Witness image taken on a cell phone. MUFON database.
Related Articles
A 12-year-old Arizona girl was getting the mail when she spotted a UFO hovering over her neighborhood street and snapped two images with her cell phone camera, according to testimony from the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) database.
The mother states that her daughter snapped the first photo where the object appears to hover above the street. In the second photo, the object is moving away and has tiled.
Following is the unedited report filed by the child's mother.
AZ, May 2009 - round squart object flat on bottom with thicker midsection and tapering top. MUFON Case # 19210.
My 12 year old daughter went to check the mail box and as she walked outside our house she witnessed floating above our street a round object not too far in the distance. she quickly grabed her cell phone in her pocket and snapped off two photos.
This happened on a school day approximately around May 2009 around 430 to 530 pm. Sorry, I do not remember the exact dates.
Photo: The object is moving away at this point and has tiled. MUFON database.
What is interesting is she managed to capture the object as it tilted and moved off. You can see the landmarks of the houses and the trees to get a distance measurement and size approximation of the object.
she was very excited when she showed me the pictures. I think the whole event lasted only for a few seconds
Look at the second attached photo first The object should be seen stationary Entitled ufo jpg.
The other photo entitled ufo 1.bmp should be the object moving away from the camera over the trees. I had a little difficulty downloading the images
Photo: Cropped and enlarged piece of the first image that shows the object that was hovering over the street. MUFON database.
If you do clean them up I would like to see them, please
I hope thiis is helpful to your investigations
EDITOR'S NOTE: New Jersey MUFON Field Investigator Kristen Winslet examined the two photos submitted with this report. Her opinion? "It's a hoax." Below are Winslet's explanation illustrations.
Comments
If her phone is automatically updated with date/time there should be that information in the photo files Exif data. Original file in any case should be given to a qualified researcher, MUFON or otherwise, with standard assurances of exclusivity.
Because of the low resolution, their statements are important to have with specific details.
ZG
I would have to agree. the only credible explanation of a HOAX would come from the photo data. Low resolution photos can have all kinds of strange anomalies and pixelations but it does not mean it is photoshopped. Its really just a bad photo. The word HOAX has been used a bit to much to explain sightings of late and needs to be checked before assuming. That is almost as bad as saying this is an alien space craft unless there is proof.
According to the child and mother, this was a 'big' even and the little girl was very excited! How then could one 'not recall' the date/day of the sighting ???? As one observer noted its easily checked on the cell phone itself at any time.
I would have to say 'nope' to this girls claim mainly because the details of a normally once in a lifetime event would not be forgotten so easily for both mother and child.
LOOKS REAL TO ME, SPECIALLY THE SECOND ONE. MAKES A GOOD SET.
Some people will reject every possible picture existing in this universe and the others.
I'm a Mufon Field investigator, and a digital producer since 1983. I have great reservations about this so called hoax evidence. Someone does not know digital well enough and is interpreting CCD pixel smearing for edit. If you simply look at all the other trees and discreet objects you will see the exact same effect. With such markers it would seem they faked the street, trees and houses too? Would love to educate on this. Contact me through MUFON.
It's important I am contacted by the investigator. This is a visual opinion, but it is far from conclusive. Again, there is an explanation for what you think you see in the low resolution. I see it every day and know the technical pathology of this effect. Hold off on closing this case. Contact me and I will discuss this with you.
It's important I am contacted by the investigator. This is a visual opinion, but it is far from conclusive. Again, there is an explanation for what you think you see in the low resolution. I see it every day and know the technical pathology of this effect. Hold off on closing this case. Contact me and I will discuss this with you.
Hey, the child saw something and took a pic...she did a good job...
I've always have said that the best UFO picture will be taken by a teenager with a cell phone. My first thought is picture taken on a street in car through the window. Cracks in the windshield can produce some awesome looking UFO's. E-mail me at Houston MUFON and I will show you mine or go outside to your own car and take a picture of a crack in the window looking skyward. Instant UFO. The only problem I have with this theory with this picture, is the UFO or crack looks like it moved. Or the person repositioned themself in the car and took a picture of the crack again. That's doable.
Sweet
www.top10ufo.com
I always wonder why the first thing some do is go on the defence and discredit the evidence, what are they worried about? No wonder we still live in the dark.
Its funny because everyone screams hoax when a picture of a UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) surfaces on the net and then the 'experts' get hold of them and confirm this. My question is how do we know the 'experts' are 'experts'?
Take for example a well known NASA 'expert' that frequents the internet defending NASA at any given opportunity. This person is labelled as an 'expert' yet it has been proved countless of times that NASA have lied to the general public about anomolies in space. Ice crystal, parallax,swamp gas and of course venus are the favourites to use to describe these strange sightings.
Is it not time that the general public are told the whole truth in order to prepare us for what is coming? The people of this world have a right to know that their existence on this planet has more purpose than they realise.
sorry folks. again not rocket science. It is a blimp. look at the features, look at the structure,even the form of the pixals. Very nice photo. Nice job by the young lady
I do graphics and I don't understand how it is that a pixelated object & pixelation in the background automatically means that it's FAKE. The variance in the schmegma around the UFO object could be a number of other things. To me that's not an automatic indicator. Anyone else out there do graphics? What do you think?
Unclear images.
Hoax or not, they lack resolution so they are of little value.
Why do we always have to categorize everything. Is it real or hoax? Why can't we reserve our judgment and hold in a "we'll see" formation or a "that's interesting" take?. Or perhaps rate each case on it's plausibility.
Young girl really doesn't give a hoot about these things, sees something cool, snaps shots, tells mom ya gotta see this. Mom is passively interested in young uneducated adolescent's antics, looks at pics says cool but a little blurry can't really tell what is there loses interest. Then interest is rekindled a little later perhaps after certain people see pics then memory is vague. Child and mother not sure or didn't think to retrieve date on past files. Perhaps deleted or uploaded then erased from original source.
To me this seems fairly plausible and very nice to see different types of movement in two separate photos of same ufo. This doesn't seem like the demographic that would fabricate a hoax. Anyone know a 13 year old girl whose into ufo's??
Now... don't misunderstand this to say that I am an 'expert' in graphics. There are wayyyyyy too many desk'perts already.
But for what it is worth, I looked over the same images and found no overlapping pixels, no unacceptable color gradients... and nothing that would make this an out-n-out 'fake'.
It is easy... especially for those who DO fake images, to look at a genuine photo and label it a hoax because... well, they COULD do that same thing. But not every good image IS a hoax and not everyone who offers one, a desk'pert' hoaxer.
None of us are smart enough these days to do that kind of forensics. Not those that hang here, anyway. The state of the art of graphics has overrun the state of the expert.
...
Okay I was a UFO buff at 13 and I'm a girl so its not impossible. But than my dad was an astronomer and I had an observatory in the backyard. Be that as it may maybe if we treat this as a good catch (not saying ufo), it will inspire this young girl to be interested in math and sciences. And make a career at of it. On the otherhand, if we slam her for bad picture or fake picture, we could for all time discourage her from having anything to do with UFO's. Futhermore, she took alot better picture than alot of adults do! At least it was not some blurry light in the night sky! Basically guys lets not eat our young.
Kristen did a good job at presenting her take on what she sees as a faked result - However, I have spent months teasing what I can from many ufo images from different sources - My own, included - and I have noticed that many have a pixelated haze or field around the object. Perhaps it is some kind of electrical or lighting effect that can cause a specific area around the 'craft' to look different.
I agree 100% with Garret Moore. I too have examined the original posted photos and cannot see any definitive proof of a hoax. While the crappy pictures in this article appear to have a rectangular block of pixelation around the UFO, a closer examination of the original photos shows a wider irregular pattern of pixelation which can be expected from a crappy cell phone camera. This same pixelation is on the trees in the left and right sides of the picture and on the wall on the right side of the picture, yet no one calls that a hoax, nor should they. I would need more info about the camera and more sample shots of similar images from this camera before I would dismiss this as a hoax. For now, I’d have to say this looks genuine and unaltered.
