From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 16:03:41 -0400 (EDT) Archived: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 03:09:07 -0400 Subject: Re: NATS Encounter Non-Conformant Traffic >From: Dave Haith <visions1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <post.nul> >Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 15:57:19 +0100 >Subject: Re: NATS Encounter Non-Conformant Traffic >>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul> >>Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 22:03:26 +0100 >>Subject: NATS Encounter Non-Conformant Traffic <snip> >The UK's Daily Telegraph gets in on the one-a-day UFO story >http://tinyurl.com/c2opu2a >A couple of observations... >1 - The seriousness of public comments below these stories seems >to increase if the report - like this one - has a reasonably >serious tone. >2 The newspaper chooses to illustrate its story with a photo of >a blurry UFO at Wiltshire's Silbury Hill. >The photographer says it can't have been dust on the lens >because she took another photo a second before (or later?) and >the object was still there. And yet photos either side of these >two were clear. >But it could surely have been an insect that landed on her lens and >then flew off a second or two later? >Opinions? Bruce? Anyone? Too well focused to be an insect on the lens. I would have to see the other photo to be certain, but an insect or bird passing by at low speed might explain it. Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp