NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Yes, and your questions about a tripod are relevant. With this level of regularity, why isn't there a tripod at the ready?Questions about the Turkey video:Why doesn't the unidentified object fly? Only the camera moves while the object is stationary.
Exactly so. There should also be reams of video of this from multiple sources. There isn't.How is it possible that what is generally considered the rarest event on earth - documenting a UFO (with apparent aliens at the helm), has been able to be documented in succession with what could only be described as an alarming frequency?
Yep.Doesn't this point to a more mundane object than what should be called the greatest mystery on earth, bringing scientists in droves to the Turksh shores?
Because it's the top of a much larger object, like a ship, or a building of some sort on the far shore, obscured by trees maybe.If this is an object floating in space, why does the bottom of the object appear to be sliced off, as if it is masked or being blocked from view somehow, and does not contain the same image value and edge distortions that the top of the object does?
As Burnt State asked a couple of weeks ago, no one has a tripod? No one can borrow one? What about a telescope? Nobody knows someone with a boat? I don't get it.
The Barking Dog
Unfortunately, I find the detailed math in this discussion about as relevant as the detailed discussion around the type of camera used to capture this imagery. In both cases there's no tripod. How can there possibly be any relevant measurements taken of dim objects on a video frame? This is one of those examples, like Horn and Meier or the validation of the Brooklyn bridge abduction, where way too much effort is being put in to confirm what is ultimately shaky evidence at best. If in fact these three cases had some validity to them then they would not require such detailed apologists to work on convincing the masses of their merits. The evidence would in fact have validated the original notion of 'alien' craft here on earth long ago. But it hasn't.This is my rebuttal to the cruise ship theory
Turkey UFO Incident: Was The Turkey UFO a Cruise Ship? Not Likely And Here Is Why
Unfortunately, I find the detailed math in this discussion about as relevant as the detailed discussion around the type of camera used to capture this imagery. In both cases there's no tripod. How can there possibly be any relevant measurements taken of dim objects on a video frame? This is one of those examples, like Horn and Meijer or the validation of the Brooklyn bridge abduction, where way too much effort is being put in to confirm what is ultimately shaky evidence at best. If in fact these three cases had some validity to them then they would not require such detailed apologists to work on convincing the masses of their merits. The evidence would in fact have validated the original notion of 'alien' craft here on earth long ago. But it hasn't.
Whether or not 'aliens' have ever landed on earth, or been in near earth orbit, seems to still be a very debatable discussion.
I think that the odds are in favour of the visiting tech, before life forms, though I'm always baffled by the following: why is it that video/photo evidence is always so lacking or indeterminate at best, but the personal narratives of seeing actual beings are so damn compelling? Is the phenomenon just something that is more psychological than material I often wonder. Perhaps it's a bit of both in the way that it appears to interact with our senses and our radar in weird ways.Burnt may be right about alien life either visiting or not, but to me its beyond any doubt that alien technology has passed thru this way, manned or not.
Yes some of the video is shaky I hand you that. To me the more perfect the video the more suspect it is of being faked.
But shakiness is a problem that is why I created an archive of over 650 single frame JPEG slides of the video so that you can study the objects without having to sift through the volumes of film. JPEG single frames
He used a tripod on some occasions and on others he did not.
Do we know what the guy is saying in this clip ?The Barking Dog
I think that the odds are in favour of the visiting tech, before life forms, though I'm always baffled by the following: why is it that video/photo evidence is always so lacking or indeterminate at best, but the personal narratives of seeing actual beings are so damn compelling? Is the phenomenon just something that is more psychological than material I often wonder. Perhaps it's a bit of both in the way that it appears to interact with our senses and our radar in weird ways.
However this case does not make me very convinced at all of anything except that mundane objects can be photographed many times over and this can be used to argue for historical Ufological significance. I put the Turkey video, Meier, Greer, alien implants and most of what Jacobs and Hopkins have to say all in the same modern era UFO swamp gas basket of disbelief.