Monday, July 18, 2005

Chilean Family Photographs UFO in Mexico

Chileans UFO Photo

Terra
7-14-05


     Mexico - On June 19th of this year, the Toledo Aldunate family was visiting the archaeological ruins of Teotihuacan in Mexico. While observing various historic monuments of the Mayan and Zapoteca cultures, Nicholas Toledo, a sixteen-year-old student of Maria Raquel Cereceda school took several photos with his digital camera, including especially the majestic pyramids that date back to 600 years a.c.

     While taking the pictures Nicholas' father noticed a strange bollide that crossed the horizon at a terrific speed. Immediately they assumed it was a bird, but upon further reflection they discarded that idea, as the distance, size, speed as well as a reflection of the object negated that possibility.

     The object was caught by Nicholas' camera and the family continues to analyze it in the hopes of figuring out just what they witnessed that day. Interesting to note that UFO sighting are not uncommon to that area.

Home

2 comments :

  1. Hi Frank -

    To quote the piece, "Immediately they assumed it was a bird, but upon further reflection they discarded that idea, as the distance, size, speed as well as a reflection of the object negated that possibility".

    My first question...what WAS the distance, size and speed of the object, if such data negated a "bird" as the object?

    My second question...How does a reflection negate a "bird" as the object? Are birds presumably unable to reflect light?

    My final question...If the photo was taken in June, and the family's "analysis" has yet to determine what the object is, what are the prospects that further "analysis" will provide an answer?

    Kyle
    UFOreflections.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  2. Greetings Kyle,

    In answer to your questions specifically:


    1). The source of the article (Terra) didn’t mention specifics in regards to the “distance, size and speed of the object.”

    2). Again the article was vague; however, my interpretation was that it was metallic, although the article “does not say that specifically.”

    3). IMHO unless the family has some “unpublished skills” in regards to photo analysis, any answers “from them” would be extraneous.

    Personally, without the “eyewitness report” from the father, and if the picture was independent of any other supportive evidence, I would have assumed it was a bug.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    ReplyDelete

Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum-FW

LIVE SIGHTING REPORTS BY MUFON