Battle: Los Angeles (2011)

[Ezechiel]

Stanton Friedman:
My preferred reason for alien visitations is to quarantine us to make sure we don’t take our brand of friendship – usually described as hostility – out there.

If aliens are occasionally checking up on the local natives (us), at some point in our technological evolution they have to intervene and turn the clock back a couple thousand years






Cool premise Can't wait for the movie !!!

 

[spacebrother]

This has always been a super cool picture. I have never seen anyone discuss the provenance of it though I have seen some dubious (actually just plain stupid) "analysis" of what was at the confluence of the lights.

It was taken by a news photographer for the LA Times I believe.

 

[NTS]

What may be the original published version of the picture is here:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/32/Battle_of_Los_Angeles_LATimes.jpg

The caption appears to read:

"SEEKING OUT 'OBJECT' -- Scores of searchlights built a wigwam of light beams over Los Angeles early yesterday morning during the alarm[?]. This picture taken during black-out shows nine beams converging on an 'object' in sky in Culver City area. The blobs of light which glow at apex of beam angles were made by anti-aircraft shells."

I suggest you look at the caption for yourself though since my eyes got a little fuzzy trying to read it!

Wikipedia also cites "An Office of Air Force History" report that "evidence points to meteorological balloons as the cause of the initial alarm"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angeles

 

[Jay]

This has always been a super cool picture. I have never seen anyone discuss the provenance of it though I have seen some dubious (actually just plain stupid) "analysis" of what was at the confluence of the lights.

Someone should have told George Lucas that as well.

 

[samsnake]

Hi

Question....

why do the light beams stop at the object?

Maybe it is touched_up.

Shame, cause I really like the image and the account

Great show and forum btw

 

[justcurious]

Hi

Question....

why do the light beams stop at the object?

Because they enter the cloud layer.

 

[justcurious]

In 2009 there was a reconstitution of the search lights of the LA battle over Paris, by artist Michel de Broin, as part of the "Nuits Blanches" festival. Great show... with the biggest disco ball in the world, 25 feet in diameter !

 

[Kandinsky]

I would not be surprised if the image was altered.

I tend to agree. The image is old and it's too late for any definitive analysis. It's a popular image and some cite it as evidence of UFO activity...as in ET. It remains a UFO, but perhaps it's also a UPI?

Unidentified photographic incident.

If you look for any contemporary images of WWII searchlights in action, it's difficult to find any that share the saturated B&W contrast of this famous picture.

An example from Malta 43...

 

[justcurious]

The footage isn't convincing either, but it is interesting that it's the first time that the military used the weather-balloon explanation on a UFO event.

 

[NTS]

The photo in the original newspaper looks the same as the enlarged version. If the link to the newspaper image is accurate, any retouching must have been done shortly after the picture was taken. lancemoody says this was a common practice though and the idea that it might have been a UFO incident didn't come along until later. Whoever handled the photo probably had no idea it would be famous.

 

[justcurious]

The photo in the original newspaper looks the same as the enlarged version. If the link to the newspaper image is accurate, any retouching must have been done shortly after the picture was taken. lancemoody says this was a common practice though and the idea that it might have been a UFO incident didn't come along until later. Whoever handled the photo probably had no idea it would be famous.

Putting the image in negative makes the idea that it was retouched very unlikely IMO, especially using "a dark pen", or any other techniques available at the time, which where to draw, paint or cut and paste by hand on the print itself.

​

Bruce Maccabee gives an interesting analysis of the picture :

The fact that the beams basically do not get past the "object" (there is some
faint evidence of beams above the object), whatever was at the beam convergence
must have been optically quite dense. If there was a lot of smoke swirling around
the volume of air illuminated by the beams, I would expect to see variations
in bream brightness (brighter where there was smoke). There are variations,
but they are uniform and agree with the distance (from the searchlight) and
width of the beam. That is, the variations are consistent with each beam getting
dimmer as it travels away from the searchlight. IF there were smoke within
any beam it should cause an increase in scattered light where there
is smoke (which is how we see the beams anyway... light bounced or
scattered from dust or smoke particles in the air).
The beams are quite bright before they reach the "object" and zero or nearly
zero afterward. Just how much optical density of smoke this requires I do not know.
However, certainly a solid metallic object would be sufficient to block the beams.

Bruce Maccabee : THE BATTLE OF LOS ANGELES <----- very concise and to the point, worth a read.