Ufo over cornwall, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times


reply posted on 1-1-2008 @ 11:42 AM by sherpa
reply to post by wigit



Thank you for that image wigit, that has helped me put the Cornwall image in better perspective.

In your image I would say the bird is flying left to right and the same goes for the Cornwall one.

Good lord, another internos avatar he is rapidly becoming a one stop shop around here


reply posted on 1-1-2008 @ 01:29 PM by ArMaP
reply to post by Timewavezer0



And how do you know the distance between the seagull and the camera?

To know the distance of anything without any external reference and using only one point of view you have to know its size, and to know the size you have to know the distance, it is impossible to know both without more information.

Just by looking at the photo is impossible to know the size and/or the distance at which the seagull was, in the same way that it is impossible to know the size and distance of the ships.

[edit on 1/1/2008 by ArMaP]


reply posted on 1-1-2008 @ 02:44 PM by stumason
reply to post by Jimmy910130



The "humpback", you so expertly cite as proof this isn't a bird, is it's other wing.

C'mon people, I'm a a believer in UFO's, but I'm not an idiot. This is a bird, quite clearly, and not for the first time.

If you look properly at the picture, you can see the tail, the two wings, the head, beak and a black streak on the belly of the bird.

See this pic of a bird, it is flying in the same manner:




reply posted on 1-1-2008 @ 02:47 PM by skibtz
reply to post by Timewavezer0



They guy didnt even know the seagull was there until he saw the photo. How would he know how far away it was?

Trust me. I am waiting for the 'Big One' but this aint it.

It is a bird and Nick Pope and Michael Soper need to justify having this story splashed over The Sun just days after the photograph was taken.

These guys are a joke and are harming Ufology.

Unless The Sun misrepresented/misquoted them


reply posted on 1-1-2008 @ 02:53 PM by ArMaP
reply to post by Jimmy910130



Forget the 2 miles, its impossible to know at what distance the UFO/seagull was.

If the ships were 2 miles away does that mean the branches that we can also see on the photo are 2 miles away? It doesn't, and we know because we recognise the branches as such and use our knowledge of what a branch looks like and its size to mentally adjust the information given by the photo.

In the same way, the fact that the ships may be 2 miles away does not mean that anything in the photo must be closer than 2 miles, the horizon is farther away than that.

PS: I don't know if the ships are 2 miles away, but I think that the idea for a distance came from the distance at which the ships were at the time.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Egg found in Martian Meteorite
  Posted 17 days ago with 126 member flags
Bad Ufologists-Lets clean the closet of any skeletons
  Posted 8 days ago with 52 member flags
Death by UFO!
  Posted 14 days ago with 49 member flags
UFOs during Satellite launch
  Posted 8 days ago with 49 member flags
Tracey Taylor - "Aliens Gave Me a Special Gift"
  Posted 7 days ago with 31 member flags
DIVINE INTERVENTION: ETs Defeating Old World Order
  Posted 15 days ago with 29 member flags