1528 replies to this topic

[Chrlzs]

zoser, on 04 November 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

If you buy me a drink I'll think about it.

Funnily enough, I'd be delighted, if you're ever down under! You sound like quite a character - we may not see eye to eye on much of what is being said on the maligned topic of ufology, but I see you are willing to listen and engage in at least some debate, you don't pretend to be in-the-know and I've actually seen you admit errors and accept (some) mundane earthly explanations..

All that sets you apart from one or two folks here, and I tips me 'at to yer.

[zoser]

Chrlzs, on 11 November 2012 - 02:26 PM, said:

Funnily enough, I'd be delighted, if you're ever down under! You sound like quite a character - we may not see eye to eye on much of what is being said on the maligned topic of ufology, but I see you are willing to listen and engage in at least some debate, you don't pretend to be in-the-know and I've actually seen you admit errors and accept (some) mundane earthly explanations..

All that sets you apart from one or two folks here, and I tips me 'at to yer.

Anyone who stays up all hours researching light in the sky has to be quirky by nature; yes I am one of those.  I think I'm in good company here.

Thanks for the offer; maybe I'll take you up on that one day.

See you later Chris

Edited by zoser, 11 November 2012 - 05:03 PM.

[bee]

Chrlzs, on 11 November 2012 - 02:04 PM, said:

Let's be absolutely clear about this - are you *seriously* saying that you don't think that the image that Boony played with and that I reposted, is a lens reflection (aka 'lens flare')?  My post was VERY specific - I was NOT referring to anything but that image.

I wasn't talking about booN's image...and that was clear from what I said next....

Quote

I am on a slow connection - so I'm not watching it.

how convenient....

Quote

Really..?  Where *exactly* have I made erroneous claims about that footage?

Please consider that a formal question - either point out my 'error/s' or withdraw the comment and apologise, thanks in advance...


As above - CITE what I said and where Oberg disagrees with it.  Or withdraw it.

Go to this link/page... http://www.unexplain...c=232810&st=570

posts 576 and 577

but if you are refusing to look at the video....






.

[Chrlzs]

bee, on 11 November 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

I wasn't talking about booN's image...and that was clear from what I said next....

But you were replying to post I made that contained Boon's image.  That 'anomaly' IS lens flare (or more precisely a reflection/refraction).

Quote

how convenient....

Gee, thanks for the sympathy.  All you would have to do is post a still image showing exactly what you are talking about...

Quote

posts 576 and 577

You mean where you quoted me explaining ALL the different things that might be happening?  Where I explained how lots of optical anomalies (eg the bokeh effect (not technically lens flare) which is applicable to the notched disks) are often lumped together as 'lens flares' by the ignorant, so I simply go with the flow?  Where I also elaborated on the numerous issues that could cause the ice/debris particles to move in 'odd' ways?

So what particular effect are you referring to?  Geez, at least give me a video timing.  I'll be happy to explain in lengthy detail about ALL the effects that might cause a PARTICULAR anomaly.  I'm sure you'd rather just keep it 'simple', and then accuse me (falsely) of mislabelling some particular effect of your choosing.  But these things aren't simple.  What explains one anomaly may not be applicable to another and they may be combinations of numerous factors.  I'm not wading through some video and trying to explain every dam thing with one liners, just so you can point score by changing the goalposts.

NOMINATE the actual still frames or the video timings and I'll be happy to elaborate at great length.  And be very specific, QUOTE the parts where you claim I contradicted Oberg.  If it was the 'notched disks', both Oberg and I know exactly what they are and we agree.  See what i did there? - I nominated the exact thing I was talking about.  Just like I showed the exact image I was talking about, above..

Please try that approach sometime.

[bee]

.

forget it Chrlzs...I've said all I want to say about it for now (sorry )

[booNyzarC]

Slightly off topic musical interlude...





We're Sgt. DB's Lonely Cohorts Band!  We hope you will enjoy the show!
We're Sgt. DB's Lonely Cohorts Band!  Sit back and let the evening go!

Sgt. DB's Lonely...
Sgt. DB's Lonely...
Sgt. DB's Lonely...
Cohorts Band!

[Saru]

Thread cleaned

Please avoid making derogatory personal observations about other thread participants.

Thank you.

[TheMacGuffin]

Apollo 7. October 1968.  This "Green Fireball" was heading up from the earth rather than going down.  LOL

[AlienDan]

The way the start out dim and get brighter, is what some satelites do as they reflect sunglight, but it is odd that there's 2 right beside eachother.

[mcrom901]

TheMacGuffin, on 15 November 2012 - 11:31 AM, said:

Apollo 7. October 1968.  This "Green Fireball" was heading up from the earth rather than going down.  LOL

http://www.treurniet...pic/orbtech.htm

[mcrom901]

Why the ejected ball is always green-colored? Ejection of small green light ball from HL is due to radiation pressure produced by the interaction between very low frequency electromagnetic waves (VLF) and atmospheric ions (present in the central white-colored ball) through ion-acoustic waves (IAW).^[12]

http://en.wikipedia....Hessdalen_light

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

mcrom901, on 15 November 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

Why the ejected ball is always green-colored? Ejection of small green light ball from HL is due to radiation pressure produced by the interaction between very low frequency electromagnetic waves (VLF) and atmospheric ions (present in the central white-colored ball) through ion-acoustic waves (IAW).^[12]

http://en.wikipedia....Hessdalen_light

Sounds like a very complicated game of snooker.

[JimOberg]

TheMacGuffin, on 15 November 2012 - 11:31 AM, said:

Apollo 7. October 1968.  This "Green Fireball" was heading up from the earth rather than going down.  LOL

Basic stuff:

Time/date of image?
Eyewitness reports -- what did the crew say?
Assessment of alternate possibilities such as film emulsion flaw?
Printer problem in later-generation copies?

And yes, before we get distracted, do we all agree that the Afanasyev story
as reported on the TV documentary is a fraud? And that Clark McClelland,
cited as a credible expert, believes Hitler escaped to a secret Antarctic base
where his Nazis built UFOs that later buzzed Washington, DC?

Edited by JimOberg, 15 November 2012 - 02:19 PM.

[bee]

747400, on 15 November 2012 - 02:03 PM, said:

Sounds like a very complicated game of snooker.

sounds like a theoretical model of a complicated game of snooker....

from mcrom's link....

Quote

The theoretical model shows that the velocity of ejected light balls by HL cluster is of about 10,000 m s−1 in a good agreement with the observed velocity of some ejected light balls, which is estimated as 20,000 m s−1.^[11] Why the ejected ball is always green-colored? Ejection of small green light ball from HL is due to radiation pressure produced by the interaction between very low frequency electromagnetic waves (VLF) and atmospheric ions (present in the central white-colored ball) through ion-acoustic waves (IAW)

and that section of the wiki page begins...

Quote

In spite of on-going research there is no convincing explanation to the origin of these lights. However, there are numerous working hypotheses.

.

[JimOberg]

bee, on 15 November 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

sounds like a theoretical model of a complicated game of snooker....
.

Before you go voyaging off on expeditions of wild conjecture, wouldn't it be sensible to verify that the original story is worth it?

Seems to me that any reality-based agenda would take that step first, or risk getting hopelessly and uselessly lost. Again.

But that's just me.