The Calvine UFO Image is finally out

a reply to: Arbitrageur

said it earlier in the thread but the lack of supporting evidence (and therefore interest) from the active UK aviation spotter community re Calvine makes me think 80/20 in favour of hoax of craft AND jet.

a reply to: aairyspace2015

LOL... so you're saying it was a classified test that went wrong?
Its possible I guess but the US/UK really has gone above and beyond with the pretence of having a gap in their "UFO flight characteristics" inventory.

Wild speculation which might support your assertion:
One rumour (which I was reminded of whilst reading the HAUC patent) was that they DO have such tech.- but you cant integrate conventional weapons and systems due to the boundary layer metric engineering conditions required around the craft.

Bullets, rockets, missiles (or anything that uses chemical reactions) are FUBAR'd due to some sort of proximity based transmutation effect.
Anything that incorporates conventional linear EM propagation (comms/nav/targeting/radar) is FUBAR'd due to the weird non linear effects/phase shifting around the craft.
Improperly shielded occupants/ anyone getting too near externally - suffer electro magnetic perturbation into tomorrow.

If thats not all just BS....something that is limited to less than 5 (operationally), is TOO specialised for general warfare, and isnt likely to be built again due to complexity/cost- has a remote possibility of being the culprit of such sightings.

Don’t know if this been posted previously….I don’t feel like digging back in time at the moment….

But here’s an analysis of the photo and some discussion by some Brits about a year ago…

Digest it as you will…


👽☕️🧐

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
Don’t know if this been posted previously….I don’t feel like digging back in time at the moment….

But here’s an analysis of the photo and some discussion by some Brits about a year ago…

Digest it as you will…

👽☕️🧐

Thanks for posting this, it is linked earlier in the thread - twice maybe - but I wasn't online in 2022 so I missed all the excitement and appreciate your drawing it to my attention.

I realise many participants are MIA but Confused Brit, a few times I think, says it can't be a mirage. Arbi mentions mirages too but in another context. It really looks like it could be a fata morgana to me. What am I missing? Where has that been ruled out?

I'll just throw this in here.

As is well known, atmospheric ducting is the explanation for certain optical mirages, and in particular the arctic illusion called "fata morgana" where distant ocean or surface ice, which is essentially flat, appears to the viewer in the form of vertical columns and spires, or "castles in the air".

People often assume that mirages occur only rarely. This may be true of optical mirages, but conditions for radar mirages are more common, due to the role played by water vapor which strongly affects the atmospheric refractivity in relation to radio waves. Since clouds are closely associated with high levels of water vapor, optical mirages due to water vapor are often rendered undetectable by the accompanying opaque cloud. On the other hand, radar propagation is essentially unaffected by the water droplets of the cloud so that changes in water vapor content with altitude are very effective in producing atmospheric ducting and radar mirages.[41]

en.wikipedia.org...(mirage)

The Harriers/Hunters/Tornados - whatever- could very well have "seen" the same anomally on radar but not been able to see it with their naked eyes. If it was apparent on radar, they may have been called out to check to make sure it was just a radar mirage, flew around the object, from the hiker's/camera's perspective, and then off again on their way - nothing of defence interest here, just weather.

I'm feeling kind of satisfied with this as an answer unless anyone wants to burst my bubble.

Prof Simon on YouTube. a reply to: Macenroe82

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis
Thanks for posting this, it is linked earlier in the thread - twice maybe - but I wasn't online in 2022 so I missed all the excitement and appreciate your drawing it to my attention.

I realise many participants are MIA but Confused Brit, a few times I think, says it can't be a mirage. Arbi mentions mirages too but in another context. It really looks like it could be a fata morgana to me. What am I missing? Where has that been ruled out?

ConfusedBrit seemed skeptical of the mirage explanation but didn't really explain why. I can't say I've seen it ruled out, but I'm skeptical of that idea too and I'll explain why.

The mirage possibility I mentioned was the "official explanation" for Kenneth' Arnold's sighting, that he saw mirages. One possibility was some kind of reflection or ducting of some more distant mountain peaks. I think that's a good possibility, for the reasons I mentioned. Mirages can be distorted and or unstable, which is consistent with Arnold's description:

Sometimes he said he could see them on edge when they seemed so thin and flat they were practically invisible. According to Jerome Clark,[3][4] Arnold described them as a series of objects with convex shapes, though he later revealed that one object differed by being crescent-shaped. Several years later, Arnold would state he likened their movement to saucers skipping on water
...
The motion he generally described as weaving like the tail of a kite and erratic flipping.

Virtually all of that sounds consistent with mirages, which can be unstable even when the observer is stationary but when the observer is moving like Arnold was, they can be even more unstable in appearance, since the layers of air forming them are rarely perfectly uniform.

So if I was going to look for some evidence of a mirage in the Calvine image, what I would be looking for is some kind of distortion, and I'm not seeing much distortion, I'm seeing a fairly symmetrical object, which no matter what it's a mirage of, would seem a bit TOO symmetrical to be a typical mirage, though I suppose that may not rule it out completely. The following link has a dozen or so examples of mirages and many of them show reflections, and ALL the reflections have less vertical symmetry than the Calvine UFO image, and show more distortion, and the accompanying text also talks about distortion:

Picture gallery of mirages

When light rays travel through air layers with different temperatures – and therefore also with different densities and different refractive indices – distant objects will appear displaced or distorted. Objects on the horizon, such as islands, cliffs, ships or icebergs, may then appear vertically stretched (towering), vertically compressed (stooping), elevated (looming) or partly, if not totally, hidden by a displaced horizon (sinking). Sometimes multiple images are created and almost always inverted images will appear. This latter form of abnormal atmospheric refraction is called a mirage.

Note the asymmetry in those mirage reflections and compare to the relative vertical symmetry of the Calvine image.

The next point is, what would it be a mirage of? In Kenneth Arnold's case, the hypothesis was he saw mirages of more distant mountain peaks. Mirages won't just create a symmetrical image like that Calvine image out of nothing, there would have to be some kind of source, as seen in the example photos at the link above. I'm not seeing any evidence or plausible theory of what that source might have been. If someone found something in that direction which resembled the mirage, that would lend a lot of support to the mirage idea, but I don't think anybody has. The mirage may be shifted vertically, but it wouldn't be shifted much horizontally.

For example, I did an analysis like this in the Salida CO UFO which I think was a mirage, and I found a plausible source of the mirage using Google Earth in the direction where the mirage was sighted, so I'm all for using mirages as an explanation if they actually fit and I think a mirge or reflection fits that Salida case well too. So far I just haven't seen how it fits with the Calvine image. I wouldn't go so far as to say I've ruled it out, though I'd say it just doesn't seem likely.

Another factor that weighs against mirage for me is to the extent there is a lack of symmetry from left to right, it doesn't appear to be a random distortion, as might happen in a mirage, but might be a characteristic of an actual object. Specifically the left side is a sharp point and the right side is not, it looks like something is there, some have surmised if it's an airship, that may be fins for guiding the airship. I think one of the hoax theories suggested an object with an asymmetry similar to that used to make the hoax, was it a hangar for an ornament or something? I can't remember all the hoax theories at the moment.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
So if I was going to look for some evidence of a mirage in the Calvine image, what I would be looking for is some kind of distortion, and I'm not seeing much distortion, I'm seeing a fairly symmetrical object, which no matter what it's a mirage of, would seem a bit TOO symmetrical to be a typical mirage, though I suppose that may not rule it out completely. The following link has a dozen or so examples of mirages and many of them show reflections, and ALL the reflections have less vertical symmetry than the Calvine UFO image, and show more distortion, and the accompanying text also talks about distortion:

May cause distortion.

But that is not a given. As your quote states "distorted or displaced".

Besides, without knowing what is being viewed how is it possible to know whether distortion or displacement is present or not?

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Note the asymmetry in those mirage reflections and compare to the relative vertical symmetry of the Calvine image.

Again we do not know what is being viewed however, I perceive a lack of symmetry in the Calvine Image - just to fully clarify that it is only relative symmetry that you are percieving.

If the orginal object being viewed is lacking symmetry the mirage could too.

www.accuweather.com...

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
The next point is, what would it be a mirage of? In Kenneth Arnold's case, the hypothesis was he saw mirages of more distant mountain peaks. Mirages won't just create a symmetrical image like that Calvine image out of nothing, there would have to be some kind of source, as seen in the example photos at the link above. I'm not seeing any evidence or plausible theory of what that source might have been. If someone found something in that direction which resembled the mirage, that would lend a lot of support to the mirage idea, but I don't think anybody has. The mirage may be shifted vertically, but it wouldn't be shifted much horizontally.

Well, for starters, we don't have sufficient information to isolate where the two witnesses were when they saw and subsequently photographed the object. The concensus, as it stands is only that they drove from Pitlochry to Calvine, and that it was stated that the object was seen over the A9. Calvine is South of the A9, suggesting that they would be looking North, unless as someone else suggested earlier in the thread, they were walking on the Bruar side, in which case they'd have been looking in a more southerly direction over the valley. If the latter, then Schiehallion, or it's peak at least, could be a fit.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
For example, I did an analysis like this in the Salida CO UFO which I think was a mirage, and I found a plausible source of the mirage using Google Earth in the direction where the mirage was sighted, so I'm all for using mirages as an explanation if they actually fit and I think a mirge or reflection fits that Salida case well too. So far I just haven't seen how it fits with the Calvine image. I wouldn't go so far as to say I've ruled it out, though I'd say it just doesn't seem likely.

Fair. Entirely so. I am enjoying playing around with the idea because frankly, from my viewpoint, it's the more exotic answer - black triangles are so common, almost passe. Lol. Where as the Fairy Mountain of the Caledonians actually living up to it's mystical nonemclature? Love it!

Cheers