Mufon ufo news case 92741 low-flying saucer

[The Eternal Flame]

10-16-2019 A Colorado witness in Colorado Springs reported seeing and photographing a flying saucer according to testimony in Case 92741. https://www.mufon.com/ufo-news/colorado-witness-describes-low-flying-saucer

[The Eternal Flame]

This new photography just emerged!

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

And, as always, it’s a blurry photo. I genuinely miss the days when the photos were of clearly defined objects, even if they were lampshades or hubcaps.

[freetoroam]

Quote

The witness was sitting on his back deck in the early evening around 6 pm on August 23, 2014.

https://www.mufon.com/ufo-news/colorado-witness-describes-low-flying-saucer

This only 5 years old,  cameras were not that bad then. Where are the other photos,  only the one?  

Quote

object seemingly appeared slowly out of nowhere.  It became clearer as I watched it

Just the camera which was rubbish then?  

No photos of it flying off anywhere?

These stories are just so lame. 

[The Eternal Flame]

1 hour ago, freetoroam said:

This only 5 years old,  cameras were not that bad then. Where are the other photos,  only the one?  

I have almost activated a old cellphone they are still on the market i love retro technology.

[ThereWeAreThen]

4 minutes ago, debra odem said:

I have almost activated a old cellphone they are still on the market i love retro technology.

Not the point though really is it mate? In this day and age you can see the surface if the moon with your smartphone and take decent pis of it. So if these ufos are actually of alien origin, why isnt there a fantastic photo out there?

[The Eternal Flame]

11 minutes ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

Not the point though really is it mate? In this day and age you can see the surface if the moon with your smartphone and take decent pis of it. So if these ufos are actually of alien origin, why isnt there a fantastic photo out there?

For me this is one of them ! You can fell the falling leaf effect of the saucer...

I dont understand why i am the only one who think this is a fantastic photo?

Maybe its beacose i saw a flying saucer long time ago.

Edited November 17, 2019 by debra odem

[ThereWeAreThen]

12 minutes ago, debra odem said:

For me this is one of them ! You can fell the falling leaf effect of the saucer...

I dont understand why i am the only one who think this is a fantastic photo?

Maybe its beacose i saw a flying saucer long time ago.

Cause it could be anything. It could be someone throwing a hat, it could be a bird, it could literally be anything. My point is, in 2014, as freetoroam said, cameras were great back.

So why is it blurry? Does the fact that the photo is blurry strike you as odd?

[freetoroam]

19 minutes ago, debra odem said:

I have almost activated a old cellphone they are still on the market i love retro technology.

Yes,   but 2014 is not retro. 

The first commercial camera phone came out in 1999, still not quite in the retro category,  yet. 

[The Eternal Flame]

2 minutes ago, freetoroam said:

Yes,   but 2014 is not retro. 

The first commercial camera phone came out in 1999, still not quite in the retro category,  yet. 

The picture are not so great i dont understand sorry its almost strange and funny at the same time how whe get lost in this conversation that would in a ideal life never occured.

[freetoroam]

15 minutes ago, debra odem said:

For me this is one of them ! You can fell the falling leaf effect of the saucer...

I dont understand why i am the only one who think this is a fantastic photo?

Maybe its beacose i saw a flying saucer long time ago.

But this is not a flying saucer. 

The photo is only 5 years old,  the reason why people blur the pictures is to hide what is really there,  and here they could have made anything.

The clue that the person who made this is trying it on,  is the fact there are no other photos to show the path of the alleged craft.

 

[freetoroam]

1 minute ago, debra odem said:

The picture are not so great i dont understand sorry its almost strange and funny at the same time how whe get lost in this conversation that would in a ideal life never occured.

In this article you have a 5 year old picture,  which is not old and no follow up pictures.

Its rubbish,  but anyone who is gullible will like it.

[The Eternal Flame]

Here whe come so you claim you are a ufo expert and this is a hoax?

Sorry but im not mad or upset just suprise, did you ever saw a flying saucer?

Its ufo expert who initially posted it and i know this is more signifian than you sorry again its just logic who bring me to the point no emotion whatsoever maybe again suprise by the conversation whe have that should in a ideal never occur imagine a ideal of yourself would appreciate sutch picture.

And im talking to you freetoroam not quoted my mistake i saw me a saucer in the past and i know when a picture is genuine.

Ok maybe i am wrong but maybe im right.

Edited November 17, 2019 by debra odem

[The Eternal Flame]

27 minutes ago, freetoroam said:

In this article you have a 5 year old picture,  which is not old and no follow up pictures.

Its rubbish,  but anyone who is gullible will like it.

Why you need follow up picture brings me to the question do you drink alcool now or for a long period in the past and or drink fluorure from taps water at a young age or maybe it the stuff they put in eggs?

 

[The Eternal Flame]

43 minutes ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

Cause it could be anything. It could be someone throwing a hat, it could be a bird, it could literally be anything. My point is, in 2014, as freetoroam said, cameras were great back.

So why is it blurry? Does the fact that the photo is blurry strike you as odd?

Cellphone camera from a guy who as a old cellphone maybe.

[The Eternal Flame]

51 minutes ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

Not the point though really is it mate? In this day and age you can see the surface if the moon with your smartphone and take decent pis of it. So if these ufos are actually of alien origin, why isnt there a fantastic photo out there?

If i was im i would post it on mufon beacose i would think its a great idea these people are often investigated and most of the time when ufo expert post it as news for me as new saucer picture emerged whe are all drawn to it for me its a remarcable picture if you do a quick or long search on ufo the 100 best pictures are most of the time not so fantastic.

Edited November 17, 2019 by debra odem

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

No, THIS is a convincing UFO photo.

 

and it’s a fake. But it’s a believable fake. 

[Hazzard]

1 hour ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

No, THIS is a convincing UFO photo.

 

and it’s a fake. But it’s a believable fake. 

Loved that picture when i first saw it, even tried to debunk it back when i was 12 yo. If i remember correctly, it a German gaslamp or something, right?!

[Robotic Jew]

This is terrible. 

[stereologist]

16 hours ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

Not the point though really is it mate? In this day and age you can see the surface if the moon with your smartphone and take decent pis of it. So if these ufos are actually of alien origin, why isnt there a fantastic photo out there?

A few years back a poster claimed it was the antigravity drives that made the fuzziness. They were asked if bigfoot also had antigravity drives.

Edited November 18, 2019 by stereologist

[Vaz]

4 hours ago, stereologist said:

A few years back a poster claimed it was the antigravity drives that made the fuzziness. They were asked if bigfoot also had antigravity drives.

Another one of your rocket re-entries?  Why not?  Anything goes with skeptics it seems.

[Vaz]

8 hours ago, Hazzard said:

Loved that picture when i first saw it, even tried to debunk it back when i was 12 yo. If i remember correctly, it a German gaslamp or something, right?!

A good ufologist can tell the difference.  Start now and you will improve.

[stereologist]

10 minutes ago, Vaz said:

Another one of your rocket re-entries?  Why not?  Anything goes with skeptics it seems.

Are you unable to read posts? 

[stereologist]

11 minutes ago, Vaz said:

A good ufologist can tell the difference.  Start now and you will improve.

Like the ufologist that thought the 1897hoax was real or the ufologists that didn't know about a second stage reentry or the ufologists that could tell what a flare is or the ufologists that lied about seeing burn marks on the ground in the Cash-Landrum case?

So which dubious ufologists are you referring to?

[Vaz]

5 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Are you unable to read posts? 

Yup.  That's the problem.