Learning Ufology -- Message to UFO summoners and a comment

Note of the Poster: My aim in posting this video together with the comments of another experienced person in filming/recording anomalies is to promote a good and fair discussion of this intriguing phenomena and that the reasoning of experienced people can pour more light into this matter and assist us to achieve a better knowledge or even a solution for the same phenomena.

Message to UFO summoners

 

whotookmymojo

Publicado a 14/07/2015

I hope that the message is not taken personal but only to share an opinion. There is a real phenomenon happening but we should be more selective as to what we call ourselves and what we choose as evidence otherwise it ends up hurting the disclosure movement.

 

Jeremy Thomas 2 weeks ago

Well it is good that you released this video for many reasons: - You are using a wrong logic: similarity to imply identity. Using your own logic since many of your own footage look like plane anticollision lights we can then "safely" assume that your many of your recordings are depicting airplanes and your camera very poor low light sensor is "distorting" some lights. - You recommended night time observations, well photographers had known since the begging of fotography that the best images are the one recorded with plenty of light. You are assuming that what you had recorded is best seen at night, but my personal experience doing nighttime observatikns and then daylight observations tells me that daylight observations are astronomical more effective than nighttime observations. - You had been using the same instruments for years, with very low optical magnification, that had lead you to have a very wrong idea of what you are observing with tools that are not upto date. - You are using a "cover all" generalization, since some anomalies do look like balloons then all are balloons, but many are far from being remotely similar to balloons, the morphing ones, amorphous, etc. Remember any inference rule have universal applicability and it is reflexive, it can be applied to you: since some of your recordings looks like airplanes then all of then are airplanes: occam razor. You are effectively using your preconceptions to actually give a valuation of something that you do not have any experience and you are acting exactly like many debunkers. But that is not surprising "ufo believers" have been dismissing , ignoring and suppressing the reality of anomalies, you are effective part of that cover-up that many of you frequently talk about. But this video reaffirm what had already been said: the only cover-up is in people's mind nothing more nothing less.

The fundamental limitations of nighttime observations: Nighttime observations have intrinsic limitations, the obvious one is the lack of light, any object that is not self luminous or do not reflect ambient light will be practically impossible to observe at night. Many anomalies are not self luminous, they will be very hard to spot at night, but the ones that are self luminous only the portions self illuminated will be visible at night, the full structure of these anomalies will scape to anybody observing them at night. This simple argument clearly shows that daylight observations will offer potentially more options and current observational data fully support that. But since at night obviously there is a lack of light any optical component must be of enough "aperture" to maximize the amount of light that reach the receiving sensor. That automatically place a practical limit to the focal lenght of any lens that can be used for nighttime observations. Many people doing nighttime observations use the 25mm p8079hp cascade image intensifier, they frequently use a 50mm lens with an aperture of 2.0 or less, the same is true for people using 18mm third generation image intensifiers. For this kind of setup a simple calculation shows that any object of one feet span will be reduced to a dot if the object is at a distance of 2000 feet or more. That is really a very short distance in atmospheric observations, many self luminous insects and birds will fly beyond that distance. If a self luminous insect or a very reflective bird fly beyond that distance in a straight line how can you differentiate it from a satellite? You really can't. That very low optical magnification is an "equalizer" for almost anything that move not far away. The potentially for misidentifications is really great because by definition a dot without structure can not be identified then that dot will be a UFO by definition, but that setup will produce "dots" from almost anything at a not very far away distance. But that is the more common type of setup used by nighttime observers, these observers will call "UFOs" to many of these dots and they will be right, but UFO today have a different meaning than its intended literal meaning and then they will be very likely wrong. Bluntly put: nighttime observers are really far behind in this quest, you need to update your equipment or combine your nighttime observations with daylight observations, that will give you a more clear "perspective" of what is really out there.

The real masters of misidentification. Nighttime observers optical equipment use very low optical magnification, the popular p8079hp image intensifier with a 50mm lens have just 2x optical magnification, that is extremely low. That setup will be unable to resolve the structure of any object not far away, the same is true for the 18mm third generation setups as the one used by whotookmymojo. And many recordings of whotookmymojo actually are a perfect example of that lack of optical magnification: the footage from his night vision setup always is depicting glowing dots without structure, many times whotookmymojo have to switch to his camcorder to be able to "resolve" some details of that glowing dot. But be aware that any digital camcorder sensitivity in low light is very poor and they tend to distort the image of a distant source of light when digital zoom is used, you just have to point a camcorder to a bright star or street light and apply zoom to realize the truth on that. Using analogy: nighttime observers are like microbiologists trying to observe microorganisms in the dark using a lupe. Obviously these microbiologists will have a very tough time trying to figure out the "structures" of microorganisms. But some microbiologists have already being using microscopes in the light to observe microorganisms, continuing with the analogy, these microbiologists have been able to see with plenty of details the structure of many of these microorganisms. But the microbiologists that have been using lupes in the dark trying to observe microorganisms have been unable to understand or even realize what the other microbiologists have been showing them. Some of these microbiologists that use lupes in the dark trying to observe microorganisms, like whotookmymojo, even want that the microbiologists using microscopes with light try his more "advanced" method to observe microorganisms in the dark. Nighttime observers need to be able to resolve the structure of their glowing dots, they need to use optical magnification a lot higher than what they have been using until now, single digits optical magnification like 2x is a "toy" magnification for atmospheric observations. You need to use optical magnifications beyong the 20x range and many times the structure of anomalies is not resolved if magnifications higher than 100x are not used. When these requirements for optical magnification are meet the structure of these glowing dots will be resolved, then you will be able to see what really is behind these glowing dots. People that have been regularly resolving the structure of these dots have found always anomalies, these amorphous, polymorphic and sometimes balloon shaped objects. Nighttime observers have been really the masters of misidentification until now, always assuming that their glowing dots were something that they are not. So update your systems and stop calling "crafts" to your glowing dots, you are misinforming your viewers

Let me add here that I had multiple videos in my Youtube channel using night vision equipment, some using the first generation cascade p8079hp and others using second generation and third generation night vision equipment similar to the ones used by whotookmymojo and others. It was a good learning experience, but in terms of providing any "evidence" of anything they are really worthless for the same reasons that I had explained here multiple times: glowing dots in a black background could be anything. Unless these glowing dots are resolved in their structure almost any footage depicting glowing dots in a black background using single digits optical magnification, as the ones provided for almost all nighttime observers, is of very little value or not value at all.

Preconceptions are filters/blinders for perception. This video of whotookmymojo is a perfect example that shows how people preconceptions are a blinder, a filter, to that person perception. Summoners had recorded multiple instances of anomalous objects, what we call anomalies, but whotookmymojo was actually unable to "see" a single example of these multiple recordings where anomalies are showed and where they are very far to be remotely similar to balloons. But even in the case of balloon shaped anomalies that filter in perception had blinded people and whotookmymojo in actually seeing many extraordinary things in this "type" of anomalies, yes some balloon shaped anomalies have something similar to tethers hanging down, but others had been observed with tethers hanging up, or tethers had been observed moving just alone as a string moving autonomously, these are weird occurences but clearly documented, other balloon shaped anomalies had been observed ejecting things, other responding to direct light signals. Similarly the ones that mimick plastic bags had been observed ejecting things multiple times, etc. All of these had been documented with plenty of details and it is publicly available to anybody that want to see it in many of the summoners Youtube channels, but if you go there looking for "alien artifacts" or similar you will not find it. Summoners had been honest, they had posted footage knowing the "reaction" of many to that kind of footage, but you really have to wonder about the real motivations of nighttime observers that use the word "craft" frequently to describe a glowing dot in a black background, but they know intuitively that using that "keyword" will attract the attention of "ufo believers" that always are looking for anything reaffirming their preconceptions.

And my last entry here: Summoning works, there is plenty of evidence supporting that. What really matters are the end results and if people claiming to be doing summoning are observing the same anomalies than other people that are not doing it, then their procedure is working. The actual mechanism that is behind summoning is unknown, but it could be as simple as that we are in constant observation and since all summoning is done in open spaces that indicates that what is being "called" need "line of sight" to see you back. Summoning was already used by Trevor J Constable in the 1950's with his "star exercise", but also summoning was used very successfully by Prophet Yahweh, yes indeed Prophet Yahweh summoned multiple anomalies, the same ones that are being observed today, and he did one successful summoning in front of the cameras of a local ABC news crew, but as is expected he was dismissed, but he showed the real deal in front of national tv.

The detail is that people calling themselves that name, summoner, had provided extraordinary evidence, evidence with a level of details that we can't find in any nighttime footage. Yes many anomalies look like balloons, but again similarity do not implies identity, that something may look like an airplane do not imply that it is an airplane. There is already footage showing the transformation of a polymorphic anomaly into a perfect balloon. We cannot change reality and these summoners have been brave enough to go against the "flow" and against the generalized "mechanicist" expectation, they had been in the receiving end of dismissals and many times personal attacks coming from people full of preconceptions. I know that at a personal level, that is why I had said many times that debunkers and ufo believers are two faces of the same coin: the coin of preconceptions, debunkers that do not accept anything as evidence and ufo believers that only accept manifestations that conform to the "mechanicist" expectation. But the problem is really deeper than that, what we are observing is extraordinary, but nobody really knows what it is. The classical Ufology had been written by people with zero observational experience, creating "theories" and expectations that are essentially detached from reality. What is being observed, anomalies, appear to be part of our environment as any other living being and they behave like living entities. In my limited experience I had not seen any evidence of any kind of "artifact" of no human origen and no evidence of any ETs. There is a huge confusion in Ufology precisely because things are not beeing observed systematically, lots of myths, preconceptions, etc. But there is a real suppression of the reality of anomalies in the "ufo believer" camp. Anomalies can be unequivocally observed, there are precise procedures for doing exactly that. But that is being ignored and suppresed by the people that call themselves "open minded" and then they talk about a "disclosure" or a "cover-up", ironic ...