Bruce Maccabbe

[Nemo492]

The famous expert made a wrong statement about this Capitola image :



http://www.aliensinmycloset.com/roswell_2007.htm



On sunday April 6th, 10538 sent an email to Bruce Maccabbe,
just to know where he now stands. No reply.

[Douglas]

It doesn't matter where Bruce stands on the issue of the two colored wire.  One can easily see that the wire is wrapped with a lighter colored tape in a spiral manner.  When the Drone passes over a spot where the two colored wire and the Drone meet visually, their colors tend to blend.

We went all over this a year ago and it has already been resolved, or so I thought.  Has some new issue surfaced that I am not aware of?

Doug
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The famous expert made a wrong statement about this Capitola image :



http://www.aliensinmycloset.com/roswell_2007.htm



On sunday April 6th, 10538 sent an email to Bruce Maccabbe,
just to know where he now stands. No reply.

[Nemo492]

Nothing new, Douglais.
That was just for the record,
to show how a famous expert got mixed up
with a very simple and wrong issue,
and decided to remain silent since then.

[leviathan]

This has always been one thing and one thing only:  A WEAKER CABLE IS WRAPPED AROUND A STRONGER CABLE FOR SUPPORT.  THE STRONGER CABLE IS STEEL AND SILVER GRAY IN COLOR.  You see this all the time.  There is no mystery and in this episode no expert.
IC

[spinnewise]

Mr Maccabbe has "prooved" his keen eye again:
http://www.ufocasebook.com/2009d/spain1958.html
If you look closely at the full size pic you can see the "ufo" is just a part of the uppermost layer of the foto that rolls a bit off.
http://www.ufocasebook.com/2009d/spain1958a.jpg
At least he should have noticed the shadows are wrong.
Lighting issues are his field of excellence, I thought.

[majicbar]

It is too bad that this print was damaged as it complicates its analysis, specifically the fold that is apparent just along the "horizon" with the water.

My impression too is that this could be nothing more than a damaged negative resulting in this strange "print". Although too, one has to consider asking, would the resulting scum of the damaged negative leave this kind of image? Most damage of this kind leaves a clear film and a black exposure is the result. What the would be causing the white exposures in the damaged area? Perhaps come contaminant in the original manufacture of the film could account for it. Without the negative, likely no answer will  ever be forthcoming.

Strangely, Macabee says in his analysis, "I am surprised because none of the other images seem to give any hint of "lettering." What other "images", and what "writing"?

If the object is not there though, then what is the fisherman on the other side of the boat shielding his eyes to look at? And what of the other figure down the beach on the right, isn't he also looking out and up toward the object? HUMM?

[majicbar]

"At least he should have noticed the shadows are wrong.
Lighting issues are his field of excellence, I thought."

How do you know spinwise that the lighting is wrong? If in-fact the "drone" is in the air, perhaps though not in the scene depicted with the pole, the lighting might be correct for another day, at another place.

More-so, even if the drone were as indicated at this place and at this time how do you know that the "flight" of the drone does not alter the atmospherics of its vicinity to bend the light so that shadows do not appear in their correct locations? It has been said that the drone is capable of "invisibility", which today we know is most likely in our technology to be accomplished by the alteration the direction of light rays around the object to be hidden.

[spinnewise]

Sorry for the late reply, majicbar

My remark about the shadows was ironic.
I think the shadows on the "craft" in this foto are not quite consistent with the rest of the foto.

The "craft" itself IS the damage.
It is not in the negative.
The paper foto you see is damaged.
The "craft" is a triangular piece of the uppermost layer of the foto paper that got loose and rolled upward.
Hence the shadow and the 3D appearance.
It IS 3D.
This is the reason why it is white.
It hasn't been degraded by UV-light as much as the foto-layer.
The fishermen are looking out to the horizon for fellows or the weather.
They are NOT looking upwards where the "craft" is.
The edges of the "craft" are far too sharp to be far away.

[majicbar]

Agreed.