UFO video from North Tryon, PEI

UFO video from North Tryon, PEI

William C. Treurniet, December, 2007 Summary. A video was taken in December, 2007, of an unusual object in the sky near Prince Edward Island, Canada. Analysis of several video frames shows a silhouette much like a modern delta wing aircraft such as the B2 stealth bomber. The aircraft appears to be spewing material which takes an overall conical shape. Also observed in the vicinity are toroidal shapes thought to be signatures of an unconventional power source (see Treurniet, 2007a). A plausible explanation of the anomaly is that it was caused by a serious malfunction of a delta wing aircraft.
Mr. and Mrs. Quigley of North Tryon, Prince Edward Island, observed a strange phenomenon in the sky and recorded a video of the event. Newspaper articles (e.g., Globe & Mail, Dec. 31, 2007) reported that meteorologists at Environment Canada had no explanation for the observed formation. The weather conditions at the time were inconsistent with those normally present with water spouts or tornados. Several frames posted below in Figure 1 were extracted from the video for further study. The details in each image were enhanced with the Photoshop equalization plugin available from Mehdi. The following discusses each enhanced frame in sequence.
Frame 1 (00:08): This frame is the initial view from a distance. The object appears as a dark blob that reaches tenuously upward to terminate in a torus.
Frame 2 (00:45): This frame shows that the tenuous region has grown and filled in to form a dark conical structure. There is a hint of a slightly lighter object above the cone.
Frame 3 (00:50): This frame shows a torus-shaped structure between the opening of the cone and the lighter object above it.
Frame 4 (00:56): This frame shows more of the object's shape. It appears very much like the silhouette of a modern delta wing aircraft. The shape could be due to a fortuitous arrangement of JPEG artifacts, but it is so similar to the silhouette of the B2 stealth bomber that it is unlikely to be an artifact. See Figure 2 below where the silhouette is outlined beside pictures of the B2 aircraft.
Frame 5 (00:57): This frame again shows the triangular shape of the presumed aircraft. It also shows a connection between the aircraft and the top of the conical object, suggesting that the cone is made from material emitted by the aircraft.

Figure 1. Extracted frames from the video

Num	Original	Enhanced
1
2
3
4
5

Figure 2 shows the enhanced Image 4 of Figure 1 with the shape of the delta wing aircraft outlined in black. Below it are photographs of the B2 stealth bomber. The silhouette of the B2 bomber is strikingly similar to that of the unknown object.

Figure 2. Outlined object from Image 4

Although some people may question the reality of the toroidal objects seen in some frames, the tori are not that unusual (see Treurniet, 2007a). In Image 1, Figure 1, there is a dark spot on the torus above the blob. The position of this spot on the ring is approximately where photographed UFOs are typically found. I suggest that the dark spot is the aircraft identified in Image 4. Images 3 and 4 show that the aircraft is still near, or in contact with, the rings of several faint tori. This configuration implies that the aircraft may be propelled by an unconventional power source.

Conclusion

Analysis of the video frames suggests that the anomaly was caused by a malfunction of a delta wing aircraft. The silhouette of the craft is similar to that of the B2 stealth bomber. Further, the presence of the tori in this video suggests that the aircraft had an unconventional method of propulsion.

My UFO photograph by William C. Treurniet

My UFO photograph

by William C. Treurniet

The photograph below was taken in the mid-afternoon of April 19, 2007, with a Nikon Coolpix 2500 digital camera. The exposure time was 1/2506.2 seconds. It shows a small aircraft, probably a Bombardier Dash 8, on its approach to the nearby airport. Above the airplane is another object that appears to be a typical flying saucer.
The focus of the shot was the aircraft, and the object above it was not noticed until the photo was displayed on the computer screen. Such an object is sometimes labelled a UFO when it is, in fact, nothing more than a bug or a bird that was in the field of view precisely when the camera shutter was open. An object that is incorrectly labelled a UFO is called a BLURFO. The name refers to the fact that such objects are usually blurry, hence the contours are not clearly defined.
In this particular instance, I would argue that the object is not a BLURFO but a UFO.

• If the object was visible, it likely was not seen for two reasons. Attention was focused on the airplane, and the brightness of the sky induced squinting and reduced visibility.
• The object in the photo appears to be in focus, so it must have been a considerable distance away from the camera focused at infinity. The lack of blur also means that the object's angular velocity relative to the camera was small. This seems more likely for a distant UFO than for a nearby bird or bug.
• The object has a shape often seen in other photos of UFOs.
• The object, when it is enhanced, appears to be superimposed on a toroidal shape often seen in other photos of UFOs.

Click on the images below to see larger versions of the photos.
The photo was processed with the Gradient Map option in Adobe Photoshop, and the resulting false colour image is shown below. The contour drawn around the supposed saucer confirms the visual impression that it has a well-defined, ellipsoidal shape.
The saucer diameter can be crudely estimated if we make the following assumptions.

• The airplane is a Dash8 which has a wingspan of about 26 m.
• The Dash8 has a typical landing approach angle of about 6 degrees. It was likely about 5 km from the airport, so it was probably at an elevation of about 500 m.
• The saucer is near the Dash8 at roughly the same altitude of 500 m or directly above as high as 6000 m. The cloud ceiling was around 6000 m (information provided by the Weather Underground).

On the photo, the Dash8 measures about 10 mm across the wingspan while the saucer measures about 2 mm along the widest diameter.
The apparent width of the saucer is about 2/10 of the width of the airplane, so if it were at 500 m, it would actually be (2/((500/500)*10)) x 26= 5.2 m across. Similarly, if it were at 6000 m, the saucer would have a diameter of about (2/((500/6000)*10)) x 26= 62.4 m.
Therefore, given the assumptions, the saucer diameter could have been anywhere from 5 to 62 m.

A change in the refractive index of space near a UFO

A change in the refractive index of space near a UFO

William C. Treurniet, July, 2010

Summary. Analysis of a photo of a UFO shows that it, like many others, is accompanied by a toroidal optical effect. In this case, the unknown object and torus were fortuitously positioned over a rainbow. Spatial shifts in bands of color under the torus suggest that it refracted the light from the rainbow. This observation indicates that the space occupied by the torus has an index of refraction that is different from the surrounding space.
An earlier article described a toroidal optical effect often seen near UFOs in photographs taken over the last 50 years or so. The UFO is typically adjacent to the ring and is almost never seen in the center of the ring. Also, there is evidence that the UFO is not always visible, and the ring alone has been spotted near high technology objects such as the Hubble telescope. These clues suggest that the torus might possibly be a side-effect of a novel energy source that powers flying craft and other devices.
The article also speculated on the the physical properties of the phenomenon. For example, the edges of the torus might become more visible if its boundary or shell has the property of absorbing light. Since light passing through the torus toward the camera would have a longer path through the shell at an edge, it would be attenuated more and the edge would appear darker. Alternatively, the torus might have the ability to organize particles in the atmosphere. That is, particles may concentrate inside it, and the ring might become darker or lighter depending on the optical properties of the material and the prevailing lighting conditions.
The photo in Figure 1 gives additional insight into the physical properties of the torus near a UFO. This photo was recently published on the Coasttocoast web site photo gallery, and was attributed to Chris Malcheski. His comments are included there with the photo.

Figure 1. Photo by Chris Malcheski; courtesy of Coasttocoast photo gallery (www.coasttocoastam.com).

The photo was taken in order to capture the double rainbow, and the unknown object was not seen until later. The author considered the possibility that it was a bird, but suggested this is unlikely given (1) the windy conditions and (2) that one end of the object appears to be covered by the distant rainbow.
The image was enhanced using an image equalization tool available from Mehdi. The tool also offers additional non-linear control to compensate for large differences in brightness over the image. The Medhi documentation says that the option employed here equalizes the three color channels independently, with a resulting dramatic improvement in contrast. It also warns that important distortions of tints can be introduced. However, such distortion apparently works to our advantage by enhancing the colors to reveal additional details.
The left panel of Figure 2 shows the object of interest cropped from the original image. The middle panel shows the equalized image, and the right panel has an overlaid graphic to direct attention to the location of the torus.

Figure 2. Cropped image, enhanced cropped image, and overlaid graphic.

