20 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

I don't think it was deliberate, no. The green triangle was from the Omaha incident, where several objects the navy referred to as drones were buzzing around the ships. One of the crew grabbed a camera and filmed it from the deck. Not surprising it was slightly out of focus.

So finally, the so called task force, admitted it was just an aircraft, after something like two years, which is quite astonishing it took them that long when it was pretty obvious what it was. Mick West analyzed the footage soon after it appeared, and recognized it as bokeh, he also identified the other triangles in the footage as stars. Anyone with a modicum of photographic knowledge would have realized what it was. Especially when it was flashing aircraft lights in just the right pattern. 🙄

What the other objects were that were buzzing around the ship we don't know. Drone's feasibly. 

According to the video I posted, one of the guys doing the analysis for the UAP task force was that Skinwalker Ranch guy. 😁 So no wonder it took them two years to figure it out. The less said about Skinwalker Ranch the better.

 

 

The Skinwalker Ranch show is another click-bait History Channel show, much like "The Curse of Oak Island" show.  Lots of drama, few answers.

2 hours ago, stans said:

The Skinwalker Ranch show is another click-bait History Channel show, much like "The Curse of Oak Island" show.  Lots of drama, few answers.

 

This is interesting...

 

Quote

Skeptical author Robert Sheaffer believes the phenomenon at Skinwalker to be "almost certainly illusory", given that NIDsci found no proof after several years of monitoring, and that the previous owners of the property, who had lived there for 60 years, say that no supernatural events of any kind had happened there. Sheaffer considers the "parsimonious explanation" to be that the Sherman family invented the story "prior to selling it to the gullible Bigelow", with many of the more extraordinary claims originating solely from Terry Sherman, who worked as a caretaker after the ranch was sold to Bigelow.^[12]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinwalker_Ranch

 

One simple question:  "WHY have we never seen a highly detailed photograph or highly detailed video of an alien craft?"  They are always blurry and indistinct to our interpretation.  With the technology we have today to see space clearly (Hubble, etc), one would think that we would capture a very clear highly detailed image of at least ONE craft.

BTW, I am a true believer in the theory that we are indeed being visited by extraterrestrial beings.  So, I'm not being cynical here.  I am really questioning why we have never seen a crystal clear image of this phenomena.

Stan

 

ps.  After all, they have been known to stand still and HOVER!

Edited August 13, 20232 yr by spilok

9 minutes ago, spilok said:

I am really questioning why we have never seen a crystal clear image of this phenomena.

This could be one reason:

5 hours ago, dmwalker said:

This could be one reason:

 HA!  Love it!  Still, the question remains...WHY NO CLEAR PICTURES...EVER?

3 hours ago, spilok said:

 HA!  Love it!  Still, the question remains...WHY NO CLEAR PICTURES...EVER?

OK I'll bite. 

Perhaps clear pictures do exist in the public sphere, but have been 'debunked', or otherwise accused of being fake. It doesn't take much doubt to be introduced before people write something off.... especially when it comes to this topic. 

A clear picture, on its own, without bulletproof (mass sighting) witnesses, chain of custody, scientific (photo expert) study, media attention and government, or other authority supporting it, is pretty easy to get lost to history...... as it doesn't meet the bar for 'extraordinary evidence'. 

What are the odds that you would see it (or believe it) without all of the things listed above? 

UFO researchers wouldn't even be able to verify much beyond a photo expert claiming it looks real. 

 

That's just one explanation: Extremely successful disinformation campaign. Good enough that you could give someone a clear picture and they automatically assume it's fake. 

 

DB

 

17 hours ago, DaviiB said:

OK I'll bite. 

Perhaps clear pictures do exist in the public sphere, but have been 'debunked', or otherwise accused of being fake. It doesn't take much doubt to be introduced before people write something off.... especially when it comes to this topic. 

A clear picture, on its own, without bulletproof (mass sighting) witnesses, chain of custody, scientific (photo expert) study, media attention and government, or other authority supporting it, is pretty easy to get lost to history...... as it doesn't meet the bar for 'extraordinary evidence'. 

What are the odds that you would see it (or believe it) without all of the things listed above? 

UFO researchers wouldn't even be able to verify much beyond a photo expert claiming it looks real. 

 

That's just one explanation: Extremely successful disinformation campaign. Good enough that you could give someone a clear picture and they automatically assume it's fake. 

 

DB

 

Your theory may be correct, but I still think that there's a way to establish credibility.  I certainly would trust a respected pilot or anyone else.  I WOULDN'T TRUST A POLITICIAN....THAT'S FOR SURE!

2 hours ago, spilok said:

Your theory may be correct, but I still think that there's a way to establish credibility.  I certainly would trust a respected pilot or anyone else.  I WOULDN'T TRUST A POLITICIAN....THAT'S FOR SURE!

Well, we currently have respected pilots providing testimony in conjunction with (blurry) photos....they don't have control over the quality of the videos released by the DoD. 

Soooo, there you have it?

 

Also, consider how many times pictures, stories etc. make it to local news stations for a 2-minute segment on the evening news, with little to no follow-up and concluding: **shrug** "Who knows?".

If you had a clear picture and an amazing story, how would you proceed to get it out to the world?
 - Would your local news station run the story?
 - Would your local University return your call?
 - Go to Reddit, Twitter(X), Avsim? and make a post there?
 - Spend your own money to get the picture vetted?
 - Call the government? << (lol kidding)
 

DB

15 hours ago, spilok said:

I certainly would trust a respected pilot

 

Respected pilots are not infallible. For example, the "gimble" ATFLIR video and the  "Its rotating" claim. The "go fast" ATFLIR video and the claim it shot off the screen. Both demonstrated to be not the case. Pilots do make mistakes and they do misidentify. 

As for photographic evidence... I was a professional photographer in the days of dunking film in a developer tank, and in those days manipulating images was harder. These days, with digital technology, any 12 year old kid can knock out a convincing flying saucer. 

Below is said to be one of the most convincing from the days of sloshing stuff around in the developer stop bath and fixer. Said to be the best that the airforce had seen. But who knows, who is to say that an object wasn't thrown in the air?

Although I have to say that interviews with the photographers wife seem convincing. See video in next reply.

 

Edited August 15, 20232 yr by martin-w

Paul Trent's wife certainly seems totally believable.

 

 

Edited August 15, 20232 yr by martin-w

Martin-W,

Thanks

Interesting video of the Trent family and that historic photo...albeit 73 years ago!  And since then, NO OTHER SIGNIFICANT PHOTO has emerged (at least to my knowledge).  Unbelievable.

16 minutes ago, spilok said:

And since then, NO OTHER SIGNIFICANT PHOTO has emerged

 

I guess we could say that the internet is full of photos. And amongst the plethora of fakes, maybe, just maybe there's something interesting.

I would guess, if we are being visited by aliens, it would be a rare phenomenon. Its the multitude of fake reports and misidentification out there that make it look like a regular occurrence. 

This is the Calvine 1990 UFO. 

 

https://www.falkirkherald.co.uk/news/people/hunt-is-on-for-falkirk-photographer-who-snapped-world-famous-1990-ufo-picture-4003793

At 6:00 of the McMinnville video, the commentator says that Phil Bladine said he was told they were the best civilian photographs of an unidentified flying object that the Air Force has ever seen. Does that mean the military had even better photos?

Those "clear" pics are just of me throwing the Frisbee in the backyard!

 

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

 Bladine said he was told they were the best civilian photographs of an unidentified flying object that the Air Force has ever seen. Does that mean the military had even better photos?

 

Good point.