UFOs: The Research, the Evidence

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rramjet said:
Yes...here IS the answer (see below). The question was whether the sight lines crossed under the wires, which would be somewhat suspicious. The SLC is important because that is the ONLY position where a stationary model could be located and still have the camera position move (as demonstrated in the photos) while maintaining the UFO positions shown in the Trent photos. The UFO debunkers have claimed that Trent "hung" a "UFO" from the overhead wires. This analysis shows this could NOT have been the case.
Click to expand...
Apart from the fact that it's not the only position where a wing mirror model could have been hung... I get the feeling we're just in for another round of Rramjet moving the elements to the place that gives the result he wants....

Rramjet said:
The following again demonstrates where Stray Cat went wrong. (HINT: Stray Cat... this time please READ the analysis description contained in my post above AND in part immediately below)
Click to expand...
Rramjet: (HINT: Please note if I wasn't reading the the analysis description, I wouldn't be able to keep finding big holes in it.)

Rramjet said:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=377&pictureid=2310

Oh, and Chief - the question is why Stray Cat is NOT doing ANY of the necessary calculations!
Click to expand...
Ah but I am... I'm just not relying on Maccabees 'Hobson's Choice' formula.
And that's what Ramjet doesn't see. If all the distances and sizes are going to change, the relationship to the camera and field of view will also change, which it can not do of course. Unless Mr Trent had changed the lens on his Roamer 1 camera to alter it's field of view capability... and if he did that, he kept it quiet.
Looking at the last two diagrams Rramjet has provided (one showing the house too far North and the last one showing it too far South) What changes is the position of Mr Trent in the yard. In the latest diagram, apparently Mr Trent can stand less than 4 foot away from being directly under the wires and still get them in shot. A remarkable achievement when Maccabee the precise scientist had Trent standing more than 19 foot away from the wires.

Rramjet said:
ETA: The dimensions of the house and garage have been exaggerated to bring them closer to prove the point - if you move them back to their original dimensions - the sightlines STILL do not cross under the wires. No mater HOW you move the house and garage in relation to each other, the SLC does NOT fall under the wires.
Click to expand...
As explained...

By the way, Hartman's photo of the Trent's yard gives an indication of the relationship between the house and garage.

Trent-Yard-Condon.jpg
 
Astrophotographer said:
Of course, even Maccabee admits this. The numbers are 14.25 and 17 feet to the crossover point if I recall correctly. This is a 16% change in distance, which should produce a corresponding change in size.
Click to expand...


Just a hair over the average stride length of an adult human. So one photo taken a single step away from the other would account for the difference? Yep, that could just about wrap it.

But... and this is a big but... since someone here is still postulating aliens as an explanation, he needs to eliminate the possibility of gods. After all, it could have been a god playing tricks on the Trents so that almost 60 years later some mouthy high school kid would fall for the joke and make an absolute fool of himself on an Internet discussion forum. That theory is at least as plausible as aliens, has at least some evidence to support it, and Rramjet hasn't debunked it yet, so it's still on the table.
 
Vortigern99 said:
...it's highly probable that this UFO = pie plate/hubcap/pot-lid, flung twice into the air frisbee-style and photographed.
Click to expand...

That was my initial assumption, and the only detail which makes me doubt it is the fixed 1/50th second shutter speed of the claimed model of camera. I'd have expected to see motion blur if the object was thrown into the frame. That's why I'm tending to the idea that it was more probably dangled on fishing line.
 
Given the earlier comments regarding bigfoot and UFOs both seeming to have this blurry photo problem... Now that it's 2010 and everyone has cameras, have UFO sightings gone up or down?

That is:
The general public seem to be taking more photos these days.
There are a zillion more places to share these photos on the internet.
So, given this potential proof for "UFO" sightings is increasing, has anyone gotten a good photo yet? Or the converse, since we now have color and video, there less blurry / unclear photos, and thus there are not many "UFO" photos.

Just curious. Since Rramjet isn't claiming anything anymore, there isn't much else to talk about. I mean, really, analyzing grainy photos from 50 years ago is all you have for JFK, but the UFO thing, if true, should still be going strong.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
That was my initial assumption, and the only detail which makes me doubt it is the fixed 1/50th second shutter speed of the claimed model of camera. I'd have expected to see motion blur if the object was thrown into the frame. That's why I'm tending to the idea that it was more probably dangled on fishing line.
Click to expand...

Of course, you'd get that same motion blur if it were a real alien craft moving with any significant angular velocity. (By angular velocity, I don't mean in a circle, I mean change in azimuth over time)
 
TjW said:
Of course, you'd get that same motion blur if it were a real alien craft moving with any significant angular velocity. (By angular velocity, I don't mean in a circle, I mean change in azimuth over time)
Click to expand...

But Aliens don't conform to physics as we know it.

This one could be: "moving quite slowly, apparently almost hovering"
At the same time as it "gathered speed and turned toward the northwest"
http://ncas.org/condon/text/case46.htm

So no doubt the 'hovering' counteracts the 'gathering speed' to reduce the motion blur... which makes you wonder why so many other UFO pictures don't display this wonderful characteristic...


... or something. :confused:
 
Astrophotographer said:
Remember, Dr. Mac also has endorsed hoaxes before based on the "character" of the witnesses.
Click to expand...
And of course let's not forget...

What Bruce Maccabee DOESN'T Tell You About His Investigation of the Famous McMinnville/Trent UFO-Photo Case
http://www.debunker.com/texts/BSMtrentPJK.html

Evidently Mrs. Trent had some “issues” keeping her story straight… not to mention all the deceased “corroborating” witnesses.
 
Astrophotographer said:
Of course, even Maccabee admits this. The numbers are 14.25 and 17 feet to the crossover point if I recall correctly. This is a 16% change in distance, which should produce a corresponding change in size.
Click to expand...
And we still have to evidence of Flying Saucers.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Belgian thought said:
There is a Dog on this photo - does that count for dyslexic deities?

... I'll get my coat.
Click to expand...

I did wonder if it was also insomniac and agnostic...

But actually, it's looking directly at the corner of the garage and marveling at how well it lines up to the south side of the house.
 
Stray Cat said:
But Aliens don't conform to physics as we know it.
Click to expand...

In which case, it might have changed size between the two pictures, and actually have moved closer while appearing to move away.

Or maybe a gigantic spaceship had a minor failure in its cloaking device as it flew by, and only one of its hubcaps decloaked. :D
 
Access Denied said:
And of course let's not forget...

What Bruce Maccabee DOESN'T Tell You About His Investigation of the Famous McMinnville/Trent UFO-Photo Case
http://www.debunker.com/texts/BSMtrentPJK.html

Evidently Mrs. Trent had some “issues” keeping her story straight… not to mention all the deceased “corroborating” witnesses.
Click to expand...

Gasp....How dare you question the intergrity of a witness!!! Using the debunker Klass as a source is just plain wrong because we know that he is a liar and will go to extremes to destroy the credibility of a UFO witness. Shame on you for even presenting this information. There....now I sound like Rramjet.

You should know that the only credible source of information is from UFO proponent websites. Others are not allowed because they are biased against the ETH.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
In which case, it might have changed size between the two pictures, and actually have moved closer while appearing to move away.

Or maybe a gigantic spaceship had a minor failure in its cloaking device as it flew by, and only one of its hubcaps decloaked. :D
Click to expand...

I'm reminded of the final shot of Joss Whedon's Serenity, as a piece of (probably extremely important) equipment plummets off the Firefly-class ship as it "gains atmo".

[MalcomReynolds]What was that?[/MR]

:cool:
 
Jack by the hedge said:
In which case, it might have changed size between the two pictures, and actually have moved closer while appearing to move away.

Or maybe a gigantic spaceship had a minor failure in its cloaking device as it flew by, and only one of its hubcaps decloaked. :D
Click to expand...


Correct. And unless Rramjet fully takes that possibility into account in his, uh, I use the word loosely, analysis, any argument he might pose to suggest the thing in the photo was alien is just another turd on the pile.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom