Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

The Calvine Photo: World’s ‘best ever’ UFO image revealed

Page 4 of 6 [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,361
Location: Hell

14 Aug 2022, 7:20 am

Not all things are worth investing a lot of time in “exhausting all avenues.” Until researchers prove otherwise, the logical stance is disbelief. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” A few doubtful and highly suspect photos are not extraordinary evidence.


_________________
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.


Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 14 Aug 2022, 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,361
Location: Hell

14 Aug 2022, 7:23 am

Also, the burden of proof rests on the person making the claim. If people want to argue that this is an alien spaceship or a hypersonic aircraft (or whatever), then it’s their job to prove it.


_________________
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.


Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 65,665
Location: Over there

14 Aug 2022, 7:27 am

cyberdad wrote:
Why are you so quick to debunk this. First exhaust all avenues, thats the scientific method
Well yeah, but when there is already glaringly obvious jiggery-pokery going on - that image from The Scottish Sun is clearly manipulated when compared to the one from The Sun UK, not just in the sudden appearance of structure on the "craft" but the very different angle of the "plane" at lower right (which has also sprouted a clearly visible structure on one wing and a cockpit bump making it look like a Harrier) - there is really little reason to invoke anything more detailed.

It's a absurd as me saying "I can hover 1 meter off the ground while emitting lightning": Ooh, ooh, let's subject that claim to a deep scientific analysis!
No; it's crap pure and simple.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

14 Aug 2022, 8:48 am

Image



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 65,665
Location: Over there

14 Aug 2022, 3:51 pm

Bah! Faked gasometers. :P


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

14 Aug 2022, 7:34 pm

I mean the odds are this is likely to remain an x-file as its hard to prove one way or another.



DanielW
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2019
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,873
Location: PNW USA

14 Aug 2022, 8:28 pm

If that's the world's best I'd hate to see the worst.

Of course it IS a UFO though, as in we can't determine what is is in such a poor photograph. That's what UFO means - UNIDENTIFIED flying OBJECT. Does that make it likely that its extra-terrestrial? NO



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

14 Aug 2022, 8:34 pm

DanielW wrote:
If that's the world's best I'd hate to see the worst.

Of course it IS a UFO though, as in we can't determine what is is in such a poor photograph. That's what UFO means - UNIDENTIFIED flying OBJECT. Does that make it likely that its extra-terrestrial? NO


One of the ongoing issues with UFO photos is they are generally always poor quality. Part of the problem is that the person with the camera (often nowadays camera phones) doesn't know how to take pictures of objects in the sky, There are issues of light filters, flash photography (for night skies) and shutter speed (the objects are often moving).

A lot of the time the observer is trying to a) process what they are seeing before they think to grab a camera and b) when they do grab their camera they are in a hurry so do a shoddy job with the focus. If the object is moving reasonably fast then its often just a blur/smudge in the sky.

The Calvine photo is heralded as one of the best ever because the lighting was good, the object stood still to pose for the hikers camera. I don't know what quality camera the hiker was using but it was 1990 so it wasn't a mobile phone.



DanielW
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2019
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,873
Location: PNW USA

14 Aug 2022, 8:38 pm

cyberdad wrote:
DanielW wrote:
If that's the world's best I'd hate to see the worst.

Of course it IS a UFO though, as in we can't determine what is is in such a poor photograph. That's what UFO means - UNIDENTIFIED flying OBJECT. Does that make it likely that its extra-terrestrial? NO


One of the ongoing issues with UFO photos is they are generally always poor quality. Part of the problem is that the person with the camera (often nowadays camera phones) doesn't know how to take pictures of objects in the sky, There are issues of light filters, flash photography (for night skies) and shutter speed (the objects are often moving).

A lot of the time the observer is trying to a) process what they are seeing before they think to grab a camera and b) when they do grab their camera they are in a hurry so do a shoddy job with the focus. If the object is moving reasonably fast then its often just a blur/smudge in the sky.

The Calvine photo is heralded as one of the best ever because the lighting was good, the object stood still to pose for the hikers camera. I don't know what quality camera the hiker was using but it was 1990 so it wasn't a mobile phone.


The fact that it was 1990 means the photo should be better, not worse. Its likely to be an SLR on 35mm film. Not a lousy digital camera.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

14 Aug 2022, 8:42 pm

DanielW wrote:
The fact that it was 1990 means the photo should be better, not worse. Its likely to be an SLR on 35mm film. Not a lousy digital camera.


For all we know it was a small SLR or even a disposable kodak camera which weren't designed for high quality images of the sky. Hikers probably aim to take pictures close up or distant landscapes not try and capture high quality images of distant objects.



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,361
Location: Hell

14 Aug 2022, 8:44 pm

For all we know, it is what it appears to be: a hoax.


_________________
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

14 Aug 2022, 8:50 pm

Twilightprincess wrote:
For all we know, it is what it appears to be: a hoax.


Again you are a teacher. Before coming to a conclusion you need to first check the data. That's what I am doing.

You and cornflake are automatically coming to a conclusion without checking the evidence. That's unscientific.



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 21,361
Location: Hell

14 Aug 2022, 8:55 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
For all we know, it is what it appears to be: a hoax.


Again you are a teacher. Before coming to a conclusion you need to first check the data. That's what I am doing.

You and cornflake are automatically coming to a conclusion without checking the evidence. That's unscientific.


There is no data which proves it. There is much to indicate that the photo is highly suspect.

The default position in this case should be disbelief. That’s called being rational. If I’m presented with valid evidence, I’ll change my stance. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” - That’s a scientific perspective.

Or should people start assuming there are mermaids if they see a blurry photograph of one?


_________________
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.


Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

14 Aug 2022, 9:32 pm

It seems to me we're way past sightings now. That's been totally routine for decades. Anything short of a close encounter of the third kind is old news.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

14 Aug 2022, 10:56 pm

Matrix Glitch wrote:
It seems to me we're way past sightings now. That's been totally routine for decades. Anything short of a close encounter of the third kind is old news.


It's more of historic interest (90% of the reason I posted it). That governments like the US and UK are releasing documents and photos of UFOs they held onto and embargoed for release.

The image harks back to the pre-internet era so the photo is of interest to me.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

14 Aug 2022, 11:02 pm

Twilightprincess wrote:
Or should people start assuming there are mermaids if they see a blurry photograph of one?


Mermaids are not supported to exist.

UFOs are supported to exist
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-reaction

You and cornflake are invoking occam's razor but the horse bolted on this issue back in 2017.

If you go to the penatgon webpage there are now proformas for members of the defense forces to fill in on any UFO sightings they experience. This means each case is taken on it's merit.
As per the scientific method until all alternative explanations are exhausted then one can't come to a firm conclusion.

I have yet to see an "expert" categorically publish the Calvine photo is fake. Until a hoax is proven beyond a shadow of doubt the identity of the object is left open.

On a final note I never once said this object is manned by aliens? I am merely trying to investigate what it is, If it does turn out to be a fake then that's ok too. But let's wait to hear what the boffins think.