My first time seeing this enhanced presentation of the Bevington photo. To be honest, the enhanced area of the photo, to my mind, makes the object appear LESS like a landing gear rather than more. In fact, looking at the enhanced object I am reminded of seeing trees float down the Yukon River in Alaska. It wasn't at all unusual for them to float crown down/root ball up which would give a similar presentation. Without some sort of perspective to determine size this could easily be a palm floating roots up. If we MUST see it as a landing gear, then we must also explain the UFOs forming a triangle with the first being almost directly above the object, the second being higher near the top of the photo frame and about halfway across the photo toward the NC and the third being lower than the second and about 2/3 of the way from the object to the NC. We should also explain the flares being fired from the NC (first just below the cloud line and just forward of the stack on the NC; proceeding up and to the left) and the small boat/raft/ partially submerged object (aircraft floating belly up!?) just off the bow of the NC and almost obscured by the frame of the blowup.
While I say all the above with tongue in cheek, I also present it as a warning that it is just too easy to find what one is seeking in virtually any photo. Is there a "Bevington Object"? Perhaps but I've seen nothing to rule out a simple glitch in the developing process (after all, this isn't modern digital photography) and the UFOs and flares show that some sort of glitches are present in this photo, nor have I seen anything to rule out a myriad of other, naturally occurring, phenomena.
Now for a serious question: Has any analysis of the other object (Bevington 2 ?) which appears just off the bow of the NC and roughly in line with the point where shore vegetation shows a significant change in height? I, personally, find that at least as interesting as the original object.
William
3425