Thursday, September 4, 2008

Those Damned Blurry UFO Pictures

You’ve heard it, thought it, wondered about it:
why are UFO videos, photos --and even vetted witness reports-- so full of BLUR?

A massive amount of UFO/craft objects captured on film, video, and digital imagery have one thing in common, and that’s blurry outlines. As in no sharp edges, no detail. I even heard this most common characteristic of UFOs discussed in depth at a MUFON training I attended.


1968 Senor Pedro Chavez, a photographer for La Prensa, on assignment in Sicuani, Peru





Debunkers and assorted fools on the internet have a field day with this single aspect of ufology. But the truth is, blurry is probable --and clear is improbable-- if we are talking real ET craft.

NASA Scientist Paul Hill finds no problem with blurry UFOs and his book Unconventional Flying Objects explains why. [Read Unconventional Flying Objects, A Scientific Analysis, Hampton Roads Publ. Co., Charlottesville, VA, 1995 (ISBN 1-57174-027-9) ]


Photo Taken By Four Professors; Lubbock Lights







But before we go to the expert, I’d like to take a walk down what I call Common Sense Highway, my kind of Highway 61 Revisited. Walk with me a moment…There are plenty of famous well-documented UFO pictures that are clear and plenty that are blurry. Most of the clear pictures of UFO craft are hovering or moving very slowly. In many reports of UFO craft, parts of the craft can clearly be seen to rotate, yet that rotation itself, should not cause the whole image to be blurry.

DVD Clips "Burry UFO"


So here’s an important question. If UFO are Extraterrestrial craft, then what would the Extraterrestrials [Off-Planet Pilots] be using as the primary mode of transportation here?
1. Propellers
2. Jet Engines
3. Rocket Engines.

In the case of ET craft using any of the travel modes from the short list above, shouldn’t images captured of craft using one of these methods have clear edges? And then we have to ask, in our hearts, do we believe this?
Even Before The Nazi Empire

I have, on occasion videoed and photographed jets, balloons, and birds, and have always been able to get clear edges. I have videoed a passenger jet, and, near the engine, of course it showed wavy images, from the jet engine’s heat exhaust; but the wavy effect never distorted the video image of the whole plane.

We treat blurry images as a strong indication of hoaxing, right? I have to admit my WARNING! flag goes up when I see blurry UFO images.

But I am wrong. Dead wrong.


The very strong possibility that these craft are powered by a propulsion system that affects the area around them is a given.

This is not the nineteenth century, although debunkers try to keep us there. I’m 65, and I know Atomic Drives are not going to hack it for travel between worlds. You get that, too, right?

I don’t even want to bring up what I can imagine about the main body of a long-distance traveling ship --say in a thousand years from now. But what the hell, I will: intelligent bio-skins.

Yangay Peru 1967 similar to what I witnessed on the beach in Atlantic City NJ 1962: Joe Capp



In Star Trek we see good movie theatrics showing rockets of plasma discharge from the rear of the craft. But in real life, rockets and those types of devices would have been abandoned long ago in the Star Trek timeline.

And we also see in Star Trek human travelers being affected by inertia at warp ten. Based on what we know now, they’d be butter.

Remember, what we’re seeing in UFO photos is not Star Trek and shuttle craft. Whatever else is true about the travelers in the UFOs we’re seeing, we do know what they are using is beyond Star Trek. Moving sideways at speeds like a thousand-plus miles an hour suggests something far more sophisticated at work here.

There are times when UFO craft have even been witnessed floating like a falling leaf. This could signify, along with other circumstantial evidence, that these craft change their very mass.

So what could be causing this blurriness? Dr. Hill formulates an interesting theory, and I will quote from this great book:

“The quantum mechanical explanation for the indistinct or invisible out line at night is particularly straightforward…”
[After the thoroughly excited molecules and electrons explanation, he continues, as excerpted below…]

“At night when the witness must see the UFO by its own light, it follows if the plasma is fully developed (saturated with ions) the plasma can completely obscure the UFOs, for the critical distance is small. In the more general case where the UFO is operating at a lower radiation the witness can see the UFO surface directly…
The absorption characteristics of the plasma can also account for a daytime hazy or smoky appearance of the Atmosphere around the UFO.”

