> Photos are not sufficient proof for the reality of UFOs because they > are easily hoaxed. If photos are not sufficient proof for the reality of UFO's, then what is? > What should you do when you see a UFO? > First, you should call for other people to come and watch the UFO with > you. > The more witnesses, the more credible the report will be to > investigators. Second, you should observe very carefully. If you have > a camera, take pictures of the UFO that include known objects in the > foreground and background. > > Last updated May 6, 1996. Looks like time for another update. Geez, this author just contradicted himself. First he says that "photos are not sufficient proof for the Looks like time for another update. Geez, this author just contradicted himself. First he says that "photos are not sufficient proof for the reality of UFOs because they are easily hoaxed. .," then he says that if you see a UFO, get your camera and take pictures. If all you have is a photo, then that will just have to do. Let me draw an analogy here. Most astronomers study photos of deep-sky objects because we don't have the technology (yet) to travel way the hell out there to see for ourselves . They apparently make do with just a photo to discover exploding galaxies, black holes, and other planets orbiting other earth-like suns, in addition to the distances to those objects...however great the distance is, and also the size and atomic weight of these objects...all of thiese things from photos. How is it that this CUFOS author can say that "photos are not sufficient proof for the reality of UFOs because they are easily hoaxed..." and yet most real scientists believe what is on a black and white photo of the sky almost every day????????> > > This confuses me. reality of UFOs because they are easily hoaxed. .," then he says that if you see a UFO, get your camera and take pictures. If all you have is a photo, then that will just have to do. Let me draw an analogy here. Most astronomers study photos of deep-sky objects because we don't have the technology (yet) to travel way the hell out there to see for ourselves . They apparently make do with just a photo to discover exploding galaxies, black holes, and other planets orbiting other earth-like suns, in addition to the distances to those objects...however great the distance is, and also the size and atomic weight of these objects...all of thiese things from photos. How is it that this CUFOS author can say that "photos are not sufficient proof for the reality of UFOs because they are easily hoaxed..." and yet most real scientists believe what is on a black and white photo of the sky almost every day????????> > > This confuses me. Dave :-) [1 lines left ... full text available at <url:http://www.reference.com/cgi-bin/pn/go?choice=message&table=04_1997&mid=3673218&hilit=UFO> ] -------------------------------- Article-ID: 04_1997&3555366 Score: 87 Subject: Re: What's wrong with Phil Klass? (Re: UFOs over Arizona)