It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by Chadwickus
Chadwickus.....
Why's it so much more blurry?
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
Originally posted by Chadwickus
I thought the "hand" was a chimney myself.
No idea why it's so blurry, maybe it's been falsely coloured?
I thought the "hand" was a chimney myself.
No idea why it's so blurry, maybe it's been falsely coloured?
The principal, Frank Samblebe, gave a simpler explanation to the Dandenong Journal, published on May 5, 1966. He said "the flood of callers and phone calls from the Air Force down to the Flying Saucer Association interrupted the children's studies." Given this real-world concern of the school, it does seem reasonable that he would have asked the press to leave the students alone, and done what he could to enforce it at the front desk. From every single 1966 account I've read, this is the full extent of what's now being described as a "coverup" or a "conspiracy".
The Air Force personnel Samblebe referred to were probably four Air Force investigators who showed up on April 9, three days after the event, to look at what was said to be the landing site. A number of enthusiasts from various UFO groups accompanied them, but apparently nothing interesting was found, because nothing was documented from this visit.
Originally posted by Nanzan
reply to post by InfaRedMan
I have been in touch many times, over the past five years, with the gentleman who took this Polaroid photograph of this object flying above his mother's house.
After 44 years he still stands by his sighting and his photograph.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
But it is true, the better cases seem to get ignored, maybe it's because there is less to debate?