The presence of the torus, in the expected location relative to the object, suggests that the object is an intelligently operated craft such as those seen in many other photos.
The colors in the image generated by the equalization algorithm appear to correspond to the more muted colors in the original image. That is, the red color of the rainbow in the original image appears in the same places as the red color in the equalized image, and the same can be said for the yellow and green colors.
Malcheski noted that the end of the object appears to be obscured by the rainbow, meaning that the object must have been at least as far away as the rainbow. But there may be another explanation consistent with the object being nearer. The equalized image shows that the part of the rainbow thought to be in front of the object is red. It should have been yellow if it were continuous with the rainbow just above and below it. Perhaps this red segment is a piece of the rainbow shifted to the left. Note that the torus is nearby, and it might have behaved like a prism to deflect the light from the rainbow.
Something similar seems to have happened at the top of the torus. There we can see that a strip of violet overlays the red at exactly the location of the torus. Here, also, the violet part of the spectrum may have been refracted by the torus so that the violet appeared where the red should be.
The displaced rainbow colors in this photograph suggest that the torus defines a region of space with a refractive index different from the space around it. The refractive index of a medium is a function of its permittivity and permeability, so the observed effect may be an important clue for understanding this novel technology.

The Kauai triangle UFO

The Kauai triangle UFO

William C. Treurniet, October, 2009

This photograph was taken on the island of Kauai in the mid-morning of October 17, 2007. The following cropped images show an equilateral triangle or sector shape in the cloud, as well as a contrast-enhanced version of the same image. Click on the center and right images to see larger versions.

The three blue rectangles in the right image identify objects that appear to be parts of a machine of some kind. A version of each object closer to the size in the original photograph is shown below.


The left image shows three intersecting rings partly occluded by the main object and the surrounding cloud material. These rings are positioned approximately at the middle of the triangle edge.
The middle image shows at least two extensions leading from the main object to a partly visible hexagonal structure some distance from the triangle. The two long extensions, each having a 45-degree bend, appear to be connected to an additional structure at the center of the hexagon.
The right image shows a cupped, triangular structure positioned at the upper-right vertex of the main object. A similar structure is recognizable at the lower left vertex of the object, although it is heavily obscured by cloud material. If the object is some kind of craft and these structures are landing pads, there would need to be an additional support at the remaining vertex. In fact, an object suitable for this purpose extends through the center of a toroidal object at that vertex.
The schematic drawing below summarizes the interesting features in this photograph. It shows a sector-shaped main object which could be some kind of spacecraft body. At each vertex are structures that could function as landing pads. Finally, there are two mysterious, tubular extensions from the craft. One is composed of orthogonal circular shapes, while the other consists of a hexagonal object attached to the triangle with extensions having 45-degree bends.


The cloud elevation around that time in Kauai was roughly 1300 feet. The object subtended about 20.5 degrees, so the estimated length of one side of the triangle is approximately 487 ft, or 150 m.

Anomalies in Spirit image Sol 076

Anomalies in Spirit image Sol 076

William C. Treurniet, April, 2008 Summary. A panoramic photograph, Sol 076, taken by the Mars Spirit rover shows a number of objects scattered on the ground. Several of the objects have properties different from those expected if the rubble were nothing more than a natural heap of rocks. Some appear to be hollow, some are thin sheets of material, and several are etched with geometric drawings. A number of pieces appear to represent, respectively, a female human torso, a feline head, a humanoid leg, and a boot or ungulate foot. Another roughly cylindrical object appears to be wrapped with a fabric. A photograph from Sol 078, which overlaps the scene, shows that the feline head is part of an object that resembles the body of a quadruped. The evidence is consistent with speculation that the rover may have photographed parts of a damaged cultural artifact on Mars. The similarities between parts of the artifact and images from Earth suggest that humanity may have been influenced long ago by beings who also visited Mars.
One of NASA's Mars Spirit rover photos (Panoramic Camera: Sol 076) contains a number of objects that appear at first glance to be just rocks. A stereo version of the image was found in the Northwestern University stereo image archive with an Image ID number of 426. Careful analyses of the latter image revealed that some of the objects have characteristics not associated with rocks, and some have shapes that are familiar to us. The left and right stereo views are shown in Figure 1. While most of the significant information can be seen in the right monocular view, some impressions cannot be seen without the ability to distinguish different depths in the image. The subjective effect is much improved with a stereo viewer.

Figure 1. Spirit Rover image Sol 076, panoramic camera

In the following discussion, a number of interesting objects in Figure 1 are identified. Many have properties that are inconsistent with rocks. In order to examine some of the areas of the photo more closely, sections of the stereo view were extracted and magnified. Visibility of many details improved considerably, especially when using a stereo viewer. A labeled monocular version of the image accompanies each stereogram for ease of reference. The relatively high frequency of anomalies compared to other sites on Mars suggests that something unusual once stood on this place.
Observations emphasized in red text support the argument that some objects are more than mere rocks and may possibly be constructed.
Figure 2 shows an enlarged area around the object that looks like a torso (A). The anatomy of the torso may be compared with a human female statue such as Falconet's Bather, for example. The angle of the breasts of the Martian female are quite similar to those of the Bather. There is also a suggestion of textured clothing covering the breasts and the neck area, leaving the area between the breasts uncovered. It is unlikely that the torso is a rock shaped by some natural process, since it has another property that differentiates it from a mere rock. Specifically, touching the torso from behind is a thin, broad, smoothly curved band of material that arcs from shoulder to shoulder. Especially in the stereo view, the torso seems to be a hollow object.
In the center is another curved sheet of material (C) with markings on the surface and indentations along the edge. In front of this sheet are bars of some material (D) with the ends bent upwards at 90 degrees. The end of the bar has a point that is itself a 90 degree angle. These shapes are not at all typical of rocks seen in the Martian environment.
Just behind the latter curved sheet is a rock with additional markings (B) that many people may find familiar. The markings seem to outline the face of an alien "gray" from contemporary Earth culture. Click here for a discussion of this even more unexpected aspect of the image.
In the foreground is an object (E) that looks like a foot or boot resting on the back of the heel. The bottom of the foot faces to the right and the sole appears to be missing. The hollow interior is easily visible in the stereo view, as is some sand that seems on the verge of falling out. Following the foot analogy, the top of the ankle has the appearance of a ball joint that is connected to the foot by a visibly separate rod-like material (E1). The rest of the foot seems to be made of several interlocking pieces. The side piece (E2) has markings consistent with a grinding process as if it were constructed. The top of the foot (E3) has several markings that smoothly follow the raised center which ends in a pointed toe. This object could have been formed by some process such as erosion, but it seems unlikely given the apparent integration of multiple parts.

Figure 2. Magnified stereo view of the area around the torso

To the right of the foot-like object is an approximately cylindrical object (F) with some simple geometric markings on its side. The stereo view is shown enlarged in Figure 2a. The right end of the cylinder is shaded from the light source, and is surrounded by material that seems to be torn and partially rolled back along the circumference (F1). In this material on the far side is a brightly lit square hole (F2), as well as another hole above it that is partially visible. Both are revealed by the light shining through. Close to the square hole in F2 is another dimmer source of illumination. Through the stereo viewer, this dimmer light is positioned slightly closer to the camera. It appears to be either a chad hanging from the edge of the brighter hole, or a reflection from the end of a shaft near the axis of the cylinder. The faint hint of the shaft is in only the left view, so its exact position and, hence, the existence of the shaft, is not certain. The torn and displaced covering material, the precise square hole, and the dimmer reflected point of light indicate that this object is not a rock.

Figure 2a. Magnified view of Object F

Figure 2b emphasizes, on a slightly enhanced image of Object F, some relatively symmetrical circular and curvilinear markings on its side. Forms like these also seem artificial, and they may have either an aesthetic or functional purpose.

Figure 2b. Adornments or functional forms on Object F

The appearance of the somewhat cylindrical Object F gives the feeling of a manufactured object. It is wrapped in some type of material that has a well-defined square hole. It may have a central axle, and it has markings on the exterior that may serve some function. If it were found on Earth, it might be considered a device like an electric motor, and the shapes on the side might show the form of an antenna under the material wrapping.
Figure 3 shows the enlarged area in the upper left of the photo. The right view shows most of what appears to be a feline head (A), while the left view contains only the profile of the nose. The top and back of the head are textured with what appear to be thick strands of hair. The right side of the head clearly shows what looks like a feline ear. In front of the head is a dark object (B) with a fuzzy, feathered contour, and this is also uncharacteristic of a rock.
The two smooth rocks on the ground in front of the head (C) are textured with a regular crisscross pattern that is similar to the pattern on the torso near the neck.
In the lower right of the image is an object (D) that appears to be hollow judging from the opening at its lower left.

Figure 3. Magnified stereo view of the area near the head

The Mars Spirit rover image in Figure 3a, taken on Sol 078, also shows the torso as well as the complete object of which the feline head is a part. Click here to see a monochrome stereo view of the Sol 078 image (Filter centers: Left - 482 nm, Right - 436 nm). The image in Figure 3a was cropped from a colorized image derived from Sol 078 data using a program called FilterMix. The orientation of the camera to the subject is different from the Sol 076 image, but the feline head is still apparent. Further, the head is part of a somewhat damaged body which, nevertheless, models musculature appropriate for a feline. From this new vantage point, there is even a suggestion of an eye socket. There is also the hint of a tail, but this may merely be the edge of another barely visible large object. Some might say that the object is a rock formed by some natural process. If so, the feline likeness of the head, first discovered in Figure 3 and subsequently supported by the quadrupedal body shape in Figure 3a, would be a remarkable chance formation.

Figure 3a. Complete object associated with the feline head

The left side of Figure 4 shows the enlarged area from the center right section of the original image. There appear to be several curious objects here. Object A is shaped like a boot with the sole and the ankle forming an angle of 110 degrees. On the side of the boot is etched part of a circular pattern (A1) centered on the toe. Inside the circumference of the circle segment are markings that appear to be graphic symbols.
The large object (B) at the bottom of the picture seems to be made of hollow sections. One section has an approximately rectangular hole in the side (B1). On the bottom left of the object is etched a semi-circular outline (B2) also decorated with a series of symbols.

Figure 4. Magnified stereo view of the center right section

Figure 5 shows the enlarged view of the top right section of the original image. The enlargement shows more clearly a darker object (A) just above the center. It has a short cylindrical shape at one end, with a smaller circle visible inside the cylinder. In terms familiar to us, it looks like an adapter for joining pipes of different diameters. It is unlikely that this object, with its connected circular shapes, is a rock carved by natural processes.
Also at the top right corner of this image, just visible behind the smooth sand dune, lies a smooth, almost cylindrical object (B). The end of the object appears to have broken off, exposing a darkened area just above the broken end piece. This darkened area is unlikely to be a shadow given the direction of the light in the image. The alternative is that the cylindrical shape is hollow, and the shadow is actually an opening to the object's interior.

Figure 5. Magnified stereo view of the top right section

Figure 6 shows the enlarged view of the left bottom of the original image. Near the bottom of the image is a symmetrical object (A) that seems to have been carved out of stone. Attached to the right end of this object is something (B) shaped very much like a starfish.
Geometric designs also appear to be present in this image segment. The rock at the center-right of the image seems to be decorated with at least two circular designs, one positioned at the lower center of the rock (C), and the other centered near the right end (D). There is a suggestion of a third circular arc etched above Element C.

Figure 6. Magnified stereo view of the left bottom section

Discussion

Some people have insisted that there are nothing but rocks in the image. The noted anomalies are not anomalies at all, but are the result of an overactive imagination that sees familiar shapes in random data. However, even without making any higher-level associations with familiar shapes, there are a number of objects that appear to have properties not consistent with rocks. This issue is examined further in another report. For example, there is the thin, almost gossamer, curved band of material running from shoulder to shoulder on the back side of the 'torso'. There is the slightly thicker curved band of material just below and to the right of the 'torso'. There is the approximately cylindrical object beside the 'boot' that appears to be covered with material that was torn and rolled back. The same object appears to have a small reflective surface in its shadow. Also unusual is the number of 'rocks' that appear to be hollow. Those objects that cannot be described as rocks must be accounted for some other way.
If there were only one recognizable object such as the torso, some natural process might have given the object its shape by chance. But there are a number of other recognizable objects in the image, and it seems highly unlikely that all can be explained in this way. For example, there is the feline head, a very recognizable object complete with an ear and texture that looks like strands of hair. The head is supported by an appropriately shaped body. There is the complex hollow object that seems to be made of interlocking pieces, and looks like it could be a representation of a foot or boot. There is the large hollow object that seems to have the shape of a humanoid leg. The likelihood of finding this many recognizable, separate but related objects in one location on Mars by chance seems rather remote. Both these objects and the glyphs engraved into several of the rocks fit well into a smashed sculpture scenario. A sculptor could have created the aforementioned objects having properties not found in rocks.

