UFO SIGHTINGS: MUFON Cases - 2 UFOs Photographed Over McAlester, Oklahoma

[zorgon]

[/center]

Dandelion Salad with Vinegar and Oil Dressing

Dandelions are a free, healthy food -- yum! My rating: 9/10.

http://www.tammysrecipes.com/dandelion_salad_vinegar_oil_dressing

[deuem]

EDIT----IMHO.

I worked this up in Auto Cad using dimensions given.

I get these results after scaling the photo to 3 sizes.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At the tree 30 Yards = 27.43m

Ufo left 0.29m   Ufo Right 0.29m
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At the wires 150 yards = 137.15m

Wire size about 0.03 dia, over 1 inch  and I took half the wire...
A stupid question, but why 2 telephone wires?

Ufo left 1.46m   Ufo Right 1.32m

Ufo right wingspan 0.64m

Road width at bend 5.6m

Right off ground 6.3m

Wires 5.0 m off ground

The projectory of the right Ufo shows at this distance and current angle that it is 14.38m from impacting the ground.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By using data from the above and the fence pole row on the left I calculated the tree line. The two green trees shown

Ufo on left 6.81m  Ufo on right 6.14m
left Ufo off ground 16m

right Ufo off ground 21m


Trees in the back. Left green tree 5.24m tall,   right larger tree 7.8m tall

At the tree line the photo is app 90.6m wide

The Ufo on the right is now 67.04m from impacting the ground

If the wires are attached to poles of the same height then it has a wire droop of 1.16m and at least a run of 68.5m 58m to the left and 10.5 to the right

If that fence on the left continued on the same path then the intersection plane with the photo is 20.83m to the left

This would mean that the electrical pole should be far on the other side of that fence if the wires were attached at the same heights right and left side. Who knows that? but if it was...

The sun is app 8 degrees to the left of photo center. The main tree shadow shows me about the same angle. Since none ofthe shaodows are clear it is hard to get real numbers.

That's all for now.

[deuem]

A close to sunset photo I did for starwarp



I would expect something like this ut a lot less. All rays over the horizon

[deuem]

Original sunsel / dusk

Auto Levels, I used auto levela and noting else. Never got any colors back.

Deuem, Nice Sun light waves scattered in the clouds.. Nature out did me. The original is fantastic.

[thorfourwinds]

Re the wires  how far are they away from the camera?  How do you tell? Are you assuming they are power lines? What makes you think so?

What is I am taking the picture through one of these? 

Nobody said anything about power lines !

They were plainly identified as telephone wires.   

Nice try troll -     

And get off Zorgon's line   

He'll be back from feeding the ferrets     

Any moment now   

[deuem]

Re the wires  how far are they away from the camera?  How do you tell? Are you assuming they are power lines? What makes you think so?

When looking at the lines in his photo, I can assume nothing. I can only read what he wrote. Telephone wire(s)

I could say that a standard telephone wire strung at least 150 yards away from the camera would almost be impossible to see in the photo. Yet we se 2 very distent wires. Maybe he is confused and they are power lines. I don't know. They might even be string or wire attached to that tree, I don't know. Wires are hard to figure out. I can do droup and do some sizing if I have a relative object.

If I really had to get a more exact number, then testing would come into play. We would have to setup an example and do it at every few yards to see the results.

On these wires, if I set the focal plane of the photo to where he said it was 150 yards and measure it. It came out a lot larger that I would expect it to. A football field and a half. maybe he meant 150 feet. Think how large a goal post is and then look at it from 100 yards away?

[ArMaP]

The camera data indicates two and a half minutes before sunset.

You're right, my mistake, I looked at the wrong time, the "Modify Date". I will take a photo at the right time today to see what I get.

However, ArMaP has continually belittled the Deuem process because he sees things differently than many others.
Is the 'blue' that Deuem sees as 'blue' the same 'blue' that ArMaP experiences?

Enquiring minds want to know.[/color]

I don't belittle the Deuem process, I just have yet to see evidence that it shows more than can be seen in the original image. That doesn't mean that I dismiss the result of the process of any image, I consider it as much as I do to any other processing.

In this thread I only mentioned the Deuem process after Deuem talked about it, and the only thing I said was that it was not needed to see the darker and brighter areas of the photo.

Not a bad guess, especially the part "... or something like that..."

Sometimes I'm not as technical as I should be.

It would have been better to write "some lepidoptera".

And where do you get these fantastic ideas?
"...a fast moving insect is translucent..."

Why do you make up quotes like that?

This is what I wrote:

One thing I noticed is that the wire is darker but less blue in the place where the object appears, which is consistent with the object being in front of the wire but being translucent, as a fast moving insect would appear.

if you can provide any credible information to reinforce your presumption -
like a similar picture of these moths.

I will try to find similar photos, as even if these are moths, it's highly unlikely that I can find a similar picture of these moths.

It should be easy for one sharing such knowledge,
as the unique centerline of the fuselage ... errrr, moth is quite unique to the design.   

Don't forget (or ignore) that the blurring changes the shape of the object.

Even in the dim light in the original, un-cropped photo, there appears to be a shadow - or shaded area - under the tree where it should/would be according to the sun's 'rays' in the Deuem processed photo.   

First of all, could you please tell me what is more correct, to call that a shadow or a shaded area? Thanks in advance.

And yes, we can see that the indirect light comes mostly from above and a little to the left, as I said before.

Considering that the telephone wires are 450 feet (137.15 meters) from the camera, and the 'moth' is clearly behind the wire, that would make it a fairly big moth, n'est-ce pas?   

That's what happens when you use part of what I wrote and ignore the rest.

My opinion of those objects being moths (or some kind of lepidoptera) is based on these facts:
1 - any moving object photographed with a shutter speed too low to get a clear image will result on the object appearing translucent in the photo, as it was in several different places while the shutter was oppened.
2 - an out of focus or motion blurred object in a photo (or scanned image), as it appears translucent, it will show everything that is behind it.

That's why I think those are moths (or some kind of lepidoptera) closer to the camera.

The second object appears to be behind the leaves of the tree that is approximately 30 yards in front of me and also appears to be Very large.


Aha: Data!      30 yards = 90 feet = 27.43 meters.

The answer is the same as the one for the object being in front or behind the wire.

Gotta just love this red herring:

p.s. I did notice prior to taking the photos my Iphone Compass was malfunctioning by loosing its magnetic north settings.

I agree, that's the most suspicious thing on the report.

[deuem]

I am not thinking translucent or transparent. To me it processed full but dead.
I can not pick out any movement either.

[thorfourwinds]

Yo Deuem, buddy:

Please, would you run the one with the wire in front?

Something is very wrong here and we would like to verify a nagging suspicion.

Plus, the lack of 'interaction' with the atmosphere is questionable.

Great work-ups!

Thank you,

tfw

[deuem]

Original Crop. nothing done to it





A problem area arises when doing a close up and levels change to day time ( the mirical program )





Deuem DT




To me the wire looks like it does go in front of the object. It would be very easy to reset the wire there using layers on the same photo. Layers from another photo can show up, but the same one is almost impossible for me to tell. But it is very simple to do if you want to move it in front.

[deuem]

For a comparision, here is an American Football field. The goal post is a little over 100 yards away in the photo. Please compare that to a telephone wire

[deuem]

I am confussed and will have to re-read my postings.

In this thread I only mentioned the Deuem process after Deuem talked about it, and the only thing I said was that it was not needed to see the darker and brighter areas of the photo.

I could swear that I wrote I used Photoshop and used the programs Auto Level function to get the day time photo. I know i am getting old but I don't remember saying anything about Deuem on light and dark. I will go back and read from the beginning. BRB

[ArMaP]

I know i am getting old but I don't remember saying anything about Deuem on light and dark.

You didn't, that comment was about the image of what you call the sun rays, that I interpreted as meaning that it was meant to detect the position of the light, that's why I made that reference to light and dark.

Sorry for the confusion.

[deuem]

And yes, posting an altered image will get comments like that from me, because you did altered the photo, didn't you?

I altered it and stated exactly what I did. What would you suggest we do, just look at the gray photo and talk about it.  I also did a lot of math. And so far with the exception of the sun light, not too much Deuem until late in the thread. Mostly Audo Cad and Photoshop so far.

You have written that it looks like moths, Ok, then is that considered a hoax in your book or is sending moths to Mufon ok with you?

Say an average moth is about 1 inch long. I went back on my Cad program and scaled the photo to that size and then slid it down to find the distance. It would have to be about 2.3 meters in front of the lens to get that shot. If the moths were in the shade then it would look solid to me. maybe the tree would wash out to be in the rear. It could also be just simple seed pods falling.

It could be a lot of things.

My Superman X-Ray vision




Huh, What happened here? Is the entire sky gone? Along with the pesky critters?



No I did not erase the sky nor the lines, nor the pests.

If you start with a photo, Move the tree to another layer, take out the sky, add the critters and wire then put the tree back on top One could get this. The cut line on the mountains is easy. Just use the original tree.

To me the shadow from the tree is a little different than the sun is showing me. So I say IMHO maybe?  Still thinking........

[ArMaP]

I altered it and stated exactly what I did. What would you suggest we do, just look at the gray photo and talk about it.

No, I just thought that the way you presented the altered photo was implying that that version was the real one.

You have written that it looks like moths, Ok, then is that considered a hoax in your book or is sending moths to Mufon ok with you?

It's not necessarily a hoax (or the photo was not made with that intention), as something like that happening is quite natural.

If the sender thought that it was a moth close to the camera when he sent the photo then yes, it was hoaxing MUFON and everyone else reading the report.

As I don't know the guy's intentions I always start from an "innocent until proven guilty" point of view.

Say an average moth is about 1 inch long. I went back on my Cad program and scaled the photo to that size and then slid it down to find the distance. It would have to be about 2.3 meters in front of the lens to get that shot.

I agree.

If the moths were in the shade then it would look solid to me.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that.

maybe the tree would wash out to be in the rear. It could also be just simple seed pods falling.

I don't think they are pods falling because it doesn't look like there is any vertical motion blur.

It could be a lot of things.

True.

If you start with a photo, Move the tree to another layer, take out the sky, add the critters and wire then put the tree back on top One could get this. The cut line on the mountains is easy. Just use the original tree.

Hoaxing a photo like this is easy, I agree, but because it's easy it doesn't mean that's what happened.

PS: the sunset photos you posted on this thread have one thing different from what the report says. According to the report, he took the photos pointing the camera to the north, not to the place of the sunset.