Blurriness and fuzzy outlines of UFOs are what we would expect in a craft from another world. UFOs use propulsion and engine mechanics completely different than we have. And those propulsion and drive methods do, at times, affect their surroundings. UFO technologies have apparently been developed to cancel inertia and gravity, including mass.

Unless they are conjuring it all up as 100% illusion --an interpretation too many thousands of reliable reports and images contradict-- UFO craft need power, and that power affects external things as part of its normal operations.

Paul Hill is a futurist in all aspects of this work, as was Arthur C. Clark. But we must understand that these Extraterrestrial travelers and their vehicles are far beyond what our best science --and maybe even our best science fiction minds-- now understand.

But what Hill has done is tell us we should be looking very close at these blurry photos and videos because in the end, they may be a signal we are looking at an authentic UFO.
Joseph Capp
UFO Media Matters



18 comments:

  1. I posted a report a few years back to NUFORC, based on an observation of something I saw as a child in North-Eastern Oklahoma. I noticed it first, with two other witnesses,both adults, in the mid/late evening. The craft was shaped like one of those fish symbols you see on cars, but without the tail. Two elongated curves, cupped together. I didn't see that exactly however. What I saw was something in the shape of that (ovular like a stretched out football). It had edges, but the edges were blurred, it was surround by what I have desribed as an "aura" bright orangish-red, It was traveling vertically, then reached a certain height, "flipped"
    to a horizontal position, then moved slowly across the sky until it snapped back, but more a slight snap, and then "jetted" forward, (like what you see a carrier based jet do, slight backward movement, then rushing forward), it disappeared, gone, in a blur, so fast, we were all stunned. The point is, inside this "aura" I could spy what seemed to be a black object, in the center. Perhaps this was the craft. The plasma theory, you describe here, almost exactly matches that. I'm inclined to think it was military related, but who knows.Time seemed to stand still, during the event and we were all in ah. I will never forget what I saw. It was in the distance, it seemed, so it was either really big, far away, or smaller, and closer in. Just thought I'd share. Have a good one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Anonymous,
    There are so many sightings and photos of a dark nucleolus objects centered around these distortions you are defiantly not alone.

    Regarding what you just stated about dark energy as a power source you might what to look at this:
    Warp Drive New Approach:

    "This energy requirement for space travel would drop dramatically if we assumed a thin shell of modified space-time instead of a bubble"

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/1251197/Warp-Drive-A-New-Approach

    One other report that doesn't jive with secret earthly spaceships is the experience where many people describe a type of communication between them and the entities on board these ships, or compulsions to film. Unless they are all liars, and I don't believe that these beings can communicate from great distances and get right into the feeling centers of the brain. I don't think that is us, yet.


    It amazing to me that we still think in basically nineteenth century terms, when we think about million year future spaceships. We basically conjure up these new ships as having new allows skins and a different engines to thrust us to past light speeds.

    But the most encouraging theories don't imply this at all. As was recently stated in a quote of mine. They even found ways to reduce the power to do it. We are being called to a future that I believe is enviable.

    I often wonder what it would feel like to have no inertia. What would it feel like go a thousand miles a hour and stop on a dime?

    Joseph Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

    ReplyDelete
  3. To Joseph Capp: So few people understand the significance of the blur. My father would have loved your comments. Thank you.

    Julie Hill, daughter of scientist/author Paul Hill

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank You so much it made my day Julie

    So many of the great thinkers are obscured by the hype seekers in the UFO field. When I read his book I was astonished. There it was the explanation laid out for us. I was at a MUFON triaging were the our teacher on Photo and video was bemoaning why there were no clear UFO pictures. It sparked my memory of the book. Then I was being attacked on You Tube for the same reason. I thought Paul Hill to the rescue. I never knew he past away. This great and courageous scientist will be sorely be needed in today's world. There are so few around.
    Thank Again
    Joe
    UFO Media Matters

    ReplyDelete
  5. Don't forget that UFO believers have plenty of fools too. I'm thinking of Bill Birnes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree I have many a bone to pick with him and the mag.
    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Joesph,

    I was just curious and was hoping someone with expertise in high speed photography had some insights...
    Best Wishes
    Bruce

