Search results

I am still recovering from nausea of watching the original video (the swaying is just....ugh!). @jarlrmai, good job! Nothing to add I guess. At the end of the clip I think the person filming is repositioning by walking a little, is my assumption.

But it is so confusing, even with all the interviews and transcripts etc.. Where they seeing the being up close or from 250m away? What happens often with witnesses, is the poor distance judgement, specially with kids. If objects are recognisable of course, it is easy. But if unknown, the...

Agreed, just wanted to comment on pressure.

Pressure is just F/A, so pretty linear.

My bad, I should have mentioned that interview was from 1996, 1.5 years after the event..

Agree, we should also not get too hung up on the witness's age thing.

Just for completeness, here is the link to the interview from Tineke (1996). Quite interesting, young kids also (< 10). Source: https://youtu.be/4cdQkXNbDvc?t=441

Investigators were all biased. Even Tineke de Nooij, the Dutch TV show host that visited the school children, was very much into the paranormal and everything related..

Ok thanks. Wondering how the "selection process" went, choosing which kids may draw.... Perhaps only the ones that want to draw aliens? Just throwing it in here.

Good find. As the lens system has no iris/aperture, the rectangle will indeed define the out of focus shape. You can also see the diffraction effect of the edges on the rectangle on the 4th image of post #1.

Were there really 250 kids outside, when it happened? Why then only say, 50 of them saw it? Was it not that big of an event? The other 200 kids preferred to play marbles? These details matter IMO. I cannot imagine any kid to say "ufo you say? Meh, I continue with my hoola-hoop".

Indeed. But in my country we call the current generation of kids the "rubbertegel generatie". ;) (sorry, being off topic)

Yeah, you are right. I checked it again and in no way the vessel would be invisible.. Oh well. But I agree about the drone option.

It is not that high up if you consider the camera is (likely*) a few meters below sea level. Also, sea worthy sailing boat masts are quite large. * I looked at the topographical map, it is more ± 0m

Ha! I think I know what it was... A sailboat with large mast and lamp in top. If you look at the ships passing at night, it makes sense. check the webcam.

Not sure if of use, but I timed a person walking on the dike towards the windmill. It took approx the same time as it took for the "ufo" to cross the scene. I think this is the path walked (orange or yellow):

It does not matter, it seems there was some "leading the witness" going on. How can be we be sure the kids were not first discussing what happened with someone else, before being interviewed? Or was there leading going on during the interviews? If we can't, a whole lot becomes a little shaky.

I think that is due to differences in perspective.

Just for my understanding.. Is there any more footage from BF at all? I cannot find any. This alone tells me it is all BF BS. EDIT Ok was a bit lazy, but now I found the Freeman footage.. Opinion not changed though. :)

Agreed. But the blob of light is also pretty large and bright, perhaps the (smaller) nav lights are not seen because of this? Just an idea. Otherwise a drone is for me the next option.