From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 22:54:26 +0100 Archived: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 04:46:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Was 'First Photographed UFO' A Comet? >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 09:16:35 -0500 >Subject: Re: Was 'First Photographed UFO' A Comet? >>Source: UniverseToday.Com >>http://tinyurl.com/3dumcbs >> October 14, 2011 >>Was The 'First Photographed UFO' A Comet? >>by Jon Voisey <snip> >Ufologists "crowed"? Gee, silly me: I thought some had merely >speculated. Not good enough for Jon Voisey's rhetorical >requirements, I infer. <snip> Hi Jerry It seems neither Voisey nor the 'study' authors investigated very deeply. Here's what Voisey wrote: "The only piece of evidence the authors, led by Hector Manterola at the Universidad Nacional Aut=F3noma de M=E9xico, use to suggest that this was a comet in the process of breaking up, was the descriptions of the objects as being "fuzzy" in nature and leaving dark trails behind them". But that's not quite accurate. Here's that part of Bonilla's report: "I said that, in the field of projection lens, the bodies appeared bright and left a bright trail, but across the solar disc they seemed opaque. Examining carefully the photographs and the negatives, one sees each is surrounded by a body like a dark cloudiness and a track (trail) out in the field of the lens, and, on going outside of the solar-disc, they are bright. That would make me believe that the bright trails of the bodies crossing the solar-disk absorb sunlight radiation or diminish its power, photographically." www.perceptions.couk.com/bonilla.html#trail original Spanish text version www.perceptions.couk.com/bonilla2.txt The implications of those two difference are mentioned in the HTML page. --- Interestingly, in The Book of the Damned, Charles Fort made a note about the year 1883: "I shall not note them all in this book, but I have records of 31 extraordinary events in 1883. Someone should write a book upon the phenomena of this one year -- that is, if books should be written." http://www.resologist.net/damn05.htm Hw was well aware that late in the year Krakatoa exploded (28 August), discussing that at length in Chapter II http://www.resologist.net/damn02.htm but Forte's note seemed more concerned with the year as a whole. Cheers Ray D 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