Blue links lead to the fully translated html versions of the page, purple links lead to pages whose start pages (as well as introductions and tables of contents at least) are already set up, green links lead to extern sites, grey means that no file is available yet).
Img.147 (P28) An example of an unjustified claim for a genuine UFO photograph being a hoax, only because the computer technique of "digital image enhancement" revealed a form that resembles a vertical "thread" running above the object. The deductions from subsection P2.10 indicate, however, that the "thread" is in fact an effect of the light being dissipated by the central magnetic circuit of this UFO. This invisible circuit of the highly concentrated magnetic field yielded from the vehicle's main Oscillatory Chamber: (1) must be positioned exactly in the indicated place, (2) should take the presented proportions of dimensions, and (3) its interaction with light should produce the impression of a rectangular column - in fact appearing on the image (hoaxers would not use a rectangular thread!). Moreover, the same computer image also revealed edges of the "topside alignment cone" and the "complementary flange" visible at the upper side of the vehicle. These edges are distinguishable features for the UFO type K7 - see (2) and (6) in Figure F5 and Figure F19. But the so-called hoaxers could not possibly have known about them. Therefore, the edges additionally testify to the authenticity of this photograph.
(a) An original photograph of the K7 type UFO, taken by an anonymous photographer calling himself "N.N." on 1 June 1966 over San Jose de Valderas, Spain - see [1P2] p. 161, [8P2] p. 161. It is one of a series of photographs of the same UFO vehicle taken by two independent photographers - see also Img.145 (P26).
(b) A computer image of the object from this photograph, produced with the use of the "digital image enhancement" technique and published in the book [7P2] p. 208. This image is claimed to be the "undisputed proof" that the photograph is a hoax. No investigator to-date has had the courage to argue with such "scientific evidence" and to provide a fair interpretation of the image.