UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > May > May 29

Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames? - Taylor

From: Barry Taylor <stingray.nul>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 14:14:17 +1000
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 06:04:05 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames? - Taylor

>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 11:45:29 -0700
>Subject: Re: UFOs Or Simply Oil Well Flames?

>Time to summarize. Sharpen your pencils. This is a multiple-
>choice exam. The correct prosaic explanation offered by the
>debunkers for the recent Mexican UFO sighting is:


>I think that about covers it. Have I missed anything?


Like yourself, everyone is entitled to an opinion on this case.
Right or wrong opinions may be settled in the end if undeniable
proof of the nature of the objects is identified.

These objects are one of two things...

1. Genuine UFOs
2. Man made devices.

We can obviously rule out the meteor, ball lightning, super
secret stealth aircraft, re-entering space debris and oil well
flames. These just do not add up.

I see no display of intelligent behaviour of the objects in the
footage. They remain in formation in all sections of the clips.
They also vary in brightness (flicker?) note the leading object
in the two groups of three objects in particular.

You can not rule out the man made lighter than air devices that
I have suggested. I have seen many of these in action and they
move the same as in the Mexican footage. My image enhancements
show identical features. I have tested the evidence. This is my

When a lighter than air device like the hot air balloons is
drifting in a 200 m/h air current, the flame will remain
unaffected by the speed of the wind because the while device is
moving at the same speed. The flame in the hoax devices is also
protected from outside conditions to a great degree because it
is burning up inside the bag hence protected from excess wind.

The 'Twins' have a second illumination directly underneath. This
is not a phantom lens reflection from the convex lens in the
zoom lens, they appear to be attached to the main object. This
is a known feature of the hoax device. I have an excellent
example of this on video of a hoax device filmed using infrared.
These secondary smaller objects should change position during
the footage if they were lens reflection, but they do not.

A lighter than air device will also move faster than the bulk of
clouds. I have seen this here.

My analysis results does not make me a debunker or sceptic, long
way from it. My tests on the photographic evidence when compared
to known hoax type objects points me toward my conclusions. This
is a much more solid basis to stake my claim than just watching
the video footage then commenting.

Barry Taylor

[ 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