Monster-Finder Posted November 28, 2003 #1 Share Posted November 28, 2003 see the whole story http://www.beckjord.com/firstalienphotos Image is cropped from larger print, taken at 235 ft. Black vertical object is a tree. 1979. How many aliens can you count? These are heads only, body in bushes. MF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Posted November 28, 2003 #2 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Those are truly, sincerely, the worst pictures I have ever seen in my life. I have seen better aliens in porridge spots. Thank you for your efforts, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted November 28, 2003 #3 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Why is it when the researchers are taking pictures of each other on the expedition they look like great quality sharp color photographs from current 35 mm cameras, but the pictures of the creatures look like they came from an antique 19th century kodak black and white with a lens problem? Maybe the explosion of the hand held powder flash scared the little guys off. It looks to me like an ink blot test. It is pretty bad when you have to outline the thing in the picture to give people an idea of what you are talking about...I still had a hard time seeing what they are claiming to see. Of course if they could have squeezed in half a dozen more horizontal dividers on the website, I might think it was all real. I think that dividers should be put between each sentence at least. If it is a longer sentence that uses a comma, one should throw a divider after the comma to be on the safe side... Some folks have a lot of spare time and an excess of imagination available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 28, 2003 Author #4 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Why is it when the researchers are taking pictures of each other on the expedition they look like great quality sharp color photographs from current 35 mm cameras, but the pictures of the creatures look like they came from an antique 19th century kodak black and white with a lens problem? Maybe the explosion of the hand held powder flash scared the little guys off. It looks to me like an ink blot test. It is pretty bad when you have to outline the thing in the picture to give people an idea of what you are talking about...I still had a hard time seeing what they are claiming to see. Of course if they could have squeezed in half a dozen more horizontal dividers on the website, I might think it was all real. I think that dividers should be put between each sentence at least. If it is a longer sentence that uses a comma, one should throw a divider after the comma to be on the safe side... Some folks have a lot of spare time and an excess of imagination available. Reply -- since you actually asked: The photo of Suzy was taken with a TELEPHOTO LENS. and in color. Others were taken with 50 mm lens. OK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 28, 2003 Author #5 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Those are truly, sincerely, the worst pictures I have ever seen in my life. I have seen better aliens in porridge spots. Thank you for your efforts, though. You do not get it.... ANY photo of a real alien is priceless.... Because there aren't any others!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You want better? Go out yourself and wait 50 years... and still get nothing. Bonk!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naveed Posted November 28, 2003 #6 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Why is it when the researchers are taking pictures of each other on the expedition they look like great quality sharp color photographs from current 35 mm cameras, but the pictures of the creatures look like they came from an antique 19th century kodak black and white with a lens problem? Maybe the explosion of the hand held powder flash scared the little guys off. It looks to me like an ink blot test. It is pretty bad when you have to outline the thing in the picture to give people an idea of what you are talking about...I still had a hard time seeing what they are claiming to see. Of course if they could have squeezed in half a dozen more horizontal dividers on the website, I might think it was all real. I think that dividers should be put between each sentence at least. If it is a longer sentence that uses a comma, one should throw a divider after the comma to be on the safe side... Some folks have a lot of spare time and an excess of imagination available. Reply -- since you actually asked: The photo of Suzy was taken with a TELEPHOTO LENS. and in color. Others were taken with 50 mm lens. OK? That still doesn't explain why the photo is B&W. The type of lens doesn't affect that. Any REAL photographer knows that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 28, 2003 Author #7 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Phantom: You understand that on forums I am like Neo or Leo beset by 100 "Agent Smiths".... dig your avatar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 28, 2003 Author #8 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Readers should note that my alien photos were not taken of POSED SUBJECTS. Aliens do not pose for you. I never saw them. Camera did. OK??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naveed Posted November 28, 2003 #9 Share Posted November 28, 2003 As I stated on your "PG bigfoot carries babies" post in the crypto section, BAD EXCUSE! It's like nature/wildlife photography. Have your camera ready! Clear photos are possible. You couldn't defend yourself on that post, so how do you expect to now? Especially with everything else that was just revealed? And still it didn't answer why the photo is B&W. News for you M.F. Ppl don't appreciate frauds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Posted November 28, 2003 #10 Share Posted November 28, 2003 Phantom: You understand that on forums I am like Neo or Leo beset by 100 "Agent Smiths".... dig your avatar... Thank you for your kind words. You do not get it.... ANY photo of a real alien is priceless.... Because there aren't any others!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You want better? Go out yourself and wait 50 years... and still get nothing. I don't get it? Really, Jon-Erik, what makes you think your photos are real? Be honest now, it takes quite an open mind and squeezed eyes to see anything in it. You should really take a look at this thread and tell me what you make of that? Thank you for your time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snuffypuffer Posted November 29, 2003 #11 Share Posted November 29, 2003 All I see is a bunch of blurry nothingness. These are really just a bunch of horrible pictures of light and shadow seen through trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted November 29, 2003 #12 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Reply -- since you actually asked: The photo of Suzy was taken with a TELEPHOTO LENS. and in color. Others were taken with 50 mm lens. OK? That still doesn't explain why the photo is B&W. The type of lens doesn't affect that. Any REAL photographer knows that. I take photos all of the time with a 200 mm lens. It does make them more grainy/blurry at the higher zoom, but nowhere near the changes I see in these photos. I would love more than anything to find photos of actual cryptozoological critters/ET's, I consider myself to have an open mind. These photos just don't convince me at all. They are incredibly blurry, and without the suggestive outlines I wouldn't see much of anything at all. Even with the outlines on some of the pictures I think you have taken quite a bit of artistic license...Rorshack Test keeps coming to mind. I guess after 50 years of searching I'd see the same thing. I am not looking for little alien Glamourshots with the little critters posed on bear skin rugs with far too much makeup on; just something that can be seen without the power of suggestion being a factor. In my opinion those photos aren't going to be enough to convince anyone, even folks that are open to the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 29, 2003 Author #13 Share Posted November 29, 2003 As I stated on your "PG bigfoot carries babies" post in the crypto section, BAD EXCUSE! It's like nature/wildlife photography. Have your camera ready! Clear photos are possible. You couldn't defend yourself on that post, so how do you expect to now? Especially with everything else that was just revealed? And still it didn't answer why the photo is B&W. News for you M.F. Ppl don't appreciate frauds. Naveed: 1) YOU DO NOT GET IT. Aliens do not permit you to take photos of them. (bonk!) 2) Fraud? Naveed only go see http://www.beckjord.com/reply.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 29, 2003 Author #14 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Fluffy: Reg photoS taken of MASTER SCENE (GOT IT?) in 50 mm. Then CROPPED. Susie photo taken with 400 mm lens. Slide not cropped. Got it? To all: ALIENS USUALLY DO NOT LET YOu take photos -- They control you. MEMORIZE THIS.... Bonk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Posted November 29, 2003 #15 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Mr.Beckjord, please refrain from becoming insulting when people question you. No need for that. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjo Koolzooie Posted November 29, 2003 #16 Share Posted November 29, 2003 It looks like that red alien from the cantina scene in Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 29, 2003 Author #17 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Phantom: You understand that on forums I am like Neo or Leo beset by 100 "Agent Smiths".... dig your avatar... Thank you for your kind words. You do not get it.... ANY photo of a real alien is priceless.... Because there aren't any others!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You want better? Go out yourself and wait 50 years... and still get nothing. I don't get it? Really, Jon-Erik, what makes you think your photos are real? Be honest now, it takes quite an open mind and squeezed eyes to see anything in it. You should really take a look at this thread and tell me what you make of that? Thank you for your time. I would never dare to dispute Agent Smith. But... they are real. LIKE IT OR NOT. I went back there and took comparison shots. Aliens had moved. Please READ my site... http://www.beckjord.com/firstalienphotos OK -- also, use my real email.... seeker@stealthaccess.net Direct is best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 29, 2003 Author #18 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Mr.Beckjord, please refrain from becoming insulting when people question you. No need for that. Thank you. Not even a mini-bonk??? ( I think people ought to see my site, and maybe even visit the camping spot before letting loose with unfounded criticism.