Trindade UFO hoaxed photos/Science not being able to get out of its own way

[Creepy Green Light]

Here's another example of how the "experts" have all this scientific data and analysis on something when it turns out it is something as mundane as two soup spoons put together. Trindade UFO photos were an admitted hoax by the photographer but look at all the scientific data and diagrams used by the experts, lol. The Trindade Island UFO Photos: A Study of Photos 1 and 2

It was the same with all the crop circles. They had all the data and analysis on how it was impossible for humans to be hoaxing the circles. Yet, it turns out to be two guys with a plank of wood with a rope attached.

Sometimes these scientific types are so smart that they cant get out of their own way.

 

[withoutlimits09]

I don't know much about this photo, but did a little research and it seems your claim that the photographer ADMITTED hoaxing this is a bit misleading.

"a major TV show in Brazil, “Fantastico”, aired a bombshell about the Trindade Island’s UFO (click for the original video and transcript in Portuguese). This is one of the most celebrated cases in ufology, so when a friend of the author of the famous photos, Almiro Barauna, tells in a recorded interview that she:

“heard from the photographer himself: he hoaxed the images, it was a montage. ‘He got two spoons, joined them and improvised a spaceship, using as background his home fridge. He photographed on the fridge door and object with a perfect lighting, because the calculated everything, he wasn’t dumb. He laughed a lot’, said Emilia Bittencourt.”


It looks like the admitted hoax was secondhand information from a friend..this amounts to nothing more than hearsay. This information could cast doubts, but we don't really know much because the claim isn't coming from the photographer himself but rather a friend of his on a TV show...perhaps she just wanted a little bit of fame.

 

[technomage]

Let's not forget about the 4 or 5 witnesses on the Brazilian navy's ship that corroborate this incident.

 

[Randall]

Here's another example of how the "experts" have all this scientific data and analysis on something when it turns out it is something as mundane as two soup spoons put together. Trindade UFO photos were an admitted hoax by the photographer but look at all the scientific data and diagrams used by the experts, lol. The Trindade Island UFO Photos: A Study of Photos 1 and 2

It was the same with all the crop circles. They had all the data and analysis on how it was impossible for humans to be hoaxing the circles. Yet, it turns out to be two guys with a plank of wood with a rope attached.

Sometimes these scientific types are so smart that they cant get out of their own way.

Good find. Definitely food for thought. I've never been convinced by fuzzy photos anyway. But that also doesn't mean the incident never happened. It's possible that even if the photo is fake, or of something else like an aircraft, that the witnesses @technomage mentioned were telling the truth, and the photographer just conjured up a photo in an attempt to get on board with the story, or get people to take it seriously. Who knows? Interesting article though.

 

[TheBitterOne]

Amazing how quickly and willingly skeptics throw out their own demands for proof as soon as some clown comes along and 'confesses' to hoaxing something they yearn to hear was a hoax.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

It's documented that he hoaxed UFO photo's prior to the Trindade photo's. Besides, I can go out on my friends 90 foot charter fishing boat, take a blurry photo of some seagulls, then take a group photo of everybody on the boat, then later publish my "UFOx" photo and say there were 15 witnesses - and with that statement show the group photo of everybody on the boat.

Yeah? Who's going to know the names and interview all 15 witnesses on the boat? More than likely, nobody. The headlines & photo that will become infamous are "Ex-Navy Flyer Photographs UFO At Sea - Has 15 Witnesses"

The guy that originally took this photo is the equivalent of Billy Meier saying "No, wait! I swear, this time it really is a UFO that I photographed!" yawwwwwwn. Yeah, ok.

 

[technomage]

I'm no expert on this case (or any case for that matter), but as I recall these witnesses were part of the Brazillian Navy and testified their experiences and never changed their stories to their dying days. From my understanding, this was a real sighting and perhaps someone who knows more about it (wasn't it Jacques Vallee who covered it in detail in one of his books) can fill in the blanks.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

I'm no expert on this case (or any case for that matter), but as I recall these witnesses were part of the Brazillian Navy and testified their experiences and never changed their stories to their dying days. From my understanding, this was a real sighting and perhaps someone who knows more about it (wasn't it Jacques Vallee who covered it in detail in one of his books) can fill in the blanks.

I think some of the Brazillian Navy crew were Rex Heflin, Paul Trent, Ed Walters & Billy Meier.

 

[Vimana]

The Trinidad photos never passed my 'smell test', because they looked like a different resolution and not of any craft i could fathom. I am curious if there is any imagery of the alleged Soup Spoons, or of any model set up, for these shots.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

The Trinidad photos never passed my 'smell test', because they looked like a different resolution and not of any craft i could fathom. I am curious if there is any imagery of the alleged Soup Spoons, or of any model set up, for these shots.

Me neither. I first saw these photo's in a book I got for Xmas in 1979. And people (including myself) need to delve deeper into claims like this. I'm talking about the witnesses. I (or someone needs to ask) "Yeah, what witnesses? What are their names, addresses and phone numbers? I need to conduct a short interview with each one of them."
But instead we get a headline something to the effect of "...With Witnesses". Then people just put 2 & 2 together and think "oh, military...Navy...Navy personnel...witnesses" - it must be legit.

 

[Creepy Green Light]

But just to reiterate, the point of this post was to show how people go overboard with all their math, scientific analysis, computer analysis of said photo, and it turns out the entire thing is bogus. But meanwhile someone is using a computer program to analyze and show how the Trindade UFO matches the shape of a twin engine (Bonanza maybe? I forget...) airplane, lol.

 

[Constance]

But just to reiterate, the point of this post was to show how people go overboard with all their math, scientific analysis, computer analysis of said photo, and it turns out the entire thing is bogus. But meanwhile someone is using a computer program to analyze and show how the Trindade UFO matches the shape of a twin engine (Bonanza maybe? I forget...) airplane, lol.

I don't think it's been proved that the Trindade photographs are 'bogus'.

You also wrote:

"It's documented that he hoaxed UFO photo's prior to the Trindade photo's. Besides, I can go out on my friends 90 foot charter fishing boat, take a blurry photo of some seagulls, then take a group photo of everybody on the boat, then later publish my "UFOx" photo and say there were 15 witnesses - and with that statement show the group photo of everybody on the boat."

If you read all that's available concerning the Trindade photos I think you'll find that it was well-investigated at the time and taken seriously by the Brazilian government. The situation was far more complex than you suggest in your caricature of how you think it went down, and how you could duplicate it with a hoax and some false witnesses. If I had time to do so I'd look back over the research on Trindade that I read ten years ago and cite it for you, but I'm sure you can find it through google. Please don't take offense, but I think you're dismissing the case with too little basis for doing so.

 

[Randall]

Amazing how quickly and willingly skeptics throw out their own demands for proof as soon as some clown comes along and 'confesses' to hoaxing something they yearn to hear was a hoax.

I consider myself to be a skeptic, but if I yearn for anything, it's for definitive evidence that claims are true, not the other way around ( as you suggest ). So if evidence surfaces that throws doubt on a case, especially a classic case, naturally I'm going to surface and check it out. What exactly is wrong with that?

 

[TheBitterOne]

I consider myself to be a skeptic, but if I yearn for anything, it's for definitive evidence that claims are true, not the other way around ( as you suggest ). So if evidence surfaces that throws doubt on a case, especially a classic case, naturally I'm going to surface and check it out. What exactly is wrong with that?

Have you yourself not noticed how uncritically 'confessions' are accepted by people eager to debunk everything?

Scratch the surface and you'll often discover that the confession stories are deeply suspicious.

But you have to scratch that surface and debunkers don't; they just move on and refer back to the case as 'an admitted hoax.'

The ridiculous Bob Hieronymous claims re: the Patterson-Gimlin film are a prime example.

 

[Randall]

Have you yourself not noticed how uncritically 'confessions' are accepted by people eager to debunk everything? Scratch the surface and you'll often discover that the confession stories are deeply suspicious. But you have to scratch that surface and debunkers don't; they just move on and refer back to the case as 'an admitted hoax.' The ridiculous Bob Hieronymous claims re: the Patterson-Gimlin film are a prime example.

I think I get the drift of your intent. I was a frequent participant over on the old JREF skeptic's thread where I was constantly ridiculed and mocked by some of the cyberbullies over there, and there does indeed seem to be an extra amount of glee whenever someone claimed to have some sort of evidence against some case or another. I think that's probably to be expected to some degree. After all, debunking is what they do, and if they make some progress doing that, they would naturally feel happy about it, and personally, I think that if something can be debunked, then it should be.

What I don't like is the personal jibes and attacks against people who find these topics interesting and are just looking for answers. I also agree with you that there is a distinct bias with some skeptics. I try not to be that way. Honest skepticism should go both ways. The phenomenon of fake confessions has been proven to be as real as fake claims of the paranormal. So you are absolutely right on that point. We shouldn't simply presume that every time someone steps up to take credit for some claim, especially if it's well known, that the confession is genuine.

On the bigfoot film. Personally I think it's a guy in a suit. If you look at it just right you can practically see the guy looking out of the hole in the headpiece. But that's just my opinion. So naturally when the confession came out, I was one of the people who said, "I told you so." LOL. So maybe I'm guilty too .

​

 

[TheBitterOne]

The phenomenon of fake confessions has been proven to be as real as fake claims of the paranormal. So you are absolutely right on that point. We shouldn't simply presume that every time someone steps up to take credit for some claim, especially if it's well known, that the confession is genuine.

Perfectly stated.

On the bigfoot film. Personally I think it's a guy in a suit. If you look at it just right you can practically see the guy looking out of the hole in the headpiece. But that's just my opinion. So naturally when the confession came out, I was one of the people who said, "I told you so." LOL. So maybe I'm guilty too .

