Am I missing something?
According to Newsweek
https://www.newsweek.com/best-ufo-picture-calvine-photo-found-30-years-missing-1733673
"On August 4, 1990, two hikers near Calvine in Scotland took a photograph of a mysterious, diamond-shaped flying object hovering in the middle of the sky.
For 32 years that image, dubbed the "Calvine photo," disappeared from the public eye, becoming the object of speculation, theories and myths. But now, the groundbreaking image has finally resurfaced thanks to the efforts of British journalist David Clarke.
After 13 years of research, Clarke—who has worked as a curator for Britain's National Archives and is currently an associate professor at Sheffield Hallam University—found that former Royal Air Force (RAF) press officer Craig Lindsay had held on to a copy of the last remaining original print, waiting for someone to enquire about the mysterious image.
In the photo—one of a series of six the hikers reportedly took—a diamond-shaped object can be seen flying in the sky, while a fighter jet can be spotted in the background not too far from it."
The first thing I noticed all those years ago was that there is something "off" about the positioning and quality of the UFO and there was something wrong about the aircraft. In point of fact the main criticism was that there was absolutely nothing in the photo to use as scale or -pointed out very quickly- nothing to show WHERE the photo was taken.
There are things you can look for but if you are dealing with a copy from a copy (with the old film cameras) it gets harder. Ground Saucer Watch in the United States "pioneered" UFO photo computer analysis and even ones identified as "genuine" many years later were revealed as hoaxes; you really need the original negatives now THOSE found would have been a breakthrough.
This is certainly NOT "one of the best" UFO photographs in existence.
I have to keep asking myself why an "arch sceptic" such as David Clarke go so excited and started promoting this photo?
We KNOW that Ufologists have been faking UFO stories since the 1980s almost like a cottage industry. It is why certain reports are never given a high credibility rating. The biggest hoaxing Ufologists are based -or were- in the North of England and I wonder whether anyone recalls this photo from 1995?
A copy was sent to me anonymously all that identified its source was a Yorkshire postmark and a note (typed) that read "Taken in Scotland I want to be anonymous for saffety" ((sic). Then Encounters magazine published the photo -after I received a call from them about this "genuine flying triangle being refuelled" and had I seen it? No one at the magazine seemed to want to answer any questions about who the photo was from. In fact, they were downright refusing to answer questions -after they had phoned me!
I then got a phone call from a reporter at the Mirror newspaper who asked me about flying triangle being refuelled. I stated that I had seen it along with some photo specialists and we believed it to be a fake. The reporter then said "Yeah, our photog reckons its dodgy" -my guess is that they wanted someone to say it was genuine!
I then followed procedure and checked with various people and organisations including the Ministry of Defence. It took less than 24 hours to find out what was going on.
The story was that Encounters had received the photo just before going to press. They asked no questions and never checked but "grabbed" the photo. They then -the magazine which would have no right to do so- immediately contacted the Daily Mail newspaper to sell the photograph to them. The rather annoyed editor told me they had "checked the photo" (no details) and that it was "a bloody fake". It was a "fake" in the sense that it was a mock-up produced to show how stealth aircraft being refuelled might look. In fact, Encounters had "paid hardly anything" for the mock-up image and then went about trying to sell it themselves for a great deal.
Things got even less likely when the hoax was exposed. Encounters stated that they knew who the hoaxer was but would not name him and would take the matter no further since he had "learning difficulties" -yet conned them into buying the image ("a very good quality photo" I was told)? And so the "Bude photo" as it was known died a death after a quick apology and before anyone dug into the story and found out that they had been trying to sell the photo as their own for money.
The only reason this was discovered to be a fake is that it was published in a magazine read by an aviation reporter who spotted it. So, if 'lost' and turning up in 2022 would it be genuine because the copy looked good?
Look at these photos sent to me by someone I know -NOT involved with UFOs- and who was shocked by what he captured on a hot sunny day on a hill overlooking Bristol. I guarantee these are not faked.
Below we can see the two discs one above the other
.jpg)
%20big.jpg)
The "saucer shape with dome -two objects moving together over the central Bristol area. and I have darkened this a little to try to make the shapes seem clearer. The photo gives us a lot of the information we need and which is lacking in the Bude and Calvine photos.
.jpg)
%20big.jpg)
So why has this copy of the photo suddenly turned up after 32 years of, I am led to believe, Nick Pope and many other Ufologists trying to find it? It has been mentioned on TV, online, in magazines and the word was out in RAFT circles as well as the MoD in general Lord (Peter) Hill-Norton told myself and others associated with our work that he had never heard or seen the Calvine photo. Would he be expected to have seen it? Yes. In case you have no idea who he was:
Hill-Norton was swiftly propelled into the post of First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff in July 1970 and then, having been promoted to Admiral of the Fleet on 12 March 1971,into the post of Chief of the Defence Staff in April 1971following the unexpected early retirement of Sir Michael Le Fanu due to ill health. In the latter role he gave the final commitment to Project Chevaline, the Polaris missile improvement programme. He became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee in 1974, remaining in that post until his retirement in 1977. He also maintained his various links within defence after retirement and was responsible for the setting up of UFO Concern which aimed at getting some form of UFO disclosure from the UK government (my own disclosure is that I was recruited to UFO Concern after it was setup).
Again; why now and WHY such a hullaballoo over a copy of a suspect photo?
