UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Jul > Jul 19

Re: The 1952 Tremonton Utah

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:17:59 -0700
Archived: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 09:50:08 -0400
Subject: Re: The 1952 Tremonton Utah

>From: Michael Tarbell <mtarbell.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 06:40:08 -0600
>Subject: Re: The 1952 Tremonton Utah 'Seagulls' Confirmation?

>>From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:02:58 +0100
>>Subject: Re: The 1952 Tremonton Utah 'Seagulls'Confirmation?

>Hartmann's suggestion that the objects are "unresolved" seems at
>odds with Baker's observation (same reference as above) that,
>based on microscopic examination of the film, the camera was
>well-focused: "...the edges of the images are sharp and clear
>on many of the properly exposed frames".

If the camera was in sharp focus, "unresolved" could simply mean
'no detail', as might be expected from something like a glowing
disc with no appendages.

However, "seagulls" would very definitely show details if the
angular size of the image is great enough. Wings in particular
will clearly stick out and wing flapping is very visible. This
brings us to the next point below.


>I am also troubled by the lack of contemporary provenance for
>Newhouse's claim that the objects were initially full-moon-
>sized, gun-metal gray 'saucers', directly overhead. This would
>obviously dash the seagull theory outright: if we adopt a 'gull-
>like' linear diameter of 3 ft, then the objects were no more
>than 350 ft away when overhead, and would have been

Quite! There's no mistaking a flapping, white seagull the
angular size of the full moon for a gun-metal grey saucer.


>Baker gives a range of
>0.02 - 0.09 deg for object angular diameters in the film. If we
>adopt a mean initial (start of filming) angular diameter of 0.05
>deg, the implication is that the objects were less than 6 deg
>above the horizon at the start of the film.

Translated into minutes of arc, .02 degress is 1.2 minarc and
.09 is 5.4 minarc. 20/20 letters on an eyechart are 5 minarc in
size composed of lines and gaps 1 minarc wide. 20/15 letters,
which are 3.75 minarc high with elements with .75 minarc
elements are discernible by about half the normal population.
Isolated elements like single lines (or wings sticking out from
the side of a bird body) can be made out at even smaller angular

Not only should Newhouse have been able to make out details like
wings on "seagulls", even when they had flown into the distance,
his film viewed under a microscope should definitely have been
able to pick them up.

The scientific twits on the Robertson Panel should have gotten
outside their laboratories more often to view flocks of birds
way off the distance. Even as they move away and they are barely
more than dots, the wing flapping is still easily visible. Even
birds riding thermals with minimal flapping should still have
visible wings. Baker's film analysis indicates that at least
some of the objects were still very resolvable "dots" and
details such as wings and flapping should have been apparent
both by eye and on film.

David Rudiak

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ 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