Dr Richard O'Connor UFO Picture

[Longeyes]

This guy has certainly put in the ground work has he come up with the goods?

http://www.freep.com/story/news/nati...roof/77857852/

CLANCY, Mont.— For nearly two years Dr. Richard O’Connor has kept two cameras pointed at the sky with the deep hope and belief that something might be out there.

And then, after nearly 280,000 photos captured by motion detection, it happened.

Or maybe not.

But O’Connor’s findings of what he believes are two unidentified flying objects has set off a barrage of email exchanges, some of them angry, in the community of UFO fans and experts.

About noon on Nov. 4, his cameras captured five photos of something flying through the skies of Montana that is hard for some to explain.

“It appears to be a light source,” O’Connor said. “In my opinion, even a hardened skeptic would say ‘Wow, that is what I expect a UFO would look like.’”

But his discovery has sparked some debate, leaving the doctor to find his own photo experts to determine what his cameras may have captured....

This is his website
http://cropcirclesresearchfoundation.org/
His email: richard@cropcirclesresearchfoundation

[A99]

O'Connor appears to be an anesthesiologist and he's offered to take a polygraph test wrt to his ufo photographs. You don't offer to take a test like that if you're lying about whatever it is that you're taking the test for.

[Longeyes]

[Longeyes]

The sequence of photos are on his site here

http://cropcirclesresearchfoundation...star-visitors/

The most interesting one is here
http://cropcirclesresearchfoundation...-21-M-5_20.jpg

Copy uploaded here:

2015-11-04-12-00-21-M-5_20.jpg

[Garuda]

This is the photo that you call the most interesting one:

[majicbar]

The sequence of photos are on his site here

http://cropcirclesresearchfoundation...star-visitors/

The most interesting one is here
http://cropcirclesresearchfoundation...-21-M-5_20.jpg

Copy uploaded here:

2015-11-04-12-00-21-M-5_20.jpg

5. "If these were water drops then the area of maximum sunlight reflection should be on the right side of the object and in the direction of the sun, not on the left side as we clearly see on the object’s surface in photo M 5/20." This would be true for any solid object being photographed. An explanation that makes sense eludes me.

[Longeyes]

I would be amazed if the lens could get both the clouds and a water drop at that distance in focus. Either the drop would be in focus and the clouds blurred, or the other way round, the clouds sharp and the drop probably won't even show up, the depth of field would have to be colossal.
It would be easy to disprove the raindrop theory, Dr O'Connor could photograph an object the size of a rain drop in front of the lens and trigger it. It should be massively blurred.

Read his page about this morning, m 1/20 shows two distant objects, m 2/20 nothing, m 3/20 he claims he can see something in one of the clouds , m4/20 in the sequence again nothing, then m 5/20 shows the two discs. He also claims his motion sensors only work up to 100ft so he has no idea how something so distant could have triggered them. He says he has tried to call them done as in Dr Greer's CE-5 protocols. Otherwise it's something closer but what?