A Bona Fide UFO?
ABC World News with Diane Sawyer aired [6/10/13] this set of images of an alleged UFO photographed by a vacationer in Europe:
Ufologists say it's a UFO traveling at supersonic speeds
.
Skeptics says it's a bug near or on the camera lens
Gilles Fernandez would say, "That's Ufology!"
RR.
Ufologists say it's a UFO traveling at supersonic speeds
.
Skeptics says it's a bug near or on the camera lens
Gilles Fernandez would say, "That's Ufology!"
RR.
posted by RRRGroup at
Monday, June 10, 2013
15 Comments:
I have to vote for the bug theory on this one. The buildings in the background are in sharp focus but the UFO is quite blurry--implying that it is closer to the camera than the buildings.
Also, I recall noticing in one of the sets of images that I saw online that the little s-shaped doohickies projecting out laterally near the left end of the object seemed to have moved to the right end of the object in the next frame--implying that the object itself seemed to have perhaps turned around 180 degrees, or perhaps has multiple sets of wings.
Without additional witness information, this just doesn't look strange enough to be a trUFO.
By
Larry, at Monday, June 10, 2013
I didn't get too excited about it either, Larry, waiting, as I am, for the return of Adamski's mother ships with their scout craft.
Loved those baroque flying saucers.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Monday, June 10, 2013
Bugfo!
By
Frank Warren, at Monday, June 10, 2013
It looks like one of Jose Escamillo's "rods", which some experts have claimed are artifacts of using a video camera. I think Escamillo claims they are a new life form.
By
purrlgurrl, at Monday, June 10, 2013
I prefer this one
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Renwal-Toy-Space-Car-MARX-Tom-Corbett-Space-Man-Poster-Print-PADLO-/130765144213?pt=Art_Prints&hash=item1e7235c095
By
Bruce Duensing, at Monday, June 10, 2013
The easiest, best thing would be for an entomologist to come forward and identify the insect and show pictures of it in situ or in flight.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Monday, June 10, 2013
On a more serious note beyond the ironic image as the surrealism of UFO kitsch I posted.... Don't look at the "bug". Look at where the camera is pointing, which has no composition value as framed unless they were trying to immortalize lopsided images, cut off at bizarre angles. So what was it they were following? A bug, I ask? Doubtful and no doubt concerning this. It's simply another case of being mesmerized by inexplicable images producing free floating theories regardless of what theory we use to explain this provocation, or is it simply entertainment?
By
Bruce Duensing, at Monday, June 10, 2013
I got the impression from the story, the report, that the "object" was found after the fact -- after the photos were viewed.
The person taking the picture(s) didn't see or know the object was in the air when the picture was snapped.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Monday, June 10, 2013
Some further thoughts on those images came to me (which is) that we are all voyeurs in relation to this phenomenon, and in many different ways, what we really desire is to participate in it. We are drawn into, and some are possessed by it...based on what? Images out of context.
The images provoke a disturbance of our own self image of ourselves in relation to what we know and do not..like a purposeful wedge whose methodology is indirect and meaningless in of itself....
that always seems to shine a mirror on our natural state of bewilderment buried under hubris.
Perhaps it's a reminder that there is more to all this than conceptual images as totems as if there is some glimpse proffered that we are in a vivid dream, lost in our own vocabulary.
By
Bruce Duensing, at Monday, June 10, 2013
But why the skewed images..? What I am suggesting is that it could be not a bug, a spaceship but a commodity to be sold for cash to a major network who finds this more entertaining than extraterrestrial corpses.
By
Bruce Duensing, at Monday, June 10, 2013
Tsss Rich, I will not say only "that's ufology!".
Yes, it's sound as an elongated "artifact" produced by cameras, maybe an insect or a bird or dunno what, mooving across the field at a high angular speed, the camera have captured.
Aka a blurfo.
Do you wrote it seems the tourist discovered it after... It is an important information to obtain if the case.
As Exif dataes, mainly focal length, exposure and speed, camera model, could be interresting in order to simulate different candidats with IPACO software.
Because with the images only, it is like a Rorschach test ^^...
Gilles
By
Gilles Fernandez, at Tuesday, June 11, 2013
More information about the photo(s):
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/100795-netherlands-ufo-photo-not-manipulated/
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Tuesday, June 11, 2013
As I have said here in the past, this is simply more evidence that despite opinions that creaking old events have more cache than current ones is to ignore the fact that this phenomenon whatever it is, is alive and well in the present and is as provocative as ever.
As befuddled voyeurs, we tend to fit an incommensurable entanglement into familiar shapes, whereas this shape is anything but familiar as an image. While images are a cash commodity of notoriety, that is simply an an issue of psychological weaknesses in the human condition, that are perhaps very distinct from the phenomenon itself.
By
Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, June 11, 2013
BTW..Is this an example?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339139/Was-bird-A-Plane-Or-UFO--Chinese-passenger-jet-hits-mysterious-object-26-000ft-lands-severely-dented-nose-cone.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
By
Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Hello Bruce
You directed to http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339139/Was-bird-A-Plane-Or-UFO--Chinese-passenger-jet-hits-mysterious-object-26-000ft-lands-severely-dented-nose-cone.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
No need of ET or dunno what exotic (I dont say it is waht you have in mind, just speacking in general).
In the folloqing link, 2 pilots have testimoned the same experience :
http://avherald.com/h?article=463508bb&opt=0
I had exactly the same thing happen to me on a flight out of LHR to YYZ on a 747-400. What caused it was a static discharge while climbing through snow showers at about 6000 feet on departure. There was a huge bang and flash followed by the wx radar failing. We leveled off at 10,000 feet and accelerated to 300 knots to see if there was any adverse effect. Since the aircraft felt perfectly normal we carried on to Toronto. As we approached the gate, the ramp hands were pointing at the nose. When we got off we saw that the radome was pushed in as if a huge fist had punched it in the nose. As it turned out the pressure from the rapidly heated and expnded air had done the damage. The radar antenna had jammed.
and
This happened to me on a B757 climbing from SAL to SJO right at 26,000 ft too. There was no indication inside other than vibrations and a failed radar. We continued to SJO and landed fine. On the ground people were pointing at our airplane in shock. The investigation revealed that a week prior, our airplane had a bird strike. The Boeing procedure was followed but the procedure failed to do some test on the inside. The company sent me pics where you can see where the beak of the bird entered the radome. Since this was not fixed, it was weaken enough to caused the collapse. The radome is designed to collapse in like a can of coke instead of flying out to the wing, tail, or engines.
I suppose Boeing will investigate and it is well known for them (precedent).
So "Boeing radome" collapses easy. That's all.
No need of E.T., Santa Klaus or "Charriots of God".
The rest, well... That's Ufology.
Gilles
By
Gilles Fernandez, at Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Post a Comment
<< Home