UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2012 > May > May 22

Re: Unusual Craft Over Reading, England

From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 09:11:19 -0400
Archived: Tue, 22 May 2012 08:32:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Unusual Craft Over Reading, England

>From: Martin Shough<parcellular.nul>
>Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 11:25:58 +0100
>Subject: Re: Unusual Craft Over Reading, England

>>From: William Treurniet<wtreurniet.nul>
>>To: post.nul
>>Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 14:54:52 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Unusual Craft Over Reading, England

>>>From: Martin Shough<parcellular.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 16:20:43 +0100
>>>Subject: Re: Unusual Craft Over Reading, England


>>Thank you Martin, for mentioning that possible explanation.
>>Maybe not a soap bubble, but a mylar balloon?

>Also possible.

>>A problem with it
>>though is that the black band in the object has a vertical
>>orientation. Presumably the horizon is horizontal in England.

>It is the camera axis that has a (near)vertical orientation,
>pointed "at the sky". The up/down of this frame orientation is
>arbitrary in relation to gravity. The orientation of the band on
>this apparently shiny spheroid is unknown.

A camera on a tripod tilted upward as far as it will go has an
angle to the ground of about 60 degrees. Up/down relative to the
object is not arbitrary, so the band's orientation appears to be

>>Also, towards the end of the clip, the object turns so that the
>>band disappears. The band appears to go behind the object,
>>suggesting it is a semicircle rather than a full circle. A
>>spherical reflection would not disappear.

>>The object also seems to flash briefly occasionally, which would
>>be odd if the light source were the sun. Judging from the way
>>the cloud is illuminated, the sun is approximately behind the
>>camera location. The flashes suggest to me that the light source
>>is the object itself.

>The changing reflection geometry of a bubble (or, differently,
>an aspherical mylar balloon) moving in relation to the
>landscape, the sun and a fixed camera is complex and the direct
>illumination need not even be constant because the ray path
>between it and a low sun "behind the camera" (whatever that
>means) can easily be interrupted by trees, poles, buildings etc.

>There're really no grounds for assuming this thing is self
>luminous or is anything other than a mundane object (bubble,
>balloon etc) until you have started to do some of the type of
>investigation of angular relationships and camera
>orientation/surroundings and local winds etc that I suggested
>already, to try to put at least approximate bounds on possible
>size and rate and altitude (coupled variables) and direction,
>for testing predictions of bubble/balloon theories.

There are insufficient data for meaningful calculations of that
nature. The possible distance and size of the object covers too
wide a range. Besides, in another case where I showed that an
object's motion was not consistent with a balloon, critics here
refused to allow mere calculations to override their own
preferences. I wouldn't expect this case to be any different in
that regard.

>You may be able to prove yourself right. Until then this is not
>very interesting for the rest of us.

You are presuming a lot, Martin, saying you speak for everyone
on the List. The appearance and behavior of the object is
sufficiently unusual that it deserves a second look. It is still
a UFO, in spite of your suppositions and predilections.


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



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 Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com