Latest activity

I recently asked Robinson about this, and he said that the original photos were most likely standard color photographs, and that Lindsay's photo was a black-and-white copy made from one of those color prints. I guess the idea of some artsy...

I understand your point, but I'm not entirely convinced. If you identify one aircraft silhouette in each of the six frames, you could technically say that you've identified six aircraft. Likewise, identifying one aircraft in one frame and a...

Yes, I think it would, and the type of thinking given the photographic technology at the time. I wonder what someone with the right tools and expertise could do today? Hopefully there is someone in the NSA or in GCHQ reading this and saying 'hold...

But as discussed somewhere up thread, Robinson later changed his mind on that identification of XP, deciding the grain wan't nearly as fine as he originally thought. I found this somewhat confusing and, to my mind, a big red flag. Robinson's...

Yes, I think it would, and the type of thinking given the photographic technology at the time. I wonder what someone with the right tools and expertise could do today? Hopefully there is someone in the NSA or in GCHQ reading this and saying 'hold...

Well, it's often claimed that the grain pattern is consistent and shows no sign of manipulation — in other words, that the UFO hasn't been cut into the scene. But if the copy was made using film with prominent grain, wouldn't that "hide" some of...

That's a good question. Sorry, I'm not fully up to speed on all the ins and outs of this, but was it just for convenience perhaps. For distribution to interested parties, paper prints were the de-facto method (no external hardware needed to...

As @Andreas noted above, they may not have had the negatives at the time. But even if they did, I think this was a standard way to create B&W copies of color photos as the paper published both. The device was literally called a "copy stand" and...

Well, it's often claimed that the grain pattern is consistent and shows no sign of manipulation — in other words, that the UFO hasn't been cut into the scene. But if the copy was made using film with prominent grain, wouldn't that "hide" some of...

This means you are ill equipped to relate to what Hall would have interpreted the sky as. To misidentify a celestial object as a UFO, it typically needs to be close to the horizon, not obscured by trees or by clouds. We don't know Halt's...

1) Calling the barely-seen Harrier a 'second aircraft' means that the clearly visible Harrier is seen in the same photo. Otherwise, they should have considered that these were two shots of the same aircraft. 2) "They show a large stationary...

As @Andreas noted above, they may not have had the negatives at the time. But even if they did, I think this was a standard way to create B&W copies of color photos as the paper published both. The device was literally called a "copy stand" and...

A Harrier can either hover or fly as a conventional aircraft. However, it cannot bank while hovering, and the "jet" in the photo appears to be banking. Also, if the witness had described it as "a jet was hovering next to the UFO," I'm sure this...

A Harrier can either hover or fly as a conventional aircraft. However, it cannot bank while hovering, and the "jet" in the photo appears to be banking. Also, if the witness had described it as "a jet was hovering next to the UFO," I'm sure this...

Or more than one other frame? The only evidence we have for a 2nd aircraft (or model/ cut-out image etc. of a 2nd aircraft) in any of the other photos/ negatives is the MoD minute. It states that the negatives were "considered by the relevant...