Search results

This is true across the Northern hemisphere. This is true across the Southern hemisphere. This is true everywhere on Earth, but less so nearer the poles.

Yes. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/tc3_09x81.pdf

See the video in my first post.

Yes. It doesn't matter, the Coriolis effect is strongest at the poles.

The gun rotates the most when you place it at a pole. Think of Focault's pendulum: it will do 360⁰/day if at a pole, but 0⁰/day at the equator. That's the Eötvös effect. On the Northern hemisphere, shots are deflected to the right no matter which direction you aim; the reason is that they're...

Great work! I thought the "appendages" at the bottom looked like the bits that have the strings attached. The tail might be hidden behind the body of the kite, given the high vantage point of the observer; or it might be made from transparent plastic? I expect that the claim of the object...

It's the other way around, with the coriolis effect being zero at the equator, and different orientations north and south of it. It doesn't matter which direction you're aiming at. More background on the artillery: Flat Earthers generally hold Earth to be motionless, with no coriolis...

Cropped: Fotoforensics' error level analysis suggests the picture wasn't edited.

Wouldn't be the first one to have caused UFO reports, see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/big-balloons-that-are-not-round.12577/post-276849 and https://www.metabunk.org/threads/dark-uap-free-falling-possible-black-plastic-bag.12170/#post-262634 .

Note: the object appears lower in the image than the horizon, which means that its altitude is less than the elevation of the observer. I've been wondering if it might be a kite or a parachute.

Do your pictures have grass and ferns in focus in the foreground, too?

How do you see that? This looks worse than the Calvine photo. Or Patagonia. Why was the photographer taking a series of pictures of the forest?

UAPMax's record on keeping promises seems not great. From back in July (strongly excerpted): Two days ago, someone direct messaged me on twitter. They said they wanted to talk, read some of my articles, and liked my verve- their words, not mine. So, with a grain of salt, we talked. And then, we...

Testimony has included both first-hand and second-hand reports of crash retrieval and reverse-engineering programs by US, Russian, and Chinese governments; the testing of materials obtained from retrieved craft; active and ongoing government disinformation operations; kinetic military action...

Yes and no. • Primary radar: that's the big rotating antenna I showed in the video clip above, that @flarkey provided some specs for. Can theoretically detect anything that reflects radar, but typically, birds and other clutter are filtered out. In some conditions, weird atmospheric reflections...

Yes, you can. You've decided you don't want to. Tell me, what's the endgame going to be? How is this conversation going to end? Realistically? and then, is it worth it?

I thought they're being fairly transparent, see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/aaro-mission-process-and-data-statistics-patterns.13087/

We've been over the "both sides" thing in the Coulthart thread, please back that claim up, because I don't believe it. (Please don't talk about tobacco and x-rays this time.) Assumptions are not a problem if they're transparent.

Welcome to Metabunk! Since you mention that, we have a place for stories like yours, at "Escaping The Rabbit Hole" https://www.metabunk.org/forums/ETRH/ . You're not alone.

Lens distortion.