Thursday, November 08, 2007

A novel property of UFOs from photographic evidence

Application of a widely available image processing technique shows toroidal optical anomalies adjacent to both UFOs and conventional aircraft in photographs. At least one torus is always very close to each UFO, suggesting that the tori are created by alien technology. Further, there is evidence that some tori found near conventional aircraft are associated with barely visible UFOs in the vicinity. The proximity of tori to civilian and military aircraft, space shuttles, and the Hubble space telescope could mean that alien devices are monitoring the performance of our aeronautical and space technology.

I'm a little confused about the nature of the purported "tori"; my initial impression is that the author is over-thinking imaging artifacts. But if he's not . . .


TJ said...

>>>my initial impression is that the author is over-thinking imaging artifacts..

Oh.. just a LITTLE bit!!!! Not only do I not see any evidence of a "tori" in any photo, but it I'm sure I can find images of the Virgin Mary or my cat if I look long enough. If the air is dusty enough, I can also show you a ton of ghostly "orbs" as well.

Someone needs to step away from Photoshop for a while.

Anonymous said... I don't seem 'em either or, at any rate, certainly not the way the author sees them. Also, before I went to the link, when I read that aircraft, etc., were accompanied by "tori" I thought, OK, if that's the case, then it's probably some kind of turbulence phenomenon and NOT UFO observation. But not even that!

mr. intense said...

Sadly, I suspect, after browsing the site, that Mr. Treurniet is incorrect in his interpretations of the photos featured on his site.

Tori is just plural for torus, or a doughnut shape. While you can see the circular artifacts, if you squint real hard, in some of his photos prior to his enhancement and filtering of same, I think these are other kinds of photo artifacts created by the digital camera being used.

Elan said...

I detest flame wars, but this post reminds me of a so-called “Open letter to Jacques Vallee”, found at the URL below.
Ever wonder why Vallee retreated from the UFO field?
Here's a hint:

Garbled obfuscators.

Sorry if this offends anyone.

mr. intense said...


Is your post above in reference to my comment or what? I don't understand your reference to "flame wars".

As for Bruce Duensing's "Open Letter" to Vallee, I merely found it unclear, confusing, and based on misperception of what Vallee has been trying to say for decades, which is not uncommon, due to the subtley and complexity with which Vallee expresses himself.

I have had a number of conversations, by phone, email, and in person myself, so I know how easily what he says can be misinterpreted or misconstrued.

But what has any of this got to do with the post topic? Please clarify.

elan said...

mr. intense,
my comment about flame wars had nothing whatsoever to do with your post.
Rather, it was a self-referential sense of guilt that I was so brazenly critical of the "Open Letter to Vallee", which I also found to be unclear and confusing.
I agree with what you wrote.
in pax forteana,

elan said...

mr. intense,
To clarify further, my "this post" comment was in reference to the "novel properties" article, not your commentary on it.