Sweetpumper Posted May 23, 2014 #1 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Here you go. Have fun with this one. UFOs shadowing a Virgin jet above Australia Photographer snaps UFOs flying over Bondi while taking photos of a storm Dan Toomey said they were not visible to the naked eye but on a computer He saw one saucer-like and cigar-shaped object hovering next to a plane Photos were taken in 2009 but Toomey has only just released them http://www.dailymail...nger-plane.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted May 23, 2014 #2 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Interesting what one blogger asks: Why is the jet plane very clear and the UFO's fuzzy? Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2637036/Drone-like-objects-spotted-storm-cloud-close-passenger-plane.html#ixzz32Z5FcGRP We all know the answer to that know don't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted May 23, 2014 Author #3 Share Posted May 23, 2014 We all know the answer to that know don't we? Anti-gravity propulsion!!! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted May 23, 2014 #4 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Anti-gravity propulsion!!! I like a man who knows his onions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted May 23, 2014 #5 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Interesting. Could one of them be a shadow of the plane cast on the cloud? But the other ... there's no chance for it to be another plane as we keep our flight paths relatively clear of other planes. I also wonder if anyone on the plane saw the other craft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solo Kind Posted May 24, 2014 #6 Share Posted May 24, 2014 I've studied photography, so.. The Shadow refrence: No, for a shodow to be cast, you need Light to be reflected from a solid mass. Where that mass is broken the Light can and will bounce obscuring the shadow cast.. Tree folige is a good exsample. And the light is behind the plane. Again the Shadow wouldnt be seen. And the its to clear.. For this image to produce, the light source would need to be much greater then what is seen. Saying that, The second object is covered in cloud. The object is hasy because the Light reflecting from it too, is being scattered and filtered from cloud. Much like we see in Fog. The first object, is a great deal farther away from the Jet. Tho, I question, you'd get that much clarity from a 35mm lense with out more detail from the Jet.. Like, I'd expect to see the Logo on the Tail? The farthest Engine is shadow (expected) yet the Nearest engine is clearly reflecting colour. PS perhaps? But why go to the trouble? Hmmm 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseCuster Posted May 24, 2014 #7 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) We all know the answer to that know don't we? There is an "answer" that has no factual basis was invented to explain away the embarrassing fact of how crap most UFO photographs are and you keep repeating it as established fact that you have never actually convincingly argued with any sort of facts or evidence.Nobody "knows" that answer to be true. You just keep parroting the same dumb story as the true believer you are. You have yet to establish the existence of the anti-gravity drives, that they have such an effect upon photos and that the banal blobs and blurs that appear in said photos are anything other than the bugs and birds that are known to appear in photographs. Keep repeating it zoser and someone might actually believe it, but not anyone with a remotely functional sense of critical thinking. Edited May 24, 2014 by JesseCuster 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseCuster Posted May 24, 2014 #8 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Here you go. Have fun with this one. UFOs shadowing a Virgin jet above Australia From the current thread about twin UFOs over New Zealand: They're not aliens in space ships. Jesus, people, do you not have anything more worthy to argue about? Do you? Edited May 24, 2014 by JesseCuster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted May 24, 2014 Author #9 Share Posted May 24, 2014 From the current thread about twin UFOs over New Zealand: Do you? I'm not arguing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DONTEATUS Posted May 24, 2014 #10 Share Posted May 24, 2014 Its that Element 115 funk around it ! The B.L. stuff again ! Not to be compared to B.S. stuff ! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted May 24, 2014 #11 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) There is an "answer" that has no factual basis was invented to explain away the embarrassing fact of how crap most UFO photographs are and you keep repeating it as established fact that you have never actually convincingly argued with any sort of facts or evidence. Nobody "knows" that answer to be true. You just keep parroting the same dumb story as the true believer you are. You have yet to establish the existence of the anti-gravity drives, that they have such an effect upon photos and that the banal blobs and blurs that appear in said photos are anything other than the bugs and birds that are known to appear in photographs. Keep repeating it zoser and someone might actually believe it, but not anyone with a remotely functional sense of critical thinking. Don't you believe the idea that the anti-gravity technology is the reason why most UFO's are blurry? What's your reasoning? Edited May 24, 2014 by zoser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Wearer of Hats Posted May 24, 2014 #12 Share Posted May 24, 2014 Don't you believe the idea that the anti-gravity technology is the reason why most UFO's are blurry? What's your reasoning? It's easier to fake a blurry photo of a balloon then a clear one? This, incidentally, isn't a photo of a balloon. It's genuinely requiring an explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Duck Posted May 24, 2014 #13 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Don't you believe the idea that the anti-gravity technology is the reason why most UFO's are blurry? What's your reasoning? Wouldn't the visual effect more likely be an anti-gravitational lens? Edited May 24, 2014 by Mangoze 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted May 24, 2014 #14 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Don't you believe the idea that the anti-gravity technology is the reason why most UFO's are blurry? OK a switch to 'most ufo's' now is it, covering yourself from all angles eh? Explain the following image? Why are some planes indistinct and blurry? We KNOW WW2 planes had no anti-gravity, so...explain it? Why are some indistinct and blurry? Maybe the penny will drop... Edited May 24, 2014 by seeder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted May 24, 2014 #15 Share Posted May 24, 2014 Wouldn't the visual effect more likely be an anti-gravitational lens? Explain.......? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoser Posted May 24, 2014 #16 Share Posted May 24, 2014 OK a switch to 'most ufo's' now is it, covering yourself from all angles eh? Explain the following image? Why are some planes indistinct and blurry? We KNOW WW2 planes had no anti-gravity, so...explain it? Why are some indistinct and blurry? Maybe the penny will drop... Easy. 1) Most of the planes are actually not blurry. 2) Some blurriness could be explained by shutter speed. Nowadays with fast speeds that is less likely. The Oregon UFO for example was taken at very fast speeds yet still blurry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 27, 2014 #17 Share Posted May 27, 2014 I like a man who knows his onions. Pity you guys are short on physics........ But yes, as far as UFO's go, you seem to be an expert on vegetables. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 27, 2014 #18 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Don't you believe the idea that the anti-gravity technology is the reason why most UFO's are blurry? What's your reasoning? Considering the way that simulated anti gravity can be achieved according to the best mids today - why would anti gravity blur things? We have idea how it works, but the blurring is just made up crap by you to shoehorn more lights in the sky into ET folders for personal validation. Anti Gravity can be achieved by ion Lift and propelled by monopole magnets - how does that create blurring? You cannot answer because you are speaking from out your backside. Again. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinewave Posted May 27, 2014 #19 Share Posted May 27, 2014 (edited) Interesting what one blogger asks: Why is the jet plane very clear and the UFO's fuzzy? Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz32Z5FcGRP We all know the answer to that know don't we? That is a good question. I would guess the camera was focused on the plane making the crud on the window (later mistaken for UFOs) appear out of focus. Edited May 27, 2014 by sinewave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perceptivum Posted May 27, 2014 #20 Share Posted May 27, 2014 I find this picture to be nothing more than a waste of time. The objects, not the Virgin Blue jet, are only UFO's by strict definition as they are unidentified, flying, and objects. However, that just raises the question of what kind of bird, meteor, falling space junk, etc. it could be...not that the objects are alien spacecraft blurred due to their technologically advanced propulsion system. Disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakari Posted May 27, 2014 #21 Share Posted May 27, 2014 (edited) Don't you believe the idea that the anti-gravity technology is the reason why most UFO's are blurry? What's your reasoning? Zoser, as we all know when you are presented with a very logical question, and answer you avoid it. But I will waste my time again. First you say " most ".....So, some do not use it, and others do.? ( talking the same speed for all ) And, what has been presented to you and you ignore. There are a ton of reports from " eye witnesses " that give great detail on " UFO's ". Not blurry, but clear details. From the same scenario a camera would catch a " blurry " object with your theory. Anything a human eye ( the brain really makes the picture, the eyes send the information ) would see ( except lies, imagination ) a camera would see the same way. Your theory is out the window with this. Unless the people flying these things turn off and on their anti gravity to let people without cameras get a good view. Edited May 27, 2014 by Sakari 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g00dfella Posted May 27, 2014 #22 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Fascinating and still unexplained.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinewave Posted May 27, 2014 #23 Share Posted May 27, 2014 Considering the way that simulated anti gravity can be achieved according to the best mids today - why would anti gravity blur things? We have idea how it works, but the blurring is just made up crap by you to shoehorn more lights in the sky into ET folders for personal validation. Anti Gravity can be achieved by ion Lift and propelled by monopole magnets - how does that create blurring? You cannot answer because you are speaking from out your backside. Again. Well you see Psyche, when the gravity A wave is created by element 115, the frequency is so high that light bends rapidly in alternating directions around the craft causing a shimmering effect. Damn, I almost made it to the end of the sentence before laughing out loud. Fascinating and still unexplained.. That implies there is something there worthy of an explanation. Could be as simple has crud on the window. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 28, 2014 #24 Share Posted May 28, 2014 Well you see Psyche, when the gravity A wave is created by element 115, the frequency is so high that light bends rapidly in alternating directions around the craft causing a shimmering effect. Damn, I almost made it to the end of the sentence before laughing out loud. Well, you did better than I did mate!! :D 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted May 28, 2014 #25 Share Posted May 28, 2014 Fascinating and still unexplained.. You seem easily fascinated. This you mean? It is a mystery insofar as we are not sure what the camera photographed - dirt on the lens or a bug flying past as it looks like a Roswell Rod too, maybe a very small insect flew past the lens as he took the picture. It's a tiny blurry line, how people equate that with UFO is beyond me. Its more of a photographic anomaly, not a physical distinct craft. The Photographer did not see it when he took the pic, so quite possibly a Roswell Rod aka insect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now