UFO Images

Todd Feinman said:
Yes, the Balwyn UFO picture:
Does look like a old bell --but is it? :cool:
Australia has always been swarming with UFOs --even back in "airship" days. When I went through all the newspaper databases with a fine comb, I found huge treasure in the TROVE database
Click to expand...

Thanks so much, I couldn't remember the name of that one. Balwyn is one I'm on the fence about. On one hand, it really does look like an object thrown into the air and photographed. One the other hand, it also looks like the nuances of the photo would have been very hard to fake using the technology of the day. When I look at the photo, my first impression is that the camera was able to focus on the object quite nicely, as if it was remaining quite still in the sky. The house and chimney are definitely more blurry because the camera was not focusing on them. Also, the house is reflecting off the object, indicating it was some distance up and larger than something that you could throw in the air.

Everything I have read indicates that the original photo was taken with a Polaroid instant camera, and no one has been able to examine the original for quite some time. The best examples are still copies, and all of the expert analysis has been done using them. The chief complaint is that there is a jagged line running through the sky, indicating that the picture may in fact be two photos combined together. This is a valid concern, however one needs to remember that the process of removing a still developing Polaroid photo from the camera can easily cause wrinkles, tears, and other defects in the image. Like the MJ-12 documents, it is not likely that we can ever rule it 100% fake or authentic as long as the original source from which the copies were made is missing.
 
I am reminded of some of the theories about crop circles and that a couple of old farts did quite a few of them for a long time. I know there is more to all that but in that case it literally is Ockham's Razor in action.

The standard skeptical fallback with most UFOs is 'thrown object' because that's the easiest way to fake something and people have been at it for years. It was a more deliberate hoax but look at all the fallout from the famous 'surgeons photo' of Nessie. Good God that got traction for years and now we actually know what the Loch Ness Monster is. It ain't that.

Here's another approach:

Forget about the decades old pictures and look at it this way: what would constitute visual 'proof' today that would be accepted? Is there such a thing ? I can see why old pictures that we like to look at are very captivating but even with the film media in use at the time years ago does that really change anything?
 
Last edited:
Looking over at Metabunk, each UFO picture or bit of footage discussed is like a Rorschach test for them. Witnesses are unreliable is what they will always say regardless of whether someone had a fleeting encounter or it was a group of police officers watching a UFO through binoculars for 30 minutes; they don't even believe folks in the military like Fravor and others who have seen them up close. Often skeptics will refuse or are ignorant of the historicity of the phenomenon, too; these things will be their undoing. Folks who have seen UFOs know that they are wrong, and always were.
 
Uniforms of any kind are not a guarantee of veracity. People are people whether they're wearing one or not. True, if a person is wearing one it may very well mean they've had training most don't get any we really should listen carefully to what's being said but that's where it ends for me. They are still witnesses with all the foibles that go along with it.

Police officers in groups and alone do all sorts of things, as we've so recently seen. Remember the balloon-road flare nonsense a few years back in the NY-NJ area? How many people came forward to speak of the depth of their professional experience and say all kinds of silly **** just to have to eat their words later? There's a little ASB - attention seeking behavior for you.

The best witnesses are impartial sensors, cameras, etc.
 
I think it is a mistake to lump all observations made by witnesses into a single basket. There is a difference between a person picking out the wrong face in a police lineup vs, watching extremely strange objects at close range for an extended period or dogfighting with the same, or a mass sighting with many witnesses all reporting the same thing. Witnessing things like that burns the image into your mind, though it does tend to fade a bit over time. But it's very different from trying to remember a face or criminal events that occurred in a mundane everyday setting, some time after those events. Objects at White Sands were witnessed by five different observation stations, and so many objects were seen over time that they apparently stopped reporting them. Objects have been watched through telescopes, binoculars, theodolites, and electronic sensors --they've been seen with all of those.
At a crime scene, investigators don't just rely on a blurry photograph of events to piece together what happened; witnesses are interviewed etc. and the same thing would happen in a trial --the photo wouldn't necessarily be the clincher. Luckily we do have these objects on sensors, radar, etc., but the good stuff the government won't allow the public to see! :)
 
I don’t discount eyewitnesses. I’ve always said ‘what to do when a credible person says something incredible’ ? It certainly keeps the interest up in the topic.

It’s a side dish not the main course. Not when the case to be made is one of that magnitude.
 
Just to pick a range I'd say the cases from 1940 - 1965 represent a different sort of animal and ones I find more interesting. We like to cherry pick things out of the past without proper context. I was just watching some old movies - Destination Moon, Forbidden Planet and War of the Worlds. Certainly 'flying saucers' were part of the zeitgeist at the time and that's really, really important. This is why when one person today puts on an evil clown outfit and capers around town and before you know it there are evil clowns all over the place.

There's an old episode of M*A*S*H that shows a clip of a ping pong playing cat. Nothing gets past it - you whack a ping pong ball anywhere near that cat and it'll fire it right back at you. I feel that way about UFO cases in general when a YouTuber thinks they've Solved The Mystery and especially about ones that want to go on about the Hudson Valley. Easy to fall into a pattern of knee jerk dismissal that way. Pointless really, it's like trying to hold back the tide with a broom.

Even factoring in the 'fog of war' regarding foo fighters and the dearth of real documentation on that subject I still can't help but find the reports compelling. I can even understand how Capt. Mantell could kill himself pursuing a Skyhook balloon. But even factoring out all the military activity, misinterpretations, outright fakers, hangers-on, the hoaxes, the lunatics there are just too many eyewitness accounts to ignore. I certainly believe that in many cases people are honestly reporting actual events. In others you have people buying into a narrative that is flawed but they believe in it sincerely - I think that's what Robert Hastings' missileers are all about. Col. Halt too. Unless someone develops a method to sort the wheat from the chaff I don't know what value they have in proving the presence of ET here. They do keep interest alive though.

I like that period because no, there really wasn't any human tech around doing any of that. Nazi bells and all that horse**** notwithstanding. Today, all bets are off. I recently heard someone speculate that we have been a 'protected species' for some time and I find that interesting. It would explain a lot of historical sightings, it would explain a peak in interest during the period I mentioned and the fact that (I think) it has sort of fallen off since then.
 
Last edited:
pigfarmer said:
Even factoring in the 'fog of war' regarding foo fighters and the dearth of real documentation on that subject I still can't help but find the reports compelling. I can even understand how Capt. Mantell could kill himself pursuing a Skyhook balloon. But even factoring out all the military activity, misinterpretations, outright fakers, hangers-on, the hoaxes, the lunatics there are just too many eyewitness accounts to ignore. I certainly believe that in many cases people are honestly reporting actual events. In others you have people buying into a narrative that is flawed but they believe in it sincerely - I think that's what Robert Hastings' missileers are all about. Col. Halt too. Unless someone develops a method to sort the wheat from the chaff I don't know what value they have in proving the presence of ET here. They do keep interest alive though.

I like that period because no, there really wasn't any human tech around doing any of that. Nazi bells and all that horse**** notwithstanding. Today, all bets are off. I recently heard someone speculate that we have been a 'protected species' for some time and I find that interesting. It would explain a lot of historical sightings, it would explain a peak in interest during the period I mentioned and the fact that (I think) it has sort of fallen off since then.
Click to expand...

This 100%. I also find it really hard to believe that an experienced combat pilot like Mantell would just forget to turn on his oxygen at high altitude. Only way the would happen is if he was disabled somehow, there are many reports of aliens causing people to experience paralysis. Or, he saw something that was so out of this fucking world it consumed all his attention.
 

Skinny cylindrical UFO flying near Baghdad is seen in six new thermal images taken by US spy drone last year​

Spy plane images obtained by DailyMail.com show a UFO flying near Baghdad last year.

The six images appear to show a skinny cylindrical-shaped object over North Eastern Iraq, close to Baghdad, moving across the screen from left to right.

The images were taken from a video filmed by a thermal camera in a United States Air Force (USAF) Reaper drone in May 2022 – and have been dubbed the 'Baghdad Phantom'.

A source with knowledge of the incident said the object was flagged in an Air Force repository as an 'Unidentified Aerial Phenomena', the government's preferred term for UFOs, last year, because of its strange characteristics.

Fast-moving craft are powered by propulsion systems like rockets or engines that create heat, but the thermal camera that filmed the object showed it was colder than its surroundings.


The object also didn't have any visible wings or fins, likely ruling it out as a glider.

A USAF source said the UFO had no visible propulsion and appeared to be under 'intelligent control'.

(More on the link)

Six images appear to show a skinny cylindrical-shaped object over North Eastern Iraq, close to Baghdad, moving across the screen from left to right

Six images appear to show a skinny cylindrical-shaped object over North Eastern Iraq, close to Baghdad, moving across the screen from left to right.

The cylindrical object can be seen to the left of the screen

The cylindrical object can be seen to the left of the screen.

Military coordinates on the bottom right of the images give the location of the Reaper Drone video as North Eastern Iraq, near Baghdad. The cylindrical object is seen right

Military coordinates on the bottom right of the images give the location of the Reaper Drone video as North Eastern Iraq, near Baghdad. The cylindrical object is seen right.

The cylindrical object is seen above, to the left of the center

The cylindrical object is seen above, to the left of the center.

The images appear to show some kind of trail or stream left in the object’s wake, though it could be an artifact from the thermal camera video from which they were taken

The images appear to show some kind of trail or stream left in the object’s wake, though it could be an artifact from the thermal camera video from which they were taken.

The images were taken in May 2022

The images were taken in May 2022.

.
 
I was interested and thought it looked a bit like a Tomahawk missile and thought maybe we just couldn't see the fins. The Iranians have been screwing around with drones, etc. Don't think they have the tech for this. They can impress the hell out of the local RC club with what they have but I don't think they have that level of technology.

I already asked myself: why were you just filming that patch of woods for no reason ? Isn't that the home of Blobsquatch? In other words, the images are cool but what was our surveillance drone doing there in the first place? Anybody wonder or do we just take it for granted ? Has to be a reason, a real-world one. In the face of a cool UFO pic we just take that for granted and I think and it's an important question. Obviously keeping an eye on something hush hush that isn't in the current newsentertainment cycle.

Haven't heard much out of Iraq lately and I know we have Special Forces operating in Syria - I think we just did a few snatch & runs and whacked a few who knows who. That's my w.a.g. as to why it was there.

Then I saw Corbell and Knapp and wasn't interested anymore.
 
Well, like Vietnam we still have our fingers in the pie after most of the troops have left. Drones are a safe and cheap way to keep an eye on things and shoot at them if necessary.
 
pigfarmer said:
I was interested and thought it looked a bit like a Tomahawk missile and thought maybe we just couldn't see the fins. The Iranians have been screwing around with drones, etc. Don't think they have the tech for this. They can impress the hell out of the local RC club with what they have but I don't think they have that level of technology.

I already asked myself: why were you just filming that patch of woods for no reason ? Isn't that the home of Blobsquatch? In other words, the images are cool but what was our surveillance drone doing there in the first place? Anybody wonder or do we just take it for granted ? Has to be a reason, a real-world one. In the face of a cool UFO pic we just take that for granted and I think and it's an important question. Obviously keeping an eye on something hush hush that isn't in the current newsentertainment cycle.

Haven't heard much out of Iraq lately and I know we have Special Forces operating in Syria - I think we just did a few snatch & runs and whacked a few who knows who. That's my w.a.g. as to why it was there.

Then I saw Corbell and Knapp and wasn't interested anymore.
Click to expand...
I used to think George Knapp was on the up and up, a true investigative reporter. The next thing you know, he was taking up with Robert Bigelow and Jeremy Corbell. I think he went over to the dark side.
 
I like George Knapp but he definitely has to engage in hype because Coast runs on it. If you ever listen to anything he does outside of C2C it's alot better.
 
Standingstones said:
I used to think George Knapp was on the up and up, a true investigative reporter. The next thing you know, he was taking up with Robert Bigelow and Jeremy Corbell. I think he went over to the dark side.
Click to expand...

I think R.B. is into dark state big time. I was listening this interview with him and he was saying like ". . . full disclosure would cause panic and institutionalised religion to fall apart.". Basically he was just blatantly scaremongering, while by now its public knowledge that he was doing MOD contracts that were researching UFOs.

And I was thinking to myself he's saying that and he knows that it is not true, because "the organised religion" i.e. Vatican is at a forefront of acknowledging presence of UFOs and there are quite of few high ranking Vatican priests actively promoting ideas aliens might be here. Me being atheist, I don't see any conflict between religion and aliens. Aliens, from religious point of view, are just people and as an extra congregation that can be converted into whatever religion we already have. What I'm trying to say, Protestant or Catholic or Muslim priests can simply convert any willing aliens to their religion. Aliens are bonus for religion.

I don't see in any way that presence of aliens automatically negates existence of the God. God is assumed to live in the heaven, and our galaxy Milky Way is only a tiny spec in that heaven, so God can be anywhere in the vast universe.
 
Last edited:
I don't see concern for religion as a huge impediment to Disclosure, whatever that may turn out to be. But one thing I do know about some religion is that you write the wrong book and you'll get stabbed in the ****ing face and lose and eyeball for it and be harassed for decades. Allah help you if you draw the wrong cartoon.

Not exactly a value added service is that ?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top