Crappy UFO Photos - High Strangeness

Mark O'Connell's experience has led to the "unalterable conclusion that most, if not all, photographs of UFOs are crap." He's undoubtedly right; we're even wondering whether ambiguous UFO footage shouldn't, without other solid witness data, render some case dispositions as "Insufficient Evidence." Mark also makes a case for the value of a drawing. However, photographs can be useful in some ways. A photographs is subject to physical analysis in ways that a drawing isn't. Also, with a relatively objective photo, fewer "filters" are involved between the actual "phenomenon" and its publication in the general community. With a drawing, there are two "filters" -- the witness' background knowledge and preconceptions, mental state at the time, visual acuity, etc. combining as the first filter; and their drawing ability, in accurately rendering what their mind has perceived. Case in point: Roger Marsh says a Delaware Witness Says UFO was Eight Miles Long. Somehow, the witness was able to judge the low altitude of this monstrosity, and come up with the length, and the same width, figures. Maybe this midnight sighting wouldn't have photographed well, but a picture surely could have been useful. The same for a celebrity sighting, as Brett Tingley reports that Kurt Russell Recalls UFO Sighting in BBC Interview. The short video is another example of an intelligent person's reactions to ambiguous data, but it is just a story without other support. Continuing with witness perceptions, Rich Reynolds muses whether Psychedelic Trips May Open the Mind, as Some Have Suggested and Created Some UFO Sightings?. This could be a factor in some UFO reports and is likely not part of an investigator's area of research, but assuming certain named UFO events are derived from such sources they would more likely generate legal consequences than case enlightenment. (WM)

-- Delivered by Feed43 service