reply to post by wmd_2008
Many members on here are long time amatuer photographers,semi pro or even professional photographers we like to look at any image of a so called ufo
and long may they continue, if I see something I think is the real deal I will back it 100% up till now I cant do that.
For your information, I was deep into photography since the age of 16, and had my own black and white dark room. I won a scholarship for photography
and was a photo major the first 2 years of college before I made the change to Advertising Management. I don't know how old you are, but I was
involved in photography before digital photography made the scene.
You can claim all you want about so called "professional photographers" tearing apart digital photographs because with today's technology, someone
can easily use Photoshop and embed an object and claim it's a UFO. Sure there are hoaxes out there, but the photos you "CAN'T" easily dismiss are
those that are done on film. I manipulated many photos in my dark room using dodging techniques, using double exposures, sandwiching negatives, and
even using special effect lenses, but those can easily be identified under close examination of the negative and photo itself. Which leaves those
photos that were taken before "digital" photography that cannot be explained away.
I've seen many photos being explained away as hoaxes on this site. Some are, and some I would definitely question. The problem I have with many
skeptics is the lack of research they have done in the area of UFO's, and abduction cases. Most of them will jump at anything to explain it away.
I have to laugh at the show that tries to duplicate various sightings using photography and other techniques. That means nothing. I can duplicate a
dent in a car, it doesn't mean it was made with the same object or in the same manner. Just because I can duplicate a glow in the night sky with a
Chinese lantern doesn't mean the glow was a Chinese lantern unless it's light signature is different. (Case in point, skeptics tried to explain
away The Phoenix Lights as being flares, yet the light signature was analyzed and was shown to be nothing close to flares). Photos of the lights can
easily be explained away as just flares. It's why analyzing a photograph doesn't always tell the whole story.
Skeptics can continue to think inside the box and try to rationalize anything that doesn't fit with today's physical properties, as being a hoax.
You need to realize that their have been many physicists, scientists and doctors who have been scoffed at because of their theories that later turned
out to be factual.
What I am saying, is that this subject has not been taken seriously by the scientific community. Most of them are afraid of even mentioning it's a
possibility for fear of losing their reputation or losing their job. We still haven't learned from the example of Galileo who was condemned for his
scientific beliefs. Or Barry Marshall who was ridiculed and laughed at when he claimed that peptic ulcers were cause by the bacteria Helicobacter
I prescribe to this belief...
While it's true that at least 99% of revolutionary announcements from the fringes of science are just as bogus as they seem, we cannot dismiss
every one of them without investigation. If we do, then we'll certainly take our place among the ranks of scoffers who accidentally helped delay
numbers of major scientific discoveries throughout history. Beware, for many discoveries such as powered flight and drifting continents today only
appear sane and acceptable because we have such powerful hindsight. These same advancements were seen as obviously a bunch of disgusting lunatic
garbage during the years they were first discovered.
Here's is a just a few of the out of reality theories that were dismissed that were later to be found to exist.
Arrhenius (ion chemistry)
Alfven, Hans (galaxy-scale plasma dynamics)
Bardeen & Brattain (transistor)
Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan (black holes in 1930)
Folk, Robert L. (existence and importance of nanobacteria)
Goddard, Robert (rocket-powered space ships)
Lovelock, James (Gaia theory)
Ovshinsky, Stanford R. (amorphous semiconductor devices)
Rous, Peyton (viruses cause cancer)
Tesla, Nikola (Earth electrical resonance, "Schumann" resonance)
J H van't Hoff (molecules are 3D)
Wright, Wilbur & Orville (flying machines)
Zwicky, Fritz (existence of dark matter, 1933)
Zweig, George (quark theory)
You can find out more here...