Calvine Photo Hoax Theories

[NoParty]

Nice @Andreas. It's funny the things that come up when searching online. I googled "Harrier Jet Cereal box" and came across this humorous story about a court case.

In 1996, PepsiCo began a promotional loyalty program in which customers could earn Pepsi Points which could be traded for physical items. A television commercial for the loyalty program displayed the commercial's protagonist flying to school in a McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II vertical take off jet aircraft, valued at $37.4 million at the time, which could be redeemed for 7,000,000 Pepsi Points. The plaintiff, John Leonard, discovered these could be directly purchased from Pepsi at 10¢ per point. Leonard delivered a check for $700,008.50 to PepsiCo, attempting to purchase the jet.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_v._Pepsico,_Inc.

fwiw Netflix did a fun little mini-series almost 3 years ago, on the Leonard/Pepsi story, which I happened to run across.
It was pretty entertaining, but somehow they stretched it out to 4 episodes and 161 minutes,
which I can't recommend anyone watch all of, as there isn't enough real material there for more than ~30 minutes...
https://www.netflix.com/title/81446626

 

[Andreas]

Of course some days aren't windy -- and on windy days, some spots are in the "wind shadow" of upwind obstructions.

The number of of existing UFO pictures created by "a thing on a string" indicates that it is not an insurmountable challenge -- in my childhood, I did one (well, two, we snapped two pics) of a classic flying saucer made from the lid of a tin can taped to a string slung over a telephone line by an old abandoned shack. (Now that I think of it, it looked a bit like the McMinnville UFO pics, especially the one without the visible "antenna.") Dad sent them to the Air Force!

Recall that you do not need to KEEP the UFO on a string steady and level, even if you want a steady and level UFO in your pic, it just needs to be steady and level intermittently long enough to snap a picture. Also, in this case, recall that we do not know what the purported other pictures looked like, nor if there were intervening discarded shots that had visible strings (or reflection on the glass, if that was the method used) or motion blur from the wind hitting it.

Absolutely true — but still, there's something about the Calvine photo that appears unusually well-composed compared to most "UFO photos" created using hanging models. We see an almost perfect side profile of the object, and it appears nearly perfectly horizontal. I agree that it's definitely possible it was staged using suspended models, but that's not my primary hypothesis.

One major clue that makes me lean toward the sheet-of-glass method is the viewing angle: the object is seen from the side. When hoaxers use hanging models — whether from a tree or one of the many power lines crossing the Calvine area — they often suspend them above the camera to create the illusion of something large and high in the sky. In this case, the hoaxer would have had to use long strings and suspend the model level with the camera, which is less typical.

And yes, I agree — we know very little about the additional five photos. But we do know some things. According to documents released by the MoD, there were six photos in total, all showing "a large stationary, diamond-shaped object." Taking multiple photos of a "UFO" hovering in place is quite easy if you're using a sheet of glass. It's possible with a model too, of course — but definitely more complicated.

And if the "jet" in the photo is also a model, then it would have taken serious effort to stage six convincing shots using only strings and suspended props.

 

[Andreas]

View attachment 82442View attachment 82444

Yes, absolutely — that's a possibility. But the models in your illustrations can still rotate. To properly stabilize a hanging model, you'd still need additional wires. Again, it's definitely possible, but I find the sheet of glass method more straightforward. And when adding the jet into the equation, it would take some serious skills to pull this off using wires.

 

[John J.]

Yes, absolutely — that's a possibility. But the models in your illustrations can still rotate. To properly stabilize a hanging model, you'd still need additional wires.

I see what you mean, but if the cord (perhaps fishing line, probably not wire) were reasonably taut, a small card shape or light model, firmly attached, needn't rotate.
And the hoaxer doesn't have to take the photos on a windy day.
Rain could make a shoot-through-glass hoax difficult, solution: Don't do it when it's raining.

Both the shooting-through glass and the hanging models methods have their pros and cons. I think it's been convincingly shown that either method could be used to replicate a "Calvine" photograph.
I'm not sure there's enough in-picture information to determine which (if either) method was used- after all, we haven't been able to demonstrate, from the image, that it is a hoax.

 

[Andreas]

Both the shooting-through glass and the hanging models methods have their pros and cons. I think it's been convincingly shown that either method could be used to replicate a "Calvine" photograph.
I'm not sure there's enough in-picture information to determine which (if either) method was used- after all, we haven't been able to demonstrate, from the image, that it is a hoax.

I totally agree. It's impossible to say exactly how the photo was created — and we'll probably never know. The only faint possibility is that, one day, the photographer finally comes forward. But even that likely wouldn't be enough to convince most ET enthusiasts. A confession isn't the same as proof of a hoax. Maybe if the hoaxer had kept the negatives and the model all these years, it could serve as stronger evidence — but that's probably just wishful thinking. In the end, though, it doesn't really matter. Since the photo can be faked, it serves as proof of absolutely nothing extraordinary considering the lack of supporting evidence.

 

[JMartJr]

I think it is also significant that this is the ONLY case (so far as I know, and as of this writing) of such a UFO being photographed. Look at pictures of real spaceships in flight, such as the space shuttles, the Apollo spacecraft, Soyuz, Dragon, where pictures have been taken of the vehicle on multiple missions -- then compare that the the subset of UFO pictures where you can see the object clearly enough to tell the shape and some details of what you are looking at. With the actual spacecraft, you can tell which one you are looking at easily, and all the Apollo CSMs look like Apollo CSMs. But with the Calvine UFO in particular, and UFOs more generally, they all seem to be "one offs." There aren't any other pictures (AFAIK) of the same "make and model" vehicle as the Calvine UFO -- it has only been seen and photographed once.

This seems to be the rule rather than the exception in UFO photos. Even with popular "general shapes," like Black Triangles, when you can see any details, they tend to be different from one photo to the next.

Are the space aliens using a different vehicle design for every mission? Or are the world's military establishments flying dozens of different hyper-advanced experimental aircraft one time each and then mothballing them forever? Or, perhaps, are hoaxsters making something they like the looks of and calling that good enough, with their own bit of creativity and using their own materials that are handy, not trying to exactly duplicate what the previous hoaxsters made?

 

[John J.]

But with the Calvine UFO in particular, and UFOs more generally, they all seem to be "one offs."

There are some exceptions, like the Venusian scout ships photographed by George Adamski. He of course got to ride in them as well.

Detail from my avatar.

I think some of Billy Meier's UFOs cropped up in more than one photo. His disillusioned ex-wife stated that they were all models made by Billy; this is almost certainly true.

 

[JMartJr]

There are some exceptions, like the Venusian scout ships photographed by George Adamski. He of course got to ride in them as well.
View attachment 82456

View attachment 82457 Detail from my avatar.

I think some of Billy Meier's UFOs cropped up in more than one photo. His disillusioned ex-wife stated that they were all models made by Billy; this is almost certainly true.

I'd accept an amendment to note that while the same photographer may use the same design several times, UFOs that are the same identifiable make and model, with the same details and features, seldom if ever show up from multiple independent photographers.

 

[Andreas]

I think some of Billy Meier's UFOs cropped up in more than one photo. His disillusioned ex-wife stated that they were all models made by Billy; this is almost certainly true.

And the "gasoline lamp beam ship" lives on in the imaginations of individuals like Bob Lazar and David Grusch…

 

[Andreas]

I'd accept an amendment to note that while the same photographer may use the same design several times, UFOs that are the same identifiable make and model, with the same details and features, seldom if ever show up from multiple independent photographers.

True. I guess it's risky to reuse another hoaxer's model — if the earlier hoax gets debunked, it could expose the new one as well. It's safer to come up with a completely new design, inspired by the UFO mythology of the time.

It's hardly surprising that the Calvine photo features a geometric-looking craft, given all the triangular "objects" people claimed to have seen during the Belgian UFO wave the previous year. But a "black triangle UFO" isn't exactly an ideal choice for a hoax when the object is shown from the side.

