UFO Images

Creepy Green Light

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius
We all heard the story that Kenneth Arnold said the MOVEMENT of the craft was like a saucer skipping on water - not their shape. We've heard that a million times. But according to Wikipedia - he did liken there shape to a saucer. This is what it says;

Several years later, Arnold would state he likened their movement to saucers skipping on water, without comparing their actual shapes to saucers,[3] but initial quotes from him do indeed have him comparing the shape to like a "saucer", "disc", "pie pan", or "half moon", or generally convex and thin (discussion below).

Then this other part doesn't make sense to me. I was wondering how far away these objects were. I'm thinking that he was pretty close to them since he made out structure & detail. However, according to Wikipedia it says the objects were approximately 23 miles away. That doesn't make sense to me. In just my experience of being an aircrewman in the U.S. Navy - I'm trying to envision that I'm back in my plane, staring out of one of the windows & seeing an object 23 miles away. Then on top of that being able to give you the objects shape/size etc. I'm almost thinking that cannot be right. Could you imagine being on a boat in the open ocean & calm seas - and then someone pointing to something and saying see that other boat? That's 23 miles away. Tell me what type of boat it is and its features/shape.

At one point Arnold said they flew behind a subpeak of Rainier and briefly disappeared. Knowing his position and the position of the (unspecified) subpeak, Arnold placed their distance as they flew past Rainier at about 23 miles (37 km).
 

Standingstones

Celestial
This is the shape of the UFOs that Kenneth Arnold saw that day...
 

Attachments

  • A238290F-22D7-4128-860A-C98E74D2F323.jpeg
    A238290F-22D7-4128-860A-C98E74D2F323.jpeg
    600.9 KB · Views: 95

Castle-Yankee54

Celestial
Now that you mention it normal commercial flights look like saucers or half moon from 23 miles away.

I'm also not sure where they got the term "subpeak" in regards to Mount Rainier.....as they are all part of the whole mountain. So it would just be "behind" Mount Rainier.
 

Creepy Green Light

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius
Now that you mention it normal commercial flights look like saucers or half moon from 23 miles away.

I'm also not sure where they got the term "subpeak" in regards to Mount Rainier.....as they are all part of the whole mountain. So it would just be "behind" Mount Rainier.
I mean here on Earth, when looking upward at a contrail - the bulk of the time I can hardly see the aircraft - if at all. And those fly at like 5 to 6.5 miles high. Could you imagine standing on your lawn and somebody saying "There's an aircraft in that direction - it's 23 miles away - please identify its shape, make, model etc.?
 

Castle-Yankee54

Celestial
I mean here on Earth, when looking upward at a contrail - the bulk of the time I can hardly see the aircraft - if at all. And those fly at like 5 to 6.5 miles high. Could you imagine standing on your lawn and somebody saying "There's an aircraft in that direction - it's 23 miles away - please identify its shape, make, model etc.?

Yes I know we are here on earth.....and I was speaking from experience saying they look saucer or half-mooned shapes.

I can identify aircraft leaving the contrails in most cases.
 

APIGuy

Independent Field Investigator
In my mind - it is debunked.

I'm neutral on the photographs in question, but can you provide reference to its debunking?

When I left off (years ago), Bruce Maccabee had the original negatives, and had done a densitometer analysis, concluding that the object was fairly distant. No analysis done on prints can be entirely conclusive, IMO.

BTW, i don't always agree with Maccabee. I share his conclusion that the Skylab 3 object was anomalous, but I find his argument for its large size unpersuasive (at least, there is no question of a hoax).
 

humanoidlord

ce3 researcher
Can someone clarify why Kenneth Arnold's UFO's have 3 different shapes? Thanks :)

(Ok, so Wikipedia says that one of the objects had a different shape. Still doesn't explain why there are 3 different versions).

View attachment 4384 View attachment 4385 View attachment 4386
this story is a funny one, the infamous painting that kenneth is holding in his hands in the first picture, believe it or not, isn't of his case! the artist that did it, mistakenly painted a completely different sighting wich was also in the original FATE
article , after that thousands of people repeated the mistake, the shape seen in the center and in the fate front page is the correct one!
source: ufo - UFOs at close sight: Kenneth Arnold, Kenneth Arnold's booklet, page 1
 

Creepy Green Light

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius
If I posted this before - forgive me. But I'm not sure who can still back Rex Heflin (the model train enthusiast) & his photos. The above photo is his "flying saucer" - the below saucer is that of a model train wheel. Case closed;

heflin comparison.jpg
 

nivek

As Above So Below
UFO Caught By Oz City Worker's Digital Camera - Whittlesea, Australia - January 15, 2004

Dqg7VfjWwAEp0sL.jpeg
 

Sheltie

Fratty and out of touch.
I mean here on Earth, when looking upward at a contrail - the bulk of the time I can hardly see the aircraft - if at all. And those fly at like 5 to 6.5 miles high. Could you imagine standing on your lawn and somebody saying "There's an aircraft in that direction - it's 23 miles away - please identify its shape, make, model etc.?
I agree. I have some serious doubts about Wiki's info stating the objects were more than 20 miles away. On a clear day one could see such objects at that distance but they would probably appear to be indistinguishable dots.
 

APIGuy

Independent Field Investigator
I agree. I have some serious doubts about Wiki's info stating the objects were more than 20 miles away. On a clear day one could see such objects at that distance but they would probably appear to be indistinguishable dots.

That's why I invented optics. I've got binoculars, monoculars, spotting scopes, telephoto lenses, etc. to help you with that task. Find some good EDC binocs and have a look.
 

Kchoo

At Peace.
Have any photography experts ever looked at this one? The object sure has the classic domed saucer shape that has been appearing in daylight pictures for decades.
I say this is not only very convincing, but much more so than any other pic I have seen...
 

Rick Hunter

Celestial
This particular saucer shape was quite common in photos from the 1920's-1960's. Good to see that the aliens still take the classic sport model out for a spin on a sunny day!
 
Top