apologies for not responding to posts a few days back, I feel any response now is 'out of date' to an extent.
I would finish my participation to say at least Chrlz has provided an argument against the analysis itself, I for one do not have the time let alone the ability to scrutinise Chrlz analysis, but hope someone with a greater knowledge does so.
I can understand why McG makes the comments he does regarding trust, in the same way a majority of skeptics did not accept the analysis of a random internet poster (mainly due to the tone being in favour of true UFO), likewise many here do not wish to take the word of another random internet poster (Chrlz, with all due respect) whos tone/outcome favours a more mundane possibilty to the object.
Overall I agree there is probably little more to be said on this photo and its down to us all to think as we will......
Excellent post!...Once again , showing yourself to be 'the voice of reason' Quillius!