There have been claims of mysterious flying saucers carrying alien creatures for over sixty years now, but very few supposed witnesses have ever taken pictures or filmed these craft. Now that cameraphones and smartphone are becoming ubiquitous, will we see a flood of UFO images, or a drought of UFO sightings? Krisse investigates!
Read on in the full article.
Nice article krisse, quite insightful of you!
It's actually quite topical for me at the moment... I was abducted by aliens just yesterday and I DID have my E90 with me. The only problem was that by the time the sluggish Camera application loaded up, they'd taken me to their UFO, probed me, then set me back down on solid ground before zipping away in a flash of light.
One can only hope that the upcoming firmware update for the E90 includes a 'UFO friendly' upgrade to the Camera application that drastically reduces the time it takes to start! 😊
LOL godeassi! 😊
Well done godeassi! You have just provided a new excuse that can be used for not taking a photograph. hehe...
Cool article to see on this site, in a general sense, regardless of the article contents it's nice to see variety!
I think a couple of your main arguments are spot on - CGI stuff and thus hoaxes are easier, and phone cams are for now lower quality. Fair enough.
Where I take issue is with this comment:
> This writer doesn't believe we will see any increase in photos of alien spacecraft, because there aren't any alien spacecraft to photograph.
Uhhh, right. You're getting that from where exactly? From the disinformation tripe that's been trotted out in the mass media for the last 60 years? O...K....
You obviously do not realise that amongst the huge amounts of nonsense that has been spouted and displayed on this subject over decades, and that everyone is quite right to be totally sceptical of, there is vast, solid evidence of ET contact with this planet, both through official channels and independently. There is also very solid evidence of a mass coverup of this. Independently of either of these facts (which have come to light through documented, verified testimony from documented, verified military and civilian "insiders"😉, is that a great deal of evidence produced by the public has been left unexplained - or rather quite often can only be explained in ways many people don't want to face up to.
The reality of this situation is fairly widely known about globally in official circles, and stuff does leak out. The question is, ultimately, "can you handle the truth?". Many people can't - ridicule is a safety mechanism. The general public, in a very general sense, are the only ones who don't know what's going on. Mass coverups are entirely possible by the way - the Manhatten Project (nukes in WW2) was kept secret for many years, as was the fact we (the Brits) had broken the Enigma code during WW2. The CIA released a document under FOIA a few years ago stating it has assets (i.e. people secretly on the CIA payroll) controlling stories in ALL non-minor media outlets in Western countries, and that this programme had been very successful - this was in the 90's.
If you genuinely want to become educated in this area, and bypass the nonsense, start with disclosureproject.org - probably the most trustworthy site. Many other UFO sites and groups have disinformation people active in them, to seed nonsense and confuse the issue. projectcamelot.org also have a noble effort, though some of the stuff is pretty far out to unfamiliar ears, and the testimonies aren't as rigorously verified as the Disclosure Project, but if you cross reference the stuff with other sources, it is generally solid and reliable too.
You're probably now thinking "Aha, I thought this story would bring out the loonies!" but all I can say is, become a truly open minded sceptic rather than a closed minded one, and choose your sources carefully. You might be suprised...
Alex
1. In that last paragraph, I was very careful to say that in my OPINION there would be no photos of UFOs. I didn't say it was a certainty, and I didn't claim any kind of supporting evidence. It's simply that in my experience I've never seen anything convincing about the existence of alien spacecraft. I could be totally wrong, and if I am wrong we should see a huge increase in the number of UFO pictures and videos taken on cameraphones over the next few decades.
2. Yes, government cover-ups are indeed possible. The decoding of Enigma at Bletchley Park is a very good example as it involved lots of people and was kept completely 100% secret until one senior officer was permitted to publish his memoirs about it in the 1970s. However, the Bletchley Park decoding took place entirely inside a secure government building full of trusted government employees, whereas alien spacecraft (if they exist) appear in the skies above public land ready to be photographed by absolutely anyone.
3. Yes, ridicule is a coping mechanism for many people, but that doesn't mean that everything ridiculed is undeserving of ridicule.
4. Disclosureproject.org and other similar sites' evidence seems to consist almost entirely of witness statements and theories, but witness statements and theories by themselves don't provide proof that anything has happened. The point of my article is that if everyone has an internet-linked camera with them all the time, we won't need witness statements, we should have pictures and videos of whatever they've seen. If they don't take pictures and videos and then distribute them, we will be forced to ask why not.