It is odd though, that the exact date is not known when both the cell phone and the picture file itself should have a record of the date the picture was taken.
I agree 100% with Garret Moore. I too have examined the original posted photos and cannot see any definitive proof of a hoax. While the crappy pictures in this article appear to have a rectangular block of pixelation around the UFO, a closer examination of the original photos shows a wider irregular pattern of pixelation which can be expected from a crappy cell phone camera. This same pixelation is on the trees in the left and right sides of the picture and on the wall on the right side of the picture, yet no one calls that a hoax, nor should they. I would need more info about the camera and more sample shots of similar images from this camera before I would dismiss this as a hoax. For now, I’d have to say this looks genuine and unaltered.
It is odd though, that the exact date is not known when both the cell phone and the picture file itself should have a record of the date the picture was taken.
whoops! DON'T hit the refresh button after posting a message. You'll get a duplicate post, hahahahahaha
Kristen Winslet is wrong and should listen to Garret Moore, but remember this is ONLY her opinion.
I don't think she's a very good investigator.
OK, here's an explanation. In low resolution imaging, each pixel must determine its color and gamma by calculating the value and comparing it to it's next neighbor. When there is a gradation the processor has to follow some rules for its display to keep the file and it's processing small. With only 320 X 240 pixels to go around a gradation will have a value that will inevitably fall between or must follow the value scale of it's next neighboring. That causes the gradation to abruptly end because there are not enough values to represent the gradation, and to preserve the file size. All this is done in square areas of calculation because you have square pixels. So what we end up seeing are a darker square against a lighter one or vice-versa. You notice the pixels under the object? That is often seen in UFO photos where very slight colors from some energy-based propulsion changes the refractive index of the air. But the very subtle colors cant be represented as anything but boxy tones
Hello:
I happen to be the one who posted this UFO sighting. First of all I am a man and it was my 12 year old daughter who took the cell phone picture. it was not her mother who reported it to Mufon.
Second IT IS NOT A HOAX as Kirsten Winslet suggests. The reason for the pixelization is simply it is a cell phone camera and it doesn't have high resolution. It was a hot sunny Phoenix, Arizona summer day, bright and reflective. My 12 year old daughter managed to capture some stange object with quick thinking and fast reflexes. I'm proud of her and she managed to keep her cool.
What is really lousy is the way Ms. Winslet manages with pseudo science to debunk the photo and she must not have contacted Mufon's field investigator in Phoenix for confirmation. I know the field investigator in Phoenix for Mufon was a true gentelman and professional Did Ms. Winslet bother to confirm with him or contact me thru the Phoenix Field office. I would have been happy to talk to her.
Hi i'm the 12 year old girl who took the photo. I promise this isn't a hoax! The only reason i dont have the date and time was because i deleted the photo. I had sent it to my dad beforehand but then felt embaressed and deleted it. So he later sent it to mufon.Kristen winslet is wrong this is not a hoax. Oh and thank you for the nice comments. If any one has any questions you can email me at chiantiaz@yahoo.com
You can't prove it is real and you can't prove it is not real. It is simply one more piece of possible evidence to add the already existing mountain of evidence that is before our eyes. It is your choice as to what you wish to do when confronted with this evidence. Free you mind and the rest will follow.
it was taken with a cell phone so of course the photo will be blurry. i think the kid did a good job. i think its real.
Jeff Z. and Chianti - Thanks for reporting your sighting and I'd like to hear more about it in the future. My apologies to you and to my readers if anyone thought that Kristen Winslet's opinion was an official MUFON opinion. Kristen is an excellent and valued MUFON investigator in NJ, and this was simply an opinion on the photo. It is not the official MUFON statement, which will come from the state director. Jeff - you can reach me directly at tremontavenue@gmail.com.
I wouldn't get too upset about one UFO investigator's opinion, as I don't think many investigators out there are very good. They overlook the obvious, and are incapable of uncovering the unobvious.
it could be heat off the ship that would defect light like that .
whos analysis is this suppose to be?
i dont think it looks like photoshop.
do yall?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!