Dan Smith - May 5th - Part One Dan Smith-May5-07-...
Dan Smith - May 5th - Part Two
Dan Smith-May5-07-...



UFO, ALIEN, DISCLOSURE, SERPO, SEINU, PROJECT-CAMELOT - Open Minds Forum - http://www.openmindsforum.com/
« UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jun 4, 2007, 4:14pm





UFO, ALIEN, DISCLOSURE, SERPO, SEINU, PROJECT-CAMELOT - Open Minds Forum - WWW.OpenMindsForum.com :: General :: UFO/ Alien / Exobiology :: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« »    [Search This Thread] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]
 Author Topic: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed (Read 60,180 times)
Dragonfire
UFO/EXOBIO MODERATOR
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

Deceptive Fence-sitter



Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,800
Location: Somewhere in time
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1665 on Yesterday at 9:47pm »


Quote:
dan the devil.


haha, I believe he is calling himself the new messiah ::) However looking at it from a different point of view, he may be the anti christ for all we know ;)
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

Irritating the world, one person at a time.
Double_Nought_Spy
Full Member
***
member is offline





Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 41
Location: Colorful Colorado
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1666 on Yesterday at 10:29pm »

I know this is off topic, but this place has been tolerating far worse, and I don't even know if I am allowed to start a new thread. Anyway, there is a very interesting new crop circle in England. It's on the Eathfiles site, here,

http://www.earthfiles.com/

It's a spiral formation, consisting of 57 circles in an arrangement that looks to me like it might be binary code. I have emailed LMH and asked if anyone has tried to decipher it in that way, but it has only been an hour or so. I see others have counted the groups of circles and tried to make some sense of it. I figured there might be one or two people here who could read it. ;) I am no better at that than I am at figuring out how to post an image here.

One of the things LMH does very well is investigate crop circles.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Dragonfire
UFO/EXOBIO MODERATOR
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

Deceptive Fence-sitter



Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,800
Location: Somewhere in time
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1667 on Yesterday at 10:40pm »

DNS,

Yes you can start a thread, however there might already be one for crop circles. There are pages of threads here. If you don't find what you're looking for, then start a new one ;D

Just check the drop down on the upper left or lower left for pages in a particular forum.

DF

Edit by me: By the way, nice find :)

Second edit by me to fix a mistake ::) Not unusual for me :-/
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:02pm by Dragonfire » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

Irritating the world, one person at a time.
calikid
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

OOPArts



Joined: Sept 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 221
Location: Sunny California
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1668 on Yesterday at 10:50pm »

Just noticed on earthfiles.com page:

Rajman1977 Image 0016, taken with a Konica Minolta DiMAGE X on May 16, 2007,
in Capitola, California. Image © 2007 by rajman1977 at flickr.com.

Didn't notice the copyright symbol on any previous picture captions, is this new? Any ramifications to reproductions of his photos?


CaliKid
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 10:51pm by calikid » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

Always keep your words soft and sweet, just in case you have to eat them.
spf33
Senior Member
****
member is offline





Joined: May 2007
Posts: 108
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1669 on Today at 12:08am »


Yesterday at 10:50pm, calikid wrote:
Just noticed on earthfiles.com page:

Rajman1977 Image 0016, taken with a Konica Minolta DiMAGE X on May 16, 2007,
in Capitola, California. Image © 2007 by rajman1977 at flickr.com.

Didn't notice the copyright symbol on any previous picture captions, is this new? Any ramifications to reproductions of his photos?


CaliKid


he definately owns the copyright, that happens the moment he snaps the picture. but i believe everything here falls under

Fair Use.

now i'm wondering if raj is selling or has sold the rights to the images...where are the 1600x1200 images?!?
« Last Edit: Today at 12:13am by spf33 » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
organelle
Full Member
***
member is offline

[avatar]


[homepage]

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 20
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? A Pause for Reflection
« Reply #1670 on Today at 4:51am »

Greetings,

In this post I examine some matters related to the phenomenon, and our processing of it.

•••

1. What are we doing?

I find this phenomenon useful outside the questions about ‘is it from space?’, ‘is it from earth?’, ‘is it a hoax?’. A lot more is happening here than meets the eye.

