Skip to comments.V-shaped UFOs in NM photos
Posted on 01/17/2009 1:52:28 PM PST by JoeProBono
CHAMA, NM - Several meandering V-shaped UFOs near a mountain slope here turned up on a woman's digital photos. Three photos shot with a 21 megapixel camera caught multiple crafts approaching in the first frame, one craft in frame two moving close to the ground while the others take positions in the sky, and then frame three shows all of the crafts moving out of the area.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
thats 21 mega pix resolution?
Stop boiling your weed in old coffee cans.
Means nothing; another group of grany photos!
We’ins in Cecil County, Maryland have been having the same sightin’s according to the local rag. No pictures though.
I think 21 mp should have been 2.1 mp. No way those shots came from a 21 mp camera.
Bird. Now its an IFO.
New government toy under test?
LOOKS LIKE A F-117 STEALTH FIGHTER
“CANON CAMERA GETS THE CREDIT
“The camera I used is a Canon Mark 3, 21 megapixel. The speed was 1600 with a 2 gig card. My husband and I did not see anything in the sky while I took photographs. I give credit to the camera for its quality, speed and the high megapixel to have captured something we could not see with our eyes.”
You stated what I was thinking.
She was shooting a Canon 1Ds II or III? That’s an $8,ooo camera body...almost as rare as UFOs.
These - http://images.google.com/images?q=Canon+Mark+3&um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N&imgsz=huge - are pictures taken with a Canon Mark 3.
They look nothing alike.
What’s this picture?
The Russians got one of ours!
“Russian KGB UFO Photos
Bill Futreal on 18 Dec 2007
Well, allegedly these are authentic declassified KGB photos showing a crashed UFO.”
Looks like birds. Sheesh.
“I can see my house from here!”
Didn’t one of those things take down a plane a day or two ago, in New York?
All those guys surrounding the UFO, and not a single one of them, over all these years, has decided to become a rich and famous whistleblower/author.
Bird. Next shot please?
That “craft” looks more like a turkey buzzard.
We DO have v-shaped airplanes in our arsenal and have for years. Maybe the aliens are copying our technology?
Where’s Quix? Happy Saturday night to you!
You sound very ignorant of the various whys.
Thanks. Some interesting photos.
See my #6. We have had recent episodes with similar sightings.
BTW, Chama is really not that far from . . . rum roll . . .
They’re not flying the 117’s out of Cannon AFB anymore.
Do you think things are intensifying re such?
Some interesting links from one of the recent ATS threads I’ve linked to on such:
Sojuzkarta KFA-1000 Camera
Well you know from past discussions that I don’t worry all that much as I know we must always be ready, but I definitely have noticed a trend toward this specific patter of lighting on UFOs that have been spotted that seems to be interesting at the least. And there seems to be an increase in activity. Related to Obama? Certainly makes one think he may have some significance to “somebody”. Thoughts?
Well, I for one would love to be Enlightened.
Doug F Up . . . about 2-3 or so pages down is a link to a YOUTUBE about antigravity physics you might be interested in.
The following also from this thread:
Source of below:
Early and middle years
Brown was born in Zanesville, Ohio; his parents were Lewis K. and Mary Townsend Brown. In 1921, Brown discovered what was later called the Biefeld-Brown effect while experimenting with a Coolidge X-ray tube. This is a vacuum tube with two asymmetrical electrodes. Brown noticed that there was a force exerted by the tube when it was connected to a high-voltage source. This force was not caused by the X-rays, but by this new effect. Later, in 1923, he collaborated with Paul Alfred Biefeld at Denison University, Granville, Ohio. He started a military career afterwards and was involved in a number of science programs.
In 1930 he joined the U.S. Navy and conducted fundamental research in electromagnetism, radiation, field physics, spectroscopy, gravity and other topics. He later worked for Glenn L. Martin and, still later, for the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) and the Office of Scientific Research and Development, headed at that time by Dr. Vannevar Bush. After 1944 he worked as a consultant to the Lockheed-Vega Aircraft Corporation.
In 1955, Brown went to England, and then France where he worked for La Société Nationale de Construction Aéronautique du Sud Ouest (SNCASO). In 1956, the aviation trade publication Interavia reported that Brown had made substantial progress in anti-gravity or electro-gravitic propulsion research. Top U.S. aerospace companies had also become involved in such research (see United States gravity control propulsion research (1955 - 1974)) which may have become a classified subject by 1957. Others contend Brown’s research simply reached a dead end and lost support. Though the effect he discovered has been proven to exist by many others, Brown’s work was controversial because others and even he himself believed that this effect could explain the existence and operation of unidentified flying objects (UFOs).
Brown was an early investigator of UFOs and in 1956 helped found the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP). Though Townsend resigned not long after NICAP was founded, NICAP was an influential force in civilian UFO research through 1970. The organization’s activities drew the attention of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), several high-level officers of which joined the group. Brown’s research has since become something of a popular pursuit around the world, with amateur experimenters replicating his early experiments in the form of “lifters” powered by high-voltage.
an interesting YOUTUBE on nano-stuff:
YouTube explaining antigravity physics:
And another here:
Electrogravitics is a research subject based upon the original work of Nikola Tesla, and hypotheses advanced by Thomas Townsend Brown and Brown’s subsequent extensive experimentation and demonstrations of the effect. The term was in widespread use by 1956. The effects of electrogravity have been searched for extensively in countless experiments since the beginning of the 20th century; to date, other than Brown’s experiments and the more recent ones reported by R. L. Talley, Eugene Podkletnov, and Giovanni Modanese, no conclusive evidence of electrogravitic signatures has been found. Recently, some investigation has begun in electrohydrodynamics (EHD) or sometimes electro-fluid-dynamics, a counterpart to the well-known magneto-hydrodynamics, but these do not seem a priori to be related to Brown’s “electrogravitics” .
UNITED STATES GRAVITY CONTROL PROPULSION RESEARCH 1955-1974
American interest in “gravity control propulsion research” intensified during the early 1950s. Literature from that period used the terms anti-gravity, anti-gravitation, baricentric, counterbary, electrogravitics, G-projects, gravitics, gravity control, and gravity propulsion. Their publicized goals were to develop and discover technologies and theories for the manipulation of gravity or gravity-like fields for propulsion. Although general relativity theory appeared to prohibit anti-gravity propulsion, several programs were funded to develop it through gravitation research from 1955 to 1974. The names of many contributors to general relativity and those of the golden age of general relativity have appeared among documents about the institutions that had served as the theoretical research components of those programs. The existence and 1950s emergence of the gravity control propulsion research had not been a subject of controversy for aerospace writers, critics, and conspiracy theory advocates. But its rationale, effectiveness, and longevity have been the objects of contested views.
A ferrofluid (from the Latin ferrum, meaning iron) is a liquid which becomes strongly polarised in the presence of a magnetic field.
Ferrofluids are colloidal mixtures composed of nanoscale ferromagnetic, or ferrimagnetic, particles suspended in a carrier fluid, usually an organic solvent or water. The ferromagnetic nano-particles are coated with a surfactant to prevent their agglomeration (due to van der Waals and magnetic forces). Although the name may suggest otherwise, ferrofluids do not display ferromagnetism, since they do not retain magnetization in the absence of an externally applied field. In fact, ferrofluids display (bulk-scale) paramagnetism, and are often described as “superparamagnetic” due to their large magnetic susceptibility. Permanently magnetized fluids are difficult to create at present.
The difference between ferrofluids and magnetorheological fluids (MR fluids) is the size of the particles. The particles in a ferrofluid primarily consist of nanoparticles which are suspended by Brownian motion and generally will not settle under normal conditions. MR fluid particles primarily consist of micrometre-scale particles which are too heavy for Brownian motion to keep them suspended, and thus will settle over time due to the inherent density difference between the particle and its carrier fluid. These two fluids have very different applications as a result.
FOR the moment . . . dat’s it.
Checked most of the last batch out. They worked for me.
I’ve learned over the decades . . . that some folks are
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.