The strange-looking diamond in the Calvine photo may have been the hoaxer's attempt to create something in the spirit of the Belgian UFOs — a kind of reinterpretation that worked better from a side view.

 

[John J.]

I guess it's risky to reuse another hoaxer's model — if the earlier hoax gets debunked, it could expose the new one as well. It's safer to come up with a completely new design, inspired by the UFO mythology of the time.

Agreed. And a hoaxer thinking of copying someone else's picture or description of a UFO might be concerned that the person(s) responsible for the original would know the copied design was a hoax if the original was a hoax itself.

Maybe that's part of the current popularity of "orbs", any point lightsource in the sky might be an orb, so lots of confirmatory "evidence" for believers if they don't think too much about alternative explanations.
A lack of features/ details prevents debunkers finding possible matches, like the gas lamp lids resembling Adamski's UFOs.
There's no risk of angry ex-partners pointing out the model-making stockpile in the garage.
Debunking one claimed orb sighting/ picture/ video doesn't necessarily debunk others, whereas few people are likely to take a new picture of an Adamski-style "scout ship" seriously.
And reports of orbs and their claimed behaviours (e.g. from Luis Elizondo) subtly invert Clarke's third law, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"; a glowing sphere, devoid of obvious structure, subsystems or means of propulsion, and capable of extraordinary manoeuvres (including passing through walls) is essentially magical- and therefore "evidence" of a highly-advanced technology...

Despite the enormous proliferation of cameras (on cellphones) routinely carried by people since the mid-1990s, and of course the commensurate ability of people to contact others if they see something unusual, we rarely see pictures of structured UFOs as were sometimes photographed in the 1950s, 60s and 70s.
The Calvine photo, supposedly taken in August 1990 might be one of the last (arguably!) "credible" photos of a nuts-and-bolts UFO to get much attention- this in our era of clickbait and the widespread dissemination of silly, and false, claims. The one emblematic photo of a "black triangle" from the Belgian UFO flap of 1989-1990 was released a little earlier, June 1990:

The photograph was examined by a number of sources, including NASA, the French National Centre for Scientific Research and the Belgian Royal Military Academy, but none could positively identify it or find obvious signs of fakery.

Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_UFO_wave, which continues

In 2011, Patrick Maréchal demonstrated how he had created the hoax UFO, by cutting a piece of styrofoam into a triangle, painting it black, embedding a flashlight in each corner, and hanging it from a string.

As a quick aside, the secret US military aircraft in the second X-files episode (September 1993, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(The_X-Files_episode), strongly implied to be based on reverse-engineered ET technology, might have been partially inspired by the Maréchal hoax picture- a triangle with a bright light at each point and a circular spotlight-type feature in the centre.

I miss the old nuts-and-bolts UFOs, they were much more fun. Shame that the ET technology has improved so rapidly .

 

[Andreas]

I miss the old nuts-and-bolts UFOs, they were much more fun. Shame that the ET technology has improved so rapidly .

Me too! I really miss the nav caps and lanterns. The AI fakes and spiritual orbs that keep showing up in Lue's living room just don't do it for me.

 

[Andreas]

Metal objects like sinkers and arrowheads have been mentioned several times in this thread. As you probably know by now, my best guess is that a random paper cutout was used — but I couldn't resist taking a photo using an antique spearhead I had lying around.

Interestingly, the patina on the metal caused some white "spots" to appear in the black-and-white photo, and overall, you get a camo-like pattern on the metal.

Here's the spearhead I used:

I think we could go on forever coming up with possible explanations for how the Calvine photo might have been created — and we'll probably never be able to prove any of them with certainty. But one thing is clear: there are numerous ways the photo could have been staged, none of which require the extraordinary involvement of ETs, time travelers, or anti-gravity craft built in some secret RAF hangar.

