May 16 2007The ghostly Angel of the Vatican

'tis just a trick of the light

It is only a priest's cigarette smoke.

Can you say "photoshop"?

It looks more like Tinkerbell. So she got promoted?

wow, for a second there, i almost believed in god...almost.

someone went photoshop happy.

What strange times are these when everyone on the internet thinks themselves an expert on spotting digitally altered fakes, and can't come to terms with the distinct possibility that the photograph is unaltered, and merely captures the image of an optical illusion caused by refraction...

"Photoshop" is almost as bad of a catch-all insult in response to a photo as "gay" is. It's hardly applicable, not very clever, and horribly overused.

Yer right PRJ, thats totally a gay angel.

well, i guess now i have to believe in jesus.
i mean, what other logical explanation could there be for a blurry, slightly misshapen ball of light that vaguely resembles an angel, other than an actual angel? it's just logic people.
now if you'll excuse me, i have about 20 years worth of drug trafficking and illicit sex-acts to confess. i'm about to make some priest's day.

ya go to church peoople

Where is Brownians' take on all this? I think it is most likely a reflection off one of the many angel figures in the church, shining through some smoke from one of the sensors. Simple as that. Or, maybe god saw an opportunity to save some souls, and now Mr. Geekobiloba is now a tool. Thats right mutha f***a, I just called you a tool.

Look carefully at the close up picture...

The illusion is just rays of light from the windows that appear extremely bright inside because the photo was taken in such dark surroundings.

The 'head' of the 'Angel' is caused by some of the light hitting the side of that pillar to the right of the arched painting (tapestry?). The 'body' is the rest of the light hitting the wall behind.

And I agree with PRJ on this one, kids scream 'photoshop' at any unusual picture these days because they think it makes them seem informed and educated, whereas it really only demonstrates their lack of imagination.

It's not Photoshopped!

The guy used Corel or something!!!

Wow... tinkerbell had a boob job :)

Ok, I do believe in angels, but this is just a light trick. Walla is right.

It's real. Well, a real reflection anyway. I have quite a few shots of reflections inside the Vatican. The best ones I have are located here: http://blog.andylittle.org/photos/2007/05/vatican-angel.html

They don't really look like an angel, but really, there's so much reflective stuff inside the Basilica it's not surprising...

Am I the only one that thinks it looks like the ghost of a turtle.

yes, your the only one.

Wow, you guys really need Jesus. What if it wasn't a light trick, but an actual angel? What are you guys gonna say at heaven's gates when youre asked by God, "Why didnt you take that sign from Me as an invitation?"

whatever is it, corel, photoshop, a reflection, it sure is a beautiful photo.

how sad... we really DO need to beleive in something... (if you can't explain it, create a god thnx to whom all of it can be used to explain "it")
some smoke of candles burning, lots of dust & very tricky lightinlet into the church
+ if you know this story.... shame on the catholic ones !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilique_de_Notre_Dame_de_la_Paix

Photoshop? what? Haven't you ever heard of MS paint?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk2sPl_Z7ZU

it's my cum shot on the lens.

Just a puff of smoke in the light beam, nothing more.

Puffs of smoke don't behave like light. Look at the way the shape deforms, on what, and then esteem me highly for being better than everyone.

I think CAPS LOCK is right. It does seem to deform at exactly the places things in the background begin and end.

Wow, I love optical illusions, and this one is really nice! The setting is perfect and the colors are beautiful.

A+!

must be real.

The last place you'd find an angel would be the vatican

It's the misbegotten love-spawn of Caspar the ghost and Tinkerbell, with hydrocephalus.

it's just the way the light is hitting the objects inside the building, plus a more than likely shitty camera.

angels should be where they're in need
like iraq or something, im pretty sure the pope has got it covered there.

And she has a bust! it Is a female angel!

You are all delusional, have schizophrenia, and a mild case of The Clap.

I didn't know it was acceptable to smoke at church! That gives me more reason to go, other than the pastor's hot daughter.

lol it is a blonde angel XD Must have been stupid enough to get caught XD Meh. Not catholica anyway. Good old fashioned apparations for me ;)

Okay, how in the hell would that be a reflection?!

