UFO Photographed over Great Britain
We in the UFO business have our own set of mentors and those that we put the most trust in. One of those for almost all of us is Nick Pope, former UFO investigator for the British Ministry of Defence. His opinion on UFOs is rarely, if ever, doubted. This is one of those rare times.A recent report from Great Britain has caused a stir among Ufologists all across the Net, and even in mainstream media in the United Kingdom. A man named Kelvin Barbery has inadvertently photographed what is being deemed by Pope as a genuine UFO.
Pope said, "If I was still there (MOD) I’d be looking at this very closely. The object looks structured, symmetrical and metallic. This man has caught something very interesting indeed.”
Also, Michael Soper, of the Contact International UFO group states that "This does appear genuine. Digital photos can be doctored but everything about it appears consistent."
The very first thing I thought when I saw the photograph was, "That's a bird in flight." Am I the one that is seeing this with too much skepticism? Give us your views on this highly touted photograph.
See full size photograph at The Sun News.
Photograph © Kelvin Barbery
Comments
With the proliferation of cheap video cameras and camera phones I believe it’s just a matter of time until we have a body of UFO photos that prove their existence.
Please note that I’m NOT a skeptic, but sadly, in my opinion that’s a seagull in mid-wingstroke flying left to right. Sorry Nick.
my 2 cents
I’m thinking it seems kinda big for a bird. Seems strange he didn’t see it when he took the pic. Maybe an artifact from the digital process. I see a lot of pics on ufocasebook where strange dots are seen in the pics and people say they didn’t see anything until they downloaded their pics. My guess is most of these dots are artifacts and not anything in the air,. If these aren’t artifacts then maybe something optical is happening. I recently heard on the news that it maybe possible to make jets optically invisible within a decade or so. My only problem with the bird synopsis is that I think the object seems a little bit closer than the ships so I’m am guessing too big for a bird. Thanks for the link.
“In a weird twist, Kelvin, 55, did not even see the UFO at the time.
He thought he was just taking a sea view — but when he loaded the digital camera card on to his computer, the round metallic “craft” was in the centre of the shot, about two miles away.”
I said it was a bird too the first time I saw it. And it is not that symmetrical..
The UFO does look like a bird in flight, you can see the beak and wing.
in comparison to the size of the boat it can not be a bird but if the boat was not there one might say yes it is a bird.
It’s a bird.
The standard disclaimer — “I saw nothing there when I took the picture” — IMPLIES that nothing was there, but if that holds true for UFO pics, it should also holds true for other amateur photography in which, “strangely,” the photographers also failed to see limbs growing out of the subject’s head, bad composition and embarassing stray items that were momentarily “invisible.” I think the “nothing there” claim is pretty weak.
This looks like a bird to me, with distortion due to speed. One of the problems with current photography is having to learn a whole new set of parameters — digital cameras pick up the infra-red range where our eyes do not normally see. But they also distort in new and different ways.
May be a feke but not a bird in any case.
Nah, this is a UFO. Its too big for a bird of any kind, the original shot shows the UFO even more clearly. I’m not for sure how anyone can make out a bird out of this, if it was a bird it would be huge. The original photo shows it very clearly to me, its too bad he didn’t have a good zoom on his camera or didn’t zoom in on the object…but like it says, he didn’t see the object till he downloaded the shot. I take a lot of digital photographery shots and I’m surprised sometimes by what I get and don’t see till I download the shot.
Charles Grubbs
This is just another obscure photo of something that could very simply be a jet plane just far enough away to make the positive outline decisive and definite. The credentials of Mr. Nick Pope are not impressive to me if this photo excites him to the point of declaring that if he was still “there”, he’d be looking at it very closely. Sure it looks structured, symmetrical and metallic.
So do jet planes. As far as being “very interesting indeed”, I agree it is interesting, as general curiosity goes; But as the official Ministry of Defence UFO analyst, if this sighting causes Mr. Pope to such excited exuberance, then it is no surprise to me that he is described as the former analyst for the M of D UFO. This photo is no better than some of the other disappointing shots I have seen supposedly depicting craft which are unidentifiable.
This one looks genuine to me. Of course, it may not be, but it certainly not a bird, aircraft or other human creation. Too bad it’s blurred, sweet little shot nevertheless.
Anything significant nearby, military or nuclear?
This looks similar to a photo you have from 2005 taken in a park in Illinois with a restored fort. I spent years bird watching. I can identify many birds just by their shape. This does not appear to be a bird. The object appears to be in motion and is blurred. What you see may not correctly represent the shape. Not seeing things while taking a photo is very common. With the new high definition digital cameras and to be able to enlarge sections of pictures on a computer this is getting more common. Based on the report on the 2005 photo this is what happened there also. Based on the picture I could not be sure of what it is.
I honestly cannot say for sure what it is. It could be faked – but if it was I don’t think they used a bird to get the fake image. Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmm………
As a veteran British UFO researcher, I have discussed and analysed this photo with my colleagues….it is a seagull!
Omar Fowler. PRA Derby, England.
SEAGULL WHAT A NUT CASE, it looks like a UFO idiot, maybe you should invest to the Doctor NOT NUT DOCTOR, have your eyes checked dude. Amorte Yvonne
It is indeed unfortunate that a few must resort to juvenile name-calling and personal insults when they disagree with an opinion expressed by someone else. The object in the photo is blurry. The actual distance to the object, and hence its relative size, is at best difficult to estimate. Without a complicated and sophisticated expert lab analysis we can only speculate about what the object might be. Fast moving objects do tend to blur and elongate in still photos, depending on speed of the exposure, accuracy of focus, direction of travel of the object in relation to the camera lens, direction and level of lighting source(s), as well as distance, possible tracking of the object by the photographer (apparently not applicable here, as the photographer indicated he did not see the object at the time.) While a variety of software programs are available that do enable elaborate manipulation of photos, it is not (readily) evident that such manipulation was employed in this instance. So we are left with an interesting photo of something we simply are not (yet) able to identify conclusively, and we are each left with our own impressions and opinions, in turn. This is a site created to promote further awareness and understanding of a phonemonon of utmost interest to mankind. Let us approach it with the respect and open-mindedness it’s critical examination deserves. Name-calling and insults do not well serve this end.
Here are a few things to consider:
Why are all UFO sightings blurred, with our technologic advancements with digital camers etc – why do we still see blurry pics.
Maybe the blurry pic is because whatever it is is going extremely fast. The phootgrapher didnt see it, as is the case of very quick UFO’s.
Also I have done some measurements on this thing and it dosent appear to be very structured in its shape. so maybe it is a creature of somekind?
But Im not saying it isnt a UFO, as we are humans, we think that all UFO’s must be either round or of some sort of symmetrical shape, maybe these ET’s are past that and can make any ship size and shape that they want. I do believe that we are not alone and maybe somtimes we dont want to know that fact.
Check out contact has begun by ‘James Gilliland’ and that might change all those non beleivers minds. Suzikatz. Sydney, Australia.
In the tiny picture on this page it’s hard to see what it might be. On the full sized picture it doesn’t look like a bird at all. There it looks like a saucer. Nobody has talked about the full sized picture. Look at that one and then comment.
After looking at the full size picture, I agree… this is too big for a bird of any known type. Nick Pope knows better than most what he’s looking at, and “bird” is out of the question. I recently took a picture of a boat in the dock and have a mystery object hovering in the sky; it can be seen at UFO North West for those interested. I just want to point something out about objects “not seen in camera at time of shooting”, like me, the photographer isn’t looking away from the field of view, i.e. he/she is looking at the subject, thus things not given attention to can, will and are easily missed. This applies to my picture too.
If Billy’s interested he can have my UFO story and shot too.
we have to make a more advancement to all techniques we have, before we judge something sounding ridiculous!
the photo is just left unclear?that is why it would still hold different interpretations..
we have to know that :not all what we see is similar to our cognition.
yet ,i believe there are still creatures never known.
we will,till the end be on that EARTH. that is a given assumption .other axiom is that creatures are everywhere and that is what ALWAYS God says .
IN suratul Nahal,for instance,:GOD says”and he creates what u donot know” HE maintains that there are other creatures we donot use in transportation and decoration…but muslims argue about the secret of the very use of “present simple in arabic”".what does the present simple imply then?
waiting for comments on mine.