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted November 30, 2003 #19 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Fluffy: Reg photoS taken of MASTER SCENE (GOT IT?) in 50 mm. Then CROPPED. Susie photo taken with 400 mm lens. Slide not cropped. Got it? To all: ALIENS USUALLY DO NOT LET YOu take photos -- They control you. MEMORIZE THIS.... Bonk! I got it. The photos are still horribly fuzzy. I can't make anything out in nearly all of them. There are a couple of "Igor" that could be something, but even they look like old b/w video captures, not photos. That doesn't fit with your story you tell. I have been reading through your website. I will always give good consideration to anything that I find. I have to be candid, your site doesn't make me think that you are on the level. That is just my gut reaction, take it or leave it. The poor quality of the photos, and that fact that the critters have all been named like pets seem to be kind of odd. I don't know how to say this without being very rude so please forgive me but by the look of the site; the photos and its writing, I get the feeling of a bit of "wackiness" on your part. Kind of like Don Quixote goes on the search for bigfoot. I am sorry to say that, but I don't get much of a feeling of credibility by what I have seen so far. Creatures (2) TWO! - " Connie" and "Thom" (one editor, one writer) WITH KIDS ON THEM. Help me out here, "Connie and Thom" are bigfoot editors and writers? Where exactly did they go to school? Bigfoot Univeristy? Did they major in photographic evasion? With bigfoot on your staff, it seems like your 50 year search for proof may be over...a few company picnic photos, and there ya go-proof of bigfoot. They would probably end up as fuzzy as the rest of the photos though... They control you. You lost me on this one. The bigfoot control you? If they control you, how did you get the photos you have? Did they slip up and allow those photos? Can you explain this please? Are all bigfoot(bigfeet?) Aliens? Vice versa? Or is this spot in Northern California kind of like a Monster Island with all of the critters of lore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffybunny Posted November 30, 2003 #20 Share Posted November 30, 2003 I would never dare to dispute Agent Smith. I hate to sound really sheltered, but who is agent smith? A movie reference of some sort? TIA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naveed Posted November 30, 2003 #21 Share Posted November 30, 2003 As I stated on your "PG bigfoot carries babies" post in the crypto section, BAD EXCUSE! It's like nature/wildlife photography. Have your camera ready! Clear photos are possible. You couldn't defend yourself on that post, so how do you expect to now? Especially with everything else that was just revealed? And still it didn't answer why the photo is B&W. News for you M.F. Ppl don't appreciate frauds. Naveed: 1) YOU DO NOT GET IT. Aliens do not permit you to take photos of them. (bonk!) 2) Fraud? Naveed only go see http://www.beckjord.com/reply.html *BONK!* No you don't get the way a good photographer works. Anyways, animals don't let you photograph them either. A good photographer has the camera ready for when they get that brief moment to capture and animal on film. I think cryptozoological photography would be the same way. So quit feeding bull down our throats. *BONK* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mud Posted November 30, 2003 #22 Share Posted November 30, 2003 BUMP. they have a wild imagination ^ o^;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 30, 2003 Author #23 Share Posted November 30, 2003 All I see is a bunch of blurry nothingness. These are really just a bunch of horrible pictures of light and shadow seen through trees. Fortunately, several scientists and some researchers I respect, (not anonymous posters) do see them. Suggest you get an eye exam, or back AWAY FROM SCREEN AND VIEW. Sorry....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 30, 2003 Author #24 Share Posted November 30, 2003 BUMP. they have a wild imagination ^ o^;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; Yes, your name is MUD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster-Finder Posted November 30, 2003 Author #25 Share Posted November 30, 2003 As I stated on your "PG bigfoot carries babies" post in the crypto section, BAD EXCUSE! It's like nature/wildlife photography. Have your camera ready! Clear photos are possible. You couldn't defend yourself on that post, so how do you expect to now? Especially with everything else that was just revealed? And still it didn't answer why the photo is B&W. News for you M.F. Ppl don't appreciate frauds. Naveed: 1) YOU DO NOT GET IT. Aliens do not permit you to take photos of them. (bonk!) 2) Fraud? Naveed only go see http://www.beckjord.com/reply.html *BONK!* No you don't get the way a good photographer works. Anyways, animals don't let you photograph them either. A good photographer has the camera ready for when they get that brief moment to capture and animal on film. I think cryptozoological photography would be the same way. So quit feeding bull down our throats. *BONK* NO! Clear photos of ALIENS are not possible. where have you been? Do you actually think you can decide, "well, I'll go photograph an alien today..." and do it??? (mini-bonk). We get them by accident. By indirection. The photos are B&W by choice. B&W shows more than color in this effort. Sir, you need to do more reading and research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts