It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Revisiting The Calvine UFO Photo...Definitive Proof Removed By UK's Ministry of Defence?

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:08 PM
link   
There have been a lot of articles here on ATS, concerning the Nimitz UFO and the Pentagon's UFO program, AATIP, but we sometimes forget that there have been many cover-ups, involving UFO evidence, that has occurred in other countries as well. I just recently viewed a 2015 video on YouTube, about the 1990 Calvine UFO sighting, that took place near Pitlochry, Scotland. A number of color photographs were taken by two hikers, who sent them to the Scottish Daily Record, who then asked the Ministry Of Defence (MoD) for confirmation on the event. The photos were later sent to the Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS), then to JARIC (Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Centre) for analysis. Supposedly, British journalist and UFO commentator, Nick Pope, who worked at the MoD from 1985 to 2006, saw a poster-sized enlargement of a photo from this sighting, when he ran the MoD’s UFO project from 1991 to 1994. This poster sized print showed a clear picture of both the Calvine UFO and a British Harrier military jet, that was flying near it. This object was a large and diamond shaped craft @ 80 feet in diameter, that hovered silently above the ground for nearly 10 minutes, before flying off at high rate of speed. It still isn't certain whether the jet was sent on an intercept mission, or if it was escorting the craft. A recreation of the poster sized photo is seen below.




“This wasn’t the archetypal distant, blurred UFO photo,” Pope added. “This was up close and personal, reach-out and you-can-touch-it stuff. ‘I don’t know what it is, but it’s not one of ours’ was the stock answer to the inevitable question. Word got around and people would swing by to take a look, even when they had no obvious business in our section.”

www.huffingtonpost.com...&title=Weather_Phenomenon

In 1994, Pope says his superior thought the craft was a secret American military aircraft or drone, but the U.S. later denied that they had anything of "theirs" flying over Scotland at the time of the incident. Soon afterwards, Nick Pope's boss took down the poster and it was never seen again. Matter of fact, none of the original color photos were ever seen.


What happened next? The suspicion was that someone had shredded the photo, but whatever the truth of the matter, it was never seen again. The same thing had happened with some Defence Intelligence Staff files on the Rendlesham Forest UFO incident that it turned out had been inadvertently destroyed and I was in the same position again: I think some people thought I’d put all this stuff through the shredder myself, but I promise I didn’t.



This was some years before the UK got its Freedom of Information Act. At the time, shredding the photo – if that’s what happened – would probably have been a legitimate (albeit unfortunate) action. If such an action happened post-FOI and was a deliberate attempt to circumnavigate the Act, it would have been illegal.



Despite the various media interviews that I did on this story, and associated public appeals, the witnesses have never come forward. Neither has anyone at the Scottish Daily Record (or any other Scottish newspaper) come forward to say that they worked on this story back in 1990. Understandably, this has generated a few conspiracy theories. I wonder if the truth is a little more mundane. In their desperation to acquire the photos/negatives (and maybe kill the story), maybe DIS staff somehow tricked the journalist into handing over all the material and never gave it back. If the journalist hadn’t briefed the editor, he may have stayed silent out of embarrassment. Similarly, maybe the witnesses were told that it would be better if they didn’t discuss what they’d seen and took this as a threat.



The MoD files that contain documents relating to this case have been released and are available at the National Archives, though MoD says that no trace has been found of the images, aside from one poor quality photocopy of a line drawing that was done as part of the original MoD investigation. The documents can be found in the following National Archives files: DEFE 24/1940/1 - page 114 DEFE 31/179/1 - pages 157-8 DEFE 31/180 - pages 55-57 DEFE 31/180/1 - pages 37-38. I don't know if the photos or negatives will ever turn up, but I certainly hope they do. Because whatever peoples’ views on UFOs, these are the photos that changed the minds of numerous skeptical civil servants, military personnel and intelligence specialists at MoD. I should know. I was one of them.

www.nickpope.net...


edit on 6/6/2018 by shawmanfromny because: grammar police caught a mistake




posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Those of us with an interest in ufo's know all about cover ups! Been going on for decades, especially in the U.S., as most of us know. Unfortunately we are now under the most science suppressing time maybe in our history. Throw in stigma, and this is not a good time for anyone trying to get to the bottom of what is going on in our skies, and where they are coming from. Sad!



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: data5091

Very well said!



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Looking at the rear bottom of the craft, there appears to be a swastika! May just be a trick of light, shadow, or degradation of the original. However, I'm leaning towards it being one of "ours".



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

It is a fascinating case certainly, I for one believe the UFO phenomena is real having seen 'something' myself late one night back in the 90's, something metallic, reflective dipping in and out of cloud layers and silent or at least I could not hear it over the gale force wind which was blowing that night and it was flying against the wind at a similar rate of speed to what a low flying RAF tornado (jet fighter) would sometimes do in the area of north Lancashire were I saw this but of course unlike the tornado there was no sound from it, this was near to the Pilkington laboratory's site in west Lancashire and the only reason I saw it was because I felt something like when you feel someone watching you and I then jerked my head up and looked directly at it as it flew overhead.


But as for this sighting which Nick Pope did a piece on I actually tend toward it likely being a US or US technology based stealth plane of some kind.

Then again?.

edit on 6-6-2018 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: EternalShadow

The pic is a recreation of the original, which has possibly been shredded



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

thank you kind sir.



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: tayton
a reply to: EternalShadow

The pic is a recreation of the original, which has possibly been shredded



Oh.

Well, that explains a lot. Lol.



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

The only "definitive" proof is one you (or I) can see with our own eyes. Even then, we are fallable bags of bones. A photo would never be enough to prove anything.

Even if a photo could be proven 100% authentic, undoctored and un edited, who's to say it isn't a photo of a messed with photo?



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: nerbot

I saw one over 40 years ago as a teen and it was the most perplexing thing I ever saw. I was born on an Air Force base and was extremely interested in airplanes growing up. A true UFO sighting messes with your head, because your mind is trying hard to decipher something it knows nothing about, all while dismissing the obvious possibilities. But, getting back to your statement, I'm curious about something you said. If military or government photo analysts conclude a picture is "100% authentic," wouldn't that prove that the photo hasn't been "messed" with?



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Anyone who works for government or military are under strict contract to follow orders, not tell truths. You work it out.

A photo can be 100% authentic, but who's to say the subject matter is 100% authentic?

If I completely doctor/manipulate/photoshop a photo, then take a new photo of that work, the result is a 100% authentic unedited picture (of an edited picture) that can be verified by experts.

Government photo analysts can only work with what they are given.



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   
This story is not purely anecdotal. It is mentioned in the various MoD released papers referenced in the opening post.

The original photograph has been seen by a handful of people.

The copy in the National Archives looks like a very bad (good few generations old) photocopy.


Photocopy as per DEFE 31/180/1 p37-38

Rumours at the time were that the US were testing a new 'stealth' aircraft called 'Aurora'.

It is also a matter of government record that questions were asked in Parliament about this incident and officially recorded.




Mr. Redmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department made of the photograph of an unidentified craft at Calvine on 4 August 1990; who removed it from an office in secretariat (air staff) 2a; for what reasons; and if he will make a statement. [39248]

Mr. Soames: A number of negatives associated with the sighting were examined by staff responsible for air defence matters. Since it was judged that they contained nothing of defence significance the negatives were not retained and we have no record of any photographs having been taken from them.

Source : Hansard 23rd July 1996


A few other pertinent questions were added on the record on that day. The Defence Minister at the time Nicholas Soames succesfully stonewalled them all as being "not of defence significance".

My gut feeling is that these photos were of defence significance but were probably of something the US and UK were testing out. But given the vague information available make of it what you will.


edit on 6/6/2018 by mirageman because: efit



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Always found this case very intriguing. If the recreation photo is completely accurate in terms of design, I find it interesting that the craft was reported to be able to hover, yet it also appears to have some kind of thruster or exhaust jet on what is presumably the back of the craft. I also find the date interesting. 1990.

Think about this for a second. Turn the craft vertical and you would have a diamond-shaped craft with an exhaust port (assuming that's what the thing on the "back" of the craft is) at the bottom. Essentially a big diamond with flames coming out of the bottom. I'm sure this sounds familiar to anyone who knows UFOlogy well. Ten years earlier, in 1980, Betty Cash, Vickie and Colby all witnessed and were injured by a very similar craft. Could it have been the same thing? Or an earlier prototype of this vehicle?
edit on 6-6-2018 by Charizard because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny


Colour pictures should have colour negatives so the hikers would have had those



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Sometimes I think the people in charge are beyond stupid

The world is falling apart, this disclosure would change the world for the better, technology would leap and humanity would come together against possible external threats

But guess they can't just give up control of the planet



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: TritonTaranis

They are not interesting in humanity only there own personal power and control of other's.



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: shawmanfromny


Colour pictures should have colour negatives so the hikers would have had those
I was going to say the same thing, but then I read mirageman's post with quotes suggesting the MOD got their hands on the negatives somehow.

Certainly an object that much bigger than a harrier would be of defense significance, unless they knew what it was and it wasn't a UFO to the MOD. Bill Scott, and aviation expert who has been interviewed about very large craft which can hover indefinitely refers to rigid hull airships which may very well exist and be classified. Well we know the Hindenberg existed and they can be built in any shape or size within reason.

Flying off at "a high rate of speed" might have been a problem for the Hindenberg, but that diamond shape looks more aerodynamic and propulsion technologies have advanced since then, and who knows what "high rate of speed" means anyway?



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: TritonTaranis

I think it's all about greed.



posted on Jun, 6 2018 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Its funny when someone in another thread was slagging off Nick Pope saying he brings nothing to Ufology the photocopy of the diamond shaped UFO popped into my mind. If I remember correctly it stood there in the sky for some time in broad daylight and was photographed. A photo ended up on Nick Popes desk he made a photocopy before photos it was confiscated.



posted on Jun, 7 2018 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Ill sound like a broke ass record to some, but to reiterate, it takes two to tango here.

If e.t. are here, they are just as much a part of the cover up as any government or person here.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join