Parts one and two of historic UFO pictures and the history

The following videos are of historic photos of UFOs. I had never seen some of the photos nor have I heard the back ground of the taking of the pictures. Interesting how the CIA always seemed to play their part in the debunk and taking the info and pictures to never be seen again... For those who are interested enjoy. youtu.be...


youtu.be...

a reply to: 727Sky

The triangel pic is a hoax:
"The author of the fake has admitted it himself. Patrick M. from the area of Verviers explains in the television station RTL-TVI that he has staged the photo together with some work colleagues. So: You take a Poresta plate, cut out a triangle, attach a few lamps, and you have a UFO. The model is then hung from the ceiling."

brf.be...

a reply to: loufo

Of course that one was a fake,but he seen others so he could recreate it,so he could get people to dismiss real ones for fakes.

a reply to: loufo

I don’t doubt the Belgian Ufo picture is a hoax but I have a question.

The hoaxer admitted to pulling this off with his work buddies

Have any of the work buddies ever been interviewed to say what they did?

I can only recall the hoaxer being interviewed.

a reply to: TheAlleghenyGentleman


There is quite a bit of information on this photo , and quite a history if you ask me .

Search this site for “Petit-Rechain photo”

I never understood the great daytime photos they used to have in the 50s and 60s compared to none today. Today with many millions of cell phones in use too, better quality of cameras also and yet never a good photo. Tossing hubcaps, pot lids into the air and snapping a photos must have been a trend back then or something. Or maybe ET has become camera shy😄

a reply to: Paddyofurniture

I know about the photo. The photo was not my point.

If half the photos are fake or all of them are fake but for one....then... there you have an answer....all it takes is one to close the deal...

That closeup video in part 1 @ 38:57 is pretty compelling if it's the real deal. Maybe the best public one there is. I assume it's been debunked, or attempted to be, since day one.

Also of interest was the photo of one that had the form of a jellyfish. I believe Corbell mentioned that shape in his recent interview with Joe Rogan.

a reply to: Skeletonized

"form of a jellyfish" -- time tag, please?

Jack Kasher was a 'space physics' expert at a small midwest college who knew less than zero about real spaceflight operations, his silly 'disproofs' of the entirely valid ice flake explanation were debunked in the mid-1990s, here's a presentation I gave at Purdue about a quarter century ago in a debate with Stephen Greer that addresses Kasher's spurious pseudo-logic head-on.

www.jamesoberg.com...

Subsequently, Kasher 'found' other space UFO photos from NASA missions including misinterpreting the dish reflector of a floodlight at the end of a boom deployed by Apollo-16.

a reply to: yuppa

Not to mention the Belgian Air Force scrambled multiple times in response to penetration of their airspace by unknown objects. That was a big deal in Belgium when that was going on. One hoaxer is but an absurd footnote to those events.

Cheers

Here is a little thought I have had over the last 50+ years.

I see UFOs as a socially created phenomena and I base that on the evolution of what we humans see as UFOs. There is a reason why they were call flying saucers in the beginning, and that is because our imagination of UFOs was in it infancy state and they were actually saucer like. As we progressed though the decades UFOs became more and more complex as we built on that imagination and today they are well beyond anything "seen" lets say in the 40s.

So this either means we created it all and evolved it along the way, or in a few decades aliens evolved their spaceships from saucers to star destroyers...

So which one makes more sense?

a reply to: JimOberg

@01:18 in part 1.

I know you will say it's a cloud / weather phenomenon, and it very well might be, but I just found it mildly interesting that that shape was mentioned being seen elsewhere.

a reply to: Xtrozero

One of the ideas proposed is that whatever the phenomenon is, it affects how we perceive it. In which case,

So this either means we created it all and evolved it along the way, or in a few decades aliens evolved their spaceships from saucers to star destroyers...

... none of the above.

Cheers

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: yuppa

Not to mention the Belgian Air Force scrambled multiple times in response to penetration of their airspace by unknown objects. That was a big deal in Belgium when that was going on. One hoaxer is but an absurd footnote to those events.

Cheers

Yes, and the pilots saw nothing.

They had radar data, but since it showed "UFO"s flying underground, that's either a helluva "transmedium" accomplishment (physically impossible to capture on standard radar even if they did that), or else it was bad radar data (definitely had to be the latter).

The Belgian UFO wave

The pilots also got intermittent contact with objects, but they appeared and disappeared and moved up and down too fast, including going underground. The pilots never saw anything at all.

a reply to: Skeletonized

The Jellyfish UFO Pic was taken in Viborg, Denmark in the 1970s. Although various cropping and manipulation of the image have appeared down the years.



The actual place it was taken is approximately here : Google Maps Link

It is believed to have been caused by an industrial chimney at Odshøjve. Located around 300-400m away on the other side of the lake. There was a south west wind blowing. Which would blow the soot and steam from the chimney to the location in the picture.

Other similar sightings have been caused by jellyfish shaped kites and rocket launches.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Hmm. Except UFOs have been observed to "go into the ground".

Honestly, any site that calls itself "skeptoid" makes me think it has at least as much of a preconceived notion about things as the UFO crowd.

My take is that I don't think the phenomenon is anything we can neatly observe and capture data about --reliably and consistently-- with the technology we have.

There is more to this than nuts-and-bolts machines coming from far away.

Cheers

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: Xtrozero

One of the ideas proposed is that whatever the phenomenon is, it affects how we perceive it. In which case,

So this either means we created it all and evolved it along the way, or in a few decades aliens evolved their spaceships from saucers to star destroyers...

... none of the above.

Cheers

Your example is more of an easy button to explain something we can not just yet.

I think it could be both, but not live aliens. It is suggested that an advance race could create an self-replicating AI to travel and explore our galaxy traveling below the speed of light, and after 2 billion years much of it would be done. This does play into that fact that much of the UFOs reported are too small to be spaceships with actual life on board and just the size of the galaxy alone is also a big deterrent for life to travel, but AI doesn't have any of the limitations that life has. What this could mean is we are seeing that AI doing it things for a race long gone and we also have a socially created phenomena built around it too that has evolved it in 100 different ways.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think one of the bigger "issues" that gets clouded by excited reports and emotional debunking is that the data available, at least for "civilians", is sparse.

SO many assumptions made about what UFOs are and what their origin may be.

If I were to guess, I'd say the answer to the above is stranger than we can (yet) imagine.

Cheers