"WHY WOULD THEY BOTHER VISITING OUR TINY PLANET?"

Have you ever wondered why an alien race would consider visiting a comparatively microscopic planet (Earth), situated in the middle of nowhere? I mean, with all the visible stars in this picture:



...Earth and it's nearby neighbors literally look like dust particles. Close your eyes and place your index finger on any section of the picture - you might've just struck gold.

It's estimated that our sun is situated amidst 100 BILLION other stars... and that digit is limited to our miniscule galaxy alone. It's also estimated that approximately 200 billion other galaxies exist in our "visible (another limitation)" universe, and that too is just a scientific approximation! The limitless mysteries of our universe - whether it has an edge, what/who it was created by, how LARGE it really is - and their existing explanations, are nothing more than mere assumptions by a network of "super-smart" bugs living on a micro-sized rock in the middle of nowhere. Who knows how large the universe really is, or how many galaxies actually exist. To think that our sun (which is actually pretty tiny next to other stars like Antares) is the only star in the universe... or even in our galaxy, capable of granting life to it's surrounding planetary bodies... is nothing short of ignorance. And to think that life is actually limited to the puny spacerock we call "earth" is nothing short of something much, much more serious... partial retardation, maybe.

And as if that weren't enough to describe the expansiveness of space, consider this ; The Milky WayGalaxy is nearly 100,000 lightyears across, which means it would take approximately 100,000 lightyears to travel. Our neighboring galaxy, Andromeda, is positioned at about 2.2 million lightyears from our own galaxy. Ergo, just traveling across two galaxies would take approximately 2 and a quarter MILLION lightyears to complete... and that's traveling at the speed of light (700 MILLION mph)!!! Our current shuttle speeds top at something like 18,000-20,000 mph!

But the question is still up for grabs: why DO they bother making meaningless stops, on meaningless little rocks; essentially interrupting their interstellar space routes?

The answer is pretty simple: Because you haven't a clue as to what their motives and purposes are in the universe. You don't even know if their spacecraft are controlled by biological entities or creatures to begin with - the "ufos" might just be intelligent in themselves, as wholes; like jellyfish crusading the vastness of the sea. What if they're somehow fueled by lightning, or electricity? Afterall, they appeared most numerous in the NASA clips over certain areas of Earth that were experiencing thunder/lightning storms, as witnessed from space. What if they're extradimensional and not extraterrestrial? We've yet to discover certain dimensions. The realm of possibilities are fucking endless. Concluding that ufos/aliens would never bother to visit our pea-sized planet, is like seeing a picture of an infamous "gray" for the first time, noticing it's lack of reproductive organs, and assuming that it couldn't reproduce... at all.

Ergo, it's an ignorant assumption, based on a very basic level of human understanding.

"The power of knowledge & theory is often limited to what our eyes can see & deduce" - anonymous

I personally think we're being observed in a petri-dish. And if I were that alien race doing the observing, I wouldn't be too pleased at the direction the human race is taking.

Hopefully, they'll save us from ourselves in a few years.

"THERE IS NO PROOF; THEREFORE, THEY DON'T EXIST"

I often hear this statement from many ignorant people on a daily basis; and being the easily annoyed & angered-type, I always feel compelled to correct them.

My rebuttal is always something along the lines of:

Let me guess - you think the object recovered at the Roswell incident was infact a "weather balloon," eh?

Humans grow up being brainwashed by what they read in schoolbooks.... And that's particularly why scientists are generally skeptics; their minds are so tightly closed, because they're arrogant enough to think that if they haven't been taught it at school and/or self-discovered, that it ultimately can't exist. It's a bit like those scientists who once thought that the world was flat and the sun revolved around the Earth. They were eventually proven wrong.

Science will NEVER unconditionally acknowledge the existence of extraterrestrial/extradimensional organisms, so long as they're under government scrutiny. And if they ever did show slight hints of approval, chaos would ensue; religious people (which make up approx. 85% of the total pop.) would be outraged, and great amounts of fear would rattle everyone up when they figure that a more intelligent & powerful alien race, who've mastered space flight, are capable of running shit on earth.

...that's when "deductive reasoning" and "common sense" come into play. You want "evidence?" Here it is:

1) There have been loads, and loads of eye-witness testimony reports compiled throughout the years. There has also been a chockfull of amateur footage captured. Is ALL of that footage authentic? Ofcourse not. But at the same instant however, a small percentage of the ufos caught by these amateurs have also been caught by other amateurs, in other parts of the world, with several different cameras. The infamous white "orbs" have been spotted by people in all countries (especially in Mexico), even here in the US. UFO hobbyist Rich Giordano devotes his free time pointing a video camera up at the Arizona skies in hopes of capturing these ufos... and with luck - he has a pretty extensive archive of all the orbs he's captured (most of which form "complex, geometric patterns and shapes" in the sky before disappearing). To even consider questioning the ufo phenomena at this point is nothing short of insulting, when you think of the effort and time it took for him to compile an actual archive (most people spend their lives trying to capture just ONE... and have no luck at doing so). His archive can be viewed here: www.cnufos.com

2) From early BC, to early AD; and even now in our present day and age, there have been COUNTLESS amounts of ufo/alienesque depictions through various symbols and hieroglyphic, left behind from a chockfull of ancient civilizations, like the Mayans, Incas, Aztecs, and the Egyptians. This alien symbolism has, and will ALWAYS be a surefire, "scientific" source that ultimately backs up the alien phenomena. It's also part of earth's history. Pictures of some of these depictions can be found on this fantastic site: www.ufoartwork.com

3) Over 400 government, military, and scientific officials came forth on May 9, 2001 in a historic national press club conference conducted by Steven M. Greer, in what was known as the "Disclosure Project." The purpose of this conference was to hear & record witness testimony offered by those 400+ top-ranking officials surrounding their personal knowledge/sightings of ufos/aliens. Some officials included Gordon Cooper (retired NASA astronaut), Colonel Philip Corso (high-ranking Army official) and Dr. Robert Wood (retired aerospace engineer). More info. here: www.disclosureproject.org.

