Originally posted by Xtraeme
Before everyone jumps all over you. I'd like to ask when you say, "due to a phenomena not yet recognized," do you mean atmospheric? Could you
elaborate further?
Probably, yes, although thats a loose definition... since they are usually seen "in the atmosphere", it would follow that that is probably what they
are. Where they originate from, who knows...
Bear in mind we could be talking about multiple types of phenomena that have not been documented yet, in fact, I would say that there are almost
certainly multiple phenomena that are either usually so rare, or so brief that we have not managed to examine/study them.
Perhaps some are just unusual forms of well known phenomena. It's difficult to speculate on what we don't know, but in times like this, I think old
sayings can perhaps offer some insight. "Truth is often stranger than fiction" works pretty well here I think
Originally posted by Xtraeme
Appreciate the advice! Between you and WitnessFromAfar's suggestion I should be off to a good start. What's good on the mid-to-high end?
.
I think I would have to go with the Canon 5D MkII. Canon because if you spot a lens you like in another manufacturers line up, you can most probably
find an adapter that lets you use it on your Canon. The same is not true for Nikon. Also because Canon has some amazing wide angle prime lenses, that
many Nikonians lust after.
The mark II because it's got great specs, and is capable of doing just about anything anyone could want of a camera. IMO the most important things to
look for are the performance at high ISO - you want very low noise, and this goes hand in hand with having a quality sensor. Good quality sensors tend
to have big individual pixels, and don't cram too many into a small bit of wafer. Big wafers are still fairly expensive though.
Nikon's are no slouch either at the moment as far as I can tell (It's a while since I bought one), but for the reasons above, I would say Canon is
the more versatile system overall.
Originally posted by Xtraeme
I have an altazimuth tripod. I've been heavily considering getting one of the computerized tracking mounts for just the reason you described above.
Only thing that puts me off is some are a bit bulky, yet I don't want to lose out on features.
Time for me to do a bit more research me thinks
.
Big bulky mounts can hold big/heavy lenses/scopes/cameras, and the good (read expensive) ones are more accurate. I'd hold off on making a decision
till you have a better idea what sort of things you'd like to try and photograph - as you say, time for more research. One thing to keep in mind, is,
are you going to do a fair bit of traveling or not? If yes, then you probably want something more portable. If it's staying in your home observatory,
bulk shouldn't matter so much.
Originally posted by Xtraeme
I'm inclined to believe the only media coverage that would convince people would be a live-video feed from a respected news organization displaying
clear structural details such as 'ports' or 'legs.' Though I suppose there's always the 'War of Worlds' or 'The Day the World Stood Still'
scenario, both of which would easily push things over the edge.
Perhaps not quite as dramatic, but I think all it would take was a UFO hovering stationary above a city for in excess or 24 hrs before leaving, and
being tracked doing so - enough time to actually do some serious tests, and get some experts on the scene. That's a scenario based on my own
preconceptions though. As I said before, the proof could potentially come in almost any form.
Originally posted by Xtraeme
Indeed, though that tends to be more of a deduced proof of existence which leaves most people wanting.
Agreed, and it's unfortunate, but "it is the way it is". It's the same "wanting" that possibly prompted people into filling the gap with
religion in the past. Nothing much has changed apart from the belief of god being replaced with the belief in UFOs, because I think people need
something to believe in, and god/religion is no longer seen to be the "cutting edge" that it once was (hmm - perhaps not the best way of putting it,
but I think you can see what I'm trying to say).
Originally posted by Xtraeme
I know you're not terribly interested in digging deeper in to the subject, but if you get a moment I would very much appreciate if you'd read
this particular post and offer critical analysis. It would mean a lot to
me.
I'll have a look, perhaps a bit later on if I get a chance.
Originally posted by Xtraeme
Thanks again for participating in this conversation.
You're welcome Xtraeme. I enjoy participating in discussions like this one for the most part, otherwise I would not be here
