Current Status of Niku 7 video analysis

[Tim Mellon]

alternativly a fixed object on a receding tide leaving a wake.

My bet: receding surf leaving a wake.

[Bill Roe]

alternativly a fixed object on a receding tide leaving a wake.

My bet: receding surf leaving a wake.

Then wouldn't the white water be on the other side of the object?  Also, viewing the original photo without enlargement, it's clear that the surf is minimal and coming from the right of the object not from the island.

[Chris Johnson]

It does remind me of bouys in the river when the tide is turning!

[Chris Johnson]

It was just a quick look on that one photo that isn't the best, I see no surf, just a wake of some description.

Just a quick look/glance :) not studied in depth.

[Bill Roe]

It was just a quick look on that one photo that isn't the best, I see no surf, just a wake of some description.

Just a quick look/glance :) not studied in depth.

Chris -

If you look at the original photo while still attached to Bevington's scrapbook, you will see minor wave action, very low, and coming from to the right of the object.

[Chris Johnson]

Bill, i'm sure your right but my observation was based purely on the photo a few posts above.  Kind of what do people see in the picture that they are shown without access to any other medium.

[Bill Roe]

Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that the 'surf' is 'moving' from northwest to southeast - from the viewer's near-left toward his shoreward-right.  How are you getting from the right?

Oh jeez - because I'm left handed.  You must be right handed.  The right side of the brain controls the left side of the body - so us lefties are in our right minds.  So there.

Meh - now that I take another look, the surf could be from either direction - but parallel to the island rather than heading into or away from the shore. 

[Ric Gillespie]

A friend, a former USAF Intelligence Operations Specialist, a Photo Interpreter studied the enlargement of the photo of the Bevington object - independent without bias or clues.  He saw white saltwater froth resulting from a fish or animal jumping or swimming in the water on the reef.

I'd be interested to know what forensic imaging techniques and algorithms your unnamed friend used to determine that the analyses Glickman and the State Dept. photo analysts made are incorrect.

So, I argue that the object could be an Electra Main Gear or it could be a Fish.  Or anything including a defect in the film.

Highly qualified photo analysts, including disinterested specialists at the U.S. State Department, have determined that it is a man-made object and not a defect in the film.

Another problem with the Bevington Photo that, to the best of my knowledge, has not been addressed - are the numerous anomalies on the photograph. 

There are numerous dust flecks, sunlight reflections off the water, a few birds in the sky, etc.  All have been addressed.

Now, for your statement: "Mellow out, lads. Jeff Glickman has done a good job........."  Maybe so.  But we cannot be certain.  Mr. Glickman's analysis has been compromised as a result of biased input from the report owner.

That is untrue and offensive.

[Bob Lanz]

Good Morning "Ladies and Germs" (Milton Berle)  Having lived on a large body of water for most of my life, what I see is simply wave action due to the wind.  Without the tidal data for the date and time this picture was taken, all speculation is moot.  There is no way to tell from this picture whether it is an incoming or outgoing tide.  And I for one have never seen or heard of a "receding surf leaving a wake".  What exactly does that mean?  A wake is created by a moving object through the water not a stationary object if that is, what it is, claimed to be.

[Bob Lanz]

quote author=Bill Roe link=topic=969.msg21956#msg21956 date=1353638760]

Now, for your statement: ..."Mellow out, lads. Jeff Glickman has done a good job......"  Maybe so.  But we cannot be certain.  Mr. Glickman's analysis has been compromised as a result of biased input from the report owner.

That is untrue and offensive.

Uh, Ric, it was not Bill Roe who said ""Mellow out, lads. Jeff Glickman has done a good job......".  It was Vahe Demirjian who coined that little tidbit which I found equally offensive to the forum.

[Tim Mellon]

  And I for one have never seen or heard of a "receding surf leaving a wake". 

Sorry for the imprecision, Bob. Perhaps I should have said "receding surf wave leaving a wake." In other words, swells that break over the reef carry water inward to a point of water equilibrium, then the water recedes back over the reef. As it does so, a fixed object stuck in the surf could cause a wake-like effect seaward of the object.

[John Ousterhout]

Waves are a poor indicator of current direction. As Andrew, Ric and others have mentioned, the current on the reef flat can be quite strong. A stationary object on the reef flat would be expected to leave a wake (correction - eddy for stationary objects, wake for moving objects) (thanks to Bob for the correction, below) when the water is in motion. In this thread, Andrew tells us that the currents around the island tend toward the N/NW.  In the Bevington photo, NW would be to the left.  Of course, the current on the reef flat might be in some other direction, depending on the tidal set at the moment.
Interesting idea, that the photo shows wake (if a moving object, or an eddy if moving water around a stationary object) - with that in mind, it's easy to see "wake" or "eddy" in the photo.  That also suggests to me that whatever object is creating the eddy (if that's what it is) is fixed in place enough to resist the force of the moving water.  That implies it is stuck in place, or massive, or both.

[Bob Lanz]

Waves are a poor indicator of current direction. As Andrew, Ric and others have mentioned, the current on the reef flat can be quite strong. A stationary object on the reef flat would be expected to leave a wake when the water is in motion. In this thread, Andrew tells us that the currents around the island tend toward the N/NW.  In the Bevington photo, NW would be to the left.  Of course, the current on the reef flat might be in some other direction, depending on the tidal set at the moment.
Interesting idea, that the photo shows wake - with that in mind, it's easy to see "wake" in the photo.  That also suggests to me that whatever object is creating the wake is fixed in place enough to resist the force of the moving water.  That implies it is stuck in place, or massive, or both.

With respect John, what you refer to as "wake" is "Ebb and Flow"  Ebb receding around a stationary object at low tide and Flow rising at high tide creating an eddy on the back side of either the Ebb or the Flow.  A stationary object in the water does not create a "wake".  "Wake is the region of recirculating flow immediately behind a moving solid body".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_(disambiguation)

[Tim Mellon]

"Wake is the region of recirculating flow immediately behind a moving solid body, caused by the flow of surrounding fluid around the body".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake

Bob, please quote accurately.

[Ric Gillespie]

quote author=Bill Roe link=topic=969.msg21956#msg21956 date=1353638760]

Now, for your statement: ..."Mellow out, lads. Jeff Glickman has done a good job......"  Maybe so.  But we cannot be certain.  Mr. Glickman's analysis has been compromised as a result of biased input from the report owner.

That is untrue and offensive.

Uh, Ric, it was not Bill Roe who said ""Mellow out, lads. Jeff Glickman has done a good job......".  It was Vahe Demirjian who coined that little tidbit which I found equally offensive to the forum.

I know that Mr.Roe was quoting Mr. Demirjian.  The part of Mr. Roe's posting that is untrue and offensive is the last sentence.  Jeff Glickman's analysis has not been compromised and my input was not biased.