Some brief considerations about

Sunday, April 3, 2016

Jeremy Thomas 22/11 às 15:09 -- Polymorphic anomaly spotted on 11/20/15 -- Part 2

Part #2 of footage of polymorphic anomaly spotted on 11/20/15 4:33pm.

Mostrar mais reações

Jeremy Thomas I truly encourage active observers to use the three key steps mentioned independently of the method that they use for "calling" anomalies. More active observers using these procedures will mean more solid evidence and consistent data around the reality of anomalies.

1- Infrared spotting.
2- The use of very high optical magnification equipment beyond what is provided by consumer products.
3- Direct signalling to anomalies.

Jeremy Thomas This was a comment from Jay Lee about this object:

The pattern is called Herringbone or Chevron. Herringbone is more mechanical and the Chevron pattern is more waspy(biological). Great capture Jeremy. Since it was picked up by IR, I lean towards mechanical.

Jeremy Thomas Jay Lee I am sure your comment above was referring to the post on the anomaly with rotational polymorphism. 

From my experience observing anomalies I had not seen a single instance of "mechanical" artifact or anomaly, that is an idea created in the minds of ufologists that never ever did any direct observation of reality, the "patterns" that you mentioned were not borned of direct observations. 

Even more when we say "mechanical" are we referring to the "human" concept or that we are able to know when in the presence of something "build" for some alien entity? I am convinced that we are unable to make that distintion, we are even unable to trully know when a balloon is a real balloon or when it is an anomaly, are we going to kid ourselves that we can do even more complex "identifications"??

Jeremy Thomas And even more IR does not have anything to do with anything, mentioning it here is an indication that the truly meaning of infrared spotting is still clouded by the myth of classical ufology. I had explained tirelessly the real role of IR spotting but still people do not really understand it.
Jeremy Thomas Furthermore UFO believers were aware that you can spot objects in IR that cannot be seen with naked eye, then why they did not have the idea for a dual optical system? Simply because there reasoning was that these objects were "cloaked" impossible to see in visible light. Clearly their thinking was clouded by their myths as almost any footage that I had taken prove them wrong, and many stars and planets are visible in IR in daylight but not to naked eye, are these stars and planets "cloaked"?? Clearly not.

Jeremy Thomas This is a comment by Jay Lee that corresponds to this post:

Hey Jeremy,
I didn’t mean to step on your toes. Sorry if you think what I said to be a cut on your research. I was simply stating my opinion on the object you captured on video. I will be the first to admit, I have no idea what it is you captured but my research has indicated that biological entities resemble (through evolution) characteristics of animals which we see here on land and in our oceans. 

Many of the lower flying anomalous objects can transform into anything we send up in the sky, probably for protection purposes. I think they mimic because of birds. Birds are nasty animals and go after every creature on earth including mammals, fish, insects, reptiles, etc. Their eyes are extremely sharp and fly faster than anything on the ground or in water. They are like dinosaurs. When it comes to this object, it displays a pattern not seen (typically) on earth other than a fabric store or brick walkways. 

Even the wasp pattern is a far stretch. I believe the atmospheric animals can change their shape and their colors but one thing that my research doesn’t support is changing their light spectrum. Only mechanical objects can do this. Not human mechanical, alien mechanical.

We see them occasionally appearing and disappearing from space shots in outer space. Again, this is only my belief. Just because I believe something is true, doesn’t make it true. I will continue to research. I know people say we are only limited by our imagination but look at what you captured… is beyond our imagination. Again, great capture. Keep up the excellent work. I want your IR system so bad but I suck at putting together something sophisticated like this. I wish there was an ‘as powerful’ system I could buy that was put together. I know I could do some incredible things with it.

Jeremy Thomas Jay Lee the effectiveness of IR spotting is not the result of anything done by me is just a direct application of basic atmospheric physics. Let me repeat the argument again:

Any relatively small object (by perspective) in the atmosphere in daylight will be masked by the sky scattering of visible light. That implies that small objects relatively not very far away will be masked as bugs, small birds, balloons, drones, anomalies, etc, and big objects far away will also be masked as stars, planets, etc. Again: ALL relatively small objects, by perspective, there is absolutely no "changing their light spectrum", absolutely none. That idea is part of the "obfuscation" that I had mentioned before.

A clear understanding of that was what gave me the idea for building a dual optical system: that have an IR spotting part but the high magnification part works in "normal" visible light, it it were any "changing in their light spectrum" no part working in visible light will capture anomalies, and that idea of changing light spectrum is just a myth as the previous explanation clearly show.

A clear understanding of this light scattering by the atmosphere is critical in anomalies studies.

No comments:

Post a Comment

trevor james constable