are there better UFO photos than '65 heflin ones?

I've never been a fan of old classic UFO pictures. Mainly because most of them looks... retarded in terms of aerodynamic design or what not. Than again, I'm not an Alien, how do I know they don't fly in basketballs?

The thing is, arguing about whether if the pictures have been tampered or not doesn't gain you any merit. I can go out to a hardware store, make my own Saucer Frisbee, tell my friend to stand across the field to shoot a few shots at it when I toss it in the air. There you go, I will have my own UFO photos up online in no time.

I'm not debunking the pictures, but just feel like they shouldn't be considered as hard evidence.

To me, without a benefit of a doubt, Aliens exists. Have they visited us already in the past? Are they observing us everyday? They might live among us. I believe it all. However, for me, real evidence would be something happening similar to the new TV show "V", or Independence Day style. In my own opinion, real evidence and real proof would be that.

Some of these old photos are the best evidence out there, since they can't be summarily dismissed as CGI or photoshopped.

I find it hilarious when people "debunk" them by saying "Oh, that looks like someone tossed a hubcap and snapped some photos.. case closed." How about you actually read all the research on the subject before commenting? Do you have any idea how many hundreds of hours of scrutiny and research this case alone has had? And you really think you are so smart, that saying "Oh that's a brake disc" has solved it?

This is a place to learn and study and discuss. I don't know why some people think it's actually a spot to try to prove how "smart" they are by "debunking" all cases, even ones with hundreds of hours of professional research, with their 3 minute in-depth study of the photos.

reply to post by reject

---

I just seen a ufo hunter episode on these I think. They had a Polaroid expert on.

Apparently, all photos were taken within 20 seconds. Some people said that camera couldn't take that many snaps in 20 seconds. The expert did it in 17 secs.

The clarity of the photo is because the polaroid camera is set to infinite and everything in the frame stays in focus.

In the last photo, it was said there are suddenly clouds in the sky. It was explained that the first photo from inside the cab and had the interior of the cab in the photo (black). These caused the contrast to mess up in the first pic.

Oh, they also ran a computer program where they took the witness specifications of size and distance of object.

Then created it in a CAD type program and when they took a 20' object and moved it 200' away (I forget the actual #'s) it shrinks the size of the object on screen. They overlayed the photo onto the display and it was like a totally perfect match. (Which I thought was kinda amazing since I couldn't judge something that size & distance)

This was supposed to rule out a frisbie or brake or whatever being tossed into the air.


Anyway a little more info to go with the pictures..
thanks for the pics.

Here's a link to the whole episode online:
aliencasebook.blogspot.com...

I think the Helfin case pretty much starts in the 2nd clip there.



Someone posted a clip from that part of the UFO hunters show earlier in this thread, and we already commented that it only proves that the photographer knew trigonometry, which he was required to know and use in his job, so it didn't really prove anything about the UFO.

The only conclusion one can draw from the 3D modeling part of the clip, is that if it didn't match up perfectly like it did, then the guy should have been fired from his job for being incompetent.

But I guess they met their objective if they got some people to think it really does prove something, they must be counting on some people not knowing any better, but you should have known better since we shared this information with you in this thread on the previous page. And it certainly doesn't rule out the model/hoax possibility as they suggested on that show. The 3D modeling part was a complete waste of time, but I like the show and they have done much better and more helpful analyses than that one on other episodes.

reply to post by Arbitrageur

---

Nothing to be sorry about, I appreciate your comments !

I had tried to find out more in relation to the Maslin case and the alleged timeframe and non-reporting aspects but was unable to confirm anything, at least from my armchair. There does appear to be a couple of different versions around but yes, that does all need to be taken into account.

The only issue I have with the model theory, aside from the depth not looking right for a model but then I am no expert, is why. Especially if then waiting that length of time to release photos !

---

---

reply to post by falcon51

---

You've got a U2U. Please click here.

What research do you think they should do? Don't be ridiculous and defend an obvious toss and shoot so adamantly. It makes you look unwise.

The truck is pulled over to the side of the road.
Someone tossed something.
Someone shot it.
someone sold the photo.

Don't be foolish.

Aliens are not going to come to earth and pull bank maneuvers for some hick dude.

PS Don't bother to flame my response and tell me to do research or try to explain to me how much research has been done on this topic. IMO all research into this photo group is a complete waste of time.
Use Occam's Razor with this case. What does that tell you? An obvious hoax is all this is to me. Don't waste your breath.

[edit on 8-11-2009 by Wormwood Squirm]

reply to post by Wormwood Squirm

---

Notwithstanding Truthseekers avatar I assume from your post that you have a fair bit of experience of tossing and shooting.

This is supposed to be an intelligent answer? You can dismiss (though fallaciously) practically any sighting with this.

Seems to me the pseudo-skeptics are the "hick dudes" here.