Okay, disclaimer. I am not in the slightest interested in “proving the validity of UFOs.”
But I am interested in the truth, wherever it may lead me. My impression, whether accurate or not, was that the comments about pacing and maneuvers were from the statement of the USAF pilot.
Certainly a still photo would not show that. It could be inferred from multiple still photos, but that would still be subject to dispute.
Poly – the problem is, as others have already mentioned, the difference between unexplained and unexplainable. Some things cannot be explained because we don’t have enough information. I’ve been thru this before in other threads. However, simply lacking information does not equate to unnatural phenomena from other worlds.
DIF got all pissy about the humorous note I posted related to somebody seeing UFOs and then figuring out they were birds. He whined that I only go after the “easy” ones. While I had no ulterior motives in posting that, it does point something out. What if the person in question had not gone and found the spotlight, leading him to figure out the “UFOs” were birds? Then would we have another “unexplained” sighting of UFOs doing dips and dives that seem beyond our technology?
Another case that I wish I could find again involved a pilot who wrote an article for one of the skeptics newsletters. He was on the ground looking up along with a couple other pilots. They saw something, apparently a large object in the distance, moving to and fro with astonishing turn-on-a-dime moves. They were just about to look away to find a camera when the object looked ready to pass behind some trees. However, it didn’t – it passed in front of them. Way in front of them. The object wasn’t large and far away; it was small and close. It was a seed packet, like from a dandelion. Their eyes played tricks on them – the eyes of three pilots! If they had looked away and then looked back, they wouldn’t have seen it, and we would have another case of the object disappearing quickly into the sky.
If DIF is still around, he’ll whine that this is an “easy” one and that I’m avoiding the hard ones. The problem is that he doesn’t seem to understand that an “easy” one is often just a “hard” one that’s been explained.
BTW, maybe I missed it, but where, exactly, is this photo DIF was referring to, along with the original description of what happened and other details of the case?