UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2008 > Oct > Oct 15

Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:02:07 +0100
Archived: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:50:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos


>From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:26:11 +0100
>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

>>From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:31:59 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

>>>From: Ferhat Talayhan <kleinergrauer.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:14:20 +0200
>>>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

><snip>

>>This is a big case and Mr. Akdogan's investigation began in
>>2007.

>>We have enough material and informations to study and analyse
>>in order to properly discuss them, everyone expressing their
>>opinion based on the evidences presented.

>>So please Mr. Talayhan honor the List and make reference
>>strictly on the case in discussion and it's evidence.

Ray Dickenson echoed Santiago's complaint about lack of specific
attention to the case in point, but then proceeded by way of
expounding a definition of science as pure induction
(unrealistic IMO), and the discussion from all parties has
continued in the direction of vague generalisation.

Very soon no one who ever cared one way or the other will
remember why the discussion started, praying only for it to end,
and Mr Akdogan's claims for the Kumburgaz videos will recede to
a metaphorical blur, merging into that vast mass of dimly-
glimpsed and ambiguous "dark matter" that gives phony weight to
the bulk of ill-digested ufological evidence.

True to Santiago's enjoinder, I did offer a few pertinent
observations about the videos, pointed out a possible suspicious
anomaly in one clip and pointed out why some other clips are of
possible genuine interest to ufologists, but these humble
comments sank (to paraphrase Leonard Cohen) beneath the List's
collective wisdom like a stone.

Nothing daunted, allow me to make a few more pertinent
observations about Akdogan's "investigation" of the Kumburgaz
affair which might help in the practical question of whether
this really is a "big case" to which Listers ought to consider
diverting their limited time and resources:

Re the near-identical 2007 videos from the same source, the
webpage claims an "HISTORICAL STATEMENT FROM TUBITAK (National
Science and Technology Research Board of Turkey)" and gives the
following startling headline as a quote from TUBITAK:

"THE OBJECTS CAPTURED ON FILM IN THE KUMBURGAZ SIGHTINGS ARE
UFO'S"

The webpage then goes on to claim that "the official report
stated" the following:

"The objects sighted in the aforementioned footage that have a
structure that is made of specific material are definitely not
made up by any kind of computer animation nor are they any form
of special effects used for simulation in a studio or for a
video effect therefore in conclusion it was decided that the
sightings were neither a mockup or hoax."

The reality is that the TUBITAK report (full text here

http://www.siriusufo.org/tr/?fx=sayfa_ac&url=html/english/tubitak_report.asp)

did _not_ "state" this, and its conclusion is not at all
"historic".

All it concludes is that the video is probably a straightforward
video of some object reflecting light rather than computer-
generated SFX (although it qualifies even this by noting that
inconsistencies in the date/time stamps "raise a suspicion about
the validity of the time in which the recordings were made",
implying some digital manipulation). But it certainly does _not_
conclude, as claimed by Sirius, "that the sightings were neither
a mockup nor a hoax".

This is what it concludes (Sirius's translation):

"In conclusion, even though a detailed analysis of the footage
is conducted, it might still remain unidentified. Hence, other
reference objects need to be recorded in the same frame with the
disputable object and further shootings need to be done by
ourselves with special equipment in the same location and
conditions.

"Accordingly, the term 'UFO' (Unidentified Flying Object) which
has been used for these sort of dubious objects can also be used
for these objects. But this definition does not mean that these
objects are from extraterrestrial (flying saucer etc.) origin."

In other words, the TUBITAK representative can't say anything
except that the video appears to show a "disputable object" or a
"dubious object" of some sort but contains no useful information
that could help determine what it is.


Martin Shough




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

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/


[ 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