One of the things I see going on is a test of our collective intelligence. I don't mean the tokenized version of intelligence, but something more like the real thing (and how rarely we experiece -that-!).

We know very little indeed of the associated topics (reams of complex and often bizarrely conflicted text records notwithstanding). Though many of us are quick to declare that many U.F.O. sightings relate to 'spacecraft', our whole concept of 'what space is/means' and 'what spacecraft are/mean' are likely, at this phase in our cognitive evolution, to be extremely primitive (in general) and prone to vast misinterpretation.

We interpret things and phenomenon according to concepts we've been taught, and those concepts are at very best woefully incomplete and at worst catastrophically misfounded. We are a much 'younger' species (cognitively) than we popularly imagine, and our ‘expertise’ is, in most cases, quite the opposite. Imagine an infant attempting to relate with a library. Even a very smart infant will only be able to make use of the tiniest fraction of the available data. Yet the infant is not as certain of its mastery as adult humans are. If you substitute the human species for the infant, the humans actually believe in the models they possess, distribute, attack and defend. This is like the infant believing it has mastered the library. A very poor position to actually learn from.

So one of the things that is happening here is we are getting to see how we might assemble and use the profound potentials of our collective intelligence, which should (properly exercised) allow us to make gains of non-ordinary and entirely unexpected variety.

The gains thus made comprise, in effect, a record of our ability to unify our intelligence for common cause. If and where common cause is reduced to simply deciding if 'it's fake' or 'it's real' we have failed to prosper from the opportunity at hand. These two answers are insufficient in their entirety, and comprise methods which seek to avoid any deep contact with the phenomenon by framing it as 'only meaningful under certain conditions'.

Let me explain why this is not so, and why it would be wrong to excuse this situation even if it is a hoax (which it certainly bears the hallmarks of). We are going to be facing all sorts of new phenomenon in the future (if not today), and if we are not equipped to carefully explore these phenomenon, we will waste our cognitive and unitive energies, and fail to actually -acquire- the intelligence we potentially possess together. This is a catastrophic outcome, whether or not the images are 'real' or 'faked'.

Again, what we actually have here is a chance to hone our skills, our intelligence, and our ability to magnify that intelligence through the process of unification — our 'agreement' to act as a unity in pursuit of a common goal.

I therefore ask that we make wise use of this phenomenon whether or not it is 'fake', because either way it represents an opportunity to hone our intelligence, as individuals, subgroups, and a group. This is an -extremely valuable- situation which allows us to experiment with our perceptions, abilities to investigate, data analysis, all sorts of things the list of which is too long to here mention. We must use such opportunities wisely, and not be lulled to sleep by the habits we were taught (verify and adore, or falsify and ignore).

2. The Mufon Problem

Although the order isn't entirely clear, it appears that the reportáge sequence goes something like this:

Chad to C2C (sometime around April 10th, 2007) 7 Pics from: Late April, or ~05.06.07
Mufon 7013 (April 12th, 2007) 2 Pics from: 05.05.07
Rajman1977 (April 20th, 2007) 6 Pics from: 05.16.07

It is claimed that, originally, 2 (dark, grainy) images were attached to the April 12th Mufon report, however, currently, there are 5 images attached. If these were submitted together, or added later by the original filer, two distinct witness-sets become unified. If they we added later by Mufon staff (or others) we need to know why, and who.

3. The Rajman Conundrums

Communications with Rajman have been friendly but infrequent. He responded to many questions, and gave clear answers to those he responded to. However, many have asked why he hasn't done more, or been more attentive. Here we must settle for speculation, however, a variety of significant details are available.

a. RM is not as interested as we might expect or desire. He appears to consider the phenomenon unusual, but not worth obsessing about. He doesn't seem to believe that the object is nonhuman, or, if he does, this doesn't impress him much.

b. I don't think he's responded to any criticism, including the proposition that the entire situation is the result of a hoax or media ploy. He has openly ignored this aspect of the discussions, and this is an uncommon thing for a male to do. Generally speaking, most men experience a form of emotional priapism when someone implies they lied or are lying. Even quiet men will address the matter directly. RM doesn't mention it.

c. The small amount of communication we have from RM is very casual and cordial. He doesn't ask any questions. He doesn't ask for advice. Most witnesses do both of these things.

d: It is likely that RM hasn’t responded as we expected because his relationship with the ideas involved differs from ours rather dramatically. I do believe he wants to know more about ‘what this is’, and isn’t willing to assume it’s anything at all until he has more information.

As to whether these circumstances tend to verify or falsify the phenomenon, it seems we must wait in the hope that further data surfaces. However, in my mind many of them are at least suspicious.


4. Couples, Couples...Everywhere...

As far as I can tell, the 'first' photo is by a 'woman' who is purportedly ‘Chad’s’ wife in ‘Central California’. A few days later new, clearer pictures are taken. The story is introduced by ‘a couple’.

Next, another couple (we are led to believe) sight a differently configured by very similar craft in ‘Tahoe’. We get commentary about the relationship along with the report (mufon), which is made by the wife.

Finally, we have a young engaged couple, and their parents. The ‘family’ angle grows.

So far, three sightings, three couples.


5. The Remora Dance

There is a well-known tactic whereby someone seeking to inflate their ostensible or real authority does a little dance we might call ‘The Remora’. Now this dance is familiar to all of us, and most of us actually have some direct experience of it. Here’s how it works: You ‘acquire’ public credentialing and authorization (to speak, be believed, be celebrated, &c) by attaching yourself to some phenomenon which, in reality, you have nothing whatsoever to do with.

One of the more common tactics in this game is to drop hints, in such a way that you manipulate your audience to leap ‘on their own’ to the conclusion(s) that you would otherwise have to explicitly state (this provides forward-deniability). This strategy generates covert momentum, because it can be ‘grown’ in a given culture, acquiring converts long after the initial communication has ended. In short, it’s a farming strategy. The basic idea is to ‘soak up’ authority from any source possible.

Now, none of us are directly involved in these sightings, and as such, we’re all ‘doing the Remora’ to some degree. However, when I hear vague suggestions like ‘Glurpo could be involved in the Ca sightings’, I hear pure Remora. It’s not even information. My left foot -could- be behind the sightings, too. This sort of statement is highly suspect to me.

But the Remora dance has, as I think you will see, a much broader relationship to the drone phenomenon. I‘ll leave it to the reader to look more deeply into this angle.


Pax
« Last Edit: Today at 8:55am by organelle » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

New Ways of Knowing: http://www.organelle.org/
garuda
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

Dare to know!



Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 379
Location: two trees away from tarzan
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1671 on Today at 5:23am »

When I posted the link to that article on the US military using UFOs, I did add a "for what it's worth"... :)

But it does show that:

1. there are operational non-conventional technologies out there that can achieve similar things like the drone.

2. the US military is looking for those.


@organelle: great post(s) !
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

Nothing is more dangerous than an idea when it's the only one you have - Emile Chartier
10538
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is online

[avatar]



Joined: Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 210
Location: California
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1672 on Today at 6:00am »

This whole deal with Steve from Mufon is bugging me. Did he get what he wanted so now he's gone? And what about this supposed $1000 reward for anyone bringing to them a "film clip" of the drone? I know mufon is a well established UFO organization but I don't trust them. To tell you the truth, I don't know who to trust when this subject is concerned.
« Last Edit: Today at 3:43pm by 10538 » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
krazyken
Forum Peer-Group Member
*****
member is offline

[avatar]

Biblical Literalist - with the Strong's

[msn]
[homepage]

Joined: Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247
Location: Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1673 on Today at 12:26pm »


Yesterday at 8:31pm, garuda wrote:
For what it's worth: while looking for existing technology that might explain the drones, I came across this article: US Military Ready to Use UFOs, Cylons To Come Next



So the US military is still spending hard earned tax dollars on obsolete technology. Still blowing smoke up everyone's butt hole. Shame on them. ;)

Ken 8-)
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD: KJV
whoopeddog
Junior Member
**
member is online





Joined: May 2007
Posts: 16
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1674 on Today at 2:19pm »

Interesting post, Organelle.

