Discussion in 'UFOs & Sightings' started by nivek, Oct 15, 2017.
Does anyone know the source of this photo, and who investigated?
bird or insect passing near camera view field
look at that "fin" at the top, its a bird
its from a old ufological newsletter, possibly APRO or one of those ones by ray palmer
i have seen suggestions in the past that its a suction cup stuck to a car window, but nothing conclusive yet
I'd say it was a pigeon.
Or this one from Lexington, MO?
Here's a similar one, which I also think is probably a bird.
I seem to recall at the time that Australian photo was taken that someone disproved it. I tried to find that article but was unsuccessful.
It's a conundrum. I've inherited this collection of photos without any background information whatever. I know some of them are hoaxes or misinterpretation. Maybe I should just delete the lot of them.
That's a cool image, but I'm suspicious about it because the disc seems to have sharper edges than the building in the background (and perhaps even the tree limbs), which makes me think that it's a small object close to the camera. But I know nothing about photo analysis.
The problem I see in this field is that all we have are anecdotal accounts and photos, and neither of those meet the standard of scientific evidence. We need hard data, like radar data, and as far as I know there has never been a case where a radar tower provided radar data of a radar-visual sighting.
Can anyone explain to me why we can't get radar data in cases where these objects show up on radar? I can understand why we can't get radar data from the military - they're fanatical about protecting their sources and methods. But public air traffic control towers are another matter altogether. Why is that not publicly accessible? We need that data to conduct a genuine scientific analysis of this phenomenon.
Our only other viable path forward, would be to set up our own dedicated passive radar network. And that would be a major undertaking, and I bet the government would try to stop it, because even stealth aircraft show up with that kind of system.
I think that's a bad idea - we may not have a way to make use of that data now, but maybe someday we'll have some kind of AI that can analyze photographic evidence, sift the wheat from the chaff, and possibly even extract useful signatures from authentic photos of these things. Digital memory is cheap these days, so it seems worthwhile to save all the data we can, in case there's something we can use it for later.
No more lens flares! I'm putting together video that i hope will reduce the number of lens flare cases we get, ideally to zero. Send me your best lens flare pics (you can roll your own on a sunny day). A street lamp or a full moon will also do it.
Inexplicata-The Journal of Hispanic Ufology: Mexico: UFO Sighting "Is The Most Shocking" in Recent Memory
I have to say are we for real? Mind you this could be a high strange vehicle it could also be a over head street light. I seem to recall an "event" 2-3 years back around Houston where a similar case was making the rounds and I think it was merely a reflection in the cars light.t
And I still have to ask, why the light show cases? Why can't you do whatever you want to do without putting on a display that wouldn't be out of place in a fourth of July show?
Maybe it's me, maybe it's a double entendre joke "most shocking" ??? please, hire a real writer.
Hi CGL, if you wouldn't mind could you produce the evidence that convinced you matey? ... because I've followed this case for as long as I can remember, and haven't come across anything that remotely debunks this classic [and imho the best photographic case of all time] set of UFO's caught on camera. Otherwise, back to reality, the evidence as been on display for 68 years and still very much counting.
I agree. Seems legit.
Scroll down about 1/4 of the way through the page until you get to the side by side comparison of the "flying saucer" and the truck mirror Bad UFOs: Skepticism, UFOs, and The Universe: Special Report: The Trent UFO Photos - the "Best" of All Time - Finally Busted? and also look at the pics at the bottom of this post.
There are some things that always bugged me about these photos (which people here have already heard what I have to say previously);
1) not one person on Earth (that we know of) have photographed a structured UFO (that hasn't been a proven fake). That includes todays era where everybody has a camera in their pocket & their are surveillance cameras everywhere. Yet we are supposed to believe that Paul Trent in 1950 had a flying saucer hover over his farm & he had the presence of mind & time to run back into the house, look for the camera, cross his fingers there was film in it (there was! whew!) run back outside & hope the flying saucer was still hovering there - and get pics.
2) they are right underneath electrical/telephone wires
3) the list on the "mast" of the flying saucer. It's always bothered me. Then look at the "list" on the truck mirror. That's when it makes perfect sense.
4) the photo's were taken from a position of being squatted down - what would the reason be for this?
Again - 800 trillion cameras around today including in everybody's pocket - & no structured flying saucer pic. Yet, lucky Paul Trent pulled it off in 1950 with and old fashioned camera & film....& the flying saucer just happens to looks exactly like an old truck mirror. Don't buy it.
Hi CGL, thanks for the reply matey.
I suspected that the erroneous Sheaffer/Klass debunk that was taken up by various other 'sceptics' [near and far] that ran with it without even checking the veracity of their "scientific methodology" ! .. and of course it is only natural for the genuinely ETH-sceptical people to see that this 'explanation/debunk' is so ubiquitous online, therefor must be correct! ... but fortunately for the sake of accuracy and justice to the spirit of true ufological studies, the madly biased views of these two arch enemies of even-handed-investigation have been challenged and comprehensively denounced by many unbiased authorities in technical investigation. ... here is a sample of that false debunking's debunking by two well respected and eminently qualified professional scientific evaluators, ... in the interest of fairness I declare that Bruce Maccabee is a tenuous proponent of the ETH, and the second commentator Brad Sparks is quite firmly a ETH detractor that still demands even handed investigation.
Have you not heard about the 1958 Trindade photos? The Trinidade Island Photographs
Above not beneath.
The unorthodox look of the UFO bothered me for years too, I always expected the Hollywood classic smooth looking flying saucer, but have learnt over the years that Hollywood representation is not really a documentary.
As for the truck mirror? Yes i'm aware of this wild theory, but am also aware that there are many prosaic things that have similarities in shape to just about anything you could think of... besides, the dimensions don't match the debunkers distance to size ratio!
Only in the 'debunked' debunking.
Well if that's your opinion, then fine it's your opinion. and you are very entitled to have it, [all that I hope is that you view the 'debunked claims' with the same pedantry parameters as you would a positive claim..] ... But in my opinion, there have been some undeniably intriguing photographs in the past , not too many 'authentic ones' i'll admit, but some nevertheless. And i'll warrant that there'll be more to come.
I've been doing some poking around and I think I've got a live one for you.
This is a photo taken by Hannah McRoberts at a rest area on Vancouver Island in 1981. She took a picture of a mountain peak surrounded by some clouds because she thought it looked like a volcano, and she didn't even notice the disc-shaped object in the upper right-hand corner of the frame until the photos came back from development.
I haven't dug into this case deeply, but I learned about it from Dr. Peter Sturroch's book called The UFO Enigma, and he described the fairly exhaustive examinations of the negative and the image by Dr. Richard Haines, as well as the interviews conducted with Mrs. Roberts and her family, and the analysis of the incidental factors in this case, and all of it seems to pass the smell test.
I'm also intrigued that this object fits a very similar description in the 2004 incidents off the coast of California, provided by USS Nimitz CSG radar operator Trevor, who saw the optical gun-camera footage of an F-18 intercept of a disc-like craft with a flat bottom and a domed top, which he said could be seen "relocating" from one position to the next so quickly that the transitions between positions couldn't be seen on intervening frames of the footage. It could be a coincidence, but perhaps not.
Here's an enlargement of the craft in her photo:
Here's the complete photo:
And here's an overview of the case:
The Hannah McRoberts UFO Photograph
So I think this might just be the one you've been looking for - a very compelling photo taken by a very credible photographer of a structured craft of unknown origin.
Any Bruce Maccabee analysis is bogus in my mind. He thought the Guardian flying saucer was real. He authenticated the red light coming from an optical mouse as a real flying saucer. He thinks the laughable Gulf Breeze UFO photo's were the real deal. He's discredited himself with several ridiculous analysis so I won't listen to anything he has to say.
Like I said earlier, in my mind the McMinnville photo's are bogus.
To me, it's like trying to say that a model train wheel isn't Rex Heflin's UFO. Anybody with common sense can see this....
Let’s not forget, Maccabee was once secretly briefing the CIA on the UFO situation.
Separate names with a comma.