Oprah.
    • killobillo, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1You have just completely debunked the entire UFO mystique. UFOs are a reflection of what we see,
      they are human fabrication, a myth. As evidenced by the 'quality' of UFOs improving
      as our technology improves, our ability to produce visual and photographic effects improve.
      The closest analogy I can come up with is how science fiction television in the 60's
      produced a certain 'vision' of the future, as the decades changed and technology got
      better, our depiction of the future also improved visually. Hence our 'vision' of UFOs
      improving as the decades march by. It is not real, it is our perception of something as being reality.
      Pretty much proves that UFOs, the common image that we think of when we say "UFOs", are a religion:
      They are a creation, a fabrication by humans, an interpretation that we fool ourselves into thinking
      is real. We see what we want to see, we think what we want to think. instead of leaving something
      unknown as "unknown". Humans by and large don't like that question mark hovering over something
      [pun intended]. We want to know, and sometimes we will create something in our heads to fill it in.
    • Connormac44, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2When I was your age, Pluto was a planet.
  • SickMonkey, on 03/28/2008, -6/+65U.F.Photo Shopped!
  • rsek, on 03/28/2008, -4/+8why those last pics have a white air? because they where edited in PS, its easier to add something on white as on a BG full of clouds.
  • johnnagy, on 03/28/2008, -13/+9just the government doing some more domestic spying. don't worry though! it catches the terrorists. nothing to see here.
  • Harabeck, on 03/28/2008, -7/+30This is so rediculous. If such craft were appearing in the way these photos suggest, there would be more pics and videos for one. And second, they wouldnt be near as clear as they appear, theyre too good. The first thing I thought when I saw them was that it was definately photoshopped, and all of the pics have similar quality.
  • borez, on 03/28/2008, -12/+65Same thing spotted over Croyden England

    http://images.elfwood.com/art/k/e/kelesaii/flying_ ...
  • inajeep, on 03/28/2008, -3/+18Anonymous source? If you had such hi-res photos why would you release them anonymously. I won't believe it till an alien lands in my yard, gets out and shakes hands with me. Till then, these photos are rendered very well. Especially the one with the thin wires/rods mounted in a circle pointing straight up that are nice and clear in the distance from the trees which happen to be beyond the DOF (depth of field)

    • clayasaurus, on 03/28/2008, -1/+2Because the secret government will kill them.
    • thetedster180, on 03/28/2008, -0/+4If you're going to tell us what DOF stands or what is the point of abbreviating it in the first place?
    • beetlecrazy12, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1"I won't believe it till an alien lands in my yard, gets out and shakes hands with me."

      Haha...you have high hopes. He's really just gonna probe ya you know.
  • SvenGeiss, on 03/28/2008, -1/+8its not photoshopped. it was a video on youtube.. but still fake, I work with shake (compositing program) all the time.. and thats all it is.. the shadows match up pretty good, but not all the time. its just simple compositing.
    • scheibs14, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1The pixels don't line up very well all the time either
  • espempire, on 03/28/2008, -11/+14pics or it didn't ha... oh wait ... ...
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 03/28/2008, -0/+23In this case: "pics and it still didn't happen"
  • Trav1289, on 03/28/2008, -2/+11I saw something like this a little less than year ago on digg.
    http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Real_or_Fake_Unusual_Obj ...
    These pics just make it look PS to me.
  • mogebier, on 03/28/2008, -5/+33OH SNAP!!
    I need to remember to turn on my cloaking device next time I go out. I had no idea it was off when I went out for Pizza.
    • jcasaurus, on 03/28/2008, -2/+1Ha ha.... I get it. It's supposed to be you, right? Hilarious.
      • UtopiaInTheSky, on 03/29/2008, -0/+2Thanks for the explanation, I totally didn't get it.
  • Orsenfelt, on 03/28/2008, -3/+66It's a weather balloon people, Calm down.
    • Jones82, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus
  • soot, on 03/28/2008, -12/+6What? This was viral marketing ***** for Halo 3 last year, I remember submitting links to these pictures. Why is this popping up now?
  • DarkReign16, on 03/28/2008, -1/+22Even the UFO hunters show on history channel has said those are likely to be CGI renders.
    • deadseksy, on 03/28/2008, -0/+2I don't really take anything they say seriously...
  • danielrh9, on 03/28/2008, -3/+206Crap. It's Xenu. We should have listened.
  • alkajazz, on 03/28/2008, -8/+2lololololololol
  • bulkhater, on 03/28/2008, -10/+2These things are usually some sort of experimental military hardware. Remember, the Air Force has admitted to using the UFO scares as a cover for aircraft testing.

    If it's real, it's terrestrial, the question is WHO MADE IT????
  • sloppymoney87, on 03/28/2008, -5/+4Mirror image1: http://uploadingit.com/view/507594_8mcvz image2: http://uploadingit.com/view/507595_ips83 image3: http://uploadingit.com/view/507596_31ray image4: http://uploadingit.com/view/507597_sxo5f
  • CATSCEO, on 03/28/2008, -6/+30These are the same viral marketing pics from a year or so ago, what the hell does NBC think these are recent?
    • lolcoderer, on 03/28/2008, -5/+7Show me the proof!
      Everyone one digg plays too many games... There were NO viral marketing relationships proved - ever.
    • archivist, on 03/28/2008, -0/+6FTA: Additionally, in the message from the PR director CARET is spelled correctly once, and then 'CARAT' is substituted afterwards. It is worth noting that Carat is the name of a major advertising and communications company, which has as a subsidiary a digital and viral marketing wing named Carat Fusion.
  • Hurricane, on 03/28/2008, -4/+11LMAO, anybody notice the Klingon Glyphs on the one that looks like a naked jet engine?
  • Brownds, on 03/28/2008, -0/+60Quick hide your anuses! That thing looks painful.
  • cubbiesx, on 03/28/2008, -2/+8Giant flying kitchen utensils will never frighten me.
  • sizzzzlerz, on 03/28/2008, -9/+3Capitola is right next to Santa Cruz where there are many, many children of the 60's still residing in the area. My guess would be that some herbage had a bit to do with this.
    • LogicBomB, on 03/28/2008, -1/+11Because pot causes hallucinations.... Right.

      At least you could paint a convincing picture to the cops that you've never done it before in your life.
      • Chassit, on 03/28/2008, -0/+4Obviously, not only dose pot cause hallucinations but hallucinations which can be photographed.

        /s
    • laterallateral, on 03/28/2008, -0/+5Burried for 'herbage"
  • Osahar, on 03/28/2008, -0/+7they don't know who took the pictures? what the hell is this about then?

    http://www.thirdeyeconcept.com/forums/index.php?to ...
  • doomeyes, on 03/28/2008, -2/+31It looks like a flying crop circle.
    • Hurricane, on 03/28/2008, -1/+4I think that might be what the artist was going for, as if these landing make inprinted crop circles.
    • zeeohsix, on 03/29/2008, -0/+0LOL
  • macweirdo42, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Of course it's fake! I can't believe people are taking this so seriously, going into detailed analysis to explain why it's fake.

    Personally, I say shut up and enjoy the pimped out spaceship. It is a really cool and unique design, I've gotta say - nice to see someone with a little bit of creativity. You know, in a way, it reminds me of those videos that were on youtube a while back of the UFO flying over the beach - the high level of detail, the unconventional design... Very cool.
  • MartinR, on 03/28/2008, -0/+3Isn't this petty old? And I thought the fakeness was already proven!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 279 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.