 

[Andreas]

The number of of existing UFO pictures created by "a thing on a string" indicates that it is not an insurmountable challenge

I see what you mean, but if the cord (perhaps fishing line, probably not wire) were reasonably taut, a small card shape or light model, firmly attached, needn't rotate.

As kindly pointed out by JMartJr and John J., small models hanging from threads are probably the most classic method used in UFO hoax photos. I suppose I've listened a bit too much to people like David Clarke, who claim it would take not only a fair amount of knowledge but also a good bit of luck to pull off a prank involving six sequential photos showing a jet flying around the scene.

To test that hypothesis, I decided to try creating a few photos of a small toy plane appearing as if it were flying by.

I had a miniature (about 10 cm) American Airlines passenger jet lying around and decided to use it as my "flying jet." I experimented with different ways of attaching the model plane to fishing line and eventually settled on a setup like this:

But then there's the fricking weather. Summer in Sweden can really be the worst! It was raining heavily today, and the forecast says it will continue. So, I decided to do a first attempt by setting up the scene indoors instead. I fastened the fishing line between two walls in my workshop and placed a large sheet of paper behind it to imitate a bright, cloudy sky. I previously had used the paper to cover the floor while spray painting so it looked kinda like clouds

Here's the result I came up with, using this rather primitive technique:

Since I used an old lousy digital camera (and not an analog one with black-and-white film), I set it to B&W mode and tweaked the settings to give the photos a more "vintage" look. I also made sure to keep the plane slightly out of focus.

The scene has little in common with the Calvine photo, but after conducting this experiment, it's clear to me that it wouldn't take much effort to create the six alleged Calvine photos using models and fishing wire. It took me about 15 minutes to set up the experiment and take the four shots.

It will be interesting to try this outdoors later on and see whether wind becomes an issue. I suspect it won't, since the metal model is fairly heavy—but I might need to attach an extra wire for stability. We'll see.

 

[JMartJr]

It would not have occurred to me to question those if shown as "pictures of a plane that flew low over my house," other than the plane not moving in relation to the smudgey stuff! I also wouldn't have guessed that they were taken indoors.

re: wind -- before attaching more string try just waiting for lulls in the breeze... there usually are some.

 

[Andreas]

It would not have occurred to me to question those if shown as "pictures of a plane that flew low over my house," other than the plane not moving in relation to the smudgey stuff! I also wouldn't have guessed that they were taken indoors.

re: wind -- before attaching more string try just waiting for lulls in the breeze... there usually are some.

And the Calvine photo is even more out of focus, with the grain making it impossible to distinguish any real detail. I'm sure even a teenager with limited camera experience could have pulled off such a prank.

An interesting detail: normally, when staging a hoax using small models, they're hung high above the camera. Controlling the models and changing their angles can therefore be somewhat challenging. But if the Calvine photo was staged this way, the hoaxer likely didn't face those issues. The hypothetical models don't appear to be hanging high up, but rather conveniently low in front of the photographer. It would have been easy to snap a photo, walk over to the fishing line to adjust the model's position, return to the same spot, and take the next shot—and so on. There could have been two people involved, but I don't think that would have been necessary.

And yeah, I'll try using the same setup outdoors as well. Since the model plane is made of metal, it's fairly heavy, and I don't think a light breeze will cause any serious issues. As soon as the rain stops, I'll give it a try.

 

[Andreas]

Surprisingly, the weather was great today, an I had the opportunity to take some outdoor photos of my "miniature plane on a fishing line" setup. The aim, as mentioned earlier, was to see if wind would be an issue when using this method. The weather was almost too good — I had hoped for a white, cloudy backdrop but ended up with an almost entirely blue sky. Still, it worked fine for this initial experiment.

I used the same setup as for the indoor photos: a 14 cm metal model of an American Airlines passenger jet, attached to a horizontal 0.4 mm fishing line. It's a very thin line, but it's more than strong enough to hold the model steady in front of the camera. The line I used was fairly long, approximately 6 meters. That's obviously more than necessary, but I really wanted to see if the wind would affect the model and make it difficult to take the photos. During the session, wind speeds were fluctuating between 3 and 8 meters per second.

Here are five photos I took, changing the model's position slightly between each shot:

I carried out this experiment on my own, without any assistance, which meant there was a delay of about 20–30 seconds between each photo. Since the few clouds present were moving quite fast, that's obviously a telltale sign of a hoax. However, in the Calvine case, moving clouds don't seem to be a major issue.

Now to the most important part of the trial: did the wind affect the model? Well, frankly, it barely moved at all, even though the line was quite long and the conditions were occasionally gusty. In other words, a metal model suspended by fishing line probably wouldn't be affected much by wind — and it wouldn't pose much of a problem for a hoaxer.

 

[Giddierone]

Cycling in Scotland, my son (unprompted) suddenly said "Hey! that looks like an alien spacecraft"...

 

[JMartJr]

Cycling in Scotland, my son (unprompted) suddenly said "Hey! that looks like an alien spacecraft"...

Interestingly it looks like two -- in the tan area you have a green chevron shape somewhat similar to the Calvine UFO, embedded in which is a darker green shape that looks like the old classic Flying Saucer With a Dome, such as the Passaic NJ photos from 1952!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passaic_UFO_photographs

 

[deirdre]

"Hey! that looks like an alien spacecraft"...

it looks like an upside down letter with an upside down king charles stamp in the corner.

 

[FatPhil]

Cycling in Scotland, my son (unprompted) suddenly said "Hey! that looks like an alien spacecraft"...View attachment 83564

I thought someone was trying to create a web forum on a hillside, and that was a post by someone with a default placeholder avatar

 

[Andreas]

I've spent quite a bit of time speculating about the actual shape of the object. Since my main hypothesis is that it's a hoax created using small models suspended from fishing wires, the shape of the prop used to depict the UFO is the key to understanding the whole thing.

Lately, I've started to think that the Calvine case might simply be a hoax inspired by the "Belgian UFO wave", during which triangular UFOs were frequently reported. A plausible explanation is that the Calvine "diamond" was an attempt to create a three-dimensional version of the "Belgian triangles." And the most logical three-dimensional triangle is, of course, a pyramid.

Let's, for a moment, consider the possibility that the Calvine object was a small prop shaped like a low pyramid with a triangular base. I've made a small (12 cm) cardboard model to illustrate this idea, and when viewed slightly from below, the pyramid looks almost exactly like the Calvine object.

Can you think of some mundane object looking like this? To me, is seems plausible that the hoaxer found some gardening, household, hiking object and decided to use it to create a hoax ufo photo.

Interestingly, the white spots on my photo are tape holding the cardboard prop together. Perhaps the white spots in the Calvine photo is the same thing?

 

[Ann K]

Can you think of some mundane object looking like this?

Yes. A small islet.

 

[JMartJr]

Can you think of some mundane object looking like this?

I wonder about some variation of this idea:

https://www.dreamstime.com/photos-images/old-lead-fishing-sinkers.html

To me, is seems plausible that the hoaxer found some gardening, household, hiking object and decided to use it to create a hoax ufo photo.

Yeah, I always kind of like the star-shaped ornament for that reason -- just something they happened to have about...

But while I like the thing(s)-on-a-string hypothesis, as just being a very common method requiring little creativity or ingenuity, the picture is just not clear enough to ever be sure barring new info.

But I'd put your shallow pyramid in the stack of things it might have been.

 

[Scaramanga]

Can you think of some mundane object looking like this?

There's no evidence or indication that what's in the photo is actually 3 dimensional and not just a flat piece of card. It could be either a photo of a piece of UFO shaped card stuck to a piece of glass....or, my favourite is that it is a photo of a photo in which someone has stuck the 'UFO' onto an original image. Or, they cut out a UFO shaped hole from a photo, put something dark behind it, and photographed that. The 'UFO' has all the hallmarks of being badly cut with scissors.

 

[Giddierone]

I've spent quite a bit of time speculating about the actual shape of the object. Since my main hypothesis is that it's a hoax created using small models suspended from fishing wires, the shape of the prop used to depict the UFO is the key to understanding the whole thing.

