Ufoforum.it

[b]CASI BOMBA, LE FOTO DI MONTREAL[/b]

Fonte:
http://www.alfredolissoni.net/montre.htm

Un noto ricercatore americano, il dottor Richard Haines (tre attestati in psicologia, dal College Luterano del Pacifico in Tacoma, e dalle Universita' Statali di Washington e del Michigan) della NASA, ha effettuato lo studio che segue su due fotografie a colori riguardanti un avvistamento di un largo e stazionario oggetto visto il 7 novembre 1990, tra le 7.30 pm circa e le 10.00 pm, alla periferia di Montreal, Canada. Benche' l'enorme oggetto sia stato visto dalle 40 alle 75 persone (incluso un poliziotto) che stavano sul tetto dell' International Hilton Bonaventure Hotel, e al piano terra in una vasta area, oltre che fotografato dai giornalisti dei quotidiani sul tetto dell'hotel, non vi e' stato un seguito ufficiale da parte degli organi governativi. Gli originali negativi a colori in 35 mm e le relative stampe sono state sottoposte ad una analisi microscopica e computerizzata di vario tipo.

Montreal, mercoledi' 7 novembre 1990. Il sole calo' alle 16.28 (EST) ora locale (tutti i tempi d'ora in poi citati sono p.m. e Eastern Standard Time, salvo specifiche). L'aria era chiara e fresca. L'umidita' relativa al suolo era del 95% e gradualmente divento' una leggera nebbia estesa dal suolo ad una altitudine di alcune centinaia di piedi. Vi erano solo alcune nuvole presenti tra i 5.000 e 8.000 piedi. Alle 7.30, il signor Bernard Guenette e P. Lachapelle camminavano per Montreal vecchia, presso Saint-Sulpice Street e Rue de Bresolles, circa dieci isolati Est-Sud-Est dall'Hilton. Essi notarono alcuni mezzi dei pompieri, auto della polizia e altri veicoli di emergenza e una folla che bloccava la via; una simulazione d'incendio era in corso. Bernard alzo' gli occhi e vide un piccolo fenomeno verdastro simile ad una aurora boreale con lunghi raggi che si estendevano da esso; l'UFO rimase fermo dai 30 ai 60 secondi. Entrambi gli uomini si accorsero che era ad una elevata altitudine.

Tutti gli altri testimoni oculari si trovavano sul tetto del 17esimo piano dell'International Hilton Bonaventure Hotel (che chiameremo semplicemente Hilton) nella periferia centrale di Montreal, che vanta una piscina esterna riscaldata ed altre strutture. Una turista americana stava nuotando nella piscina, ed e' stata la prima ad osservare lo strano luminoso oggetto, direttamente in alto, nel cielo notturno alle 7.15. Piu' tardi ella disse che aveva una forma ovale e un colore giallognolo. Lo fece notare alla signora L.S.P., la bagnina, che allerto' l'ufficiale di sicurezza, Albert Sterling, alle 7.30. Egli arrivo' alle 7.35 e osservo il largo oggetto librarsi nel "cielo molto nuvoloso", e presto (7.38) telefono' alla Polizia Urbana della Comunita' di Montral (MUCP), stazione n.25, per assistenza. La sua prima impressione fu che si trattasse "di un detrito di un satellite o di un altro oggetto spaziale". Egli provo' anche a chiamare l'Aereoporto Internazionale Dorval di Montreal per chiedere di quale oggetto potesse trattarsi, ma la linea era occupata.

Nel frattempo, tra le 7.30 e 7.35, la signora L.S.P. chiamo' l'ufficio del quotidiano La Presse e intanto altri ospiti uscirono per osservare l'apparizione. Il sig. Sterling disse che l'oggetto era situato sopra l'angolo sud-est della piscina e che c'erano circa 12 persone presenti al momento. Vi erano altre 75 persone presenti durante tutto l'avvistamento, come confermo' L.S.P. Alle 7.55 l'oggetto divento' visibile, e Sterling telefono' alla stazione di polizia una seconda volta. Alle 8.00 Marcel Laroche il primo dei tre giornalisti coinvolti arrivo dal giornale La presse. L'ufficiale F. Lippe' del MUCP venne inviato alle 8.07, arrivo' alle 8.11 circa. Parlo' con Steirling e vide egli stesso l'oggetto. Piu' tardi disse di aver visto vide come tre luci gialle da ogni singolo raggio di luce emanato. L'oggetto stesso era luminoso e rotondo; sembrava immobile. Lippe', Laroche e L.S.P. videro un piccolo aereo privato volare direttamente in mezzo alle nubi e abbastanza sotto l'oggetto. All'ufficiale Lippe' sembro' che l'oggetto fosse "molto alto rispetto all'aereo" e Laroche stimo' che l'aereo doveva essere ad una altitudine di 12.000 piedi dal suolo (AGL). L.S.P. e Laroche riferirono che l'aereo era 'minuscolo' in relazione con l'UFO. (Un aereo privato non catalogato deve mantenere una altezza verticale di 1000 piedi sopra l'ostruzione piu' alta con un raggio laterale di 2000 piedi. Mount Royal, con la sua altitudine di 1199 piedi e' il piu' alto punto nella periferia di Montreal ed e' posto a 1.3 miglia N-E dall'Hilton. Esso ha una antenna radio sulla sua vetta cosi' la minima altezza legale di volo e' a 1200 piedi AGL. Inoltre, gli aerei privati non possono volare oltre i 2000 piedi a meno che non dispongano dell'instrument flight rules' (IFR) ed il pilota deve essere abilitato a volare in 'instrument meteorological conditions' (IMC) dovuta alla potenziale interferenza con il traffico aereo da e per Dorval Airport.

La maggior parte dei piloti vola fra i 1500 e 1800 piedi).
Jules Beliveau, un altro giornalista di La Presse ricevette una lettera (datata 8 novembre 1990) da un certo Francois Chevrefils che diceva che un suo amico (Jean) fu testimone dell'oggetto tra le 7.30 e le 8.00 dal suo piccolo aeroplano (doveva essere il pilota del piccolo aereo visto). Alle 8.15 una donna e suo figlio, in macchina sulla Champlain Boulevard in direzione a sud-ovest di Montreal, vicino al Douglas Hospital, vedevano due grandi fasci di luce bianca nel cielo, con numerose piccole luci che sembravano ferme e silenziose, a 4,2 miglia ovest-sud-ovest dall'Hilton. Lippe' telefono' al sergente Masson alle 8.20 per copertura, e alle 8.30 Masson arrivo' sul tetto dell'Hilton. Stupito dall'apparizione di quell'oggetto, Masson chiamo' il Royal Canadia Mounted Police (RCMP) alle 8.44. L'ispettore Minkoff del RCMP disse che l'ispettore Morrin sarebbe stato assegnato al caso. Nel frattempo Lippe' telefono' al direttore del distretto del MUCP, Denis Pare, che immediatamente telefono' alla RCMP per assistenza in loco. Lippe' chiamo' la torre di controllo del Dorval Airport.

Gli venne detto che non era il primo a chiamare riguardo uno strano oggetto che non era visibile ai radar. Nel frattempo il sergente Lettendre telefono' all'operatore del RCMP Operation Centre, inoltre chiamo' l'aeroporto e riferi' al dipartimento dei "piani di volo". Laroche ritorno' alla sua macchina per prendere la sua camera da 35mm tra le 8.30 e le 8.45 e torno' sul tetto dell'Hilton. Alle 9.00 Beliveau e Robert Mailloux, entrambi giornalisti di La Presse, arrivarono all'Hilton. Piu' tardi Beliveau descrisse cio' che aveva visto. Anche l'investigatore Morin del RCMP vide la scena. Comunque, prima di lasciare casa, egli chiamo' il Maggiore Thompson (comandante delle operazioni militari del dipartimento di Difesa Nazionale Canadese della base di St. Hubert) per scoprire se vi erano operazioni militari nell'area. Gli fu risposto negativamente. Numerose altre telefonate giunsero tra le 8.55 e le 9.00. Tra le 9.00 e le 9.05 Laroche fece la prima della serie di foto con la sua macchina. L'ingrandimento di due figure mostra particolari delle luci che la prima stampa non mostra bene. La seconda esposizione venne presa a circa 2 o 3 minuti dopo.

Una delle due foto venne pubblicata su di un articolo di La Presse con titolo : "Sterling descrisse alcune nuvole nel cielo. L'oggetto luminoso aveva 6 luci sul perimetro di un largo cerchio con un raggio di luce emesso. Molti testimoni descrissero i bianchi raggi, mentre altri li videro blu, gialli e rossi." Avvertito, l'ispettore Luc Morin della RCMP (Dipartimento generale inquirenti del RCMP), arrivo' all'Hilton alle 9.30 e vide l'oggetto; personale dal Quebec Provincial Police (QPP) e del Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) insieme al RCMP e il MUCP rilasciarono analoghe testimonianze. Un pilota dell'aeronautica canadese stimo' che l'oggetto si trovava ad un'altitudine fra gli 8000 e 10000 piedi e che le nuvole erano a quota 3500. Lippe' contatto' il sovrintendente di un palazzo di 45 piani costruito sulla strada ovest dell'Hilton (1000 della Gauchetiere); questi spense tutte le luci sul tetto ma l'UFO non spari'. Non era dunque pensabile che l'oggetto fosse il prodotto diretto o indiretto del riflesso delle luci sulla parte inferiore delle nubi. Inoltre le luci del palazzo avevano un inclinazione di 60 gradi circa, molto piu' basse dell'oggetto. P. Caumartin disse che mentre guidava dal lavoro a casa, tra le 10.30 e le 11.00, vide "luci molto intense, ed un oggetto luminoso a forma di boomerang, volare basso del cielo, a circa l'altezza delle nubi." Queste luci erano molto grandi e forti e illuminavano l'interno della macchina. Quando arrivo' a casa nella sezione esterna di Montreal, vicino alla Longue-Pointe Military Base, egli vide l'oggetto vicino alla centrale elettrica Hydro-Quebec Longue-Pointe (che riceve 12.000 volts di elettricita'). Uscito dalla macchina, senti' uno strano suono. In seguito vennero raccolte molte altre testimonianze indipendenti, che comprovavano l'esistenza materiale dell'oggetto in cielo.


Traduzione di Samuele Ghilardi, CUN Peschiera Borromeo. Un ringraziamento a Timothy Good per l'articolo

---

UFO over Montreal downtown, Canada, 1990

<EMBED WIDTH="400" HEIGHT="326" SRC="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=113171942428466824&hl=it&fs=true style=width:400px;height:326px allowFullScreen=true allowScriptAccess=always type=application/x-shockwave-flash> </embed>" HIDDEN="false" AUTOSTART="true" LOOP="true" volume="100"></EMBED>

Sul tubo c'è gia la puntata di ieri di voyager dove parlano del caso?

Large stationary object over Montreal

Fonte:
http://www.caelestia.be/montreal.html

November 7, 1990. It's about 7:15 in the evening. An American woman tourist is swimming in the outdoor rooftop pool on the 17th floor of the International Hilton Bonaventure Hotel in downtown Montreal, when she notices a strange lighted object in the night sky. The object is directly overhead and looks like "an oval shape with a yellowish colour". She notifies the hotel's pool lifeguard, Mrs. L.S.P., who in turn alerts the hotel's security officer, Mr. A.S. Intrigued by the stationary unknown object, the security officer telephones the MUCP (Montreal Urban Community Police) for assistance. Meanwhile the pool's lifeguard has urged guests to come outside to look at what she herself later described as "a lighted object with six lights on the perimeter of a large circle with a ray of light emitted from each one". Mrs. L.S.P. then notifies La Presse, one of Canada's major newspapers. La Presse takes the story seriously and sends out reporter Marcel LAROCHE to investigate.

Some five minutes before Mr. LAROCHE arrives at the hotel, the object had become brighter, prompting the security officer to contact the police station a second time. Officer François LIPPE of the MUCP is dispatched at 8:07 and arrives at the hotel about five minutes later. In his report, Officer LIPPE describes the object as "three yellowish lights from each of which a single beam of light emanated". He added that "the object itself was luminous and round and did not appear to move".

Meanwhile several other people in and around Montreal are witnessing unusual lights in the sky. Among them is Bernard GUENETTE, a computer graphics expert and member of the then Texas based Mutual UFO Network (MUFON). GUENETTE later compared what he saw to "a small greenish Aurora Borealis-like phenomenon with long streamers extending out from it". The time is circa 7:30 p.m.. He watches the luminous phenomenon for 30 to 60 seconds from a spot in Old Montreal, about a mile ("ten city blocks") east-southeast from the hotel. GUENETTE is accompanied by a second witness. Both men agree that the phenomenon is at a very high altitude and not moving.

