UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > May > May 3

Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico - Deardorff

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 11:19:39 -0700
Fwd Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 12:27:33 -0400
Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico - Deardorff

>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 10:35:52 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico

>>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:02:32 -0700
>>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico

>>>From: Kyle King <kyleking.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 22:10:49 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico

>>>Balloons unless and until
>>>evidence emerges to the contrary.

>>It's a no-brainer: they can't have been balloons. The key reason
>>for this you didn't mention, but others have. The objects
>>remained in the same relative positions with respect to each
>>other - hundreds of them, for as long as the video showed them,
>>which was over many seconds. This was more than enough time to
>>disclose the influence of turbulence had these been balloons.

>Turbulence aside, you make the assumption the balloons
>are each separate from the other. It should be assumed they
>are connected via strings.

>Regarding turbulence, it is unknown what the atmosphere
>characteristics were at that location. Perhaps the turbulent
>layer was higher than you think or quiescent in that location
>or with a granularity that would not affect the balloons as
>you propose.

>With wind shear, ditto. But add strings.

>>Therefore, not balloons.

>No, the burden is on the person bringing the video to provide
>more data. But if you want to gumshoe it, go ahead. ...

To the string balloonists, Kyle & James,

You are avoiding all details of such a proposed hoax. The
daytime atmosphere is always turbulent, from the ground up to
many hundreds of feet.

Strings between balloons, such as each balloon being connected
to four neighboring balloons, still leaves some degrees of
freedom in which the turbulence will cause the hypothesized
balloons in such a setup to vary in relative position and
orientation as viewed from the camera.

(a) The periphery of the balloons would quickly shrink in, here
and there, causing many of the hypothesized strings to go slack.
Variations in balloons' relative positions due to turbulence and
wind shear would then quickly become apparent.

(b) Besides (a), the whole array would be free to tilt away from
the plane in which it was set up. The turbulence would cause its
upper portion here and there to tilt somewhat towards or away
from the camera relative to the lower portion, and similarly
cause the left-hand portion to veer towards or away from the
camera relative to the right-hand portion. Bear in mind that
turbulence is three-dimensional and occurs simultaneously on a
very wide range of scales.

(c) Besides (a) and (b), the whole array would be subject to a
rotary motion, driven by the upper portion being subject to a
stronger mean wind speed than the lower portion.

Then consider the problem of setting up such a hypothesized
array. Some 400 balloons to inflate and temporarily anchor down
on some large flat area, and then some 1600 strings of varying
lengths to tie between them. How long would it take how many
people to do this? Could they step between the balloons without
getting some of the strings tangled up? I should think you'd
want the balloons in the upper edge of the array to have enough
lift to hoist them all, with some fellow hoaxers walking along
underneath and holding onto strings hanging down from the lower
edge, to establish a nearly constant initial height for the
array. Could all this activity be kept secret? The odds are
against it. Once the hypothesized array is launched, then
objections (a), (b) and (c) take over.

It's up to you string-balloonists to try to demonstrate that
such a feat could be accomplished, despite the ever turbulent
atmosphere & wind shear, using your own video-camera taping of
length one minute or more, to prove you can do it. You are
allowed only one such attempt, since any practice attempts would
too easily give away the fact it was all a hoax. You are the
ones saying it was balloons with strings. It's up to you to
prove it or cede defeat.

I predict, from previous experience with debunkers, that no such
attempt will be forthcoming, and that the details set forth here
will be ignored.


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com