Some implications

The discovery of remnants of a humanoid sculpture on Mars would be convincing evidence that intelligent life existed there in the past. The appearance there of objects familiar to us suggests the possibility that Earth culture may have been influenced long ago by beings who also visited Mars. These beings might have been responsible for the observed similarity between the Martian artifacts and images from Earth.

The Norway spiral mystery

The Norway spiral mystery

William C. Treurniet, Jan, 2010 Summary. On Dec. 9, 2009, a luminous cloud arranged as an Archimedes spiral was photographed over Norway. Analysis of a video and some still photos recording the event indicates that there were in fact two different spirals. One had the spinning motion expected from a failed rocket stage, while the other appeared to be a larger non-rotating display which must have had a different origin.
On December 9, 2009, Norwegians were treated to an unusual spiral visual display in the sky. It is now widely considered to have been caused by a failed Russian rocket test. Belated admission by Russian authorities that such a failure had occurred seemed to confirm this explanation. However, there is some ambiguity about the available visual data that might cause one to doubt this conclusion. In particular, there are differences between the video and still photo records of the event. The still photos show a much more extensive spiral than do the videos. Some have suggested that the still photos are time exposures, thus accounting for the larger spiral display. This report examines whether or not this is a viable explanation. A further unexpected observation strongly suggests that the overall event was not as simple as it first appeared.
First, we examine the possibility that a time exposure could have given the unsmeared spiral pattern seen in the still images. We do this by overlaying successive frames from a video and evaluating the result. If the spiral and the object creating the spiral have a lateral motion, smearing of the image would be expected. Estimating the relative motion of the spiral in a video requires a common reference point on the ground. A suitable video for this was suggested by Hoagland who used it for the same purpose. Three frames were extracted at the 42, 45, and 47 second marks. Cropped frames from the video, seen in the left column of Figure 1, show that the spiral moved a small amount to the left in those five seconds. The corresponding enlarged centers of the spiral are displayed in the right column, and these show that the center of the spiral is indeed rotating as the phase at the origin shifts in successive frames. The speed of rotation was estimated by Amini to be about one Hz.

42 sec
45 sec
47 sec
Figure 1. Successive frames from a video of the Norway Spiral.

Can these three frames be merged to yield an unsmeared spiral display? Figure 2 shows the three frames superimposed after the images were aligned with the help of cues on the ground. The obvious misalignment of the spirals indicates that a time exposure of five sec or more would have given a severely distorted spiral in a still photo. Thus, it is unlikely that the larger spirals in the still photos are due to time lapse photography.

Figure 2. Video frames of Figure 1 superimposed.

Then we compare a number of still photos of the spiral that were published on-line. Six of these are displayed in the left column of Figure 3. These were originally published at the following web sites ( Row 1, Row 2, Row 3, Row 4, Row 5, Row 6 ). Click on the left images to retrieve mirrored versions of the original images. In each row of the figure, the right column contains the enlarged center of the spiral in the left column.
Remarkably, the phase of the spiral visible at its center appears to be the same in all these images. The last image is somewhat blurred, but its phase seems not unlike that of the previous five images. This consistency across images is highly unlikely assuming that the object at the center of the spiral was rotating at one Hz and the pictures were taken at different times.

1
2
3
4
5
6
Figure 3. Still photos of the Norway Spiral

Conclusion

This analysis leads to the conclusion that there were two separate spirals in the sky over Norway on Dec. 9, 2009. A dynamic spiral appeared in a number of videos of the event. This spiral could well have been the emissions from the spinning third stage of a failed Russian rocket launch as is commonly believed. A spiral also appeared in a number of still photos. The phases of the spirals in these photos were consistent and, since there is no reason to believe that all the photos were taken in synchrony with the phase of the spiral, it appears that the photographed spiral was not rotating. Hoagland also discusses evidence that there was both a rotating and a non-rotating spiral over Norway. Because the spiral in the still photos was not rotating, it likely was not created by the failed rocket launch, and we should look elsewhere for an explanation.