posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 07:38 PM
The only problem I have with the "other bird theory" is that it should have been standing still before the first one approached. But there is no
evident acceleration and I doubt that a pelican can start moving without having to flap quite a bit, also producing a considerable movement of water,
and the shape should at least show a deformation rather than a smaller signature. This without even going into the field of how much water is needed
on the feathers to make it disappear (dropping its temperature drastically) and reapper and still wouldn't explain the same effect seen above the
The "debunker" didn't do a great job, I suspect she just skimmed on the report because she seems to think that the authors used the tracking to
calculate the distance not knowing that the measure was for the floor behind. You just need to reach page 19 to read they considered that
She also did a calculation using a highway (that in fact was the airport runway) and placing the object half way between the camera and the background
and there is no way to tell this in a few frames, the object could be on that line at any point, much closer or quite a bit farther than midpoint.
What she says isn't backed up by a line of sight analysis which is the only way to determine the distance and needs to be done either in a short
enough time and with enough angular motion and it's a pain in the ass, so I understand her comment on being lazy, or averaged across most of the
Another claim is that the small object can't be locked because it is too small, but there is no source to backup this claim and it's not really this
evident by itself. I think that the software evaluates both the laser tracking data and the angular diameter, not just the blooming signature, but I
can't find additional details other than the pdf presented also in the appendix of the report and I couldn't find any more techinical detail on the
And just to play like most of the debunkers, are you sure her credentials are really enough?
The problem is that I am not able to find any other military flir cam video that shows a bird to make a proper comparison. The few I found are at
terrible resolution and from the ground without camera motion and not really for military application. Same can be said for the thermal imager
presented a few posts ago to show multiple reflections of the same object: they can't be comparable to a military grade high quality camera shooting
at distant targets, and the reflection even in that case is much dimmer.
Bird? Maybe, but I can't see clearly this flapping, and pelicans don't glide "forever". I still prefer to say I don't know.
edit on 24 8 2015
by Mastronaut because: (no reason given)