5. Disclosureproject.org and other similar sites say they want to get the truth out, but charge $25 each for DVDs and books of the truth. They heavily advertise these merchandise all over their website. If all they want to do is raise the alarm, wouldn't it be more effective to upload it all onto file sharing sites and let as many people as possible see this material for free? The only rational explanation is that the true motive of these sites is to milk people interested in this topic for every cent they can get.
"The reality of this situation is fairly widely known about globally in official circles, and stuff does leak out. "
Can you give an example from a neutral source of an important government official stating that aliens have visited this planet?
But I thought the UFOs usually resulted in electrical appliances failing to work. That being the case, your phone isn't going to be much use is it...
Mine tend to reboot from time to time even when there are no UFOs present. I bet you would get a radio has crashed failure if a UFO turned up. And by the time it rebooted...
Zuber
I always thought UFO were unidentified frozen objects. Stuff put in the freezer which looses its label and be comes unknown...
I think the point is well made though camera phones are every where now. The most obvious sign of this is when you got to a concert and everyone is waving their phone about.
Your essay made some good points, and I enjoyed this: "The main argument sceptics currently use against the existence of UFOs is the lack of physical evidence, but this is unsatisfactory as aeroplanes rarely leave any physical sign of their presence, yet they definitely exist."
However, as already commented, be careful about throwing-in your opinion about a rare aerial phenomena.
There is too much data out there to dismiss so readily.
Without even bring up "coverups" from governmental organizations, consider the testimonies from professional pilots and astronauts, if you don't want to give any credibility to the 1000s of ordinary people who had a close encounter of one kind or other with a UFOs and perhaps even their occupants.
Also, you might have mentioned something about the much discussed NASA films, which is within the realm of your topic. Although some of the supposed "UFOs" on those films may be merely lens debris or due to concurrent lens adjustments, there are other objects in those films that move quite unexpectedly in a space environment that have yet to be properly explained.
There are no aliens.
Even the ones in Star Trek are just people dressed up to look alien.
You all waste my time with this nonsense.
The article though raises an interesting question, will we see more UFO photos. My guess is yes simply because more cameras = more pictures taken.
"However, as already commented, be careful about throwing-in your opinion about a rare aerial phenomena."
You be careful about throwing-in your opinion that there's proof of UFOs.
I haven't seen any proof, and everyone on this thread that I ask for this proof just says it's out there without citing any.
"There is too much data out there to dismiss so readily."
Give me one specific piece of information which indicates aliens have visited earth. A specific piece of actual data, not some website address or witness statement.
"consider the testimonies from professional pilots and astronauts"
That's definitely enough to make the subject worth investigating, and that's why I respect people interested in this topic, but it's still not enough to prove anything.
If someone who seems trustworthy says they saw a murder, that would get the police to investigate.
But unless the police find a body, or body parts, or proof that someone is missing, or photos/video of the murder, no trial could possibly take place because there would be no evidence that a crime had even happened.
Testimonies alone are never proof of anything, they're just a starting point.
"if you don't want to give any credibility to the 1000s of ordinary people who had a close encounter of one kind or other with a UFOs and perhaps even their occupants."
The example I gave of the people seeing the giant diamond being transported away by helicopters... that's the kind of thing I want to see on video, but it never is on video, it's always just a witness claiming they saw it and didn't have a camera. That was plausible in 1980 but it's less and less plausible today.
If there are literally thousands of people who have close encounters with UFOs, over the next decades as cameraphones spread throughout the population we should see more and more close-up pictures and videos of UFOs appearing on the internet.
But as far as I know we're not seeing them. The only UFO videos I've seen have been of lights in the sky, which isn't what I'd call a close encounter.
If you can point me towards any videos which actually show creatures and/or alien craft I'd love to see them.
"there are other objects in those films that move quite unexpectedly in a space environment that have yet to be properly explained."
Again, interesting and worth investigating, but still no proof of any aliens. It just implies there's some unexplained lights in space, which may be due to unknown natural phenomena.
Pulsars and atmospheric sprites are examples of phenomena in space which seemed strange but turned out to be natural.
"But I thought the UFOs usually resulted in electrical appliances failing to work. That being the case, your phone isn't going to be much use is it..."
EM pulses are real of course, nuclear explosions give them off, but I think they permanently disable electronic equipment. The disabled phone would itself be physical evidence that the witness was near a very strong source of EM waves. As far as I know it's not the sort of thing you can fake easily without specialist knowledge.
"I always thought UFO were unidentified frozen objects. Stuff put in the freezer which looses its label and be comes unknown..."
Yeah, the worst thing is when you don't have anything else to eat and wonder if the unlabelled frozen stuff is still safe. I've tried those freezer pens but they just seem to smudge.
The Universe has millions of stars, the planets revolving around them would count up to billions, the probability of intellingent life on 1 of those, 2 of those or even hundred of those planets is pretty high. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets proved that intelligent life exists on other planets.
but....
I feel the coverup stories are plain rubbish, what would a govt. get out of covering up a phenomenon like this.
Krisse,
Quite apart from all the opinions for against the existence of aliens you have a couple of suppositions in your article which don't hold water.
Firstly you are fooling yourself if you believe that more than 1% of the camera phone owners out there know how to upload pictures from their phone to an internet site. Many of those who could figure out the process if they could be bothered don't have accounts set up on the relevant web services because they rely on transfering media to and from a PC via USB.
Secondly, the fact that many people now carry camera phones does NOT mean that there should be more pictures and videos of UFOs.
Nearly all sightings which are reported in the press or on the internet reference moving lights in the night sky or objects moving erratically during daylight hours but at high altitude.
Have you ever tried taking a picture of a high flying aeroplane with a camera phone? The average camera phone is still in the 1 - 2 MPx range, not nearly enough definition to take this kind of picture. Without an optical zoom I suspect you would be lucky if there was anything visible on the image at all.
I'll test this theory by taking a 5Mpx image of a flying plane tomorrow and seeing what comes out.
Thirdly, (and I know this will contradict my second point a little but bear with me) there HAS been an increase in the number of UFO pictures taken because of the widespread use of camera phones. I am not a big UFO enthusiast so I cannot quote a lot of examples but there was an incident in April of this year in which several dozen people in North London simultaneously reported a number of unusual lights hovering and moving in the sky. Many of these people called the police and emergency services because they were so worried by what they were seeing. There were also reports from police officers and other "officially trained observers".
This sighting was reported in the papers at the time and a number of camera phone pictures were published in a side bar. Of course they were all very blurry and unedifying - precisely the sort of picture that you would say doesn't prove anything.
My guess is that there actually are more pictures being taken but that most of them are rubbish. There isn't really any way to know because most people would rather not expose themselves to ridicule by reporting a UFO sighting.
A video of the sighting taken by an amateur camera man can be found here
Note that as per my second point above, this footage was taken on a real camcorder rather than a camera phone and the unidentified objects still only show as points of light.
Aliens are sensitive to phone radio frequencies, so be careful.
That said, your silly nokia phones cant compare to the superior professional quality camera in the iPhone.
"Firstly you are fooling yourself if you believe that more than 1% of the camera phone owners out there know how to upload pictures from their phone to an internet site."
At the moment maybe, but the same could have been said about mobile phone use in general when it was a new thing, and indeed cameras when they were a new thing. People learn to operate devices, and devices become easier to operate.
Give it five or ten years and most phones will make it a matter of just clicking an "upload" option from the photo gallery. This is already how you send multimedia messages, just select a photo and click "send".
And places like YouTube already offer easy ways to upload from phones:
"Secondly, the fact that many people now carry camera phones does NOT mean that there should be more pictures and videos of UFOs. Nearly all sightings which are reported in the press or on the internet reference moving lights in the night sky or objects moving erratically during daylight hours but at high altitude."
I think you misunderstand the point I was trying to make.
As you say, lights in the sky are just too distant for cameras to ever be of any use. I totally agree that cameraphones will have little impact on the study of such things.
I said at the beginning that I was using the term UFO in its popular sense, to mean alien craft. I wasn't using the term to mean unidentified flying objects in general, but objects where the witness can see that they're clearly not a natural phenomenon or a known type of aircraft.
The kind of UFOs I mean are the ones in the example I gave at the beginning, where people witness them at close range and they're clearly artificial flying craft of a mysterious origin.
If the people in the Texan example I gave had had cameraphones, they could have taken pictures of that giant floating diamond which would have been very very interesting (assuming they did actually witness such a thing).
The article is meant to be about people who claim to see UFOs at close range, but later claim they didn't have a camera so we only have their word for it.
"That said, your silly nokia phones cant compare to the superior professional quality camera in the iPhone."
Macboy, you already told us in previous posts that the iPhone's selling point is its interface, not its hardware features.