I agree in most cases, but I am speaking specifically of the Disclosure project witnesses. If you did not read the transcripts, which are making very clear-cut assertions, you are unable to set the context for discussion of this particular issue. I added "delusional" as another possibility.

Fine, gzhpcu, lets see...

I wasen't aware that right-hand "turns" had ever been impossible for aircrafts.

He's not really lying then since it's second hand information. He can't possibly know if it's true or not. Unless he made it up. But he could have information he didn't make up himself.

Same as above, second hand information.

Not really a UFO then is it? Did he see it fly? No?

"Massive UFO on radar"? Could simply be disinformation, as far as I know most radar systems of that time didn't show the size of the object, just it's location.

Second hand information.

Disinformation within the military to see how people would react on a ET threat. Seems also a lot is second hand information. They could be telling the truth, that they've heard of these things, or read about them, but that does not prove that the incidents have happened.

Same applies for anyone who is speaking for someone else, and did not experience the incidents themselves. Second hand information. Does not equal lying and/or being delusional.

Now gzhpcu, I've read the transcripts and given some comments. How about you answer Wolverine's question?

Johnno,
I said read the transcripts not my brief synopsis. Buy the book. Read the book. You have to read the transcript, not a few selected snippets. I can not cut and paste the whole book in one post.

I have stated my opinion: they are either lying/delusional or telling the truth. This is my opinion. You and Wolverine are entitled to different opinions.

I have therefore answered Wolverine's question: If you make a statement on tape (and I am not referring to what you referenced), then...

There is no sense in continuing this discussion if you have not read the book.

edited for typo

Being simply mistaken is not an option?

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

Certainly. But not if you read the statements in the book for most of the witnesses. There are many witnesses in the book with much more extreme statements concerning dead aliens, recovered ufos seen etc.

*shudder* Why are people always trying to get me to buy books?

You could recommend it, you could say it's interesting, but no, you have to just say "buy the book". No. Out of principle I don't buy any book someone else tells me to buy. If someone recommends one and gives me a good reason to buy it, I might do so.

You must be connected to whoever's selling the book in some way. Nice tactic, get on a forum, discuss it, then suddenly say "you have to read the book, go buy it".... whatever.

You can't cut and paste the whole book because it's a book. You can quote it though. How about quoting the most interesting incident, fully, and not just a synopsis with your own words in it that makes it full of errors.

So you're not going to admit that someone quoting/passing on second hand information is not lying?

No you haven't.

And

How about answering those two questions, in detail.

Classic buy-my-book-syndrome.

OK, then just look at the conference video with about 20 witnesses:

Disclosure

Here images of a nearly stationary object clear enough to see the details.You can even judge the size,the elevation and the distance of the object based on the size of the trees.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo328.htm
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo327.htm
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo326.htm
Do it.Show us how you proceed without copy and paste the image of the object.You can even try built a model and add it to image of trees find on the internet and compare the results.That could be an interesting
demonstration.

Definitely not a hoax - looks like a hot-air balloon. I can't quite make-out the writing on it though... perhaps if the full-resolution shots were available. I vote a little of both: lying and delusional. But also, misinterpreted (to the extreme) by a man who wants to find something. The Disclosure Project is laughably silly. And no, I won't buy the book (watched some of the press conference though).

I'd love to hear how you could do that from what you see in those pictures.

Lets hear your approximation of size/elevation/distance.
And just how can you tell the object has not been copy/pasted in?
Sure, I have plenty of models, I'll give it a go. Worst case I won't have a pic til during the weekend, work and everything, but still.

It looks like a Hot Air Balloon to me, albeit a strange one. I remember when Richard Branson sent one up -- a UFO lookalike -- as a publicity stunt, circa late 80s, and right beside the M25 during a Friday rush hour! The Police were not amused! Could it be the same balloon?

Hot-air balloon :roll:
Pics of a similar object taken elsewere and from differents years.
Gulf Breeze
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo220.htm
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo221.htm

Venezuela
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo44.htm

I can find others if needed.

Just to check for myself what the value is of the old and blurry pics to start with, I tried making one myself.

This is 5 minutes work without making a real or even a 3D model, which obviously would increase the realism.

Fake:
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/olimotion/cyprus1964.jpg
68kb
(right click and save, the host allows no direct linking)
original:
http://www.exclusively-cyprus.com/ph...20Tripylos.jpg
137kb

While this clearly is a hoax, it appears to me from this experience that with some effort I would be able to fake "perfect" old photos. For the clearer photos I'd need some time and preferably a model. With models you can do "anything". Just look at some sf movies.

Anyway, enjoy my hoax

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Good try.But not convincing at all.
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/olimotion/cyprus1964.jpg


http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/olimoti...al_picture.jpg
However clear image of a forest trees who can serve as front for trying a clear image fake of that one with a model.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/Photographs/Photo328.htm

No it isn't convincing as a UFO photo.
But I have drawn my "UFO" from 2 ellipses in Paint (yes Windows Paint).
That's my UFO model. I added some light effects, small texture, 2 porthole-like details, wind, ageing and JPEG compression. Heavy zoom in, and done. Now if I had started from a good looking scale model (easy to build) instead of paint ellipses...

From that point of view, it convinces me that faking the old photos is no problem at all.
About sharp photos, the best way to go is using a good scale model I think.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

I would love to try to use that forest pic of mine (well, from the Cyprus real estate website but anyway ) to make a sharp model fake, but
-I haven't got time
-I haven't got a digital camera
-I have lots of vinyl records, but I'm not gonna throw them all over the place, no not even glueing a fishing line to them.

I'll leave that picture to someone else.
On reflection, If I had copy-pasted that porthole, it would have looked more realistic maybe.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

I'm on it, made a quick first pic, but since it's the middle of the night the model would either be overlighted by the flash, or get a crummy lighting because I only have a regular 60W lightbulb in my room.

I have several models to play with, none of them are studio size, but I'm sure I can make something work.

Just need a good shot of the model(s).