Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Was there any radar confirmation? It could have been a reflection. There was a moon up (although it was a half moon). That area does have light houses and many boats (possibly with search lights) that might cause a reflection. Maybe there was enough moisture in the air to act as a screen?
Interesting. This is the same place (and the same guy pictured in the article) of the sightings back in the mid-1960s. He seems competent enough, and the original story is intriguing.
The picture in the linked article looks more like a weather balloon than most UFOs that are attributed to being weather balloons. It's translucent and sort of "shimmery". I didn't notice if there was a video in the article.
There's also a well-known condition called "lens flare". If you point your camera directly at the setting sun and take a picture, you'll see what appears to be a circular object but in actuality is light bouncing around on the internal lens of the camera. You can't see the "object" with the naked eye, only in the picture. I've heard some people claim they've photographed the elusive "Niburu", or "Planet X" when it's just lens flare.
Sometimes the reflection from inside the camera shows the shape of the iris (which is the part which closes when the different stops are selected).
For example an f11 stop when pointing almost into the sun would be a quite small iris opening otherwise too much light would hit the 'film'/sensor.
If it showed up on the photo like this you would probably see the angular straight lines of the iris in the outside borders of the reflection or lens flare.
A shining spot off an aircraft would produce exactly this effect. Perhaps a rare combination of elements, but five-nines against being an alien spacecraft.
If I read it correctly,, it was in the air in that locale for an hour and a half and it moved quite a bit. With different angles like that you can eliminate lens flare. Plus you had eye witnesses that also work against lens flare as an explanation.
My suggestion is this... New Brunswick air space is actually controlled by the FAA, Boston ATC (ZBW), not sure about Nova Scotia. If so, some enterprising American could file a FOIA. It takes time. It may take money. But in the end, the FAA has to yield that which is requested.
Some org like MUFON, I am sure could help with the details.
In the end, you can show perhaps, that a craft without an ID sent by transponder was visible. Then, it's up to the individual reader to kinda' figure what it is.
If I read it correctly,, it was in the air in that locale for an hour and a half and it moved quite a bit. With different angles like that you can eliminate lens flare. Plus you had eye witnesses that also work against lens flare as an explanation.
My suggestion is this... New Brunswick air space is actually controlled by the FAA, Boston ATC (ZBW), not sure about Nova Scotia. If so, some enterprising American could file a FOIA. It takes time. It may take money. But in the end, the FAA has to yield that which is requested.
Some org like MUFON, I am sure could help with the details.
In the end, you can show perhaps, that a craft without an ID sent by transponder was visible. Then, it's up to the individual reader to kinda' figure what it is.
You wont get anywhere with FOIA when it involves UFOs.
"Furthermore, the FAA decision appears to represent a tacit reversal of its response to MUFON’s request for Stephenville data in 2008. Back then, the FAA supplied researchers with 2.5 million radar hits that plotted not only the UFO’s course to President Bush’s Crawford ranch, but also charted the flight paths of military jets as they shadowed the object, which approached a no-fly zone without a transponder."
Now, in that article, when Obama passed that law in 2009, he said that federal orgs are to err on the side of transparency.
"Furthermore, the FAA decision appears to represent a tacit reversal of its response to MUFON’s request for Stephenville data in 2008. Back then, the FAA supplied researchers with 2.5 million radar hits that plotted not only the UFO’s course to President Bush’s Crawford ranch, but also charted the flight paths of military jets as they shadowed the object, which approached a no-fly zone without a transponder."
Now, in that article, when Obama passed that law in 2009, he said that federal orgs are to err on the side of transparency.
oopsie.
Yep, people dont stop to consider that they keep this stuff HIGHLY classified for a reason, 'quality' of life is much better NOT knowing. I have a sneaky feeling this subject goes a WHOLE lot deeper than most think it does and is more 'existential' that 'extraterrestrial'. lol
Yep, people dont stop to consider that they keep this stuff HIGHLY classified for a reason, 'quality' of life is much better NOT knowing.
Why would the quality of life be much better NOT knowing?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's translucent and sort of "shimmery". I didn't notice if there was a video in the article. 
