I was just wondering if you have thoughts.

There are the four lights beneath. They taper into the direction
of travel. They are larger aft, than fore. Could this be a field effect?
If you had a power system in a very modest condition of output,
would this be it? Would you expect more "light" from more power?

And the tapering effect. Close inspection reveals the lights are larger
aft, smaller fore. And the object moves in the same direction.
If there were ions capturing electrons from the atmosphere, then maybe
that gives the light we see. And the fact it tapers, may be an indication
of gradient of field. More to the rear, less to the front, voila, we move
accordingly.

One is red. It must have less energy at the time of this picture.
It does appear white, in the second picture, and it has moved in relation
to the other three. This could mean the object rotated, or the light moved,
but changed color, in any event. Also, the lights are brighter from the rear.
Again, a possible field effect, because of gradient.

One last mention, the diffraction of light in both pictures.
In the first picture, a small branch of the tree is seen between the
camera and the object, crossing upward, through the bottom light.
Notice, the light is bending around the branch. A typical quality
of longer waves of light, is to bend around surfaces.

I could not upload high resolution pictures, so these are lower in quality.

The object moving away.

[Edit] Post removed

Diffraction.

The lights seems to shine through the branches. Unless the tree is transparent, there is no way that could happened. It's an edited photo.

That is a good observation. What role, if any, could diffraction play in the
bending of light waves, from a source beyond the tree? I know I may be
overlooking editing as the reason for the appearance. But, if someone
was able to place the object into the picture, and make such an
oversight, it seems contradictory.
Can someone create the same type picture, and post it?
Without the "light error"?

Dreamrebel-
I too believe it is fair to discuss this after photo-contrast inspection.
Here is an enlarged, contrast enhanced version.
Please note, I have highlighted two rows of JPEG compression.
If you follow straight to the object, you will notice a natural encursion
through the plane of the disk shape. This seems consistant with JPEG,
especially in a lower-end digital device, which may have been used to
capture the image, rather than a more expensive model.
That said, I see no smearing, no painting over.
My rows are continuos, from the orange starting points.

The depth of field in the original seems consistant with a cloudy, low
ambient light time of day. And, it looks higher than the tree.

There is one other detail, I did not mention. That is rather intuitive,
but my impression is that the object, if it is real, has two distinct
structures, visible from beneath. One is the overhang of the main
structure, and the other is a smaller diameter compartment,
beneath. This could be conceived this way. Begin with the main,
top light. At about "two-o'clock" it gives way to a series of small,
possibly vertical window-type shapes. They ring their way
around, becoming lost in a branch, beyond the red light, again,
about two-o'clock from that red light.
A cloudy, misty atmosphere would make vertical, dimly lit windows
indistinct. Lack of detail may be from these various aspects.
I would like your opinion.

You see, my "opinion" is that the lights are located below the
second structure, and extend beyond it. This would satisfy
my concept of a field effect. The lights are not from glowing
metal, or self-enclosed housings. They are irregular in shape,
larger in back than in front, like an egg, and point in the
direction of travel. I maintain they appear seperate and distinct
from the apparent hull. So many reports mention lights, but what
use is external illumination to navigtion of some such object?
These seem suspended below, and partially under the lower
compartment, partially under the upper structure.
The object is not simply a disk, but a disk over a more narrow
compartment.

And further, would these lights appear in a vaccuum, where there
would be no atmosphere? Are they the product of nitrogen?
Oxygen?

hummm.. are they the same object? The first one has only 3 lights, and the 2nd one has 4.

Yes, the reddish colored light has been replaced by another color.
It may be some accelerating to the field, if that is at all the case.
In addition, its position appears moved, relative to the others.

I just wanted to mention one last thing. In the picture detail, below, the
light is more pink, than primary red. The limbs on the tree seem to
have a cast of reflected light about them.
If the humidity is high enough, there could be moisture on the branches.
This moisture would be very effective at scattering light.

Red light does not scatter as easy as blue, that is why the sky is blue.
But, not all red light avoids being scattered, like rainbows.
And against a dark limb, on a humid day, the effect of red scattering may
possibly be seen.

never seen these pics before... where'd they come from? any story? I can probably host the higher resolution pics for a while if you want

So far you have only showed that the photo is not edited but not if it's a hoax

Isn't that the Virgin Airship that was used in an attempt to see how many people would see it as a UFO ?

Could someone enlighten us? Virgin whom? The English corporation?
Was there a publicized event, concerning advertising? Was there a
campaign, funded to conduct a scientific experiment using an inflated
balloon of some sort? Or simply a bizzare undertaking by someone
with too much money, and too little honest occupation...

If this was a frisbee, with lights, that is one heck of a shutter speed,
just to my thinking.

Doesn't anyone else find it odd how these photos, and stories only circulate on the internet where people have unlimited access to frauding equipment.



.........odd that.



I really love the whole thrill of the unexplained but I just get the feeling alot of you are blindly following whatever you're shown.

[Edit] Post removed

It's nice to believe though eh.

Baring any freak light warping; I am going to say that the photo is edited. It doesn't look right along with the surroundings. Although if it is indeed a hoax, then they did a good job of it.

looks like a bubble to me! look i can do it too!

No kidding nordic dragon! Looks kinda like a spaceship(that doesn't mean i'm dumb)especially around the sides and the middle!

looks totally doctored to me

Please explain.

DreamRebel-

RealMedia
http://www.dbarkertv.com/Allen_Park.ram

or

http://www.dbarkertv.com/Allen_Park.wma

I thought mayybee, this might prevail.

Of course, the risk I take is to bear the rath of those who have never
served in the military, and may be wet behind the ears...

[URL=http://www.dbarkertv.com/Allen_Park.htm]
http://www.dbarkertv.com/Allen_Park.htm[/URL]

http://www.dbarkertv.com/UPDATE.htm

P.S.
I have written them to tell them of my experience, which pertains.

Reconstruction of one witness, below.