Alien investigator and UFO-hunter Scott C Waring was impressed by a 15-year-old photo of what is supposed to be a bipedal extraterrestrial. The bizarre photo, dated May 10, 2004, was snapped in the Parque Forest in Santiago, Chile, by German Pereira. The now infamous picture has been at the heart of conspiracy theory debates since it was taken nearly two decades ago. Mr Waring, who runs the blog ET Database, shared the picture online in a bid to spread what he said is a “historical sighting of an alien”.
The self-titled UFOlogist said: “Let’s try to zoom in on the little fella.
“I was wondering myself, is this a squirrel? Because I’ve seen squirrels in videos standing up on end, standing up on two back legs, and to me, if it’s a squirrel it has no tail. It has no tail.
“And it doesn’t look like a squirrel to me. It doesn’t look like a squirrel.
“It could be a rat but I don’t think rats have that long legs. I see rats all the time when I’m exercising at the park – they don’t look like that.”
On May 10, 2004, Mr Pereira took 10 snapshots of mounted police or Carabineros on patrol in the forest.
The photos were snapped in the afternoon hours, around 5.40pm local time, using a low shutter speed and zoom, which explains the blurriness.
At the time, Mr Pereira said he was so impressed by his discovery he shared his pictures with the public.
He said: “I would like to know the true nature of the image that appears in it and if anyone has ever caught anything similar in a photo.”
Countless UFO enthusiast and so-called truthers have since analysed the photos to crack the mystery of the unidentified creature.
However, according to popular UFO expert and “hoax buster” Scott Brando, the creature is not an alien but rather a blurry dog in motion.
And the photo was professionally analysed and submitted to the International UFO Research Community by Andres Duarte of the UFO group Cifae Chile,
The inconclusive report stated: “Due to poor lighting, a weak signal was obtained with excessive motion blur due to the long exposure time.
“The object of interest is moving and has a different, more severe motion blur than the static objects in the scene.
“The image is compressed, which truncates the information necessary for its restoration.”
Mr Waring, however, is convinced the photograph shows the real deal.
He said: “I wanted to share this with you guys. It’s a real sighting from 2004.”