The Calvine UFO Image is finally out

Ok….it’s a wrap with this photobomb…


👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

LOL!

Funny how in all his time since he sat at that desk, he's wrote about that poster on his wall, he's talked about it for 30 years. He even had CGI mock ups made. But he showed absolutely no interest in getting to the bottom of the story did he?

a reply to: mirageman
LOL, and I may have missed this, but has Mr pope commented on the photo since it's been found? Has he confirmed that it is the same photo that was on his wall all them years ago? 👍

Close enough for MOD work….



Nicky is obsolete!

What’s more relevant is, who does this craft belong to? ……Assuming “Russell” didn’t Hoax it…

👽

originally posted by: TheGeneral33
a reply to: mirageman
LOL, and I may have missed this, but has Mr pope commented on the photo since it's been found? Has he confirmed that it is the same photo that was on his wall all them years ago? 👍

Yep.

Despite freely talking it up for 25 years or so he's now gone all coy and hiding behind "it might be classified" excuse.

Calvine UFO Photo: It's my policy not to comment on leaked information, especially if it might be classified, so until I receive Ministry of Defence advice, I can neither confirm nor deny if this is the picture that was displayed on my office wall when I ran the MoD's 'UFO desk'.

Papal Twit Sphere

But it's not. Because the copyright lies with the civilian photographer, not the MoD. The photo was taken in a public place and originally the MoD was preparing statements to deal with questions after publication in the Daily Record in 1990.

HIs holiness is talking out of his pulpit.

Tricky Nicky has-been juggling the Calvine story for years….always looking for new venues to peddle his act…....



What’s next?

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1



UFO queen Story time??? 😂

a reply to: Ophiuchus1 he is the former Head of the British ufo project...lol
I hope the other photos come to light soon and he can stop with all this nonsense about getting permission to talk about photos that don't belong to him or the mod.
I do believe it's an American project being tested and is the reason mod blocked release.

Anybody else linking the tidbits to the yanks also testing their secret triangle in Belgium airspace ?

Re-reading some accounts from that perspective, especially those with radar tracking / F-16 involvement, perhaps gives insight to the level of ECM available, especially when paired with an invisible diamond.

originally posted by: wobbs62
a reply to: Ophiuchus1 he is the former Head of the British ufo project...lol

Not really...he's a civil servant who worked a desk for the MoD Air Staff secretariat.
Dont think he's ever claimed otherwise - but didn't remonstrate when the US press hung those misleading labels on him because=money.

If there was someone from DI55 spilling the beans - would be more inclined to listen.

a reply to: Jukiodone he has claimed to be the Head of Britain's ufo programme/ project , it was on one of the t.v shows and that clip was also on YouTube, don't know if it's still on there.
He has totally hoodwinked the yank and British media.

originally posted by: Jukiodone
If there was someone from DI55 spilling the beans - would be more inclined to listen.

Did anybody listen when David Clarke dug up what DI55 said about UFOs?

Is this what UFO disclosure looks like?
Clarke said: "I eventually discovered the ‘truth’ about what DI55 knew about UFOs."

But nobody seemed to care, I suspect because people saying they are looking for the truth aren't really looking for the truth, they are looking for things to confirm their pre-existing world view. That's why any "disclosure" that doesn't involve aliens will likely be rejected by most of the "disclosure advocates", even if it's true. But at least with the Calvine UFO, it does seem more likely to be earthly tech than alien tech, if it's not a hoax.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

its the MoD- so very likely a couple of ex public school boys in a dusty old office tasked with making sure sightings didnt have "made by MIG" on them.
An official annual UK UAP research budget that is either minuscule or non existent would not surprise me either.

David Clarke is one of the good guys and I think his reporting is sound- but it's probably a bit naive to think he got the full truth because he asked nicely/officially.

If one of the truths were that they dont have enough staff/ resources to keep on top of conventional adversary identifications - this would never be declared officially for obvious political and strategic reasons.

MOD = Ministry of Defence

The alternative meaning….

MOD = Ministry of Disinformation

Nicky was….and out of Loyalty, probably remains the MOD’s tool.

Hence his two facing life.


👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1


Oh my!

I may have missed it…….

But was the aircraft in the Calvine photo positively unequivocally have been ID’d yet?

Kindly link analysis………

I’m not looking for “well it looked like to me” would be witness speculation…..I’m looking for indisputable ID of what the aircraft below was…



Thx in advance…

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

As early as 1990 the aircraft was identified as a Harrier by UK MoD Air Staff.

As confirmed in this memo.

".... The negarives have been considered by the relevant staffs who have established that the jet aircrafit is a Harrier"

a reply to: mirageman

Did not the Harrier’s of the Calvine sighting have nose cameras?

If so, where are the images of those 2 harrier’s nose cams?

Surely, if it was a craft being tested….then it would make sense for the escorting harrier’s to take pictures while the craft is operational in the air……giving those who were testing it….image flight characteristics data for research and development.

If it was a craft of unknown origin and being tailed by the harrier’s…..that too would be all the reason to use nose cameras for documenting and analyzing the event.

👽

Not definitve by any stretch of the imagination, but the plane looks more like a Hawker Hunter to me.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: mirageman

Did not the Harrier’s of the Calvine sighting have nose cameras?

If so, where are the images of those 2 harrier’s nose cams?

Didn't you see where the memo said there is no record of harriers operating in the area at the time?

If you just take that at face value, it might imply a hoax. But I'm not sure if we can take anything at face value in this case. For example, were there harriers in that area at another time and the dates are simply off? That can happen and even Halt's memo in the famous Rendlesham case has the wrong date.

originally posted by: unifaun
Not definitve by any stretch of the imagination, but the plane looks more like a Hawker Hunter to me.

You're not the first person to question the harrier identification. The version we have isn't that clear, but maybe the original photo was more clear and made it easier to ID the aircraft?