I wish their was a photo database of ultra clear, structured craft but...

[Creepy Green Light]

...I don't think there is. I'm so sick & tired of seeing blurry pics, smudges, blobs in daylight footage. And I'm so sick of seeing lights in the nighttime sky pics. If were being visited on the reg by E.T. (or something else), is it possible to get clear, sharp photo's videos? Don't you find it a little odd that every single clear, sharp photo we've seen are fakes/hoaxes (i.e. Meier/Heflin/Gulf Breeze)??

 

[Skymon876]

I have done a fair amount of checking on this case and this screenshot from a video taken shows something in the sky over the sea bordering Turkey. Its not a model or prop. If you want to know why I can answer.



For the background of were this was filmed see here: Turkey UFO Incident

 

[Randall]

I have done a fair amount of checking on this case and this screenshot from a video taken shows something in the sky over the sea bordering Turkey. Its not a model or prop. If you want to know why I can answer.



For the background of were this was filmed see here: Turkey UFO Incident

We've been there and done that one. For the skeptical viewpoint I'd also suggest this link: KUMBURGAZ_TURKEY

 

[Skymon876]

To the contrary

Alcione compared the wrong date May 15th and 17 of 2009 are the ones that are the focus of interest by some not May 13th.

Furthermore Alcione failed to even watch the 2008 and 2007 footage. We are talking about 25 separate segments over multiple months and days. Even though the cruise ship port is on the other side of the peninsula, not even visible from the witness location Not likely that this so called cruise boat would be parked in the same location for 3 years and just so happened to be misidentified.

AIS shipping logs even for the May 13th date (which Alcione cherry picked, but it's not the dates of interest) do not show a cruise ship docked in the point of view of the camera.

Also the image I posted in reply to the OP was from the June 12, 2008 segment which has nothing to do with May 13th.

Finally --- Using the moon in the May 17th segment a triangulation was able to be done proving that the unknown object was not resting on the horizon but too high above to be a cruise boat.

More here: Cruise Boat Theory Debunked 4 times Turkey UFO Incident: Cruise Boat Theory Debunked Multiple Times

 

[Skymon876]

I understand the need to include the skeptical point of view but the public record should also consider the other side or the rebuttal.






Another theory may match, but the cruise boat theory doesn't fly.

 

[Skymon876]

And finally there is an album of single frame slides here if anyone wants to study or come up with a hypothesis. Imgur

 

[Creepy Green Light]

Thanks, but it's a boat. You can clearly see the horizon. I've seen this dozens of times while doing surface searches for ships/submarines in the Atlantic, Mediterranean, Carribbean, Red Sea & other area's.

 

[Skymon876]

Thanks, but it's a boat. You can clearly see the horizon. I've seen this dozens of times while doing surface searches for ships/submarines in the Atlantic, Mediterranean, Carribbean, Red Sea & other area's.

You are entitled to your opinion but to date nobody has found any evidence or proof that it was a boat. And you ignored the triangulation that showed the object on May 17th, 2009 too high in angular elevation to be a distant boat.

I am pretty certain your opinion will not change but I just had to lay out the facts.

You asked for clear images of "unknown craft" or what could be saucers that were filmed and then I posted several which nobody has succeeded in debunking including the best debunkers in the field, and you are still not satisfied. I am not sure what else you want outside of a saucer landing on your lap, and I am not sure if that will be enough.

BTW there are multiple witnesses from different vantage points.

Cheers,

P.S. I am not going to debate here in this thread, because after dozens of debates about this case with several skeptics I found it to be a futile waste of time when they don't want to consider the facts.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

You are entitled to your opinion but to date nobody has found any evidence or proof that it was a boat. And you ignored the triangulation that showed the object on May 17th, 2009 too high in angular elevation to be a distant boat.

I am pretty certain your opinion will not change but I just had to lay out the facts.

You asked for clear images of "unknown craft" or what could be saucers that were filmed and then I posted several which nobody has succeeded in debunking including the best debunkers in the field, and you are still not satisfied. I am not sure what else you want outside of a saucer landing on your lap, and I am not sure if that will be enough.

BTW there are multiple witnesses from different vantage points.

Cheers,

P.S. I am not going to debate here in this thread, because after dozens of debates about this case with several skeptics I found it to be a futile waste of time when they don't want to consider the facts.

I didn't see a link which contained clear photo's of UFO's. Maybe I missed it? I only saw a link which had the Turkey pics in it. The way I interpreted your statement was that there was a link with various, clear pics of UFO's. People can try and do a high-tech analysis of the Turkey photo's (as you've posted) but anybody can manipulate information to make it fit their viewpoint. Just like I manipulate statistics to fit any situation I am in (regarding my job). Also, look at what I posted earlier. Someone went through an elaborate exorcise with the same type of analysis on the Trindade flying saucer to show how it is a twin engine plane (which was considered some of the best evidence out there for decades - The Trindade Island UFO Photos: A Study of Photos 1 and 2) when really it was hoaxed by taking a photo of two spoons put face to face. So I always take these type of analysis's with a grain of salt. The same type of analysis has been done on the Heflin photos (hoax) and Trent photo's (likely hoax).

FYI - I've been a believer since 1979. But I've come to discover that 99% of what is out there (as far as UFO evidence) is garbage. Tons of hoaxes & misidentifications.

 

[Randall]

You are entitled to your opinion but to date nobody has found any evidence or proof that it was a boat. And you ignored the triangulation that showed the object on May 17th, 2009 too high in angular elevation to be a distant boat.

I am pretty certain your opinion will not change but I just had to lay out the facts.

You asked for clear images of "unknown craft" or what could be saucers that were filmed and then I posted several which nobody has succeeded in debunking including the best debunkers in the field, and you are still not satisfied. I am not sure what else you want outside of a saucer landing on your lap, and I am not sure if that will be enough.

BTW there are multiple witnesses from different vantage points.

Cheers,

P.S. I am not going to debate here in this thread, because after dozens of debates about this case with several skeptics I found it to be a futile waste of time when they don't want to consider the facts.

To be clear. I don't know for sure what caused the images, but one thing I am certain of. Fuzzy vague images of whatever off in the distance do not constitute images of an alien craft. The official definition for UFO requires that the object in question be clearly observed and unexplained by any natural or manmade phenomena, which leaves only one alternative, an alien craft. We don't know what that image is of. There is insufficient information. Some sort of ship? Maybe. Some sort of huge parasail? Maybe. Some sort of mirage? Maybe. An alien craft? Maybe, but given the other options, we can't say for sure. If it had suddenly zoomed up to the beach and hovered over the cameras and filmed by them all while zigzagging around in the sky, only to zip off at impossible speed up into the sky, then that would be another story.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

Remember the Colorado UFO that made it's rounds on the news? Seen right over Denver, broad daylight. But the only way to see it was from the news cam? I remember the "experts" said no way that it was bugs zipping back and forth across the screen. Yet that's exactly what it was. An illusion. Made sense that none of the population of Denver saw it. But the experts were adamant that no way it was bugs.

(this is just something that I remembered - I am NOT implying that the Turkey thing is a bug.)

 

[Randall]

Remember the Colorado UFO that made it's rounds on the news? Seen right over Denver, broad daylight. But the only way to see it was from the news cam? I remember the "experts" said no way that it was bugs zipping back and forth across the screen. Yet that's exactly what it was. An illusion. Made sense that none of the population of Denver saw it. But the experts were adamant that no way it was bugs.

(this is just something that I remembered - I am NOT implying that the Turkey thing is a bug.)

Ya, I remember that. It seemed fairly obvious that it wasn't an alien craft. Even though such reports turn out to be something mundane, the experience of doing some critical analysis and information digging is still valuable. It's better to be a believer like yourself who has a refined sense of skepticism, than someone who promotes questionable reports as genuine.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I'm sure you remember this fellow;

 

[Randall]

I'm sure you remember this fellow ...

Actually, I've seen hundreds and hundreds of videos, so many that I don't recall them all. I rarely bother with them anymore. Maybe someday something good will come along, but I'm no longer interested in being visitor either number 1 or 10,999 to somebody's UFO video. That's why I've taken on that whole other perspective I keep coming back to. Like I find this old witness interview more credible ( or at least more interesting ) than most of the videos I see these days.

​

 

[Waller]

FYI - I've been a believer since 1979. But I've come to discover that 99% of what is out there (as far as UFO evidence) is garbage. Tons of hoaxes & misidentifications.

Yes, of course, if you look for information from the wrong venues, GIGO. That's on you though.

 

[Skymon876]

Ya, I remember that. It seemed fairly obvious that it wasn't an alien craft. Even though such reports turn out to be something mundane, the experience of doing some critical analysis and information digging is still valuable. It's better to be a believer like yourself who has a refined sense of skepticism, than someone who promotes questionable reports as genuine.

Just to make it clear I am not saying its proof of aliens.

I have done a ton of research on this case however. Even interviewed the witnesses.

Video only does not make a case, but when you have multiple witnesses from different angles it has more to go on.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

Just to make it clear I am not saying its proof of aliens.

I have done a ton of research on this case however. Even interviewed the witnesses.

Video only does not make a case, but when you have multiple witnesses from different angles it has more to go on.

I remember Dr. Roger Leir (the "alien implant" podiatrist) talking about this case. He was convinced it was a ufo...I think someone may have taken him to see it for himself. Because as it turned out, the thing appeared on the same date every year. And just hung low near the horizon for hours. He even speculated about how it could be on such a precise annual schedule, and he talked about time travel to explain it. But it seems more likely to me that it was on a cruise ship schedule, and conditions at that time of year make it appear on the horizon from that pov.

But then I tend to be unimpressed by most sightings that don't involve startling flight characteristics - there are just too many things that can float/fly around at low speeds to rule out conventional explanations of those kinds of sightings.

 

[Skymon876]

I remember Dr. Roger Leir (the "alien implant" podiatrist) talking about this case. He was convinced it was a ufo...I think someone may have taken him to see it for himself. Because as it turned out, the thing appeared on the same date every year. And just hung low near the horizon for hours. He even speculated about how it could be on such a precise annual schedule, and he talked about time travel to explain it. But it seems more likely to me that it was on a cruise ship schedule, and conditions at that time of year make it appear on the horizon from that pov.

But then I tend to be unimpressed by most sightings that don't involve startling flight characteristics - there are just too many things that can float/fly around at low speeds to rule out conventional explanations of those kinds of sightings.

It did not appear on the same date every year. The dates were random. In fact unknown aerial objects are still seen in the area presently. It might be something else but it sure was not a cruise ship.

Here is an AIS marine radar ping chart which shows large vessel traffic over a 6 month period. Each dot is an AIS vessell report.

The Sea of Marmara is barely used for large vessells. This is just one of many reasons it was not a cruise boat.

 

[Skymon876]