Back on the rooftop, Officier LIPPE, the security officer and the pool's lifeguard notice a small private aircraft flying directly beneath the clouds and much farther below the object.

At 8:20 Officer LIPPE telephones Sergeant MASSON of the MUCP for backup. Overwhelmed by what he sees when he arrives at the 17th floor, the Sergeant calls the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). The time is now 8:44. An investigator, Officer Luc MORIN, is assigned to handle the case. The RCMP investigator arrives at the hotel at approximately 9:30 p.m. and informs the other witnesses that contact has been made with the Commander of Military Operations of the country's Department of National Defence. The latter has assured him that no military operations are being held in the area. Officer LIPPE then calls the MUCP's District Director, who in turn also telephones the RCMP for immediate "in situ assistance".

Also contacted is Montreal's international airport at Dorval. The operators at the control tower confirm that there have been other calls by people seeing a strange object over the city, but they emphasize that nothing has appeared on the airport's radar screen.

About half an hour earlier, at 9 o'clock, two more journalists from La Presse (Mr. J. BELIVEAU and Mr. R. MAILLOUX) arrived at the hotel. It was at about that time that their colleague Mr. LAROCHE started taking pictures of the object. Not being a professional photographer himself, he telephoned a photographer at the newspaper and asked for advice. Mr. LAROCHE was told to stabilize his camera on a bench nearby and use a 30 second exposure.



The two pictures taken by La Presse reporter Marcel LAROCHE on November 7, 1990. LAROCHE used a Nikon FS 35 mm single lens reflex camera, fitted with a 50 mm lens and set to infinity focus with aperture at f /1.8.
[images were scanned from colour copies included in the HAINES/GUENETTE report]


An MUCP officer who arrives at the scene at 9:45 in the hope of gathering more photographic evidence, finally decides not to take any pictures "because the clouds were too thick".

According to investigator MORIN the object disappeared from sight at about 10:10 "due to increasingly dense cloud cover".

The day after the sighting, and after the incident had been covered by La Presse, journalist BELIVEAU received a letter from someone claiming that his friend had witnessed the object from his small airplane. Although the pilot/witness completed a MUFON sighting form, no useful details surfaced. The pilot himself declined any further interviews and a direct link with the plane spotted during the sighting could not be made.

In 1992 GUENETTE, together with Dr. Richard F. HAINES (a well-known ufo researcher and psychologist formerly employed by NASA), published a 25 page report of the sightings. The report concludes that "the evidence for the existence of a highly unusual, hovering, silent large object is indisputable". Basing themselves on the available eyewitness testimonies, they add that "a reasonable lower bound for the angular size of the object's central 'oval body' as seen from the roof of the B(onaventure) H(otel) is 27 degrees arc". Having established this angular size, the authors calculate the actual size for the "main body of the object" to have been no less than 1,783 feet (585 m) across if it was at 3,500 feet (1,148 m) altitude, or 4,586 feet (1,504 m) if it was at 9,000 feet (2,953 m).

We end this case summary with a compilation of six sketches made by some of the principal witnesses.



Three explanations were offered for this multiple witness sighting of a gigantic "UFO" over Montreal: a display of the aurora borealis [1]; spotlights from a nearby construction tower shining through a thick fog [2] the same spotlights, but reflected off of the clouds [3].

The aurora explanation certainly sounds promising, but verification learned that there was no solar activity of note recorded on November 7, 1990. Furthermore, the overcast cloud deck, together with the ambient light pollution in Montreal, would have made it impossible to see the aurora that night.

The second and third possibility can be discarded on the ground of the following lines from the HAINES/GUENETTE report:

"Officer Lippé contacted the superintendent of a 45 story commercial building being built across the street to the West from the Bonaventure Hotel (at 1000 de La Gauchetière, the tallest building in Montreal) to turn off all of the intense construction lights which were located on the top of a construction crane. As expected, no influence was noticed on the appearance of the object when these lights were extinguished".

A huge, lighted object, photographed and observed by highly credible witnesses, deserves a solid explanation. We believe the key to the mystery can be found in a news item that the Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC) dedicated to the sightings on the fourth birthday of the incident [4].

The opening shot of this 10 minute long film, shows an aerial view of downtown Montreal at night, including a close up of the outdoor swimming pool on the rooftop of the Bonaventure Hotel. Interestingly, at the bottom of the pool there are six bright spotlights beaming skyward through the water. They appear to be the brightest unshielded lights anywhere near the hotel. Is it possible that the mystery object was a reflection of the pool lights in a high-altitude cloud of ice crystals? If so, the size of the mirrored image should be identical to that of the original, but the investigation showed that the longest axis of the "oval body" measured probably between 585 m and 1,504 m, whereas the longest axis of the pool measures 15 to 20 m at most!



The image to the left is a picture of the heated swimming pool on the roof of the Hilton Bonaventure hotel. The aerial view on the right shows the same swimming pool at night filmed from a helicopter. Six spotlights are mounted at the bottom of the pool. The dark dot in the center is a swimmer.
[Left picture taken from http://www.hiltonmontreal.com. Night view taken from the opening scene of "CBC Newswatch", broadcast on November 7, 1994]

The sizes given by HAINES and GUENETTE (H & G) were calculated from estimates of angular size and distance. While the angular size was determined by asking six witnesses to estimate the apparent size of the object at arm's length in centimetres or inches, the minimal and maximal distances were obtained from estimates of the object's position with regard to the cloud base (3,500 feet), and from estimates given by an Air Canada pilot who was also on the rooftop that night and situated the object between 8,000 and 10,000 feet. Although the authors admit that 'humans are not good estimators of distances or angles when using their memory of an earlier event', they do not take this observation into account when trying to determine the size of the phenomenon. The visual angles calculated from the witnesses' estimates vary from 1° 50' (estimate given by GUENETTE) to 45° (estimate given by the pool's lifeguard)! Only the smallest estimate (1° 50') was noted down on the day of the sighting. All other estimates (ranging from 11° 55' to 45°) were obtained at least 9 and a half months after the event. Despite the fact that they have serious doubts about the accuracy of such estimates, the authors settle on an average angular width for the main body of the object of 27°.

This choice of 27° is even more difficult to understand when H & G write that the visual angle of 1° 50' given by GUENETTE himself "is remarkably close to the measured visual angle obtained from the two photographs", namely "1° 14 min. arc for the first picture and 1° 17 min. arc for the second". According to the report these angles "define the distance between the two luminous areas in the photos that are farthest apart from one another and determine the longest axis of the 'oval body'" (unfortunately only three of the six lights are discernable on the low quality images included with the report). Being a ufologist, GUENETTE was probably aware of the grotesque exaggerations that are often made when witnesses try to estimate the size of an object at arm's length. As such, his personal estimate should be considered much more reliable than those of the other five witnesses. H & G argue that, probably, GUENETTE only saw one of the pencil rays due to his vantage at street level where the nearby buildings blocked his view. However, this explanation for the small visual angle given by GUENETTE is refuted by what the authors wrote elsewhere, namely that GUENETTE’s estimate of the size matches the size obtained from the pictures remarkably well. Moreover, GUENETTE described "a small greenish Aurora Borealis-like phenomenon with long streamers extending out from it" (our emphasis). This clearly suggests that GUENETTE had a view of the entire phenomenon, and certainly of its central body.

The sketch by La Presse reporter Marcel LAROCHE is another indication that a visual angle of 1.5° should be regarded as much closer to reality than the other estimates. On his sketch, LAROCHE compares the diameter of the object's "body" with that of the Moon (which has an angular size of only 0.5°!). Comparisons with known celestial bodies (such as the Moon or a bright star) are always much more reliable to work with than estimates at arm's length.

Let us stick with the hard evidence and do the math again starting with the first of the two pictures taken by LAROCHE. According to H & G, the linear width of the longest axis of the central body measures 0.370” on a 8” x 12” enlargement. This means that the linear width of the image on the 35 mm negative was 1.079 mm. This measurement can be converted to the real size of the phenomenon for any assumed value for the distance using the formula that holds that the size of the photographed object equals the size of the object’s image on the negative divided by the focal distance (50 mm) and multiplied by the distance between the camera and the object (in our case the distance to the cloud base which we believe acted as a reflective layer). According to weather data gleaned from the records of the Dorval International Airport [5], there was a cloud layer at 4,500 feet at 8:30 pm which had lowered to 4,200 feet at 9:00 and to 3,500 feet at 9:30 pm. From this we can safely assume that, when Mr. LAROCHE took his first picture, i.e. at 9:10 pm, the cloud base was between 3,500 and 4,200 feet (1,148 m and 1,377 m). Since the pictures were taken from the rooftop of the hotel, we have to subtract 65 m (the average height of a 17 story building) from these altitudes. This gives 1,083 m for the minimum and 1,312 m for the maximum distance between the camera and the phenomenon. To obtain the size of the phenomenon we have to multiply these distances by 1.079 and divide the result by 50. We get 23.4 and 28.3 m. In other words, not that far away (compared to 585 and 1,504 m) from the average length of a swimming pool (the pool at the Hilton hotel being "about 15 metres long", according to a traveller's review on http://www.tripadvisor.com).

H & G point out that the angle subtended by the phenomenon in the second shot is slightly larger (1° 17' instead of 1° 14'). According to the authors, this suggests "either that the object decreased in altitude, tipped in angle, or physically changed in size between the time the two photographs were taken". There is, however, another possibility, namely that the reflected image was now closer to the camera because of the descending cloud-base.

The majority of the sketches gathered by H & G either show six to eight lights arranged in an oval, or a partial circular arc with three or more small lights along its length. In interviews, the witnesses explained that the lights had different sizes and that there were white rays of light protruding from them, each ray beginning and ending abruptly, and the larger the diameter of the light, the longer the ray. As with most nocturnal UAP sightings that involve multiple witnesses, here too we notice important differences with regard to the number of lights, their colour and position. In these circumstances, a photograph - no matter how little detail it shows - is often a much more reliable piece of evidence to work with.

The pool lights visible in the helicopter shot from the CBC news item, are six in number. They are arranged in a semi circle and are not all equally bright. These variations in intensity are probably due to the fact that each of the lights reaches the camera under a different angle. It is also quite likely that the lights are mounted on an inclined pool surface, meaning that some lights will be deeper under water than others. The three lights visible on the UFO pictures display a similar appearance as the ones in the helicopter shot and are also positioned on one side of an imaginary circle (or oval).

According to a line drawing made from a high quality print of the first picture, there are three more lights visible in the original document, two of which are located on the opposite side of the "oval body" and one at its lowest point. Apparently, these lights are very faint because they do not appear in the colour reproductions that are inserted in the report. Moreover, the positions of the two opposite lights, as sketched by H & G, suggest that they may have been caused by internal camera reflections of the two brightest lights in the picture.

H & G are puzzled by the fact that "the end of each ray appeared to stop abruptly rather than taper to zero brightness gradually". They ask themselves if this may not have been "the result of air ionization along well defined energy paths". More likely is that the abrupt ends of the beams mark the end (actually the base) of the ice-crystal cloud [6]. Such narrow beams with sharply defined ends or tips appear in many pictures of pillar-shaped reflections created by ice-clouds. Of special interest is the striking resemblance between the lights in the photos taken by Mr. LAROCHE and the reflections photographed by Joël BAVAIS in the Belgian community of Ath in 2006 [7].

The reflection hypothesis not only explains the aspect, the immobility and the disappearance of the unidentified lights, it also explains why, apparently, the best spot to observe them was the rooftop of the Bonaventure Hotel. And perhaps even more important, it tells us why the phenomenon could be captured on camera but went undetected by radar, despite the fact that it was well within the radar range coverage.

---

[1] This possibility was mentioned in the CBC news item.

[2] See forum.sceptiques.qc.ca (French). On this forum, that is managed by the "Sceptiques du Québec", someone who worked close to the Bonaventure Hotel at the time of the sightings, suggested that the unidentified lights were construction lights from a tower that served to get materials to the top of a much larger building at 1000 de la Gauchetière. The writer in question, who calls himself "brio39", speculates that a gust of wind had bent the tower towards the roof of the Bonaventure hotel. According to brio39, the bright lights shining down on the rooftop in this way, together with a thick fog that obscured the upper part of the tower, could easily have created the illusion of a UFO.

[3] This possibility is considered by HAINES & GUENETTE themselves.

[4] The news item in question can be viewed at archives.cbc.ca.