I go from the assumption that it is possible to find out “what really happened” with these sightings. I think one issue here is the question of where to draw the boundaries of this event. As you include sightings that are possibly related, then you bring in additional odd twists to the story. For instance:

1. Is the Alabama report to LMH of a similar object near a power line part of the current phenomenon? I tend to think it is part of the same phenomenon due to some of the characteristics on the photo—the long wing, sixteen segments on the bottom ring, the behavior of the object.

2. What then do you make of the Alabama guy’s odd statement about talking to someone from the USAF about the object, and the man told him odd things like, “do not speak by any type of telephone or that will fix them right on top of your position…”

3. Then you have someone else posting to LMH to say that he saw an object just like the Alabama object in a hanger during an airshow at an Air Force Base in the 1980’s, at which time someone moved the object stating that it was not supposed to be on display and then closed the hangar.

4. There is also the lady, again as reported by LMH, who saw something similar to Chad’s craft at the Sequoia National Park, it was explained away in an oddly nonchalant manner by a park ranger.

It is hard to know where to draw the boundaries of this event, partly because different players have different pieces of it and don’t seem to be cooperating very much. Earthfiles has been the source for a lot of it, but I can understand that her information is proprietary. Who can say how well she checks out her sources? It seems to me like she is throwing a lot of stuff on the wall, without any analysis. What does it mean for a military person to tell the Alabama man to keep quiet, for instance? What does it mean for a park ranger to act like these drones are commonplace and then for the park service to deny it?

It seems to me that if this is a hoax, then it seems to involve Tahoe wife, Chad, and Raj, and most likely also the Alabama reporter and possibly also the reported “professional engineer” who reports seeing the object in a hangar in the 1980’s. One question for me is whether LMH is checking the reliability of her sources.

I think there are a few loose ends that will help us figure out better what we’re dealing with. For one, someone is checking with the Santa Cruz newspapers to see whether a report was ever made. If they say yes, a report was made, then that lends credibility to Raj. Any other answer leaves you where you started.

Another answer is going to come from Raj himself. If he makes good on his promise to post more photos, then that lends him credibility. If he never comes back, that tends to suggest he’s pulling everybody’s leg. I also find it a telling detail that he never addresses the issue that people are trying to rule out a hoax.

It seems like another loose end is the detail of how the Chad photos got put in with the Tahoe wife photos as part of MUFON report 7013. I presume somebody is putting that question to them? (If it turns out that Chad is the husband to the Tahoe wife, then we’ve got a ton of inconsistencies in the story.)

Finally, I’m left looking at the behavior of the reporters. You have one report to MUFON, one report to Coast to Coast AM and then to Earthfiles, and then one report to Craig’s List and then to Flickr. (If I were a hoaxer, it wouldn’t be a bad way to propagate the hoax—to put it out to multiple outlets in such a way to create a quiet buzz just like what has happened.) I still find it suspicious that the reporters seem to have so little curiosity about the objects that they themselves found and alerted the world about. I’m also suspicious that a party like LMH seems to have more interest in putting out an interesting story than in verifying anything, which would make her vulnerable to being hoaxed. I could be wrong, but it would be nice to hear how she has gone about verifying these sources.

It certainly seems possible that if you’re going to the trouble to make these fake images that you could then make it seem like multiple people from various places are backing you up. It also seems likely that if somebody has made these images, they can make more. Ultimately though, if I were a hoaxer, I’d want the issue to hang there—I wouldn’t want to be debunked. So, if people were getting too close, I’d just quietly go away.

And then last of all, the Chad photos just look fake to me. That’s my bias. I would love to be proven wrong, though. It just seems to me that there is a good reason that these images are the best UFO images ever. It is just too farfetched for me to believe that Chad and Raj have both coincidentally come up with so much sharp detail. I can't get that much detail when I take a picture of my kids. If either one could produce just one blurry image or off-center shot, I'd be less suspicious.

I also bet we’ve heard the last of Raj, and that should tell us something. I would love to be wrong.
« Last Edit: Today at 2:40pm by whoopeddog » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
italiclikeitis
Junior Member
**
member is online





Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 16
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1675 on Today at 3:00pm »

The media ladder is very long. It's like that game. You know...Who wants to stick their hands in the fire first?? If the mass media decides to go ahead and "UFO" the crap out of this, it may come and bite them back like Captain Quinn in the movie "Jaws". Besides, we wouldn't know if they have already been briefed and suppressed about the issue. For all we know, they might all be waiting for more information like the rest of us.

Although, I will add that I have not seen anything in the media here in Canada about it. This doesn't mean that it hasn't been aired, but there are enough people that know about this, and would most likely tell others about it right away from around the globe.

I personally don't really see how the mass media can really help solve this, accept that maybe some of the witnesses do not have the Internet, and have been waiting to see on TV if anyone else saw it.


Great analysis Organelle...
I think that another boundary which needs to be considered is "The boundary of obsession". How many of you ever ask yourself if you are getting obsessed, and that this might affect your judgment?
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
whoopeddog
Junior Member
**
member is online





Joined: May 2007
Posts: 16
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1676 on Today at 3:15pm »

Take for instance a news outlet like the local Santa Cruz newspaper, which I don't know anything about. I'm sure they have a process where they accept news tips. However, I'd say there's an editorial process where much of that information is screened out and taken with a grain of salt. It would be easy for a newspaper to look foolish, especially if they were going to be the ones to stick their neck out first.

I think if you heard about it in the mainstream news, it would be from the angle of "popular phenomenon", like, "...a lot of people are talking about a UFO that might have been sighted..." and that way they distance themselves from it. But the safest thing really is to stay out of it until it makes itself news, which it hasn't done yet. I don't see anything sinister in that.

As far as obsession, I have gotten pretty fascinated with this story, and by and large I'm not a UFO enthusiast, if you will. To be honest, I can't recall now where I first saw the Chad/Raj/Tahoe wife photos that led me here. But I'm hooked on the story until it gets resolved one way or another, or until it withers from lack of new information.

Does my level of interest affect my judgment? Maybe to some mild degree. It might cause me to wonder why Raj or Chad don't help us out more, because I'm certainly fascinated to find out what's up. I am impatient to sort it out. Raj might come back a month from tomorrow and say, "oh, hey, guys, yeah I was busy doin' stuff. Here's some other photos." He may have a whole different level of interest. Time will sort it all out, I think.
« Last Edit: Today at 3:16pm by whoopeddog » Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
kenticus
Senior Member
****
member is offline

[avatar]

my questions dont fit inside my answers

[aim]

Joined: Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 135
Location: 30.295 -90.795
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1677 on Today at 3:17pm »

Italics, judging by the way this thread has exploded, I think it's safe to say that many posters here have passed the "obsessive threshold". Even Toon self-destructed on this thread ( my money was on the D.S. pages, but such is life). This subject & it's ethereal ability to be anything to anybody makes it pure nitro in a forum such as this. OUR job as researchers is to read through the static & try to find the (tiny) threads that matter.
Kudos to the folks here who have the will to keep on-topic for 112 pages!
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged

noli nothis permittere te terere
italiclikeitis
Junior Member
**
member is online





Joined: May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 16
Location: Ontario, Canada
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1678 on Today at 4:03pm »

When using the scientific method at an attempt to prove the existence of something. The element of doubt, is sometimes even more valuable than it's counterpart. Rule out what it isn't, and that should lead us to what it is.

When more evidence surfaces, we'll have more answers.

Is anyone going to argue that the concept of this craft isn't plausible? If that isn't the case, then some of us should move on to get a better understanding of this technology.

I am willing bet that there are many people already trying to build one of these in their heads, if not already in their garages.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
whoopeddog
Junior Member
**
member is online





Joined: May 2007
Posts: 16
 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #1679 on Today at 4:09pm »

That's a proper question for the engineers, but all the real world drone photos I've seen have looked like conventional aircraft, with propellers and landing gear, etc. They've also featured bilateral symmetry as well. I do think people have made pretty fair approximations on their computers of CG craft, and my hunch is that is where this thing was hatched.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
« »    [Search This Thread] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]

The Alien Seeker News

Click to discover what is: - 'Exempt From Disclosure'


Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free



This Board Hosted For FREE By ProBoards
Get Your Own Free Message Board!