Lately, I've started to think that the Calvine case might simply be a hoax inspired by the "Belgian UFO wave", during which triangular UFOs were frequently reported. A plausible explanation is that the Calvine "diamond" was an attempt to create a three-dimensional version of the "Belgian triangles." And the most logical three-dimensional triangle is, of course, a pyramid.

Let's, for a moment, consider the possibility that the Calvine object was a small prop shaped like a low pyramid with a triangular base. I've made a small (12 cm) cardboard model to illustrate this idea, and when viewed slightly from below, the pyramid looks almost exactly like the Calvine object.

View attachment 85002
View attachment 85003
Can you think of some mundane object looking like this? To me, is seems plausible that the hoaxer found some gardening, household, hiking object and decided to use it to create a hoax ufo photo.View attachment 85004
Interestingly, the white spots on my photo are tape holding the cardboard prop together. Perhaps the white spots in the Calvine photo is the same thing?

More simply you can get the same shape with a single fold in square of paper. e.g. #921

 

[Andreas]

More simply you can get the same shape with a single fold in square of paper. e.g. #921

Yes, I agree. Have used that shape for some of my reconstructions. Just wanted to add another possible shape to the list. The pyramid is tempting for the reason that it's a kind if 3D version if a triangle. And triangles are the latest in ufology back then, with all the "black triangles" of the Belgian UFO wave.

There's no evidence or indication that what's in the photo is actually 3 dimensional and not just a flat piece of card. It could be either a photo of a piece of UFO shaped card stuck to a piece of glass....or, my favourite is that it is a photo of a photo in which someone has stuck the 'UFO' onto an original image. Or, they cut out a UFO shaped hole from a photo, put something dark behind it, and photographed that. The 'UFO' has all the hallmarks of being badly cut with scissors.

Definitely a possibility. Perhaps someone would object that the MoD would have seen this when analyzing the original negatives, but personally I'm sure it's possible. But as most things with the Calvine case, with the lack of evidence to analyze, almost everything is pure speculation. The reason why I consider the possibility of a 3D ufo prop hanging from a wire is because that's a metod often used by hoaxers over the years, like the Belgian polystyrene triangles.

 

[Andreas]

Here's another photo I took of a small folded paper pyramid. I made a pyramid with a triangular base, about 12 cm wide, and attached a small ball to one of the edges.

The photo was taken slightly from below to create the illusion of a fairly symmetrical diamond shape. The "dark spot" was made by simply cutting a small hole in the pyramid. I shot the photo outdoors just after sunset.

(Calvine object compared with my paper pyramid.)

I think the overall shape, the slightly uneven and asymmetrical edges, as well as the dark spot, match quite well with the Calvine object. However, I completely failed to replicate the two blurry "white spots." I tried to create them by painting them on with white paint, but they disappeared entirely in the photo. My best guess is that they might be tape or some other reflective material—possibly nothing more than Scotch tape—reflecting light from the sky and used to hold the paper pyramid together.

This is, of course, just speculation, and we have no way of knowing whether the Calvine object actually was a paper pyramid. But to me, it's an interesting hypothesis. Considering the "Belgian UFO wave" of 1989–90, with numerous reports of flying triangles, a triangular shape seems like a plausible choice for a hoaxer. And a pyramid is very easy to make using nothing more than a piece of cardboard or thick paper and some tape.

An obvious weakness in my reasoning is that I intentionally tried to imitate the Calvine object by creating a pyramid designed to match what we see in the photo. This approach relies on several assumptions, and we have no way of knowing whether they are reasonable or not. Therefore, this is not in any way a claim that the Calvine object was a paper pyramid—only that it could have been. And since paper pyramids are known to exist… yeah, you get my point.

 

[JMartJr]

Let's, for a moment, consider the possibility that the Calvine object was a small prop shaped like a low pyramid with a triangular base.

