Results of Investigations Concerning Pterosaur Sightings In Papua New Guinea
Target [left] Still Emitting at Eight Seconds
(Excerpts of original report are on the left; explanations by Whitcomb are on the right.)
Image Processing of Paul Nation Video
Intensity Plot Indicates Spatial Underlying Spatial Variation (Possible Infrastructure)
Results for these frames:
target cumulative number = 2
with source 1 intensity reduction.
Neither target shows displacement within the
electromagnetic intensity variations:
Plate 23 D shows the presence of back-
ground radiation substantially below
sources one and two.
possible combustion sources:
fires: not indicated in Plate 23 D;
however not confirmed absent in this plate.
possible ballistic sources:
meteors or aircraft: none indicated in
Plate 23 D however not confirmed absent
in this plate.
camera inherent diffraction sources:
internal camera imaging artifacts on the
focal plane: none, however camera is
not available for testing and confirmation
fabrication: potential of hoax:
none indicated in Plate 23 D however
not confirmed absent in this plate.
Casual observation of Paul Nation’s video seems to show that the lower-left light fades out while the upper-right light is still glowing brightly. Paiva’s analysis shows that the lower “target” does not completely cease glowing but continues a low-intensity emission eight seconds from the beginning of the video recording.
Plate 23 shows two distinct “targets,” and neither moves against the background. It seems that Paul Nation’s description of the two lights taking off into the air may have occurred after he turned off the camcorder, rather than near (but before the end) of the recording.
Fire-source is not indicated but not proven absent in Plate 23.
Meteors or airplanes are not indicated but not proven absent in Plate 23.
No evidence for or against camera artifacts is proven in Plate 23.
No evidence for or against any hoax is proven in Plate 23.
Page 23 of R.I.C.P.S.P.N.G