Originally posted by cornucopia
my grandfather worked for nasa and helped create mufon, why are you humans not listening to me?

i KNOW we are not alone, never were

we are throughout this universe, life is everywhere

all is well, remember?

lol, whatever

i'm just trying to speed up the process..

all shall be known soon either way

If these images were taken the same day... What's out of place??






There's a rockfall on 1st image, but can see the cooker/oven clearly on 2nd image.

^^^Probably because they took the pic at a different spot.

I think the object was stationary. If it were moving she would have probably noticed it in her peripheral vision and got her attention.
So I don't think it was anything being blown by the wind or a bird.

Originally posted by Druid42
I guess I'll just wait my turn in line.

I Have a premise, which doesn't violate any aspect of Jeff's analysis, but it depends on ATS members deciding on a focal distance.

I'll wait my turn in the queue, and build my case, and present my position when I have more facts.

My position remains that it is a lens reflection from the sunglasses. That's where I'm focusing my research.

I've got a wonderful suggestion.. Since you have some reservations about pursuing other avenues which may add or diminish the credibility of the other theories... Why not work on trying to duplicate your theory?

Have you attempted to get the same results when using a camera out a rolled down window while wearing sunglasses? It seems that it would be a fairly simple task and definitely would add weight to your theory that you could then disclose to the membership.

Ideas are great on paper, but to have a working model and template adds gravitas to back one's thought's and theories.

At the risk of tarnishing my reputation, I am going to go out on a limb and make my conclusion.

At this point no evidence has been satisfactory nor has been presented to clearly show what the object is.
I have actively participated in this thread from the get go and have read every post.

So it remains that this is a UFO.

I am leaning towards it actually being an underwater kind, caught in ascention, accidentally by our photographer.

The is more proof of it being this than there is for it not being this.

Undebunkable thus far

Originally posted by JohnnyAnonymous

Originally posted by Druid42
I guess I'll just wait my turn in line.

I Have a premise, which doesn't violate any aspect of Jeff's analysis, but it depends on ATS members deciding on a focal distance.

I'll wait my turn in the queue, and build my case, and present my position when I have more facts.

My position remains that it is a lens reflection from the sunglasses. That's where I'm focusing my research.

I've got a wonderful suggestion.. Since you have some reservations about pursuing other avenues which may add or diminish the credibility of the other theories... Why not work on trying to duplicate your theory?

Have you attempted to get the same results when using a camera out a rolled down window while wearing sunglasses? It seems that it would be a fairly simple task and definitely would add weight to your theory that you could then disclose to the membership.

Ideas are great on paper, but to have a working model and template adds gravitas to back one's thought's and theories.

I HAVE been working on my own theory, and have been experimenting with mirrors and lenses (digital, of course). To duplicate the parameters involved with this particular anomaly is beyond my capabilities. It's why this particular anomaly defies explanation, as of yet.

The darkened spots on the anomaly are the inverse reflections of the goats beside the car. I am working, to that end, as the focus of my ability to refute this picture.

When I can produce plausible evidence, I will present it. Till then, I will wait my turn in the queue.

I stand firm on the UO being a reflection, close to the camera, not "out there". The UO is a reflection, from the Shooter's sunglasses, and reflects the goats with dark fur. The parameters, aye, will be decided.

I HAVE been working on my own theory, and have been experimenting with mirrors and lenses (digital, of course). To duplicate the parameters involved with this particular anomaly is beyond my capabilities. It's why this particular anomaly defies explanation, as of yet. The darkened spots on the anomaly are the inverse reflections of the goats beside the car. I am working, to that end, as the focus of my ability to refute this picture. When I can produce plausible evidence, I will present it. Till then, I will wait my turn in the queue. I stand firm on the UO being a reflection, close to the camera, not "out there". The UO is a reflection, from the Shooter's sunglasses, and reflects the goats with dark fur. The parameters, aye, will be decided.

( Hint ) look at that shiny diamond ring !


matter of fact, I'll help ya out a bit







Top one is the "UFO" bottom is her diamond ring, Notice any similarity's?




I am looking at the way she has taken the picture and it is not like she had her eye up to the camera and could have missed that object, So if she did not see it then good sense tells you it was not there, if it wasn't there then it is a reflection that only the camera could see.

I don't know if anyone will understand where I'm coming from on this or
Be able to replicate it but here's an idea. As I was looking over this photo I noticed it looks like the object is reflecting the sun, on the top right corner. Maybe if someone who is more savvy with computer stuff can reaserch according to which direction the picture was taken, and figure out the sun path. Then you can see if it's plausible for the sun to reflect off the object at that angle. Once you figure that out, you can second check it with the shadows on the goats to see if both match up in the sky according to sun location and time of day. Well there's my middle of the night epiphany.

It's definately aliens!

Originally posted by TinfoilTP

Originally posted by aynock

Originally posted by salmoneggs
You can add 15 multicoloured grid lines, talk of the trajectory of reflected angles and analyze contrasting proportions. It still looks exactly like a drop of water

water droplets tend to be round - the object clearly has a flat bottom - a drop falling straight down would show some distortion to the bottom caused by air pressure but the object looks too flat to be a droplet imo

if it is fluid it is definitely falling straight down though, so it's unlikely to be from the goats

Goat sweat goes up and comes down with lateral movement, like ballistics, when flung from the shake of the goats body.

It wouldn't shoot in a straight line from the goat to the vehicle.

Lateral velocity would elongate the miniscule fluid droplet and the ballistic characteristic of falling would flatten the bottom all at the same time.

If you don't like goat sweat than think wet jowl ejection or wet shaggy fur from a recent urination.

could be - the more i look at the original (unimproved) image though, the more it looks like a blue plastic bag

Gotta love the people who say its a bird lol This looks nothing like a bird! What it is, i don't know, but bird!?