4) There have been hundreds, and hundreds of hours of NASA space footage captured from the space shuttles during various sts shuttle missions, discovered by Martyn Stubbs. "Evidence : The Case For NASA ufos," was a recent dvd/book created by physicist/ufologist David Sereda, and in it he explains by way of physics, how and WHY the objects in the footage are infact intelligent UFOs, and not meteors, satellites, or debris (more info. here www.ufonasa.com). The very same "NASA" footage was originally released in a documentary known as "The Smoking Gun," but didn't have a host to explain and talk about the ufos in question, like Sereda does in his movie. The same footage was also aired on TLC's "The best UFO evidence ever captured."

5) The infamous Derbyshire/Bonsall account : www.rense.com/general19/new.htm. This ufo is believed to have been one of those ufos captured in the NASA transmissions, because it's physical characteristics are identical; a hole etched out in the center, a notch carved out near the rim and mysterious "pulsing" effect on it's surface. There is testimony, video(s), and even a few e-mails from dumb skeptics/debunkers throwing out their typically lame explanations (to which they're responded to). You can even see a UK army military helicopter investigating the area where the ufo was spotted at the day after, in one of the clips - surefire evidence indicating government/military involvement.

Now it's YOUR turn to "DEDUCE" from the above shreds and formulate a logical conclusion. And if you fail at doing that, here's a helpful tip: drive to your nearest highway bridge (preferably the highest one in your city)... and jump off:



Our gene pool needs cleaning.

ALIEN/UFO SYMBOLOGY THROUGH THE AGES

Here is the basic rundown of "UFO" pictures and alienesque figures in the art-work of Earth's history. There are a few dozen more prominent pictures, but this is a rundown of the best, as well as those that have been proven to be hoaxes. This catagory only includes "UFO" depictions in artwork, from early BC, to early AD, and not modern day UFO photographs.

ALL of the information comes from a terrific site called: www.ufoartwork.com. Please view with an open mind, but also a scrutinizing mind that explores all of possibilities.

=============================




These two images are from France: the cave of Pech Merle near Le Cabrerets c.17,000 - 15,000 BC. The scene depicts a landscape full of wildlife together with a number of saucer shaped objects. The objects seem totally out of context.

--------------------------------------------


This cave painting is c.10,000 BC and is from Val Camonica, Italy. It appears to depict two beings in protective suits, holding strange implements.

---------------------------------------------


Images c.6000 BC from Tassili, Sahara Desert, North Africa. They don't look human, do they? Also notice the disk in the sky.

---------------------------------------------


This strange suited figure was found in Kiev. I believe it's dated to 4,000 BC or so.

---------------------------------------------


More strange looking figures, this time from Sego Canyon, Utah. Estimated up to 5,500 BC.

---------------------------------------------




These are illustrations from a book by Lt. Grey: Journals of Two Expeditions of Discovery in North-West and Western Australia 1837, 1838, & 1839." He led an expedition in the 19th century to some caves near the Glenelg River region of Kimberley, Northern Australia where he came across a series of cave paintings. The beings are called the Wandjina by the Aboriginies who painted them.

---------------------------------------------



More examples of Wandjina. These are images from Kimberley, Australia. Possibly 5,000 years old. Some believe they represent ET beings.

---------------------------------------------


The above photo represents a number of reptilian entities found in Iraq. They are dated at 5000-4500 BC

---------------------------------------------


This artwork is alledgedly from the buddhist Dharamsala temple in Himachal Pradesh, India. This is where the Dalai Lama lives in exile. You can just make out six silvery saucer shaped objects.

---------------------------------------------


This image of a crusader dates from a 12th century manuscript Annales Laurissenses (volumes/books about historical and religion events) and refer to a UFO sighting in the year 776, during the siege on Sigiburg castle, France. The Saxons besieged and surrounded the French people. They were fighting when suddenly, a group of discs (flaming shields) appeared hovering over the top of the church. It appeared to the Saxons that the French were protected by these objects and the Saxons fled.

----------------------------------------------


The first picture shows a fresco entitled The Crucifixion and was painted in 1350. Two objects with figures inside can be seen in the top left and top right of the fresco. Two enlargements of these objects are shown below. The fresco is located above the altar at the Visoki Decani Monestary in Kosovo, Yugoslavia.



---------------------------------------------


The above painting is by Paolo Uccello (1396-1475) and is entitled La Tebaide (painted c.1460-1465). The blown up picture on the right shows a red saucer shaped UFO seen near Jesus. It hangs in the Academy of Florence.

---------------------------------------------


The above painting is by Carlo Crivelli (1430-1495) and is called The Annunciation (1486). It hangs in the National Gallery, London. A disk shaped object is shining a pencil beam of light down onto the crown of Mary's head.

---------------------------------------------


The above is a painting on wood drawer from furniture kept at the Earls D’Oltremond, Belgium. Moses is receiving the tablets and several objects in the sky are seen near by. Date and artist are unknown.

----------------------------------------


The above picture depicts Jesus and Mary on what appear to be lenticular clouds. The painting is entitled The Miracle of the Snow, and was painted by Masolino Da Panicale (1383-1440) and hangs at the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, Florence, Italy.



This painting is called The Madonna with Saint Giovannino. It was painted in the 15th century. The Palazzo Vecchio lists the artist as unknown although attributed to the Lippi school. Above Mary's right shoulder is a disk shaped object. Below is a blow up of this section, and a man with his dog can clearly be seen looking up at the object.



-------------------------------------------


This is a 15th century fresco from Kiev. Seems to show Jesus in a rocket type device.

---------------------------------------------


This broadsheet picture by Samuel Coccius illustrates a UFO sighting over Basel, Switzerland in 1566. 'Large black Globes' appeared in the skies. It is held at the Wickiana Collection, Zurich Central Library.

---------------------------------------------


More wheels! This picture shows a UFO sighting over Hamburg, Germany (November 1697). The objects were described as "two glowing wheels."

---------------------------------------------


This image is by flemish artist Aert De Gelder and is entitled "The Baptism of Christ." It was painted in 1710 and hangs in Fitzwilliam Musuem, Cambridge. A disk shaped object is shining beams of light down on John the Baptist and Jesus.

---------------------------------------------


Symbology from the ancient Egyptian temple of Seti I.
Appears to be an appache attack chopper and a jet fighter.

The Hoaxes



This painting appears to show a bipedal insectiod entity on an Egyptian wall in the tomb of Ptahhotpe, in Mastabas, North Saqqara. Not all is as it seems though - it is in fact a vase with food offerings. Shown below is another version of the same image from Bonechi's "All of Egypt," an easy-to-get Egyptian guide (Thanks to Cesar Guarde).



---------------------------------------------


Clearly showing a disk shaped UFO. There is also a figure on the disc looking remarkably similar to what we would today call a Grey. It's supposedly housed at a museum in Berlin.

---------------------------------------------


This plate was first shown in a book from the 1970s entitled Sungods in Exile, by Karyl Robin-Evans. The book was actually written by a chap named David Agamon, whose real name was Gamon. He admitted that this was his hoax.

--------------------------------------------


This was claimed by many to have been a cave painting found near Fergana in Uezbekistan, thought to be thousands of years old. Part of it is depicted in Erich Von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods (Souvenir Press 1973 Hardback)."

Basically, it was a sketch done by a Russian artist for the magazine "Spoutnik" in 1967, for an article concerning astronauts visiting mankind 12,000 yrs ago. Spoutnik was a magazine from the former USSR (in Reader's Digest format). It was published in several languages, including Russian, German, English, French and Italian. For a full picture of the magazine cover, visit the Hoax section of www.ufoartwork.com.

THE DROPA STONES MYSTERY

The Dropa (also known as Dropas, Drok-pa or Dzopa) are, according to certain controversial writers, a race of dwarf-like extraterrestrials who landed near the Chinese-Tibetan border some twelve thousand years ago. Skeptics note, however, a number of problems with the case (and a lack of corroborative evidence), which offers significant doubt as to the reality of the more sensationalistic Dropa claims. Mainstream critics argue that the entire affair is a hoax.

Alleged Discovery -- Chi Pu Tei, a professor of archaeology at Beijing University, and his students were on an expedition to explore a series of caves in the pathless Himalayan mountains of the remote Bayan-Kara-Ula in Qinghai on the border of China and Tibet. The caves may have been artificially carved to be a system of tunnels and underground storerooms. The walls were squared and glazed, as if cut into the mountain with great heat.

They found many neat rows of tombs with short 4 ft 4 in inch skeletons buried within. The skeletons had abnormally big heads, and small, thin, fragile bodies. A member of the team suggested that these might be the remains of an unknown species of mountain gorilla. Prof. Chi Pu Tei was said to respond, "Who ever heard of apes burying one another?"

There were no epitaphs at the graves, but instead hundreds of one foot wide stone discs ("Dropa Stones") were found having 3/4 inch wide holes in their centers. On the walls were carved pictures of the rising sun, moon, stars, the land, mountains, and lines of pea-sized dots connecting the earth with the sky. Along with the discs, the cave drawings had been determined to be about 12,000 years old.

Dropa Stones



Each stone disk was reportedly inscribed with two fine grooves spiraling from the edge to a hole in the disk's center, perhaps not unlike the Phaistos Disk.

The disks were labeled along with other finds of the expedition and stored away at Beijing University for 20 years, during which deciphering attempts were unsuccessful.When the disks were closely examined by Dr. Tsum Um Nui of Beijing around 1958, he concluded that each groove actually consisted of a series of tiny hieroglyphs of unknown pattern and origin. The rows of hieroglyphics were so small that a magnifying glass was needed to see them clearly. Many of the hieroglyphics had been worn away by erosion. When Dr. Tsum deciphered the symbols, they told the story of the crash-landing of the Dropa spaceship and the killing of most of the survivors by local people.

According to Tsum Um Nui, one of the lines of the hieroglyphs reads, "The Dropas came down from the clouds in their aircraft. Our men, women and children hid in the caves ten times before sunrise. When at last they understood the sign language of the Dropas, they realized that the newcomers had peaceful intentions . . . ." Another section expresses "regret" by the Ham that the aliens' craft had crash-landed in such a remote and inaccessible mountain range and that there had been no way to building a new one to enable the Dropas to return to their own planet.

Dr. Tsum's report supposedly appeared in a professional journal in 1962. He was subsequently ridiculed to the point of self-imposed exile in Japan, where he died. The Peking Academy of Pre-history never allowed him to publish and never speak of his findings.

"Tsum Um Nui" is not a real Chinese name, and critics suggest that Dr. Tsum may not have actually existed. However Tsum Um Nui is a Japanese name adapted to Chinese language. There is no evidence of him beyond the Dropa allegations.

Further research

In 1965, Professor Chi Pu Tei and four of his colleagues were finally given permission to reveal their theory. They published it under the title "The Grooved Script concerning Space-ships which, as recorded on the Discs, landed on Earth 12,000 years ago".

The records - some 716 grooved discs later uncovered in the same caves - tell an astonishing story of a space probe sent by the inhabitants of another planet. After landing at the Bayan-Kara-Ula mountain range, the scripts allegedly say, the peaceful intentions of the aliens confused the members of the Ham tribe, inhabitants of the neighboring caves, who hunted down and killed the extraterrestrials.



Photos claiming to show Dropa Disks are in fact Bi Disks, thousands of which have been found throughout China, mostly in the Southeastern Provinces. Bi Disks range in size of a few inches to several feet, and are most commonly made of jade or nephrite, with a round or square small central hole.
Most Bi Disks date to the Neolithic Period (c. 3000 BCE), but are found up to the Shang Dynasty Period. Bi Disks beyond the Shang Period are usually more ornate, carved with dragons, snakes and sometimes fish, and used in ritual ceremonies.

Most Neolithic Bi Disks were found in gravesites, buried beneath the head or feet of the deceased. It is theorised that this was to assist the deceased's spirit. No Bi Disks have been found to contain writing or spiral grooves as described in the Dropa story by authors such as Hartwig Hausdorf.
The Dropa Disks are said to be only 12 inches in diameter. However, one black and white photograph claimed by Hausdorf and others to display a Dropa Disk clearly shows the disk resting on a seat, and it is clearly several feet in diameter and has no markings whatsoever.

Russian Research

Russian scientists asked to see the discs and several were sent to Moscow for examination. They were scraped free of rock particles which had stuck to them and then put through chemical analysis. To the surprise of the scientists, the disks contained large amounts of cobalt and other metallic substances. What is more, when placed on a special turntable - according to Dr. Vyatcheslav Saizev, who described the experiments in the Soviet magazine Sputnik - they vibrate or "hum" in an unusual rhythm as though an electric charge is passing through them. Or as one scientist suggested, "as if they formed some part of an electrical circuit." At some time, they have clearly been exposed to extraordinarily high voltages. "They seem like ancient hard disks, spinning like the hard disks we have now days. Perhaps if we could read these ancient hard disks, we would find more answers."

Wegerer's Photos

In 1974, Ernst Wegerer, an Austrian engineer, photographed two disks that met the descriptions of the Dropa Stones. He was on a guided tour of Banpo-Museum in Xian, when he saw the stone discs on display. He claims he saw a hole in the center of each disc and hieroglyphs in partly crumbled spiral-like grooves.

Wegerer asked the managers of Banpo-Museum for more information on the pieces in the showcase. The manager knew nothing of the stones' history, though she was able to tell a complete story about all the other artifacts made from clay. She only knew that the stone discs were unimportant "cult objects".
Wegerer was allowed to take one of the discs in his hand. He estimated their weight at 1 kilogram or 2 pounds, and the diameter at one foot. The hieroglyphs can't be seen in his photos, because they have crumbled away partly, and his camera's flash washed out the fine detail, such as the spiral grooves.
A few days after his visit, the manager was called away from her job without telling her why. She and the two stone discs vanished, according to Professor Wang Zhijun, the Director of the Banpo-Museum in March of 1994.

Corroboration

In the years since the discovery of the first disc, archeologists and anthropologists have learned more about the isolated Bayan-Kara-Ula area. Much of the information has been interpreted as corroborating the story recorded on the discs.

Legends supposedly still preserved in the area speak of small, gaunt, yellow-faced men who "came from the clouds, long, long ago". The men had huge, bulging heads and puny bodies and were so ugly and repellent that they were shunned by everyone. "Men with the quick horses" hunted down the ugly dwarfs. Strangely, the description of the "invaders" is said to match that of the skeletons originally discovered in the caves by Professor Chi Pu Tei.

Criticism

Critics have largely rejected the above claims, arguing they are a combination of hoax and urban legend. For example, writer David Richie notes that the Dropa tales intrigued Gordon Chreighton, a Fellow of the Royal Anthropological Society and Royal Geographical Society. Upon investigation, Chreighton judged the sensationalistic Dropa-Extraterrestrial allegations to be "groundless," and detailed his findings in an article for Flying Saucer Review.