I actually believe that it is an angel, even if it isnt, that is still one gorgeous picture.

I think it interesting that so many people are so quick to dis-believe in something they do not now anything about more than what they see in the picture. Perhaps if any of you had any actual faith in anything other than money and porn, you'd see the beauty that is in this world and take it for face value.
As for the comment on where angels should be opposed to shouldn't be, Angels are anywhere and everywhere that God is venerated.

Am I the only one who thinks it's odd that this "angel"'s shoulder/side area on the left just happens to follow the edge of the pillar in the background exactly, making a sharp edge where everything else fades out?

Makes me think either altered, or dirt on the lense.

Some things in life don't need explanations, just people who will say things other than dicks and t***.

Anonymous: I need Jesus like I need a hole in the head.

Looks like Tinkerbell to me, too. Clap if you believe in fairies! Clap!

It is indd a bit of smoke hitting the light. I don't have to tell you what smoke does in church. anyway, they couldnt indd seen it at the moment they saw it.

Well shit... When FAGGOTRON says it "must be real," I guess it must! I'm a believer!

It's a streetlight.

I think that if this photo has not been altered in any way, then it is indeed an angel. If everyone believes it's real and it's not, what have we lost? But if it is real and everyone is making fun and boasting about being an atheist, I feel sorry for you come judgement day. Light reflections are real, sure, but do they resemble an angel AND inside of a church? Fantastic photograph and praise God

I got a great shot of what I'm pretty sure is Mr.Hanky when I took happy snaps in my toilet last night.. true!..
..jesus LOL

A gorgeous pictures? An angel? S.Peter? Christians?
For me is an alien from outta space. I live in Rome and the only ghost and monster that I saw in S.Peter were the savage christians,brrrrrrrrrrrr

Reality Check: Angels don't exist. It's either the way the light is hitting the wall or it's photoshopped. Er... I mean... Modified using the Adobe Photoshop (tm) software.

Angels don't exist? Dude you really need to read the bible. I guess nobody believes in UFOs either. Look up Roswell rods videos(objects flying in the thousands of miles per hour, Nasa tether incident, astronaut's conversations while orbiting the moon(back side) etc. Then say we are alone in this great big 'ol universe. If there are such things as ET's , why couldn't there be a God mighty enough to create all of this. There's a lot of info at our fingertips and most people are too close-minded to accept that just because we don't believe in something or understand something doesn't mean that it's not true. People fear what they do not understand. Not every picture or video on the internet has been edited or "photoshopped". Photoshop just ruins the validity for those of us who want to believe.....................

that looks really fake, like photoshop.

you people actually believe in angels and gods? the idiots are taking over.

Just looks like the light hitting the camera lens to me.

i think everyone is completely missing one little bit of information...
how the hell does a retired police officer of 48! pay for a trip to rome. im calling shinnanigans.

Lens flare. But if lens flare, or reflections, or smoke can make us think about angels, especially given the context in which the photograph was taken, then amen.

and i don't think this 48 year old is good enough to photoshop at that quality, it looks like it is actually there with the smuddging round the edges

I think you are all missing what is truly terrifying here.

http://img.waffleimages.com/50f3f478a462d31de76ccfbec16c59950e8d14db/ChurchRaptor.jpg

that photo is obviously paintbrushed

You people actually DON'T believe in angels and God? Why, the idiots ARE taking over! I don't think that at all, I just get sick of people yelling about how atheist and awesome they are. Believe whatever the hell you want to believe, just don't drag me into it...

*cough* That aside, I don't think this is an angel. I'm no angel expert, but from what I've read, they don't really look like overweight Tinkerbells.

Down with photoshop.

Anonymous, my response to god if I were somehow to show up at the pearly gates would be dependant on whether he was as blurry and vague as the 'angel' here is.

If he wasn't blurry, I'd ask why the hell he couldn't make an angel in focus.

If he was blurry, I'd probably think I was not in heaven, but in fact, at Lenscrafters.

Either way, I'd tell him to shove the scratch-resistant coating up his ass.