I often look at the film and think it's a guy in a suit but then remind myself that if the creature is more human than ape there probably would be some deep-seated, innate recognition in us that we're looking at 'a guy'.

But is it a guy in a suit or a furry guy?

I don't know how familiar you are with the Bob Hieronymous story but I've looked into it a fair bit and get the sense that:

a) There's no way known he was wearing a furry costume in the PG film,

and

b) The PG film is more than just a spontaneous, chance recording of a cryptid in the woods.

My spin is that there is some kind of ceremonial magick behind the whole thing, with the year 1967, The Mothman, LSD, The Beatles and a host of other pivotal events in the shaping of pop culture mind control in the late 20th century being intertwined.

 

[Randall]

Perfectly stated.

Thank you .

I often look at the film and think it's a guy in a suit ...

And that would be perfectly stated if it ended there ... LOL. But more seriously, I had some school buddies who swore they saw some kind of big creature out in BC where I used to live. And I had one weird experience that suggested something out of the ordinary, but didn't actually see the creature. And there are just so many other reports, that I have a hard time thinking everybody must be either hoaxing or lying or misperceiving.

Strange stuff goes on out in the forest. One time I was driving out to visit my Mom in BC and at one spot where the river ran near the highway, I glanced across to the other side, and making it's way along one of the game trails was a huge wolf. I mean this thing was like no wolf I've seen anyplace on TV or otherwise. It was like the height of a small deer. It was lanky and lean and it glanced back across at me as I drove by and we made eye contact. I'm glad I was in a car on the other side of the river!

Other people claim to have seen huge birds. So I dunno, If giant wolves and birds are possible, why not some huge man-ape thing? I love nature but the forest freaks me out. Just about every weird thing I've experienced ( except hauntings ) have happened out in some remote place.

 

[TheBitterOne]

Thank you .

And that would be perfectly stated if it ended there ... LOL. But more seriously, I had some school buddies who swore they saw some kind of big creature out in BC where I used to live. And I had one weird experience that suggested something out of the ordinary, but didn't actually see the creature. And there are just so many other reports, that I have a hard time thinking everybody must be either hoaxing or lying or misperceiving.

Strange stuff goes on out in the forest. One time I was driving out to visit my Mom in BC and at one spot where the river ran near the highway, I glanced across to the other side, and making it's way along one of the game trails was a huge wolf. I mean this thing was like no wolf I've seen anyplace on TV or otherwise. It was like the height of a small deer. It was lanky and lean and it glanced back across at me as I drove by and we made eye contact. I'm glad I was in a car on the other side of the river!

Other people claim to have seen huge birds. So I dunno, If giant wolves and birds are possible, why not some huge man-ape thing? I love nature but the forest freaks me out. Just about every weird thing I've experienced ( except hauntings ) have happened out in some remote place.

Interesting.

Funny thing is, although I've had quite a few strange experiences in my time, NONE of them have ever happened in the woods.

And I'm someone who has access to a lot of private woodland and loves to strip naked and roam the trails in the heat of summer all alone.

I've done that before and after the David Paulides stuff came out, and must admit to being slightly unnerved by the unclothed aspect of some of the victims.

Maybe clothes dampen our receptivity to other realms, but as I said, nothing unusual has ever happened to me while galavanting about in the wilderness in the nude.

Having said that you'll probably now never hear from me again.

 

[Randall]

... And I'm someone who has access to a lot of private woodland and loves to strip naked and roam the trails in the heat of summer all alone ...

Hey I'm not judging. I used to do that when I was a kid growing up out in BC. I was like a little Mowgli ... LOL. But on a certain level it's still kind of bizarre. There's was this sort of beckoning feeling from the forest, and then I'd go, and It's like I became part of something other. Like there's some other presence besides yourself, but it's nothing you can point to or put your finger on. Sound familiar? I wouldn't be surprised if you've had some missing time while out there that hasn't really registered.

 

[TheBitterOne]

Hey I'm not judging. I used to do that when I was a kid growing up out in BC. I was like a little Mowgli ... LOL. But on a certain level it's still kind of bizarre. There's was this sort of beckoning feeling from the forest, and then I'd go, and It's like I became part of something other. Like there's some other presence besides yourself, but it's nothing you can point to or put your finger on. Sound familiar? I wouldn't be surprised if you've had some missing time while out there that hasn't really registered.

I'm a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner and in Buddhism it is commonly acknowledged that demonically-inclined non-physical beings do indeed lurk in wilderness areas and elsewhere and sometimes abduct and eat humans.

The beckoning feeling was very possibly some such entity trying to lure you onto her dinner plate.

I don't think I've had missing time out there but suspect it may have happened indoors between the four dumbing walls of suburbia where I think it probably occurs much more commonly and is easer to disguise.