No traceable, credible evidence for this theory exists, or can be proven to have existed in the past. Proponents of the Dropa-stones story claim that this is the result of social disruption caused by the Chinese Cultural Revolution and of a conspiratorial coverup by Chinese authorities. However this story goes well beyond China. Its opponents claim it is long proven to be a forgery by Erich von Däniken.

http://www.crystalinks.com/dropa.html

VIDEO CAMERA SHUTTER EFFECT? OPTICAL DISTORTION? DEBUNKING THE DEBUNKERS

Info. taken from Rense.com. Direct link can be found here.


Many have suggested that once one has zoomed-in to the extreme with conventional digital camcorders or digital cameras, the artifacts of bloom, specifically the circular field with donut like hole in the center, along with intensely colored light variance, are products of the shutter aperture in these cameras, and what we're actually seeing is a complete distortion. We've heard these same claims about saucer, disc and triangle shaped shutters causing such effects on intense zoom.

Though this cannot be completely dismissed, as examples in the past have shown serious and peculiar distortions in overzoom/focus related to shutter shape, the STS-75 image - shot by NASA cameras without any extreme zoom or focus problems (as the image of the tether is in fine focus even for several miles!) -begs the question: Isn't this far too great of a coincidence that the shutter-effect in the UK photos matches the exact same "notched" UFO (estimated to be some miles in diameter) with the same pulsing lights and waveform patterns of energy AND the hole-like artifact in the center? It seems very unlikely, and it appears that the 2001 and 2001 UK images have captured the very same remarkable and monstrously sized craft. Not only does the STS-75 footage substantiate the UK images from a totally unique vantage (ie, miles above the earth with expert equipment), but one can clearly see in the Quicktime footage #2 above that whatever the bright object is being videotaped at the start of the clip, when it is seen against the backdrop of the neighborhood - a yard lamp, house and tree for some reference - is extremely bright and extremely large. Anyone who has ever tried videotaping at night knows stars, even the brightest, scarcely even register on tape. This object was massive in size and intense in light. Christoffer Walther also informs us that the Sony 700 camera of these most recent clips had additional zoom capabilities, not just standard zoom.If anyone has information on the shutter shape of the Sony 700 and can document it, please forward to mailto:webmaster@rense.com We'd like to report on this aspect, even though it does not appear to be involved in the UK images at all. We would almost bet our bottom dollar the shutter is tri-fold, not circular, which under distortion of zoom/focus would leave a triangle shape, not the amazingly detailed disc with its lights, phenomenal electric aura and surface artifacts which perfectly match the STS-75 craft shot just outside the earth's atmosphere by NASA shuttle crew.

Notch Analysis

The "notch" appears hard to see in many of the images, likely due to the brilliance of the UFO itself, but as the following color and contrast enhancements demonstrate, the notch is definitely present. Submitted by

Timothy Hill:

'I took a frame from the video and tried to pull more details from the disk. The attached gif animation is the result of a few of my findings. I added a black border to frame the object for better viewing. As you can see in almost all of the pictures there is a notch missing from one side of the disk, much like the so-called "Dropa" stones. I am a little skeptical about the whole Dropa story because the background is VERY muddy. I cannot, however, dismiss the similarities between the STS video and this object.'



Researcher Has Contact Bambi Performs Video Test On Stars To Disprove Zoom/Blur Effect As Responsible For UFO Image

We have now attempted to re-produce the "Derbyshire" phenomena, by using the same video recorder that was used to capture the footage 3 weeks ago; by zooming onto a bright star in the night sky and attempt to distort the star by using the zoom mechanism on the video recorder. These sessions have been made using the same video recorder as the original sighting. That is, the same physical device, same lens, same zoom. It has been shot under the same weather conditions, that is dark cold clear evening/night.

TEST Footage I

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesC/OrionsBelt.qt (right click, save as)

Bambi zoomed in onto the largest and brightest star in the Orion belt; as far as the zoom capability would go. Max ZOOM.

Result: Negative.
The camera is not able to get a close zoom-up of the star; and much less capable of distorting the picture by over-zooming or zooming while out of focus. This has absolutely *nothing* to do with the "Derbyshire" -like sighting and footage of the phenomena. The Orion star is absolutely far too far away.

With this result, we decided to give it another try. This time I asked her to go outside, find the brightest star in the entire nightsky, film it and zoom in as far in as possible.

TEST Footage II

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesC/brightstar.qt (right click, save as)

Result: Negative.
This time the she zoomed in once again to the fullest capacity of the recorder. The result is slightly better than the Orion one. But far, far from resembling the UFO footage in any way.

The star in question (possibly Venus or the north star), is way too far away. Which is really not a surprise.

No colors, no patterns. Just a regular white view of a star.

---

Here follows an analysis of the footage clip "moonref.qt" (See clip 4 above)

Watching the "moonref.qt" clip, we have a quite large moon at the top of the view; no stars at all seem to register on the video recorder even though it is completely dark *and* completely clear skies. This could be due to two reasons.

1) we have a pretty bright moon which "pollutes" the dark sky with light

2) we have a video recorder that has rather *small* lense to gather light

The recorder is able to zoom and enhance, but that is a completely different thing than being able to *gather light*. That has to do with the size of the lense that recieves and registers the light.

There are a few other lights than just the moon. These are all located on the ground, and not in the sky. There are various background lights from a nearby city.

And then there is A SINGLE other light in the sky.

