From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 21:59:34 -0400 (EDT) Archived: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:37:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Chasing Mexican UFOs >From: Jim Deardorff <jimdeardorff.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 11:38:40 -0700 >Subject: Re: Chasing Mexican UFOs >>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 23:29:14 -0400 (EDT) >>Subject: Chasing Mexican UFOs >>I just watched the Chasing UFOs - National Geographic Channel - >>segment on the Mexican Air Force case of March, 2004, that >>involved FLIR imagery of distant 'lights'. >>This IR video has been shown in dozens or hundreds of UFO shows >>since 2004. >>The lights in the video have been claimed to be oil field gas >>burnoff flames that were over 100 miles from the airplane at the >>time. >>They did an experiment to test this hypothesis: with FLIR >>equipment they flew along the same path as the Mexican Air Force >>but saw nothing (they did see a flame when they were only a few >>miles from the oil field). >>Nevertheless the segment ended with investigator Ben claiming >>that by using satellite imagery he determined that the sighting >>lines from the Mexican Air Force plane actually did point toward >>the fires that were burning at the time of the sighting. >>Ergo, I guess Chasing UFOs concluded that the lights were oil >>well fires (James did not agree). >>OK, I'll buy that! I did the same analysis in 2004 and my long >>research article presenting my results has been available since >>late 2004. >>The reason I bring this up is to point out that they, and >>everyone else who concentrates on the FLIR lights, have missed >>the "real UFO!" >>As I showed in my article, the radar detection which started >>this whole sighting remains unexplained. >>The radar sighting began many minutes before they detected "UFO >>lights". >>Anyone interested in reading about the radar UFO sighting that >>was overlooked and would also like to see why oil field flares >>is a plausible explanation for the FLIR lights can find more >>than you ever wanted to know at: >>http://brumac.8k.com/MexicanDOD5mar04/ >Bruce, >Can you clarify? Do you agree with James that the oil-well >flares were not the FLIR UFOs, or with Ben that they presumably >were? As my article shows, the FLIR system was pointed toward the area of the oil field, about 100 miles away, as the plane flew eastward for many miles. I denonstrated reasonably good, although not perfect, agreement between the FLIR lights and the oil burnoff fires that were picked up by satellite that day. At the very least I was able to demonstrate that the oil fire explanation was plausible. The biggest question was, could the mid-IR (3-5 micron) radiation travel that far and be detected. I proposed to the MExican Air Force an experiment using their FLIR equipped airplane to test the oil field hypothesis, but they never did it - or at least never told me they had. Their main argument against the fires was "we never saw them before or since." This of course, does not rule out the possibility that unusual atmospheric conditions ocurred on the day of the sighting. >Did National Geographics actually arrange for some FLIR equipped >plane to make this test run? Yes, but they didn't specify the nature of the FLIR equipment. I don't know if NatGeo was aware of the differences in near IR (0.7 - 1 micron wavelength), mid-IR (3-5 micron) and far-IR (9- 11 micron). They used what looked like hand-held commercial videocameras which can detect near IR. They should have used a camera for 3-5 micron to duplicate the MExican AF camera. I was told the MExican Af camera system cost about $400,000. >Is there no information given as to >the date and the weather/visibility of this test run. No doubt that information is available somewhere. IT looked to me as if there was more haze during their test than during the actual sighting, but this is my subjective impression from seeing the TV show. >and >whether the FLIR equipment used was of nearly equal or better >capability than that on the Mexican plane in 2004? Probably not as good... possibly the wrong wavelength band. >In light of the result that the oil flares could not be seen on >the FLIR in the test run, do you still find that "oil field >flares is a plausible explanation for the FLIR lights?" Yes 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 | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp