So being good scientists the first thing we must do with our hoax theories is seek to disprove them and point out the potential flaws. So here's a summary of the most commonly mentioned theories and their drawbacks:

Common to all

​

a) Contradicts David Clarke's Defence Intelligence source​

b) Apparently fooled the MoD (for a certain period of time)​

c) Not obviously apparent​

1. Kite

a) Is anyone actually still entertaining this?​

2. Hill or mountaintop above a sea of fog

a) Seems that we can see clouds and sky throughout the photo​

b) Plane visible when probably lower than hypothesised countryside that isn't​

c) No strikingly similar images produced so far (from anywhere in the world)​

d) Peak looking like that perhaps feasible, but bottom triangle seems weird/unlikely​

e) Weather records don't show thick fog (location/date uncertain though)​

​

3. Reflection theories

a) No visible ripples or distortions or disturbance of water surface anywhere in the picture (some say possible "wavelets" in bottom left - hypothetical "shoreline" - but not clear that's what it is)​

b) No rock or island matching the image has been found​

c) "Man in a boat" seems highly unlikely (no disturbance)​

d) No successful physical reproduction as yet (though computer recreations show it's possible)​

e) Dismissed by Stu Little, who apparently saw much more detailed versions of all six photos​

f) Apparently very few lochs in Scotland - and none suitable yet identified - where barbed wire fences directly abut water (though could be some other body of water, including puddle, as well as outside Scotland)​

g) If plane is a reflection then plane is flying upside down (unless photo has been horizontally flipped)​

4. Model(s) on a line

a) The trees, fence and 'craft' would all be more or less the same distance from the camera yet show different levels of focus​

b) If the plane is a model, same applies there​

c) If the plane isn't a model, implication of huge amount of patience/luck on the photographer's part (unless taken somewhere jets were known to flyover and circle and schedule somehow known)​

d) Were the trees tall enough/the branches long enough to hang the models from and appear as they do in the picture?​

5. Balloon

a) No images presented of balloons that look like the object​

b) No sign of a tether​

c) Difficult to imagine six pictures showing same view (ie, a balloon would probably rotate and otherwise move in the breeze/wind)​

​

6. Unintentional double exposure

a) No obvious signs​

b) Would have required someone to have taken several unremarkable shots of aeroplanes that coincided with a shot of an unremarkable shot of a rock/island that just so happened to be the only thing that 'transfered over'​

c) One double exposure maybe, but six?​

7. Cutout on glass in front of the camera

​

a) No obvious signs of glass​

b) Potential issues with focus​

c) How big would the sheet of glass have to be?​

​

8. Computer manipulation

​

a) Photoshop didn't come out until February 1990​

b) Program and equipment relatively expensive (PS $895, Mac ~$2-3000)​

d) Quantel Paintbox incredibly expensive commercial product​

e) Not believed to be digitally manipulated (ie, "it's a genuine photo) by MoD and Andrew Robinson​

​

9. Darkroom manipulation

​

a) Not believed to be manipulated by MoD and Andrew Robinson​

b) Probably other reasons I'm not aware of​

​

So that's a brief summary. What have I missed? What have I got wrong?

Might as well add the main drawbacks to the non-hoax theories:

1. Stealth craft

• No known technology that can hover for ten minutes and then fly vertically up at great speed
• No obvious signs of a means of propulsion
• Nothing known that can hover/fly without making a sound
• Top secret aircraft hovering in daylight near a Scottish village seems unlikely
• No records of anyone else noticing it
• Apparently denied by both the US and the UK

2, Military balloon

• Military apparently have no record of it
• No sign of tether
• Doesn't match any known military balloon
• Peculiar to tether it near a main road rather than on a base or at sea

3. ETs

• No evidence that ETs have ever visited Earth
• Statistically unlikely that ETs will visit Earth during humankind's existence
• No known records from the pilots of the planes
• Not noticed by anyone else (as far as we know)
• Photographer didn't pursue publishing photos after being turned down by the Daily Record (and questioned by the MoD)

Though I suppose if we want to discuss these three we'll have to do it in some other thread.