[5] The Dorval International Airport, later renamed as Montreal Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport, is located at 8 miles (13 km) west of the hotel. Its elevation is slightly more than 100 feet (about 35 m) above mean sea level, which is about the same as that of downtown Montreal. The data from the airport revealed that:
- the weather was generally clear at 7:30 pm with a thin layer of scattered clouds at 6,700 feet above ground level (visibility was 15 miles).
- at 8:30 pm there was a scattered layer of clouds at 3,000 feet and an overcast layer at 4,500 feet.
- by 9:30 the cloud ceiling had lowered to 3,500 feet.
- at 10:00, when the object was seen to slowly fade out and finally disappear completely, the clouds were developing into very opaque, thick snow clouds from 4,000 to 5,000 feet thick.
- temperatures near the ground were just below zero that night and there was a slight breeze, with the wind coming from the west (later northwest) at 4 km/h increasing to 9 km/h.

[6] According to the weather data obtained from the Dorval International Airport the air temperature near the ground was -1° C at 8:00 pm. This suggests that temperatures were well below zero at altitudes above 3,500 feet (1,148 m). Tiny ice columns and hexagonal plate-crystals (only these two crystal types have large enough surfaces to reflect light back to the ground over such distances) form at temperatures from 0° to -25° C.

[7] For more info on pillar-shaped reflections observed near the zenith, see also Chapter 4 of our article Light pillars in cirriform clouds.

Near ha scritto:

Sul tubo c'è gia la puntata di ieri di voyager dove parlano del caso?

Anconra no Near.... ma penso che qualcuno lo inserirà...

[BBvideo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU7VzBgSBwU[/BBvideo]

540 metri circa di diametro..... e fermo per più di un'ora....

Ci rendiamo conto?

secondo me non ce ne rendiamo conto

Ho trovato altre immagini in rete....






... e questa pubblicazione:



The Canadian UFO Report:
The Best Cases Revealed
Di Chris Rutkowski,Geoff Dittman

http://books.google.it/books?id=wetk5GX ... fo&f=false

Ma come... Fermo per un ora....di 540 metri di diametro...e neanche uno straccio di fotografia decente?

Robs, ma quello che hai postato è solo l'anteprima o tutto il servizio che hanno fatto?

fotografia decente? si vede che emanava fumi

Near ha scritto:

Ma come... Fermo per un ora....di 540 metri di diametro...
e neanche uno straccio di fotografia decente?

Caro Near..... come dice il filmato, il caso è stato abilmente insabbiato
(con recupero verosimile delle pellicole originali in possesso del signor
Marcel Laroche).

Ciò che abbiamo qui a disposizione, non sono altro che le immagini
che sono arrivate al quotidiano "La Presse"......

Mi dirai che una cosa del genere potrebbe essere stata fotografarla
anche da altri testimoni........ chissà, magari si potrebbe estendere la ricerca...

Near ha scritto:

Robs, ma quello che hai postato è solo l'anteprima o tutto il servizio che hanno fatto?

è l'anteprima del documentario, ma il servizio finisce lì... come per dire "se continuate a seguire il documentario, ne vedrete delle belle".
Un pò come dare il becchime ai piccioni

ripropongo la foto che ho trovato sul web

Versione estesa (in francese) da cui voyager ha tratto le immagini:

OVNI de Montréal partie 1, UFO in Montreal part 1




OVNI de Montréal partie 2, UFO in Montreal part 2

Thethirdeye ha scritto:

Near ha scritto:

Ma come... Fermo per un ora....di 540 metri di diametro...
e neanche uno straccio di fotografia decente?

Caro Near..... come dice il filmato, il caso è stato abilmente insabbiato
(con recupero verosimile delle pellicole originali in possesso del signor
Marcel Laroche).

Ciò che abbiamo qui a disposizione, non sono altro che le immagini
che sono arrivate al quotidiano "La Presse"......

Mi dirai che una cosa del genere potrebbe essere stata fotografarla
anche da altri testimoni........ chissà, magari si potrebbe estendere la ricerca...

Be, se è un caso reale non ho dubbi che sia entrato in gioco il cover up. Proviamo a cercare, ma conosco gia il risultato...purtroppo...

cagliari79 ha scritto:

Near ha scritto:

Robs, ma quello che hai postato è solo l'anteprima o tutto il servizio che hanno fatto?

è l'anteprima del documentario, ma il servizio finisce lì... come per dire "se continuate a seguire il documentario, ne vedrete delle belle".
Un pò come dare il becchime ai piccioni

Ma quindi dopo ne hanno riparlato o no?