Type keyword(s) to search

Features

Fact Check: Is the viral 3I/Atlas “leaked photo” real or fake? Social media debates strange new image

Is the viral 3I/Atlas leaked photo real or fake? A clear fact check on its origin, what NASA data show, why basic optics say no, and how social media fueled the debate.
  • NEW YORK, NEW YORK - APRIL 12:  Avi Loeb, Frank B. Baird, Jr. Professor of Science at Harvard University speaks on stage as Yuri Milner and Stephen Hawking host press conference to announce Breakthrough Starshot, a new space exploration initiative, at One World Observatory on April 12, 2016 in New York City.  (Photo by Bryan Bedder/Getty Images for Breakthrough Prize Foundation)
    NEW YORK, NEW YORK - APRIL 12: Avi Loeb, Frank B. Baird, Jr. Professor of Science at Harvard University speaks on stage as Yuri Milner and Stephen Hawking host press conference to announce Breakthrough Starshot, a new space exploration initiative, at One World Observatory on April 12, 2016 in New York City. (Photo by Bryan Bedder/Getty Images for Breakthrough Prize Foundation)

    3I/Atlas is back in the headlines for all the wrong reasons. A new “leaked photo” racing across X and Instagram claims to show a sharp, bullet-shaped 3I/Atlas nucleus with glowing details. NASA images of 3I/Atlas are still fuzzy and show a normal comet with a coma and tail, which has kept expectations modest.

    The viral frame, posted by the account UFO mania with the question “Another supposedly 3I/ATLAS leaked Photo… real or fake?”, has restarted arguments about whether agencies are hiding better pictures. Astronomers counter that current telescopes cannot resolve the solid core of 3I/Atlas at these distances. The closest approach to Earth is still far, and official galleries list only low-resolution comet views.


    Is the viral 3I/Atlas “leaked photo” real or fake

    The Short answer is almost certainly fake. The physics and the archives are against it. Hubble’s team explains that the nucleus of 3I/Atlas cannot be directly seen, even by Hubble. As per the NASA Science report dated August 7, 2025, the article noted that the images,

    “Though the Hubble images put tighter constraints on the size of the nucleus compared to previous ground-based estimates, the solid heart of the comet presently cannot be directly seen, even by Hubble.”

    If the nucleus is unresolved for Hubble, any crisp multi-pixel “ship-like” body in a social post should be treated as art, not data. Mainstream NASA voices also state that the object behaves like a comet and poses no threat. As per the NASA Science report dated November 2025, the page noted,

    “There is no danger to Earth from this comet, which will come no closer than 170 million miles (270 million kilometers), or 1.8 astronomical units, to our planet.”

    That distance explains why official pictures show a faint coma and tails rather than a sculpted core. Independent expert quotes line up with that view. As per The Guardian report dated September 11, 2025, NASA small-bodies lead scientist Tom Statler said,

    “It looks like a comet. It does comet things. It very, very strongly resembles, in just about every way, the comets that we know.”

    The same article reports NASA’s rejection of claims that 3I/Atlas is alien-made. The sharpest official frame to date shows a teardrop-like coma with background stars streaked because the telescope tracks the comet. As per the NASA Science release dated August 7, 2025, team member David Jewitt stated,

    “No one knows where the comet came from. It’s like glimpsing a rifle bullet for a thousandth of a second.”

    That gives useful context. We are looking at a tiny, fast object wrapped in dust and gas. The “leaked photo” style does not match how real datasets look or how they are labeled.


    Inside the viral post and the social-media debate

    The latest image spread from the X thread by the account UFO mania, with the prompt,

    “Another supposedly 3I/ATLAS leaked Photo… real or fake?”

    The frame uses false-colour and overlaid boxes that resemble generic software readouts, yet lists no instrument or observatory. Similar graphics have circulated for weeks under the “NASA leak” tagline without provenance.

    Reactions in the same thread capture the split. One user stated arguing that the labels and typography resemble AI composites rather than mission metadata.,

    “Fake as f***. Look at the AI text,”

    Another user, Michael McNeil, stated that,

    “neither Nasa’s nor anybody else’s images of 3I/ATLAS itself—its 3-km (2 mile) nucleus—are worth a damn,”

    Adding that the object’s angular size during the Mars pass was “~0.02 arc-seconds,” which would not yield a detailed shape. The post’s question invites a verdict, and many astronomy-literate replies point to missing source data and unrealistic resolution.

    A check against official galleries also hurts the claim. NASA’s public 3I/Atlas pages show Hubble’s July image and later updates, all documenting a small coma and tail with full instrument labels and captions. No release matches the viral art-style frame. That is exactly what one expects for an object that remains unresolved at the core.


    Stay tuned for more updates.

    TOPICS: 3I/Atlas Alien spaceship, 3I/ATLAS, 3I/Atlas viral leaked NASA image, Avi Loeb 3I/ATLAS