Board Logo
« #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jun 25th, 2017, 03:39am


Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

*Totally FREE 24/7 Access *Your Nickname and Avatar *Private Messages

*Join today and be a part of one of the largest UFO sites on the Net.


« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22  ...  99 Notify Send Topic Print
 sticky  Author  Topic: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth  (Read 114386 times)
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #285 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 12:41pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:48am, neveleeleven wrote:
For the record Marvin, the first three images you posted in your last post were not created by me.

The first image was created by SPF33, after I explained the shadows at OMF with my renders.

The second two images were created by Kris A.

However both images completely show MY conclusions. Making it 3 completely different people from different places on the Earth coming to the same conclusion..




My apologies Eleven,

I did not mean to say you made the pics... which is why I called them studies.

Thank you for clarifying.

Marvin
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #286 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 12:44pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:16pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Studies and research by some very bright people have proven that there are two distinct light sources. Whether or not "drone believers" want to accept this evidence is another matter. They do not have to accept it at all. But I have yet to see any research or study that refutes the two light source conclusion. All I ever see or hear is that the conclusion is wrong....never why it is wrong.

I personally believe that the drones started as viral marketing for the SCC tv show but that the viral campaign timing was screwed up due to the writers strike. So the campaign was abandoned. Those that fell for it have kept whatever spark that remains from going completely out.

The SCC viral marketing explains the quality daylight photos (done with state of the art CGI programs and a nice budget) and the anonymous witnesses who, for all intents and purposes do not even exist.

But I guess that "dronies' will continue to believe, defend, and investigate until hell freezes over lol! wink




It does seem that research shows the issues and opinion says there are no issues. wink
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #287 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 3:21pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 11:48am, tomi01 wrote:
Hi Marvin,

If you are using the glare coming off of the metal tag as an indication that there are two sources of light in this photo, then I have a counter point to make about this assumption. The tag is metal and it is going to reflect and refract light in a completely different way then the surface surrounding it. IMO it is entirely possible that this light on the tag comes from the same angle that highlights the drones.





Tomi,

I am not using the yellow tag in the analysis (I really do not see any glare on the tag anyway). You need to go back, re-read and understand the analysis first.

Best regards,

Marvin
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
tomi01
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 2
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #288 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:16pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
But I guess that "dronies' will continue to believe, defend, and investigate until hell freezes over lol! wink


Hi Jeddyhi, laugh I hope this doesn't mean that anyone with a counter argument to subjective proof, which is all we have on the table really.... is going to be labeled a "dronie".. hmmm someone coined that word.. rolleyes

ok.. maybe I am a dronie, but that doesn't mean I believe blindly or even by any proof, (subjective of course..) So I don't believe, I wait for what it will take for me to know.... one way or another.
Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there wink

Marvin, I think you mean also the shadow that edges the length of the pole. I really see so many arguments for this lighting source to be the same that I'm at a loss as to if I went ahead and drew lines on where I think it shows correctness, if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Which I personally don't think can be an accurate assessment. And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it?
Just wondering...
« Last Edit: Dec 18th, 2008, 5:12pm by tomi01 » User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #289 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 5:25pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
ok.. maybe I am a dronie, but that doesn't mean I believe blindly or even by any proof, (subjective of course..) So I don't believe, I wait for what it will take for me to know.... one way or another.

Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there wink



If the debate is honest here, then define “subjective.” I know what it means... but do you apply the same meaning?

Also, since it seems your “balance” for the burden of proof appears to be a bit on the biased side (and has yet to be supported by objective evidence), what is the level of proof you need for “belief.”

(My apology Tomi, and here is the bias I am seeing… evidence, proof, facts and knowing something is not a “belief” system, it is a knowledge system. If you truly are entrenched in a belief system, then I fear no level of proof will be enough to give you a different view point, since you firmly believe it to be true.


on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
Marvin, I think you mean also the shadow that edges the length of the pole. I really see so many arguments for this lighting source to be the same that I'm at a loss as to if I went ahead and drew lines on where I think it shows correctness, if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Which I personally don't think can be an accurate assesment.



I wish you would share that side of the debate with us… I have not seen anyone using CGI that has demonstrated a single light source (vs. two)… not even Nekitamo.

All of the 3D work I have seen, backs what I am seeing. So please share (and I hope it is not from Lev).

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it.

Just wondering...


I have no issue with someone doing that… but you are looking at the light source for the pole here:

User Image

Do you disagree with it? It matches the shadows on the pole.

User Image

Here they are together… in CGI, which is telling us there are 2 sources. It is a simple question of you accepting this data or not? When everything lines up in CGI (and the CGI models are basically correct)… then it is the same thing as taking a model (like HPO”S, which is basically correct, but not exact) and a pole. When independently verified by 4 CGI artist (as this work has)... then this just goes back to my first question, “what is the level of proof you need for ‘belief’.”
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Gort
New Member
Image


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 0
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #290 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 5:34pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
Hi Jeddyhi, laugh I hope this doesn't mean that anyone with a counter argument to subjective proof, which is all we have on the table really.... is going to be labeled a "dronie".. hmmm someone coined that word.. rolleyes

ok.. maybe I am a dronie, but that doesn't mean I believe blindly or even by any proof, (subjective of course..) So I don't believe, I wait for what it will take for me to know.... one way or another.
Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there wink

Marvin, I think you mean also the shadow that edges the length of the pole. I really see so many arguments for this lighting source to be the same that I'm at a loss as to if I went ahead and drew lines on where I think it shows correctness, if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Which I personally don't think can be an accurate assessment. And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it?
Just wondering...


If you are still on this cgi stuff your pissing in the wind.

I guess you don't know anything about RC models. I have made plenty and have many on YouTube

You have no idea, it would be so easy to make an RC model of this drone. I'm almost tempted to do that.

But I have other RC models I'm currently working on.

Even if I did and even if I said it was an RC model you wouldn't believe me you'd still think it was real.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1380642903108144015


User IP Logged

DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #291 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 6:03pm »

Hi Tomi, I hope you’re well. smiley

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
<snip>
Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there

The absolute opposite, isn’t it? Threshold being the level that must be reached for a psychological or physiological effect to begin or be noticeable. Surely his threshold his higher?

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
<snip>
if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Nice delivery Tomi!! (I’m a sucker for sarcasm kiss).

But surely it’s just shifting the goal-posts? While I appreciate you didn’t write the following a similar comment was also posted without being questioned (just the opposite in fact) at the DRT forum, so I assumed it was something of a consensus:

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 5:21pm, Latitude wrote:
Are you kidding me? It's a 3D environment. It's not as simple as connecting dots and drawing lines in two dimensions. It's much more complicated. Maybe that concept is too much for you?

on Dec 7th, 2008, 12:53pm, Latitude wrote:
Marvin,

Your yellow arrow showing the sunlight direction on the pole is totally wrong. You evidently are confused when looking at a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional scene. Either that or you are purposely misrepresenting it to further your agenda. Actually, I think it's a lttle of both. wink

So Marv updated and represented his factually based appraisal using a 3D environment……(Kudos Marvin!! grin)

Poor Marv, he has constantly & consistently rose to all challenges and answered every question asked of him, providing data, examples, images, animations and the best it seems he gets in return is, “You’re wrong” with the person claiming such having little or no evidential data to back it up. But as you, Marv, Kris, Lat & others have already mentioned, perhaps the best chance of this being resolved is to composite HPO’s model into a 3D environment and test the lighting/shadows.

Merry Christmas Tomi & all!! smiley

(I’m sure you had more posts logged Tomi….. wink)
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
tommi01
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 3940
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #292 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm »



Hi DrDil,

Yes,, At sometime I got two logins herw and keep forgetting which version it is.. tongue Sry..

Getting to the issues you raised, I can summarize more easily by condensing it down to what I do agree with what Lat has said, in my estimation and I believe he thought the same, the sun is more of a 2 + oclock postion above the horizon.

Now DrDil, the rest of what Lats reasoning is, I really haven't had a chance to discus for a while !

I found a posting at one post on OM (I think) that was an initial attempt to replicate HPO's drone in CGI. I thought .. yes!.. the shadows between the real and the cgi are not exact... but I was busy and didn't note much more than that. It would be good to do. Especially outside with a large object similiar to the phone pole but in some kind of realistic scale. Then someone does the CGI of this scene. I bet the shadows will be off..
Any takers..?

Now I'm not saying the pictures are real either. And maybe I'm more concerned with the what and why and maybe who than the finer aspects of arguing shadows in 3D compared to 2D. All we have are 2D pictures and now a 3D drone.. Serious forensic work could be done with this regarding knowledge of how exact in fine detail replication these 3D programs are..

But common sense tells me that if you can't use this kind of analysis in deciding legal issues, it's not air tight.

Nobody, so far, has found one "gotcha" smoking gun.. A myriad of opinions from experts that never have a consenus, always an opinion about another issue.. Always finding a new issue to declare it a hoax with.. and well it may be. I don't know.

I spent a day researching James Cameron and his associations and resources and that boy has de power.. and motive maybe.. if anyone has or had to have created this.. but did he?

That should tell you a lot DrDil. That I have conceeded from hours of looking at the talent this man has under his network... that this could have been done with the kind of perfection it has by this one talent house and resource.. but was it?

I dont know.. and to be perfectly honest.. a matching or not matching shadow doesn't even begin to tell me what I want to know about this case. But yes, I do admit it could have been a magnificent production of fantasy.. (nicer than saying hoax..) but is ithuh
Hard to believe the drones are real, the longer it goes on.. the more the initial dronie glow begins to fade.. but there is so much that needs to be answered..


« Last Edit: Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm by tommi01 » User IP Logged

nekitamo
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 87
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #293 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 9:58pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 09:41am, Marvin wrote:
What did Nekitamo have to say about this (who happens to be a Global Moderator and Founding Dronie at the DRT):

I think some explanations are in order here, as this "flashy title" may seem like more than it really is. Although I became a member of the DRT forum soon after it was created (note the distinction: only a DRT forum member, not a member of the original Drone Research Team of five that started it), the title of "Founding Dronie" is simply due to the fact that I reached 100 posts - it has the same meaning as someone's "Senior Member" status that is gained after a few hundred posts over here (not sure about the exact number, as it depends on custom forum settings).

As for my "Global Moderator" status - it has nothing to do with moderation and I never used it for that purpose. If you remember, when Chad's location was discovered by the PIs, it wasn't revealed by the DRT right away in order to protect the ongoing investigation. However, along with some other DRT forum members, I was given a privilege of early access to some of the images and measurements from the location by means of a special, moderator-only forum board which required our elevation into moderator status in order to be able to access it and collaborate with each other. After a few weeks, the results of our research were made available to the general public and soon everybody found out everything about the "secret" location.

As you can see, there's nothing special about my status over there - I'm pretty much just one of the members, expressing my own thoughts, like I do here or at any other forum, for that matter. But there's something special about the DRT forum that is not so common elsewhere: it is a great place to do research, a place where you're treated with respect, a place where nobody is forcing you to think this way or that, despite what some may think. And let me assure you: there's no such thing some often refer to as "the DRT forum opinion" or "the DRT forum angle" or however they put it - everyone is allowed to think for themself over there.
User IP Logged

murnut
Senior Member
ImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 614
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #294 on: Dec 18th, 2008, 10:25pm »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 9:58pm, nekitamo wrote:
But there's something special about the DRT forum that is not so common elsewhere: it is a great place to do research, a place where you're treated with respect, a place where nobody is forcing you to think this way or that, despite what some may think. And let me assure you: there's no such thing some often refer to as "the DRT forum opinion" or "the DRT forum angle" or however they put it - everyone is allowed to think for themself over there.


Ha!

Anyone who believes it to be a hoax is prohibited from joining.

Yeah, that's respect.

And it is amazing the research that can be accomplished when one side of the coin is completely excluded.

Don't get me wrong, you can have whatever clubhouse and members you want.

But there is no respect when you don't allow dissenting opinions which include the hoax theory.

That's what cults do, not researchers.

So forgive us if the drt is grouped together as one rather than individuals.

Sorry for the rant, it's not personal....just the hypocrisy of your above words struck a nerve.

wink
User IP Logged

You want a revolution?
You've got to make a difference on your own
You want a revolution?
Stand up, stand out and make it known
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #295 on: Dec 19th, 2008, 03:20am »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Now I'm not saying the pictures are real either. And maybe I'm more concerned with the what and why and maybe who than the finer aspects of arguing shadows in 3D compared to 2D. All we have are 2D pictures and now a 3D drone.. Serious forensic work could be done with this regarding knowledge of how exact in fine detail replication these 3D programs are..

Hi Tomi,

Wouldn’t that make you a……

*Hoax Hunter*? User Image

Cheers.


(I found the following image a while ago).
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
tommi01
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 3940
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #296 on: Dec 19th, 2008, 04:46am »

I found two excellent articles on sunlight and shadows.
In case they haven't been posted or read before:

http://www.sunposition.com/

http://vstar3d.com/index.php?page=3d-lighting-tutorials

One thing that leaps at me from this info is how a sun positioned at the angle that is described by Marvin and others being more at a 3 oclock angle above the horizon would be less capable of casting such a strong shadow. As you can see in these articles, the sun from that angle has more dissipation and a reddish hue, that is why I believe that long shadow cast along the length of the pole has the possibility of coming from the sun at a higher position in the sky.

« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2008, 04:55am by tommi01 » User IP Logged

Jeddyhi
Senior Member
ImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 589
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #297 on: Dec 19th, 2008, 05:47am »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:25pm, murnut wrote:
Ha!

Anyone who believes it to be a hoax is prohibited from joining.

Yeah, that's respect.

And it is amazing the research that can be accomplished when one side of the coin is completely excluded.

Don't get me wrong, you can have whatever clubhouse and members you want.

But there is no respect when you don't allow dissenting opinions which include the hoax theory.

That's what cults do, not researchers.

So forgive us if the drt is grouped together as one rather than individuals.

Sorry for the rant, it's not personal....just the hypocrisy of your above words struck a nerve.

wink


I hear ya, Mur. This quote by majicbar is quite astounding and revealing.

"I still think that the cloaking/invisibility aspect of the drone might also distort the local atmosphere and thus also the shadows falling on the drone."

In this one statement, Majic rejects all shadow and light research and evidence of a hoax and finds it easier to accept that a yet to be proven to exist drone may have a cloaking machine that effects shadows. For the love of God, am I the only one that sees the weirdness in that?

I'm sorry as well, Nek. Not aimed at you personally, just venting my frustration. Sorry to get off topic. We should not turn this into a "Bash the DRT" party. My apologies.
« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2008, 06:59am by Jeddyhi » User IP Logged

"Nothing will ever claim ownership of the original Drone information, so copyright is not a question. Use it."- Masker33
tommi01
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 3940
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #298 on: Dec 19th, 2008, 07:27am »

Outside of the US, many people don't know about Ted Turner, who started CNN, the way we do from the States. He is an outspoken, many times too arrogant, true maverick.

In my case, I lived on one of his sailboats, knew Fredericka (sex on two legs is the only way to describe her), his wife, his kids, his "tom" Jimmy, a wonderful black man who knew him from a boy, stayed with him all his life. The mouth of the south is what Ted was called.. But Turner had to fight hard to raise the empire he did. He became a mental mentor to me, especially after one day when he told me, "get a job at McDonalds.." Granted, I was very young then, but it had a motivating effect on me to build a business too...

Why am I saying all this?.. Because yesterday I saw an interview with him on CNBC. Turner, for all his shortcomings as a father, and the arrogance he has, is still a very perceptive and intelligent man.

He was asked what do you think reflecting back on your relationship with Castro in Cuba.. he is an enemy of this country you were on a friendly basis, communicating with him? He said, "I like to know and be on friendly terms with everyone, I don't let ideologies stop me when I am in the news business."

So.... as long as there is no malicious intent from anyone regarding the discovery and solving of this drone case or against the members who are conducting the work from both sides of the spectrum, in my opinion, taking sides based on ideology is shorting the discovery potential.
« Last Edit: Dec 19th, 2008, 08:07am by tommi01 » User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #299 on: Dec 19th, 2008, 07:56am »

on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Getting to the issues you raised, I can summarize more easily by condensing it down to what I do agree with what Lat has said, in my estimation and I believe he thought the same, the sun is more of a 2 + oclock postion above the horizon.



I think you are using the terminology for clock location, in a confusing way.

Are you using the time of day for the solar location:

User Image

or are you using the actual clock location:

User Image

http://www.kayakforum.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/guille/wiki.pl?Clock_Directions


on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
I found a posting at one post on OM (I think) that was an initial attempt to replicate HPO's drone in CGI. I thought .. yes!.. the shadows between the real and the cgi are not exact... but I was busy and didn't note much more than that. It would be good to do. Especially outside with a large object similiar to the phone pole but in some kind of realistic scale. Then someone does the CGI of this scene. I bet the shadows will be off..
Any takers..?


Swapping out a similar model (the Drone) in CGI will not change the direction of illumination. That is controlled by the software. So if there was an issue or “mistake,” it was with the placement of the light source by who ever created that CGI.

If you can find it again, would you place a link to it here?

(for the Mods… is there no search ability on the forum to find things on Casebook?)



on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Now I'm not saying the pictures are real either. And maybe I'm more concerned with the what and why and maybe who than the finer aspects of arguing shadows in 3D compared to 2D. All we have are 2D pictures and now a 3D drone.. Serious forensic work could be done with this regarding knowledge of how exact in fine detail replication these 3D programs are..

But common sense tells me that if you can't use this kind of analysis in deciding legal issues, it's not air tight.



I do not know about the UK, but in the States, this type of modeling is used in the Courts. Air tight? That’s up to a jury, isn’t it?



on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Nobody, so far, has found one "gotcha" smoking gun.. A myriad of opinions from experts that never have a consenus, always an opinion about another issue.. Always finding a new issue to declare it a hoax with.. and well it may be. I don't know.


Really, nobody has found one?

Let me re-ask… what level of evidence are you willing to accept or are you in a belief system?

Honestly, it’s okay if you just want to believe in this. But before you claim to other people that it is real, you need facts and evidence.



on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
I dont know.. and to be perfectly honest.. a matching or not matching shadow doesn't even begin to tell me what I want to know about this case. But yes, I do admit it could have been a magnificent production of fantasy.. (nicer than saying hoax..) but is ithuh
Hard to believe the drones are real, the longer it goes on.. the more the initial dronie glow begins to fade.. but there is so much that needs to be answered..



I think you are giving your “belief” position away here Tomi… the shadows not matching tells you about the credibility of the photographic evidence (which is the only “objective evidence” you have in this case). If the photographic evidence is bogus, then what foundation do you have to continue the case? You have no witnesses… you only have the anonymously submitted internet story and fake photos. Add it up (it equals zero). If you want it to be real, you need real evidence.

http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/admissibilityofdigital.html

http://www.thirdamendment.com/photos.html

http://chnm.gmu.edu/aq/photos/essay/1.htm







on Dec 19th, 2008, 04:46am, tomi01uk wrote:
I found two excellent articles on sunlight and shadows.
In case they haven't been posted or read before:

http://www.sunposition.com/

http://vstar3d.com/index.php?page=3d-lighting-tutorials

One thing that leaps at me from this info is how a sun positioned at the angle that is described by Marvin and others being more at a 3 oclock angle above the horizon would be less capable of casting such a strong shadow. As you can see in these articles, the sun from that angle has more dissipation and a reddish hue, that is why I believe that long shadow cast along the length of the pole has the possibility of coming from the sun at a higher position in the sky.




I am glad you are seeing some things I have been seeing. For the time of day and the solar angle… the photos are too “bright.” Yet, you have a photo of a slightly tilted Drone, with the bottom illuminated. Therefore, logic will tell you the sun can not be very high above the horizon.

I believe 1111 has done a study on the time of day (5:42pm per EXIF info imbedded in the JPEG) for that date (and month) which reveals the Sun’s position in the sky. Maybe 1111 will enlighten us with more information.

But it seems to me Tomi, we all find the issues… but some of us spend a lot of time trying to explain them all away.
User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22  ...  99 Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Become a member of the UFO Casebook Forum today and join our more than 18,000 members.

Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls