Be Reasonable: Episode #036 – Richard O’Connor

Richard O’Connor is anaesthetist and crop circle researcher who is convinced he has evidence that UFOs are routinely visiting the earth.

Support the MSS, our work, and all of our podcasts by making a monthly contribution via Patreon.

UPDATE: The images we discussed in the pocast:



  1. #1 by Matthew Sanders on February 26, 2016 - 16:21

    Michael, will you please add to the episode notes the photograph you and Richard were both looking at and talking about? (about minute 20)

  2. #2 by BracesForImpact on February 26, 2016 - 19:46

    Hello, I stumbled upon your podcast and I’m enjoying it immensely. In regards to the photos above, a google image search of “drone led lights” gives some interesting ideas for the above picture.

    Also, if the “aliens” are attempting to keep a low profile, why have lights on their vehicles emitting wavelengths that can be seen by those they observe? Certainly they have eyes if they have lights on their vehicles. You would think they’d have low light technology of some kind, but even so, why have these very bright lights on during the daytime?

    If they’re not intentional lights and they’re a byproduct of some kind of advanced propulsion, why are they not hiding this? For such an advanced species that can travel light years, they seem a bit dense.

  3. #3 by Sara on February 26, 2016 - 20:51

    He seems like a chill person, but that seems super water-droppy to me.

  4. #4 by Rich on February 27, 2016 - 15:24

    Saw these pictures yesterday. Today I lost a Disney foil helium-filled balloon in the wind coming out of my daughters birthday party. I instantly thought it looked *exactly* like the thing in the picture as it flew off.

    Luckily she didn’t see it!

  5. #5 by Mr Floppy on February 28, 2016 - 05:10

    How many photographs did he say he has looked at 300,000?

  6. #6 by Pdubyah on February 29, 2016 - 06:40

    he was a bit lost for words when he was asked about the probably of a cold war superpowers colluding to keep a secret. And it was amusing that despite the idea floated these things might be on-world and not off-world, from the sea or a cave or something, that they’ve spent thousands of years ‘observing’ and getting to know the culture, like Humans would if we discovered life on Mars on a visit. Nice but harmless.

  7. #7 by Lucas on March 5, 2016 - 07:36

    Depending on the camera these could be rain drops that were distorted by the scan rate of the camera’s CCD. If you’ve tried to take action shots with a cell phone you might have been unlucky to have one with a slow scanning rate which causes the bending and distortion of fast moving images.

    I think if the drop is falling from the top of the frame and the scanning is performed from the bottom of the frame going towards the top this would tend to make falling objects appear flatter than they are.

    Perhaps Mr O’Conner can attempt to capture photos of falling water droplets and determine if they have a similar appearance to these photos. Seems like it would be an easy experiment for anyone to try.

    PS I see two objects/crafts/drops…

  8. #8 by Wendy on March 6, 2016 - 16:12

    Could you please post the other 19 photos. They might allow us to determine what, exactly, the object is. This photo is 5 of 20. The others might give us greater perspective.

  9. #9 by Wendy on March 6, 2016 - 16:31

    I went onto and found more of the photos. There are water droplets in photo 1 of 20 as well as 5 of 20 and not in the others. If these were extraterrestrial, why would they appear, disappear and appear again. It’s not reasonable.

  10. #10 by Rosallie Brown on March 12, 2016 - 12:34

    Very respectful conversation. One point you touched on was his belief in others’ stories. He compared UFO stories to a person talking about their back pain in a clinical setting. One would be likely to accept their assessment of their pain experience but comparing that type of info to viewing something as mundane as a traffic accident is not a good comparison. One is very likely to report pain as they sense it, but highly unlikely to provide accurate evidence for an unexpected viewed ‘event’, such as an accident.

(will not be published)