UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 12

Re: The Beveridge UFO - Sensi

From: Darren Sensi <mrsensi.nul>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:45:03 +0100 (CET)
Fwd Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 07:37:16 -0500
Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO - Sensi


>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 01:22:02 -0400
>Subject: Re: The Beveridge UFO - Ledger


>No Steve and Amy I don't see that same degree of Gibb's effect
>in other parts of the photo or mosquitoing-or ringing if you
>will as is surrounding the "object" and I'm betting no one else
>does either.


Hello Don,

I originally posted because i saw the effect around the object
as a typical noise/artifact that i see in almost any jpeg and i
didn't want to see it become accepted as some kind of physical
effect until someone had pointed that out. Try looking at the
furthest left branch on the tree in the foreground directly
below and to the right of the object it has almost the exact
same combination of mosquito noise and tiling artifacts as those
that keep getting pointed out around the object itself.

>Many have been rushing in to show off their expertise re JPEG,
>MPEG and their vast experience of dealing with it. and is
>probably a satisfying way in which to stroke egos, but it
>doesn't do much for the study of the image does it? I want to
>see more and proof to boot. If this is an IFO, prove it. Don't
>just throw words around.

I tried to explain as clearly as possible using known terms to
avoid any confusion on exactly what effects i was pointing out.
I never claimed to be an expert and the only satisfaction gained
was that of knowing i had brought to everyone's attention
something which might have hindered a fair analysis of the
photo. I agree this is far from being an IFO and i don't believe
that this is a bird or insect either but i am open minded to
both these things as possible explanations to.

>Dan Bright's contrast and color enhancements seems to bring out
>some detail and even suggests a wing, but it looks much to small
>a surface area to sustain lift. A bee's wing area to body weight
>ratio is bad enough but even its wings are larger proportionally
>than what I see in the color enhancements.

I agree the "wing" is definatly not in proportion with the size
of what would have to be the body and if a semi translucent wing
is held at the right angle to produce a glazing reflection then
it would be highlighting the entire area of that wing because of
it's flat surface. I can't see any legs or body segments either
and if in flight a beetle has it's wing cases open .LOL so there
would be no smooth areas on the object at all except perhaps the
head?




[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com