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dear Bruce,
    I don't know but people with fast digital cameras are posting disk like flying craft photos a great deal now on the web.Especially if they are near a hot spot.
    One was with the Canon 3 he claimed 21 megs with a fast shutter speeds. The object was in one frame somewhat clear but still a little fuzzy. Was that the speed or some other factor or both? I don't know, but interesting to study.
    We are going to do Peru and the Galapagos at the end of October, my wife has a fast Canon so I will get my own memory I can shoot all the fast picture I want. The theory is they are around but you need: the right spot, extreme luck ,fast speeds and to make sure to take many, many shots. We are not talking rods here but real UFOs craft.

    Do I think I will catch anything...no... will I still try...yes.

    I do believe as we become more technological, the more they will have to make a decision to become public. I can't see them staying hidden forever.
    As always thanks Bruce.
    Joe
    UFO Media Matters

    ReplyDelete
  9. “Of all the officers in all the armed forces of the world, perhaps none has a more unusual job than” Cmdr. Julio Chamorro of the Fuerza Aerea Peruana (FAP, or Peruvian Air Force–J.T.) “to investigate–and perhaps prove–the existence of UFOs.”

    “As head of the Office to Investigate Aerial Phenomena, Chamorro directs a seven-member team in charge of studying what he calls ‘anomalies that could cause problems with aviation.’”

    “Ostensibly, the Office investigates planes that veer off course and hang gliders that steer too close to military bases, but that’s not the crux of their work. Of the hundreds of calls received each month by the Office, Chamorro says at least half are to report UFO sightings. And Chamorro says many are credible.”

    “‘There are several mysteries that we believe are highly important and which merit our full attention,’ Chamorro said, ‘If we can arrive at definitive conclusions, our work will be highly beneficial to Peru and all of humanity. Just think about the technological advances if we can definitively prove the existence of (alien) spacecraft.’”

    A different world...indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dear God if only we could get our government to think that way. There are good people in the Governments of the world and if the power brokers gave them half a chance we would have this solved by now.

    Thanks Bruce great info.
    Joe
    UFOMM

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm a semi-professional photographer--I do wedding photography on the side--and I can attest that it's not the easiest to get clear photographs of UFOs. Even if there was no distortion around the UFOs from the plasma or other fields, the fact that they are usually very far in the distance (horizontally and/or vertically from the camera), they are sometimes moving at incredible speeds, the zoom factor (the more you zoom the more likely you'll get motion blur from camera shake), and add in the adrenalin factor, and you'd better be ready for at least some photos that you won't be proud of. :) Canon DSLRs are notorious for taking a smooth, less sharp picture than other brands straight out of the box. Image stabilization (whether in the lens or the camera itself in other brands) helps with camera shake, but doesn't help if the object itself is moving (unless somewhat in horizontal pan mode). The best conditions would be in bright daylight with the sun behind you and directly on the UFO, with the UFO hovering and not covered in plasma or high radiation, and the UFO much closer and lower than an airline jet--but how often can you expect that to happen?!

    Ms. Hill, your father's knowledge of UFO technology is absolutely monumental--he hasn't been given nearly enough credit for his outstanding work. While others speculated and theorized, he took it several steps further.

    Anyway, great article once again, Mr. Capp.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dear NS,
    Thank you for your comment. In the book "Strange Company" Keith Chester, one Second World War bombing crew witness a very large saucer hovering, just before it shot away they described a mist or cloud forming around it. It may have been a forming a cloud for camaphlage purposes as the pilot guessed or this description may have been exactly what we are discussing here, because just as the mist formed around the object it shot off at an unbelievable speed.I to believe the occupants can hover or move sometimes without this distortion but Mr. Hill description fits so many sightings from all over the world we should bring him up evertime one of the taking head debunkers mention blurry UFO pictures as a hoax.
    One day I believe we will find the answers to these questions and I believe Paul Hill and others will be considered pioneers... way ahead of their times... but in the end isn't that how it always seems to be.


    Thanks again for your information

    Joseph Capp
    UFO Media Matters.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Very interesting subject indeed and well written.

    But you didn't mention what debunkers normally are opposed to when evaluating blurry pictures. What is the objection really? Do they think that the pics are not real because they're blurry or what? That sounds just moronic if that's the case. You didn't elaborate enough on that IMO. What's their main gripe with blurry pics? Are all thrown into the same basket? Who are debunking blurry pics the loudest?

    Obviously we have to be careful not expecting too obvious characteristics for aircraft belonging to another space/time. Some skeptics comments really are stuck in 20th century science like you said. I think an open mind can look for patterns and maybe some theorizing surrounding patterns observed in UFO pics/film can shed some light on what science could be behind this, like the way Paul Hill approached it.

    Too bad none of these observations and theories are enough to be the smoking gun for proving some UFOs non-terrestrial origin. But they are very interesting nonetheless. Very exotic terrestrial technologies, sometimes discussed, should have similar characteristics to what is shown in the pics. So a mixup with any true non-terrestrial UFOs would be impossible to stay clear of nowadays. The pics from early times like 1920s-1950s are likely more interesting for that kind of debate.

    Another thing interesting; rocket scientist David Adair tells a story in which he visited Area 51, in 1971 I think, and saw there a organic symbiotic engine that the government was trying to back-engineer. That was not 20th or 21st century technology for sure...that was way way beyond. It was organic not even mechanical (not made of nuts and bolts). That's the quantum leap in technology you'd expect from non-terrestrial technology. I try to be open minded but whatever technology the military have come up with until this time - no one can convince me that we have, ourselves, designed an organic engine capable of symbiotic relationship with the occupants - no one. There is my final limit for what is earthly and what is not. (David Adair whos all story can be followed up and verified)

    I note that Larry Kings producer seems obsessed with the pics of Meiers clear UFO pics :-D

    Thanks for putting together intriguing articles over and over again Joseph!

    // Daniel Bergh, Sweden

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dear Daniel,
    Thank you you are well researched on this subject.
    That is what is so great about being non-commercial. I started this blog when Paul Kimball attacked the O'Hare witnesses reports. I thought why them. For years it bothered me that the perception was that most of these were hoaxes or reported by "nuts". I also thought that some UFO researcher played to the secret weapon readers and metaphysical readers constantly attacking the Roswell witnesses and others as if they were fodder for their next book.
    I thought about myself and how during my computer business years I kept a low profile on my own UFO Craft experience. I knew that if I talk about that... some of my clients may have been a little hesitant in letting me worked on data that was worth millions of dollars.
    So I decided enough was enough. When I push a book or DVD it is because I believe it. When I argue with a researcher it is because I believe they have disrespected the proven character of a UFO witness experience.
    I never expected to ask to go on a radio or anything else, my main purpose was to gain some empathy for the courage it takes to come forward around this phenomenon,especially if I had a potential for changing one mind. I think I have achieve that so in my book this blog is a success.
    Thank again David for an informative comment. I try to keep my blog at 800 words my editor has done this for free for the last year and I respect her and follow her instructions. I think I should have made this a two parter as you said there is so much to this topic. It seem clear these intelligences craft are affecting the space around them which may cause distortion and it should be a given however many, even some MUFON investigators are living in the 19 century Newtonian world.
    Thanks
    Joseph Capp
    UfO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

    ReplyDelete
  15. It is soooo silly to believe in this crap. Never has been any hard evidence. Blury images, "witness" accounts. BUNK.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You don't understand I had a daylight sighting with a friend. I couldn't mistake what I saw and I am like many many other people - My reality world change that day. I was in my twenties and now I am in my seventies. I still remember it and so does my friend. Now if you had a daylight sighing of two classic flying saucers. I think you may be curious enough to wonder what in hell they were.
    I can't lie to myself and say it didn't happen.
    My friend is very frightened of the subject but I am too curious for that and curiosity is the bedrock of intelligence.
    I like the idea that there is something in this world that I know is true when many think it's impossible.

    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

    ReplyDelete
  17. i think every picture or movie showing a ufo is told by the government to blur it out so many people would not know the fact that they exist. a lot are phonies are made by the government to keep us wondering.. maybe there are really no ufo at all. it all comes down to the story on Roxwell, that was true, but changed by the people in government to keep it to themselves. my thougths

    ReplyDelete
  18. What a joke this article is.

    ReplyDelete