One argument against it would be that there were supposedly several pictures. A pyramid can look like this lance-head shape from a specific angle, but will give itself away, so to speak, if it turns at all. That could be prevented, of course, by hanging it from multiple strings to prevent it turning, so it would always be seen from the same angle. But that's extra work to prevent a pyramid inspired by the triangle UFO craze from looking like a triangle!

CAVEAT: We of course do not KNOW what the other pictures showed.

 

[Scaramanga]

An interesting little observation...

A Harrier is 46 feet long, which means ( from the photo ) that the Harrier must be at least 500 feet above the terrain below as we see at least that much space below it. If the UFO is at a similar distance then you can add another 200 feet...giving it a height above ground of at least 700 feet. That is crucial.

I hope my maths here makes sense....

We do not know exactly what direction the photo is taken in, but here we have a big clue, as there are only a tiny number of locations where that 700 feet plus the height of the valley floor would leave the UFO the same height as the observer and seen edge on. They are claimed to be in the Tay Forest Park, which levels off at around 1400 feet...so we know the max height the photo was taken from. This means that the UFO has to be overhead to an area that is itself no more than 700 feet in elevation.

There are no such areas to the west or east....so we can effectively rule out those directions for the UFO. To the north there's only a very thin strip of the B847 road valley that matches. I don't think the Loch Tummel valley is even visible from where they were. Which only leaves the Tummel Bridge direction to the south west, and the UFO would have had to be at least 2 miles away.

So we can actually use the details in the photo itself, even without seeing the horizon, to determine that the photo is most likely looking to the south west...which I've seen general claims is the right direction. And yet, we can only do this if we assume the UFO is a real object.

 

[Mendel]

One argument against it would be that there were supposedly several pictures. A pyramid can look like this lance-head shape from a specific angle, but will give itself away, so to speak, if it turns at all. That could be prevented, of course, by hanging it from multiple strings to prevent it turning, so it would always be seen from the same angle. But that's extra work to prevent a pyramid inspired by the triangle UFO craze from looking like a triangle!

CAVEAT: We of course do not KNOW what the other pictures showed.

Exactly. If it looked the same in every picture, that'd be suspicious. If it was a floating pyramid, at least it'd look like a real object.

 

[Mendel]

They are claimed to be in the Tay Forest Park

who claimed that? where and when did they claim it? sources?

 

[Scaramanga]

who claimed that? where and when did they claim it? sources?

Even Wikipedia says ' on the moors above Calvine '. The guys can't have got that many miles as they started late afternoon and the photo is ( allegedly ) around 9pm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvine_UFO_photograph

 

[Scaramanga]

But that's extra work to prevent a pyramid inspired by the triangle UFO craze from looking like a triangle!

We don't know that the Calvine UFO is actually a pyramid. I don't see any vertices. Also, Donald Menzel had recorded a bewildering array of UFO shapes as far back as 1963....

"Eyewitness descriptions differ in reported appearance, movement, and purpose. In a 1963 overview of flying saucers, astronomer Donald Howard Menzel found some broad traits across sightings but noted that "no two reports describe exactly the same kind of UFO."[83]​: 7 ​ Menzel found saucers were usually reported as round but included objects shaped like dining saucers, teardrops, cigars, kidney beans, the planet Saturn, and yarn spindles."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_saucer

 

[JMartJr]

We don't know that the Calvine UFO is actually a pyramid. I don't see any vertices. Also, Donald Menzel had recorded a bewildering array of UFO shapes as far back as 1963....

I don't believe it is. I was responding to Andreas's idea from post #542 showing how a triangular pyramid of the right proportions and seen at the right angle can look like the Calvine "UFO." Which I agree, it CAN, but it seems unlikely to me assuming the other pictures did not show a different profile shape as the dangly UFO turned on the end of its string!

The recorded bewildering array of shapes is interesting, it strikes me how rarely an exact shape is repeated in pics and vids. Sure, there are a lot of disks, for example, but even the similar shapes are almost all different in various ways -- domes or no domes, antenna or no, finned or finless, etc.

We see so many "one off" shapes, seen once and never again. Like the Calvine "UFO." This seems odd if they are manufactured spacecraft from another world, but is maybe what you'd expect if they are "Wow, if we hung this thing here on a string it would make a cool UFO picture!"

 

[Stryder]

We see so many "one off" shapes, seen once and never again. Like the Calvine "UFO." This seems odd if they are manufactured spacecraft from another world, but is maybe what you'd expect if they are "Wow, if we hung this thing here on a string it would make a cool UFO picture!"

This also applies to secret military projects that inadvertently get glimpsed by the public. You would expect similarity (same objects, different perspectives) if the pictures were of a secret aircraft. Of course, time discloses all major military projects and at some point we would be able to say aha! those pictures were of the F___ fighter or the B____ bomber or the X___ experimental aircraft. We see examples of this from the B-2 and F-117 programs that eventually revealed unusual aircraft. Given 20 years or more of no reveals pretty much takes the secret military project off the table for a given anomalous photograph.

 

[Scaramanga]

I don't believe it is. I was responding to Andreas's idea from post #542 showing how a triangular pyramid of the right proportions and seen at the right angle can look like the Calvine "UFO." Which I agree, it CAN, but it seems unlikely to me assuming the other pictures did not show a different profile shape as the dangly UFO turned on the end of its string!

The recorded bewildering array of shapes is interesting, it strikes me how rarely an exact shape is repeated in pics and vids. Sure, there are a lot of disks, for example, but even the similar shapes are almost all different in various ways -- domes or no domes, antenna or no, finned or finless, etc.

We see so many "one off" shapes, seen once and never again. Like the Calvine "UFO." This seems odd if they are manufactured spacecraft from another world, but is maybe what you'd expect if they are "Wow, if we hung this thing here on a string it would make a cool UFO picture!"

I came across not only diamond shaped vodka flasks that look like the UFO, but also there are literally hundreds of variants of diamond shaped pendants, prisms, etc....all with the UFO style 'appendage' at the end, which in the case of the pendants is what the necklace goes through...

 

[JMartJr]

Yeah, for this one (and for a number of others) the list of mundane things that could be used to hoax the picture is extremely large. Now I'm not saying this is a hoax (I'm thinking it pretty loud, though) but given that we know hoaxes exist and this one would be hoaxable in so many ways using so many techniques and props, other than the fun of thinking up more I think our work here is largely done. If UFO friends want to use this one as evidence for their theories of What Is Really Going On, it's on them now to show it is not a hoax, or at least that their theory, whatever it is, is at least AS likely.

 

[Andreas]

One argument against it would be that there were supposedly several pictures. A pyramid can look like this lance-head shape from a specific angle, but will give itself away, so to speak, if it turns at all. That could be prevented, of course, by hanging it from multiple strings to prevent it turning, so it would always be seen from the same angle. But that's extra work to prevent a pyramid inspired by the triangle UFO craze from looking like a triangle!

CAVEAT: We of course do not KNOW what the other pictures showed.

True, but as you say, we don't really know what the other five photos looked like. When I tried to recreate a scene with a small model jet "flying over" the landscape, I used horizontal fishing wires stretched between two trees. This was the easiest way I found to move the model plane between shots—it could easily be slid along the wire. Perhaps the UFO model was also attached to a horizontal wire? If so, it would have stayed quite stable and kept showing the same side in all the photos. Just a thought.

 

[Andreas]

given that we know hoaxes exist and this one would be hoaxable in so many ways using so many techniques and props, other than the fun of thinking up more I think our work here is largely done.

I agree! It could be a hoax, and that's enough for me. If it is a hoax, then, in my view, it proves absolutely nothing. That said, since I dislike mysteries, it's still really interesting to explore different possible explanations. My dream would be to find a mundane object that perfectly matches what we see in the photo—like the Adamski lantern—but that's probably wishful thinking, as it's fairly easy to create such an object using just a piece of paper and a pair of scissors.