From: Ole Henningsen <oleh.nul> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 21:46:08 +0200 Archived: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 07:16:32 -0400 Subject: Re: A Haunebu II Photo Feature >From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 12:55:30 -0400 >Subject: Re: A Haunebu II Photo Feature >>From: Martin Shough<parcellular.nul> >>To: <post.nul> >>Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 18:17:58 +0100 >>Subject: Re: A Haunebu II Photo Feature >>>From: William Treurniet<wtreurniet.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 14:43:59 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: A Haunebu II Photo Feature >><snip> >>I think you still need to explain to the list in simple physical >>terms why your "toroid" can _not_ be one of four blueish flares, >>interspersed with three yellowish flares. If you can do that I >>will readily concede that it must be something else. >I think I have already done that to my satisfaction. You have >cleverly directed this discussion so that any unexpected spot in >an image is a lens flare. It doesn't matter what it looks like >or where it is. You refuse to consider other possibilities, so >of course anything I say is not going to pass that hurdle. That >leaves us at an impasse, I think. Hi William, "We" dont refuse to consider "other possibilities", but when I - and a lot of other old researchers in this field - look at pictures with a lot of lens flares, we simply are not looking for other possibilities. Why should we?? If you look at a picture of a cow on a road, would you ever consider "it might be some kind of a car" ??? Regards, Ole 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 | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp