The Calvine UFO Image is finally out

You are deciding that they’re being accurate on the stuff you agree with but not with the stuff you disagree with. If they say that there were no Harriers in the area at the alleged time the photo was taken then I can’t see why they would misinform each other about that. it would be easy to check and far better to include factual information to each other.

originally posted by: Tortuga
You are deciding that they’re being accurate on the stuff you agree with but not with the stuff you disagree with. If they say that there were no Harriers in the area at the alleged time the photo was taken then I can’t see why they would misinform each other about that.

I don't think they phrased it "no harriers in the area" it was more like "no records of Harriers in the area", which sounds similar, except that records can be lost or destroyed, either accidentally or intentionally. Or it could be some other kind of aircraft that remembles a Harrier, but the low resolution might make positive identification difficult.

I do recall NASA claiming they couldn't find records related to the UFO reported near Kecksburg, but that doesn't mean there never were any records; apparently there were at one point, before they were lost or destroyed or whatever.

New Documents Shed Light on NASA's Secretive 'Project Moon Dust'

In 2007, NASA finally relented and gave over the files it had and agreed to pay Kean’s legal fees related to the lawsuit. But some of the files related to Kecksburg and Project Moon Dust were allegedly lost forever. According to a NASA public affairs document included in this latest round of documents, NASA sent its files to the National Archives for safekeeping two years after the Kecksburg incident. In 1996, the National Archives told NASA that the files had been marked as lost since 1987.

Some of that moondust information could have been sensitive (as in documenting violations of international agreements to return space debris to the originating country), so there oculd be incentives to "lose" it. There could be incentives to "lose" other sensitive information, but it's hard to judge if we don't know all the details.

Clarke wrote previously that the Calvine object is a "UFO" to us, but a source told him it was not unidentified (to people who knew what it was).

archive.ph...

But although my sources disagree about what they images show, they all agree that whatever was captured on film was not a UFO because it was not unidentified. That might explain why a full set of papers are missing from the UFO files released at The National Archives in 2009.

More missing papers? My, oh my, how could that happen?

Whether they might have "lost" some records of Harrier deployments, I have no idea, but it was a denial of records, not a denial of Harriers.

a reply to: Blaine91555

It has a visible seam that appears to bisect the craft and other hatches? and indentations. The odd delamination/flaring of the body is reminiscent of a flap use to fill balloons. I think it's a hoax.

originally posted by: chunder
a reply to: mirageman

I'm not sure much store can be put in the fact that they stated they couldn't trace any Harrier's in the area. If there were and they admitted that if the story was then run in the papers there would have been a lot further questioning. Easy just to say no Harrier there and put further doubt on the photo.

The memo is advising the UK Under Secretary of State for the Armed Forces what to say to the newspaper in the assumption that the article would be going to press shortly.



So if this was all put together to shut down further public scrutiny, then Nick Pope's predecessor was effectively providing misinformation to his superior. Something I would find highly concerning coming from what was a junior supervisory position within the MoD.

The comment about UFO sightings being rare in Scotland is open to interpretation. The MoD UFO records contain about 10 reports in 1990 alone before the Calvine case.

originally posted by: mirageman
So if this was all put together to shut down further public scrutiny, then Nick Pope's predecessor was effectively providing misinformation to his superior. Something I would find highly concerning coming from what was a junior supervisory position within the MoD.

Not really, all it says effectively is that the junior supervisor in that position in the MoD has no record, it isn't clear how hard they tried to find one. The assumption may be that the RAF had no record but it doesn't say that and I guess you could speculate on a number of reasons why there might not be anyway (the Harrier was diverted mid-flight - the time they were checking was GMT not BST).

All speculation I suppose but having worked for the MoD and other similar organisations a "junior" providing "factual" information such as this is a common cut off allowing the "senior" to state something truthfully which might not be 100% correct. Yes Minister style.

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: Direne

The angular sides are highly suggestive of a Stealth blimp.

That's what I believe.

A blimp, or dirigible, where the actual blimp is encased in a thin, but strong and lighwieght material. Think of a balloon in a skeleton box frame.
It would hover, makes viturally no noise and have enough power to power the lights on it.

Now, if you're just some random citizen walking around and you saw this floating black triangle object, you'll scream UFO.
Hell, I probably would too.

Infact, this can be a DIY pet project, make a few Balloons, framed them on black cardboard box cutouts, paint it black, throw in a cheap LED, boom.

Anyway, it could also be the real deal UFO. We just have to have all the facts.

Not a photo guy, but the analysis posted by mm says it wasn’t manipulated as a photo and that any manipulation of it had to be from in front of the camera.

So, it could be just what it looks like a paper mache toy or some guy twisted up your average lamp shade. It sure looks far from a UFO of any technological advancement.

Is it an accepted fact that the photograph was taken in or around Calvine, in Scotland? I mean, one of the photographs shown, the one hold by the old man, shows trees in the upper left corner of the picture. I thought the hikers took the picture while on a mountain North of Calvine. I'm not sure you can find those trees in any mountain in Scotland.

Also, there are some poles with barbed-wires in the bottom side of the picture. I guess to protect sheep from I'm not sure what. I doubt the picture was taken from any altitude whatsoever. Seems more it was taken from a field in a farm.
But again, those trees seem out of place to me.

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

It is not a matter of whether the pic is genuine or not. It is a matter for the ufologists to prove it is not a blimp.

For some it's not as straightforward as that. Some are genuinely convinced that it's either a 'rock in a lake' or a 'mirage' - but the former is mostly based on ignorance of the CONTEXT and geography of the case, unaware that the photographer was hiding at the time, looking upwards.

As Arby says, it seems unlikely to be a blimp, but his alternative explanation was fascinating.

It's certainly one of the best pics of a UFO ever taken - and that's what it remains at present: Unidentified. If only we could locate the two witnesses who could elaborate on the lack of sound and the surprising speed by which it departed vertically.

PS: I'm still reading through the thread, so who knows, someone may have solved the mystery already...

originally posted by: chunder


So actually this photo, albeit a cropped even lower res version, has been in the public domain for over a decade.

It was a crudely 'traced' version rather than a 'lower res' photo - which wasn't good enough for any sort of analysis compared to the Real Deal.

Not sure why others have criticised the previous artist's impression as somehow rendering the entire case fake - that was just an excitable Nick Pope pushing that forward, and who is probably disappointed that the rest of the world is now familiar with the pic rather than just himself and a few MoD colleagues.

To up the intrigue, Pope seems to have suddenly lost his testicles and refused to 'confirm or deny' whilst simultaneously trying to portray himself as a fearless Americanised UFOtainment superstar.

Basically, the entire case needs to treated with respect and the history at least perused before jumping to conclusions that are either anomalous or not.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

A rock in what lake? I mean, I am convinced it is a rigid-hull airship for testing purposes. My bet is it was used as a target for testing radar RCS and stealth detection capabilities. But I'm not really interested in the object itself.

I'm now more interested in knowing whether the picture was even taken at Calvine at all. I'm talking about the picture Mr. Lindsay is holding in his hands. Clearly, it was not taken from a peak of a mountain (no trees exist in the peak of any mountain). The so-called tree line for Scotland (the altitude above which no trees can grow) is apparently 1,105 meters. If it was taken from a hill side then the altitude at which the RHA was flying was not that much. Anyway, those trees that are visible in the picture it was I really find intriguing.

Plus the fact the sky in Scotland by no means looks like the one in the picture in August, at 09:00 pm. Anyone knows how is the sky in Scotland in August at 09:00 pm? Last time I checked the sun sets at precisely 09:00 pm in that area. That is: it was night-time.

You don't stay at night in a Scottish hill.

I think maybe a lot of the 'flying triangle' night sightings are airships

one went by me one night. I saw three lights (nose, tail, one on top middle) and it blocked the stars. creepy for a few minutes.

unless you're real close you won't hear a thing.

a reply to: Direne

I'm now more interested in knowing whether the picture was even taken at Calvine at all.

I am guessing you are probably not a Daily Mail reader, like me.They have a recent picture of the spot where the Calvine photo was allegedly snapped. The sheep worrying defences are still present, you'll note.



Source : Daily Mail

Plus the fact the sky in Scotland by no means looks like the one in the picture in August, at 09:00 pm. ...Anyone knows how is the sky in Scotland in August at 09:00 pm? Last time I checked the sun sets at precisely 09:00 pm in that area

Dusk isn't until 9:15 to 9:20pm in that part of Scotland on an early August evening. That's if the Scotch mist doesn't roll in and dampen your spirits, laddy.

You don't stay at night in a Scottish hill.

Not even for the sheep?

a reply to: mirageman

Jeez! That's picture, take this and that, looks exactly as the 1990 one... Look at the tree branches: they are exactly the same. Is that spot a place where time stopped? An otherwordly portal somehow? Or is it that the picture is more recent than assumed?

I see your photograph shows it was not a hill side, at all. Looks like a prairie to me. But I am still not convinced about the correct timing. Even if the sun sets at 09:15 pm, the sky in the original pic does not seem to match. Too much light for a sun-setting sky, in my opinion.

But again, perhaps Calvine is a place where the trees remain the same after 32 years. This now is a real mystery, better than the alleged UFO sighting.

a reply to: mirageman

Yep, I don't think it was dark yet. I did a quick search and at the longitude/latitude of that location (56.768201, -3.966186) on August 4th of this year sunset was at 9:24:05 pm. Back in 1990 it would have varied a bit, but I suspect it would only have been +/- a few minutes.

Sunrise-Sunset.org

ETA

Ok, got it... in 1990, it would have been 09:21.

Timeanddate.com

a reply to: Direne

The photo was supposedly taken in an area called Struan. Here's a shot from a different angle.

a reply to: Direne

I think you are right to question everything we supposedly know about this story by the way.

One thing claimed in 2020 by Nick Pope

...Because the photos had been taken in daylight with the surrounding countryside visible, MoD boffins could make some calculations about the mystery object’s size. It turned out to be nearly 100 feet in diameter.

Source

I'm looking at the photo and I can't see the countryside beyond the barbed wire fence. So is there another photo out there? Or is this what we might call another "mala-pope-ism "?

Using the photo in the OP I used some non-destructive methods to try and pull out the color from the haze.


Enlarged without an algorithm.



That certainly appears to be camouflage to me. Military surveillance craft? Good of a guess as any at this point.

a reply to: mirageman

To be fair to the Pope (a rare instinct!), I suspect "surrounding countryside" was a clumsy way of describing the vegetation visible at the top and bottom of the photo, including the fence - which was all the information needed for Dr. Clarke's own photographic expert to come to the same conclusion that the object measured 100 feet.


By the way, aside from the two main witnesses, I wonder what the chances are of the presumably now-retired aircraft pilot coming forward? I know: Zero.

I also need to follow my own advice and refer back to the original reports to separate the facts from the Pope-isms. Eg, even Dr. Clarke's own article describes how the UFO shot upwards at speed, but if this is an actual Pope-ism it's important to de-contaminate the story as a whole from his more dubious statements.

One more point. Can we be sure that the dark spot towards the middle of the UFO (which I initially assumed was a small 'window') is not the end-point of another 'arm' pointing towards the camera, transforming this object from a 'diamond' to something more 'starfish'-like, perhaps accounting for the darker shades of the bottom half? I haven't seen this notion mentioned by anyone, which may underline how naive I'm being, but I'll throw it out there anyway!

a reply to: Macenroe82

Diamond shape. Check.

Hovering. Check.

Humming Sound. Check.

On the evening of April 5, 2012, over the Costa Mesa area of California, a motorist reportedly saw a diamond-shaped object hovering about a mile away from him. In his report filed with the Mutual UFO Network, or MUFON, he also claims to have heard a humming sound emanating from the object

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...