Only one object in the sky registers on the videro recorder other than the moon. Does that mean there is no stars out? No. It means the video recorder does not collect the faint light from those other natural stars in the sky, because its lens does not possess the ability to do so, with the sky so "polluted" with the light that comes from the moon.

The one object other than the moon, appears to be located *inside* the earth's atmosphere and seemingly as far away as a regular bright star.

It is rather big, it gives of a great amount of light, even while "polluted" by the moonlight.

I am certain it is located inside the earth's atmosphere, and not that far from the witness. How far the object is exactly is hard to say. But it clearly is NOT as far away as the Orion star or the "Brightest star in the nightsky."

It registers *clearly* even without zoom on the video recorder as the clips demonstrate. It is obviously NOT a normal planetary or star object. This object gives off more light than a normal star in the sky.

The original photographer (Bambi's friend at the party) proceeds to zoom in on the object. This time the video has no problems in reaching in close to the object for detail. Even from a large distance you can begin to make out the patterns (see single frame example above near lamp light)

While zooming in, the patterns do not change, like a distorted view would. On the contrary, the patterns become clearer and clearer.


CONCLUSION

The woman, Bambi, who had the sighting is not in doubt that the phenomena was something out of the ordinary. She is 100% convinced that it was NO star, NO planet and NOT some other natural object in the sky that caused the phenomena. It changed shape. It moved around. It was seen during the day as well. Moving. The hard thing is to tell other people about this, it's hard to explain what happened to someone who was not present and did not see this with their own eyes.

That is what she has attempted now. She contacted me about 2 weeks after the sighting, unsure what to do with the footage. We decided upon doing a complete public disclosure of the sighting and the footage, regardless of wheter or not it would benefit us, financially or otherwise.

Many people witnessed these events, from the guests present at the party, Bambi's friend who filmed most of the footage, to the garbage men who on their own spotted the object in daytime.

Bambi herself does not claim that the footage depicts an alien entity of some sorts. She does not know what it is, but is inclined to think it is either some sort of new phenomena or object, or phenomena/object that previously has not been sighted. There is no real indication in her point of view that this infact should be an alien entity. Rather, it is something we do not understand yet, but her hope is that we will accept it, regardless.


More debunking of dubunkers

Comments from: Keith Mayes, 1-18-2

I see that in relation to the recent UFO video clips some 'tests' have been carrid out to 'prove' that is not an artifact of the lens system. Christoffer from Denmark tested the camera by zooming in on some bright stars and noted the same effect as the video could not not reproduced. He claims this means that it must be a UFO. The 'test' is absolutely meaningless. A star is a point light source and cannot be enlarged, as he pointed out himself. Jupiter though presents a large 'solid' object and is easily enlarged with even modest equipment. It is, apart from the Moon, currently the largest and brightest object in the sky, and was in January when the video was taken. I am an ametuer astronomer and have been for over 30 years. I have specialised in astro-photography for the past 20 years. The night video of the 'UFO' is nothing more than Jupiter, it is easily recognisable to an astronomer by its size, brightness and position in the sky for an observer in the UK at this time of year. When zoomed in, it will show just the image that you have shown as a UFO. The so called tests on stars were meaningless, do the test on Jupiter then tell me it was a UFO. "

RESPONSE

Keith - That's interesting, We didn't know Jupiter bobbed and weaved in the sky, or traversed so rapidly from one part of the sky to the other in minutes. What a planet! We were also unaware that Jupiter could also appear exactly the same to conventional camcorders in October, too - as in the Derbyshire/Bonsall footage. That's one amazingly mobile and sneaky planet. We're also curious how the same Jupiter got into those STS-75 NASA shots (especially since there were hundreds of Jupiters, if you've seen the video). Curious! Something sure took one heck of a bite out of Jupiter, too.

Sky & Telescope states: Jupiter is at opposition (opposite the Sun in our sky) at the beginning of the month, so for all of December and January it appears about as big and bright as it gets. Use as little as 40x or 50x magnification on your telescope, and Jupiter will look as big in your eyepiece as the full Moon does to the naked eye. But higher powers will probably work better. Wait until late at night when Jupiter climbs high in the sky for the sharpest, steadiest telescopic views of its dark cloud belts and bright zones.

I'm sure Christoffer and Bambi couldn't have missed such a glaringly bright object to run their tests on -- which were done on the 17th, if ole' Jupiter is the brightest thing in the sky throughout December and January. They had to settle for what WAS there... the brightest star in Orion and the "clearest star in the nightsky" - which would have been... JUPITER, according to you and Sky & Telescope ("It is, apart from the Moon, currently the largest and brightest object in the sky"). So TEST II footage IS a shot of Jupiter... and it did NOT become what was formerly videotaped when zoomed, much less unzoomed. If not, where was Jupiter when they shot their test footage? We would like to see someone submit a video image of Jupiter that looks like the frames below. No super zoom-in... just straight on, natural, as these images reflect. We find this assessment as incredulous as the woefully oft repeated "venus" "swamp gas" and "flock of Geese" explanation always tossed at UFO sightings and photos. BTW, UFO stands for "Unidentified Flying Object." And that is precisely what they videotaped.


1st picture: Close lamp in frame focused, and glaring UFO clearly visible; little or no zoom. JUPITER?? Not very likely. (lampst452 k.qt)

2nd picture: Incredibly bright object over house at considerable distance - no zoom - no other stars apparent (Hqufofilm1.qt)

A debunk from SkyNet, from Mike Farrell:

Dear UFO Video Enthusiasts,

I'm no expert on video equipment,
so I must concede to someone who is.

http://www.ufovideo.com/database/crap.htm

Please check out this new page by Tom King
(Arizona, USA) who can certainly back up his
technical claims with many years of video
expertise and experience. He put this page
together just to answer dubious claims
posted on the Jeff Rense website recently
concerning "camera artifacts" on those new
UK/UFO images and the STS-75 Tether UFO images.

And while you're, there take the time to look over
his excellent website called SKYNET.

Thank You, Tom King!

Let's get these "technical considerations" settled
for once and for all.

RESPONSE:

Tom, like many others, has done an excellent job of actually shoring up the claims of our content, rather than duplicating or tearing down what has been displayed at rense.com. But his efforts are applauded. It was a good attempt at duplication, but it falls far short of what we have offered here. There's nothing inexplicable about Tom's experimental shots and examples. Yes... video cameras at night, out of focus, and/or zoomed, can produce spheres of blurred, colored light and even some odd artifacts, including the appearance of a disc with an apparent "hole" or "notch"... or even half of it missing! We don't deny this at all.

We do NOT deny that distortions take place on video at night, in shots out of focus, or zoomed. We do NOT suggest that what is being seen is actual surface relief or texture in Bambi's footage -- or even a "flying saucer" (though we feel the STS-75 evidence represents a shocking coincidence, and we are convinced of its absolute authenticity!). We ARE saying... it IS a UFO... it is unidentified, it did fly (we accept our contacts testimony) and it is an object and it was not Jupiter, as the test shots proved. Tom's shots of Jupiter only scarcely approximate a possible type of distortion that can take place. It does not explain the other enigmatic elements of Bambi's footage, or why Jupiter would be so intensely bright for Bambi, and move unlike stars in the sky, while Tom's Jupiter is dulled, entirely unbrilliant and only slightly resembles what is presented here. Daylight and night footage both have been presented. Anomalies generated in the videos from Bambi have NOT been duplicated, thus far. Only approximated. And just because someone can shoot a star and make it blurry so it looks like a blob with a dark center doesn't say anything to what Bambi caught on tape, as her star test footage reveals.





What we have yet to see produced by anyone is DUAL effects, as our contact has produced. Foreground objects, even lighted objects, in focus, without zoom, while the mysterious "object" displays not merely one, but several appearances, one of which happens to be the so-called "zoom distortion" appearance claimed by Tom and others to be a routine failure of the camera to focus properly on a light source. How is this possible? Yes, anyone can zoom or blur a star or bright light and WILL get 'similar' results... a circle, some bracket-blocking effect depending on the camera type, unique colors and perhaps even a "hole" in the center of the blurred light. But what we have not seen is reproductions of what we see on these videos... only close proximites and those substantially less interesting that those from Bambi/Christoffer. And, no DUAL effects. The Dual effects are part of what make these UK images entirely unique.

Again - we are not suggesting that the object in the videos looks precisely like what the camera is picking up. We are simply awed at the unparalleled quality and enigmatic brilliance and unduplicatable artifacts we see, under the conditions given and the accompanying testimony which we see not reason to dismiss as "nonsense," much less lies. Remember, Bambi both saw AND videotaped a strange, bright object that moved. It was not a slowly moving, naturally traversing object in the night sky such as Jupiter. We believe Bambi is quite capable of telling the difference between the movement of stars in the sky and the movement of what caught her attention to videotape the enigma.

Those visiting Tom's page at http://www.ufovideo.com/database/crap.htm, crudely labeled "crap.htm," will notice two things.
(1) Tom clearly has never seen the STS-75 video footage. Anyone who has could not make this statement without being utterly blind: "In some of the Space Shuttle videos you can see strange objects moving around. Quite a few of them aren't in focus. I know because I posted a lot of these videos 5 years ago. I studied them carefully and can easily recognize the effects of the "UFOs" you see below."

I don't know what videotape Tom has seen, but it sure wasn't STS-75 "Smoking Gun" evidence, as there is absolutely no way the myraid of pulsing, clearly defined, well in-focus UFOs flying by the tether in the footage could be the result of blurring, zooming or any other camera defect/effect. Plenty of people have seen stills of STS-75... and yes, they leave much to be desired. We have no rights to show the footage, unfortunately. Those who have seen the videos, however, know they're seeing something NASA doesn't want to discuss and blacked out in its transmissions. The STS-75 footage is, in a word, shocking. I think to even suggest that STS-75 footage is the result of blur or some other camera defect is simply preposterous.(2) Tom's images are lacking many of the elements seen in Bambi's footage, yet he's claiming he's shot the exact same thing.

We welcome every opportunity to challenge these images featured, and by no means plan to hold them up as sacred cows protected from analysis by others. Rense.com has a solid reputation for reporting both UFO frauds as well as openly admitting mistakes and revising all necessary data when something can be conclusively demonstrated to be something other than what we think it might be. We're interested in the truth. We invite every skepticism and scrutiny and experiment. Unfortunately, Bambi in the UK has captured something on video tape, multiple times, which others cannot accurately duplicate, which defies some basic conventional wisdom (ie, how you get a street lamp in focus while the claimed distortion "effect" is clearly visible on the object, even at an unzoomed distance, while NOT effecting foreground objects, lights, etc. If one light distorts as such, all similar and/or relative lights should also likewise distort with similar effects. That's just using your logic bean, folks.)

Neither Christoffer or Bambi, or Rense.com, is claiming these are images of a space ship from another world. We are saying it is a Unidentified Flying Object videotaped with some extraordinary characteristics which are worthy of attention and examination, and we bring to bear against it remarkably similar imagery as STS-75 as examples and reference.

DERBYSHIRE-LIKE UFO SEEN AGAIN IN ENGLAND

This time, by a lady named Bambi.

Here's her story; taken from Rense.com:

Military Involvement In UK UFO Sighting

We have just received additional UFO footage from Researcher Christoffer Walther - including clear evidence which points to strong UK military interest/involvement - in the remarkable ongoing series of UFO sightings witnessed and recorded by his contact in England, 'Bambi'. As you will see, UK military helicopters are now actually flying right through Bambi's home neighborhood down to heights of less than TEN feet above the ground.

Interview w/ Bambi:

CW: When did you first see the (UFO) object? ...

Bambi: Fri, Jan 18, 2002, about 6 pm. I did not send it (the material/footage) as I was keeping this very good, clear, sharp object back because I was getting a lot of people saying rubbish about me. So. I thought when every person has said all they can and stopped saying its a star, I would send this film (tape), as it is not a star.

CW: Where was it in the sky?

Bambi: It was in the same place in the sky where the army helicopter was in the day film I've sent you, maybe higher. (see new Military Helicopter footage below -- apparently right in front of Bambi's home. An outside yard lamp appears in several of the video clips as an excellent reference point.)

CW: What did it look like to the naked eye?

Bambi: I (taped) it in front of the (street) lamp to give an idea on size. I thought if something was in the tape other than the UFO it would prove both are sharp and in focus and not much zoom was used, if any, as you can see in the video clips. It was not as plain, if it were, it would of all ready crashed into the house behind the UFO. It was not a helicopter as it does not flash or make a sound. Also please note, if it were a star why is there not any other stars on this clip? And it cannot be any distortion zooming effect as the lamp is very sharp in focus. It looked like a very bright ball of fire at first then it stopped and just hovered from left to right, and then stopped -- still then after some time it just went off like a ball of fire.

CW: On the video it appears to have a lot of detail, texture, etc. To the eye, however, was it like this or smooth in color and hue?

Bambi: The object looked like a very bright red-white egg shape to the eye, and it was sort of turning in sky -- and I could see some ring-like glow around it.

While composing this update, Bambi also videotaped more of the Military presence... " I have just filmed an army helicopter 8 feet off the ground in a field next to our house. What is an army helicopter doing 8 feet off the ground near a public house and where children play?" (Footage below). It is Bambi's impression that these choppers are chasing something...which appears to be seen briefly in several of the video clips below.




And with that being said, here are the videos in question (the ones taped by Bambi):

Clip 1



Notice how it bares striking similarities to the ufos caught in NASA's sts-75 (and other sts missions) video feed; a la a hole etched out in it's center, a missing "notch" near the edge, and (most importantly) a mysterious pulsing effect on the surface.

Clip 2



Here's the UFO undergoing a mysterious "morphing" phase.

Clip 3



From a distance. Notice how no other "stars" appear in the foreground.

Clip 4



Moon reference.

Clip 5



Above the lamp post. Notice how sharp the lamp appears in the shot; proof that the object in question is not an optical illusion or distortion.

Clip 6



Stationary.

Clip 7



This vid. shows a strong indication of military involvement/intelligence. A UK Army helicopter appeared the day after the UFO was spotted, and in the same spot. Also, notice the lamp post that was lit when the UFO was shot the day prior.

Clip 8



The UFO appeared hovering through clouds a day after it was originally spottted.

Clip 9



Hovering stationary 2

-Compiliation version-




Here's a side-by-side comparison of Derbyshire, the new UFO, and the NASA UFOs.



And some interesting frames/enlargements:




Reasearcher Christopher Walther's personal commentary:

The following is the story of the events that lead to the footage.

The witness, a single mother British woman was giving a party a few weeks back. It's about midday when she notice a strange disck like object in far above in the sky. Meanwhile her friend is inside the house filming the party events, she calls him outside and he see the object as well.

He succesfully tapes the white like disc flowing through a thin layer of skies, he zooms in and it appeas to be a white disc, no surface details visible. To me it looks like it reflects the sun.

Later when it has turned dark, the object returns. From a distance it appears as a white glowing stationary object, at times it appears to be changing shape morphing into two connected objects and then back to a single one again.

He zooms in onto the object and it clearly resemblences the original "Derbyshire" phenomena, the "bite" missing on the one end of the disc is clearly visible, and on close look the object displays a myriad of green, blue, red colors.

At one point the object begins to move, first slowly, and later it floats through the a layer of skies and disappears. This is captured on video as well.

The next morning the woman is alerted by a team of garbage men, that has arrived early to collect garbage. They have spotted the object in the sky, and once again the object is recorded on movie, during daylight. However, this object to me looks a bit different than the one spotted the day and night before. It seems triangular shaped, and not circle round.

Kind regards,

Christoffer Walther
UFO Research Denmark