June 24 episode - Venezuela photo

[BrandonD]

The Venezuela photo David is referencing and the Venezuela photo Maccabee is referencing are indeed the same photo. Go to amazon and type in the book title. Apparently David does not know the difference between a lake and a cloud cover after all, haha.

Actually, it does look pretty much like a lake.

[David Biedny]

Indeed, Bruce was right and I was wrong.

The only version of the image I had seen was on ufoevidence.org, here. Tell me it doesn't look like a body of water. I tracked down a used copy of the UFOs are Real book that Maccabee wrote with Ed Walters, the color version of the photo on the cover looks like water as well. As I said on the show, I always reserve the right to be wrong.

dB

[Brian Now]

that is one horrible picture! I was picturing something much clearer in my mind when you were talking about this. Who could blame you for getting that wrong? That could be anything.

[Miah]

I agree, I always thought it was water too.

But then again, I thought the object was an attic vent...so what do I know.

The book cover image:


I don't think it is color though, just did some effect on all of the images on the cover.

[CapnG]

Hey David, in regards to your laments about the lack of visual sophistication in the general public, I gotta say it's pretty unrealistic to expect us to be on par with your level of expertise. Maybe it's never occured to you but one of the reasons you're so good at what you do is probably because it's an innate talent you have that most people lack and could never obtain even with proper training.

That said, I think it should be taken as a sign of encouragement that more and more people are able to at least spot CGI even if it's not work you personally find impressive. As for the rest, well they're the Meirites of our day, people who desperatley want to believe that hubcap is a UFO, so there's not alot we can do for them (especially if it's a digital hubcap!)...

As for the show, it was a bit bland. I was really hoping you guys would probe Bruce for dirt on more interesting cases he's handled, how he feels about the direction of UFOlogy, the "aging of the guard" for guys like himself and Stanton, etc. Most of the time it just felt like you guys were talking shop about image processing.

[Brian Now]

Originally Posted by CapnG

Hey David, in regards to your laments about the lack of visual sophistication in the general public, I gotta say it's pretty unrealistic to expect us to be on par with your level of expertise.

See, now, I thought David was right about this. I think the "Chad" photos should throw up red flags to even the untrained eye. There is, in fact,a lack of visual sophistication from people who bought into those pictures hook, line and sinker. I thought this was what David was talking about.

[ondafritz]

Me thought water too!

Oppps us bad!

[Aaron LeClair]

I've seen video from Gulf Breeze I think, where water is being sucked up by some sort of craft. Hard vid to come by. I've only seen it a handful of times. Anyway, if any of you know what I'm talking about and have a link to the vid, please post. Thanks.

I haven't listened to all of BM interview, finishing it up now. While I'm thinking of it, I just wanted to mention that he took a polygraph test awhile back, due to some Jerry Black and Kenny Young criticism that occurred during a thread I made on Gulf Breeze at UFOupdates. They were trying to show that he sold out (took money for his work on a particular Gulf Breeze book) etc. I can't recall Bruce's claim. Whether he said he took NO money, or only something like 10 percent etc. Anyway, Bruce told me the results were "Positively inconclusive". That was the examiner's term, not Bruce's if I remember correctly. This happened a few years ago. I haven't heard anyone deal with it is why I mention it. Maybe ask next time he's on, if you ever have him back.

[Rob]

David, I was wondering if you could briefly explain why you think this photo is so compelling. Does it remind you of the object you and multiple witnesses saw in Venezuela, or is it the quality of the image (technical/optical-wise), or both?

I'm intrigued because when I see this image, it looks far from genuine (of course, I have only seen the one you linked to, so if this is a poor reproduction, apologies in advance). In no way am I questioning your professional visuel skills, I'm genuinely curious as to why you feel how you do about this photo.
Thanks.

It looks like water to me too, btw.

[David Biedny]

Rob,

To briefly answer your question, there are some things about this image that immediately strike me as highly compelling. The atmospheric density around the craft indicates to me that it's indeed up in the air, at a distance from the camera, and is not a miniature. The beam of light emitting from the bottom of it is really bright, even though there is a very good amount of actual sunlight in the image, and the opacity of the light beam varies along it's length, which would be really tough to replicate with practical effects. It was reportedly taken in a region of Venezuela, Canaima, which is highly remote, and where there has been a ton of UFO activity over many years. It looks strikingly like the images reported from Gulf Breeze. All of these things, and more, make it a very convincing image, IMO.

dB