From: bruce maccabee <email@example.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:31:18 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:11:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Confirmation? >Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 10:37:34 +1100 >To: firstname.lastname@example.org >From: Mike Farrell <email@example.com> >Subject: Re: Confirmation?> >>Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 00:09:31 -0500 >>From: bruce maccabee <firstname.lastname@example.org> >>Subject: CONFIRMATION? >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <email@example.com> >Hello Updates List, >>In particular, it advertises the Aug. 6, 1997 Mexico City >>video.... which I demonstrated, at the studio which produced >>the NBC show, is a likely hoax (background imagery smeared by >>hand motion; UFO image never smeared by hand motion). . >To Bruce and others concerned with the validity of this Mexican >Video; >It's hard to argue with the analysis that qualified >professionals like Bruce Maccabee and Jeff Sanio (MUFON) have >>sit on the sidelines can only be grateful for their dedication, ti>me and efforts to help clarify the Truth.> >But at the same time, we see the videotaped interviews with >eye-witnesses to this questionable event on Aug. 6, 1997, and we >have to ask; How do we reconsile the witness testimony with the >computer analysis? Thank you for your comments on the Mexico City Aug 6 , 1997 video and he claim by me and Sainio and others that the video is a hoax. As I pointed out in my MUFON paper a year ago, there are also witnesses. The big question is, did the witnesses actually see what is in the video? A major problem is that the videographer is unknown, so far as I know. If said person came forward, _maybe_ he could say something that would contradict the evidence of several kinds which indicate a hoax (in particular, the lack of image smear of the UFO image at times when the building images are smeared by camera motion). It seems barely possible that the videographer might have seen a real UFO that wasseen by th others, but did _not_ videotape it. But then decided to make an "illustration" of what he saw. It has always been a mystery as to why something as bizarre as a 30 foot saucer could fly over a large area of the city at such a low altitued and _not_ be reported by _anyone_ until after the video was received (over a month later) by Maussan. Until we get better evidence regarding the video .... one must assume the video, at least, is a hoax and go on to other things.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp