Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Feb -> Here

From: "Tom Burnett" <burnettc@gte.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 19:39:24 -1000
Fwd Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 08:20:54 -0500
Subject: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY



> From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY
> Date: Sunday, February 8, 1998 17:32 PM

> Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 19:13:54 -0800 (PST)
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY


> >From: "Tom Burnett" <burnettc@gte.net>
> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'UFO Sphere/Orb' over Brooklyn, NY
> >Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 08:52:19 -1000

> <snip>

> >I'm not sure of the significance of this thread.  If you say you
> >saw an anomaly and photographed it, then you did as far as I am
> >concerned. I think you can be taken at your word. Even so, if it
> >is not lens flare, it is not identifiable as anything either
> >terrestrial or extraterrestrial so what is the point? Everyone
> >agrees that there are unidentifiable lights in the sky, and the
> >fact that you and millions of other people have seen and
> >photographed them is interesting.

> >But the discussion has digressed to the point where people are
> >suggesting that UFOs intentionally spoof camera optics to mimic a
> >natural camera phenomenon while appearing as something else to a
> >live observer. Is it that two sets of photons are on the same
> >path but one set enters only the camera and one set enters only
> >the observer's eye?  As my english professor used to state so
> >eloquently:  "How do it know?"

> >Has it come to the point when everything anyone sees is an ET
> >craft?  And if it happens to look exactly like an airplane or a
> >falling star, or a black helicopter or a lens flare, does that
> >merely mean that the ETs have nothing better to do than defy the
> >known laws of physics for the purpose of creating optical
> >illusions on the off-chance that a UFO investigator with a camera
> >might be looking up?????

> >Apparently so.

> <snip>

> Tom,

> Obviously if the object looks and behaves like some well known
> object, it doesn't interest either a layman or ufologist as being
> anything abnormal.

> If an object that looks like a certain kind of lens flare flits
> around the sky as reported by a reliable eye witness, then it's
> of great interest to the layman and even to some ufologists!
> (Most ufologists have heard of similar reports for so many years
> that it may not interest them any more.)

<snip>

Aloha Jim...

>For me, it's worth noting for two reasons: (1) It says something
>about how far ahead the UFO-aliens' technology is from anything
>we can understand,

If you see a perfectly recognizable terrestrial aircraft, the
chances are that you cannot tell it's altitude within 1,000 feet
or it's speed within 50% of actual groundspeed.  Nor can you tell
the weight or engine size of a car approaching you on the road.
Without knowing whether an object even exists; what an object is;
a known distance from the object or a quantifiable performance
spectrum of an unknown, you cannot tell anything at all. The only
thing a still picture of what appears to be a lens flare tells
you is that you cannot tell anything at all about it.  You cannot
even tell whether or not it is actually a lens flare.

>and (2) it says something about their strategy
>or level of ethics in dealing with us, in that they provide a
>certain measure of deniability to persons who can't accept its
>reality and who don't mind ignoring certain aspects about the
>object's description or reported behavior when latching onto that
>deniability factor.

You do not even know what the picture represents, Jim.  What does
a picture of a lens flare tell you about 'their strategy or level
of ethics..........' ?  And since you cannot know what it is a
picture of, since no one does, it cannot tell you anything.

I have spoken with you before, and I respect your opinion and
intelligence, but the most anyone can say about a picture of an
unidentified object is that it is a picture of an unidentified
object, and that is not EVIDENCE of anything.

Tom Burnett