**Golf Clap
Sweet, even over a week later with 57 previous comments Brownian still manages to elicit a laugh from me with completely original material. You know what that means? It means it really IS an angel. Because only stuff that is true can get the best laughs. Like Bushies idiocy or ummmm, cancer. All funny funny stuff.

And I share the exact same sentiments a Dii-chan, in that far too many athiests think being athiest means you have to attack others and shove what they 'believe' or what their more popular people who they are copying are telling them to say and think. Many Many athiests have LOW LOW IQ's yet have the audacity to spew the words 'rational' and 'logical', yet have no ability to debate their stance that those who aren't proclaimed to be athiest are idiots. If you can't put forth original intelligent arguments of your own on the subject, unless you are asked keep your athiesm off my leg. And by athiesm, I mean.................**ding-dong** uh oh someones at the door, gotta go.

if that's an angel, then god must be peter pan (and hook the devil)

Photoshop for sure. It could be done in less than 5 mins.

Am I the only here that is truly terrified of Raptors? Think about it, after all according to this http://www.christiananswers.net/dinosaurs/j-where2.html the dinosaurs existed in biblical times. They could easily come back to haunt our Roman Catholic churches and possibly other venues of faith (or chili cook-offs).

Better start preparing now, I think it is the four Raptors of the apocalypse I hear coming.

I'll take a neutral side.

-I noticed a major light source on the left side, in the middle, its obviously a window with sun beaming in. However, if there is a light source of such on the opposing side, or even behind the picture taker, that would mean the bright object we see could very well be a reflective issue.

-However, if that is the only light source (left, middle) then a reflection of someones watch, or another camera would come into play. I'm no photography expert, but what this appears to be is a bending of light (Or, the trumpet of the angle) on the pillar, followed by second reflection on the back wall.

- As you'll notice, under the trumpet (most extending part of the apparatus), there is a sharp line, which is cased by the pillar (should be obvious to most).

you all need to read your bibles you satinits

no you need to read your bible suck it

no you need to read your bible suck it

you all suck

you all suck

Oh noes, the satinists are invading! Have at you, satin worshipers! The power of wool compels you!

Angel or not, it has a pretty big rack.

Raptors.

All Glory, Honor and Praise To Our LORD JESUS CHRIST..It is an Angel of Course it is..

it may not be an "angel" in the sense that it was a spirit or something of that nature but maybe it meant something to the person or someone who saw the picture. angel in the sense of it being a visual "sign".

Maybe you don't believe in Jesus as your Savior but you shouldn't doubt the existence of God.

But I think the beauty of the picture has been lost by people wanting to analyze, because if it's "photoshopped" or not, it's an interesting picture.

I copied the image, and using PSP, enlarged it., and what I found was amazing. At the top of the picture, I discovered a man-like figure with an awesome erection.
Wow! Can you believe it?
Must be the angel's rack

O mi god the end its near!!!! Its the first angel of the Apocalypto the one the apears to the mayan cops...

I bet they did the trick with windows 3.0 paint!

It's the light hitting a scratch in the lens.

I think it's funny how the religious people in here are being just as discriminatory as the Atheists, talk about hypocrites.

angels have big boobies aparently!

I viewed this photo with a completely open mind and no interest in debunking it. But it only took a couple of seconds to discern that the illusion of a head is created by an abstract shape from a shaft of light being interrupted by a pillar. Once you recognize this element of the image, it becomes obvious that the apparent breast shape is created in conjunction with it. At this point, no mystery remains.

In response to one observer who is forlorn at the prospect of disenchantment and asks, “Couldn't it be an actual angel?” the answer is no; not because the simple explanation is easier to accept, but because it’s clearly the correct one.

unstablemind said:

I feel sorry for you on judgement day.

Let's hope God's not a stickler on spelling...

i dont care what none of these comments
say but thats a angel and all of u who say
its not go 2 hell

Not enough for me...in my bible readings which are daily, everytime they mention that someone saw an angel it was either in a dream or in person and when they saw them in person, it looked like another person but with some glow to it and here all I see is a blur.