From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul> Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 23:00:02 +0100 Archived: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 07:35:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >From: John Rimmer <johnrimmer.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 19:31:23 +0100 (BST) >Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>From: Gerald O'Connell <goc.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:26:37 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>>From: John Rimmer <johnrimmer.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:34:55 +0100 (BST) >>>Subject: Re: Trindade 'Negative Witness' Found >>>>Game, set and match. >>I agree with you John. >>We have a witness to the effect that crewmen and others saw >>something, and they didn't know what it was. They became >>excited. There was a commotion. So even if the photographs were >>fabricated as an opportunistic response to the sighting, there >>was a sighting. A sighting of a flying object that could not be >>identified. >You claim: "We have a witness to the effect that crewmen and >others saw something, and they didn't know what it was." >In fact we have no such thing. We have a witness saying that >people were looking into the sky and trying to see something. John is incorrect. Jansen does say repeatedly that "everyone saw it", not that everyone was "trying to see it." Jansen said he was the only one "trying to see it" and failing. Others tried to make _him_ see it, but he, alone, could see nothing. In Kentaro's interview Jansen says: " ...they started to say they were seeing [something], ... Everyone ["sailors" and "civilian[s]"] saw it. But my vision was 20/20. I could see everything. And I didn't see anything. 'It's there!' [they said]. 'But where?' [I asked]. I didn't see a thing." Kentaro paraphrases the Martinho interview: ". . . one can hear Jansen refer to the fact he did see the commotion of people pointing to the sky, and the fact that he, despite having perfect vision, couldn't see a thing." Jansen repeats: "I don't know what made everyone see... and I didn't see" Neither do I. (Iincidentally, 20/20 vision is not "perfect" vision, it is a standard of acuity defined as "normal" in the sense that it is ophthalmologically "good enough" not to need correction. The average visual acuity of healthy eyes is actually 20/16 to 20/12 and reaches better than 20/10, which is twice as sharp as 20/20. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity) >have no statement from anyone (other than the famous trio of >Barauna and his mates) saying that they saw anything. We have >several statements from people claiming other people might have >seen something, which is not exactly the same thing, is it? We have several statements, including now evidence-against- interest from whay we might call a "hostile witness" who thinks Barauna's story is "bollocks", to the effect that numbers of his fellow crewmen on deck did really believe they could see this thing in the sky that excited them, and Jansen says they actively tried to point it out to him, but that he alone of "everyone" couldn't see anything. (And I'll allude here to Kentaro's new "second negative witness" merely to point out that this Brito does not satisfy the definition, having evidently arrived on deck in the aftermath of the incident. A negative witness needs to be one who is in the right place at the right time to have seen the object but could not see it.) >Further you aver: "There was a commotion. So even if the >photographs were fabricated as an opportunistic response to the >sighting, there was a sighting. A sighting of a flying object >that could not be identified." >Nonsense. There is no evidence of an sighting. Not only is Gerald correct that Jansen's testimony is evidence (such as it is, given the circumstances) of a sighting (definition: some people believing they observe an unexplained object in the sky), we also still have the strong witness statements made by Capt Bacellar - not only publicly in his well-known press statement, but officially and confidentially, in his capacity as the Navy High Command's designated cognizant expert on the spot with pre-existing instructions to report on UAO sightings at Trindade - that he definitely observed the UFO images etc on the still wet uncut negative strip (see my other reply to the post by Kentaro). IMO no plausible case has yet been made that removes this fact, and any plausible theory at the moment has to shape itself around it, meaning that unless we assume the complicity of Capt. Bacellar (at least) in a hoax there has to have been a pre-planned photographic imposture by Barauna and co. This is problemmatical, and conflicts with claims of mere on- the-hoof opportunism made by another recent"hostile witness", nephew Marcello Ribeiro (only a hearsay witness of course, but claiming Barauna's complete confidence) who's account was received with some enthusiasm in (so-called) sceptical quarters. Ribeiro insists that there was "something there, they saw something", and that this had nothing to do with Barauna. It was not any part of the alleged hoax. Ribeiro: "When [Barauna] got there the people were saying: 'look!' And he saw it. He saw that there was something out there. Then he simulated [the photos]". The implication of Jansen's account seems consistent with this. He says that other sailors were trying to make him see the object, pointing out "there it is!" It was not Barauna or the other civilians, about whom Jansen seems to have known little. They were secondary in his recollection. He was responding to imprecations by other crewmen trying to make him see this object which he declares "everyone" could see but him. As I pointed out before, this is not inconsistent with early Navy sources which record not only that there were Navy witnesses but that it was members of the crew who first "raised the alarm". Martin Shough Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp