160 replies to this topic

[psyche101]

TheMcGuffin, on 12 June 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

In fact, the "light" seemed to blink on and off several times over two hours, as it followed them and they followed it.

Indeed, as I said, it disappeared regularly, which indicates natural phenomena, so does "cat n mouse" when we consider electrical charges.
It is just too old and convoluted. James McDonald had his "final say" in the 60's, Klass did not bother with it until the 70's so little challenge was there. I just figure to had little to work with more than what is essentially a ghost story. Even if this was a genuine Alien space craft playing games with a plane, I do not feel enough information exists to determine such. It's just an anomaly in antiquity. And it only remains an anomaly because so little is known other than some pilots saw an intermittent light. Quite a few bombers reported anomalies didn't they? Maybe it was an equipment characteristic. Phil Klass did show that the plane had a faulty relay connected to the polarity switch as PFP stated. Nicap confirm this in their evaluation - here.
In addition to the previous, we also have a faulty system on the plane, and a meteor shower in this vicinity. I feel the more compelling cases are ones where one does not have to create a case to fit the events. Particularly so when prosaic explanations can also fit the bill.

[psyche101]

Slave2Fate, on 12 June 2012 - 02:56 AM, said:

Unless you invoke the ever popular 'do-anything exotic alien technology'. Nothing like using an unverified, unsupported ambiguous hypothesis to explain an unknown.

It just goes downhill from there IMHO. A sensible debate is valuable, but white washing nonsense is just feeding imaginations. I do not understand how some can be satisfied with such, and then go on to say how anyone who listens to a scientist is a sheep. These are people obviously not well versed in logic, which is just another evil and have no concept of empirical evidence.


Ahh well, they do say it takes all types, and by gum so it does indeed!

[TheMcGuffin]

psyche101, on 12 June 2012 - 03:24 AM, said:

Indeed, as I said, it disappeared regularly, which indicates natural phenomena, so does "cat n mouse" when we consider electrical charges.
It is just too old and convoluted. James McDonald had his "final say" in the 60's, Klass did not bother with it until the 70's so little challenge was there. I just figure to had little to work with more than what is essentially a ghost story. Even if this was a genuine Alien space craft playing games with a plane, I do not feel enough information exists to determine such. It's just an anomaly in antiquity. And it only remains an anomaly because so little is known other than some pilots saw an intermittent light. Quite a few bombers reported anomalies didn't they? Maybe it was an equipment characteristic. Phil Klass did show that the plane had a faulty relay connected to the polarity switch as PFP stated. Nicap confirm this in their evaluation - here.
In addition to the previous, we also have a faulty system on the plane, and a meteor shower in this vicinity. I feel the more compelling cases are ones where one does not have to create a case to fit the events. Particularly so when prosaic explanations can also fit the bill.

I put this one in the unknown category since no one at Blue Book, ATIC, Air Defense Command or anywhere else was able to identify it as a known aircraft.  They certainly trued to identify it as something because the indications are that the investigation went on for months behind the scenes, but with no results except unknown and unexplained.

I think we can safely rule out a meteorire or any other natural phenomenon behaving this way for two hours, and the UFO was detected from at least two radar stations on the ground, as well as visually and by radar in the air.

As far as the thing attempting to mimic our radar signals, I have no explanation for that either, but since it did not respond to IFF (Idenification Friend or Foe) we know that it wasn't one of us, while trying to imagine that it was something from the Soviets flying that far south in 1957 seems highly unlikely.

[psyche101]

TheMcGuffin, on 12 June 2012 - 04:35 AM, said:

I put this one in the unknown category since no one at Blue Book, ATIC, Air Defense Command or anywhere else was able to identify it as a known aircraft.  They certainly trued to identify it as something because the indications are that the investigation went on for months behind the scenes, but with no results except unknown and unexplained.

I think we can safely rule out a meteorire or any other natural phenomenon behaving this way for two hours, and the UFO was detected from at least two radar stations on the ground, as well as visually and by radar in the air.

As far as the thing attempting to mimic our radar signals, I have no explanation for that either, but since it did not respond to IFF (Idenification Friend or Foe) we know that it wasn't one of us, while trying to imagine that it was something from the Soviets flying that far south in 1957 seems highly unlikely.

I cannot disagree with this evaluation, it is a mystery, and will likely remain unexplained. It is just too long since anyone can access the information directly. The meteor I find might still be a factor as a shower was happening making the sighting of such probably quite regular during the discussed time frame but would not account for the instances of cat n mouse. I am for the moment putting the strangeness of the signal down to the experimental types being tested at the time.

[zoser]

psyche101, on 12 June 2012 - 05:12 AM, said:

I cannot disagree with this evaluation, it is a mystery, and will likely remain unexplained. It is just too long since anyone can access the information directly. The meteor I find might still be a factor as a shower was happening making the sighting of such probably quite regular during the discussed time frame but would not account for the instances of cat n mouse. I am for the moment putting the strangeness of the signal down to the experimental types being tested at the time.

An intelligent meteor that follows aircraft?

[TheMcGuffin]

zoser, on 12 June 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

An intelligent meteor that follows aircraft?

I think that's one of the things that had them so perplexed back then, since meteorites or other natural phenomena don't act this way.  They don't emit signals and don't follow planes around for two hours, but they couldn't identify it as any known aircraft.  They certainly gave it the old college try, though, but in the end they just admitted that they didn't know what it was.

[psyche101]

zoser, on 12 June 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

An intelligent meteor that follows aircraft?

It was a meteor shower. That means a meteor possibly every few seconds down to minutes at time during the shower. Some meteors do fall in a horizontal fashion - consider approaching earth on an oblique angle at high speed, gravity is not strong enough to sway the path significantly being a weak force in nature. The inertia will overcome, so you could be seeing things in all directions, which conceivably could be perceived as "following."
It pays to consider that they are hitting the atmosphere at high speed as well, can the temps induce induction plasmas? I do not know, but I bet that question is worth asking. I said it did not explain the "cat n mouse" in my post if you re-read it, but I would put that down to plasmas, which I would like to pursue the possibility of connecting plasmas with meteors. In any case, the faulty relay could account for the "cat n mouse" readings.

Edited by psyche101, 13 June 2012 - 12:28 AM.

[psyche101]

TheMcGuffin, on 12 June 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

I think that's one of the things that had them so perplexed back then, since meteorites or other natural phenomena don't act this way.  They don't emit signals and don't follow planes around for two hours, but they couldn't identify it as any known aircraft.  They certainly gave it the old college try, though, but in the end they just admitted that they didn't know what it was.

I do not think the meteorites are a complete conclusion, but surely a meteor shower happening at the time must add to some confusion? We know the craft had faulty on board electronics to - that pesky relay. I know you prefer the ET option, and going out on my speculation limb, which as you know I rarely do, if ET was coming here, and had nefarious purposes so therefore wanted to remain covert, a meteor shower might just provide the right "cover"?

Also, the plane was not followed for two hours was it? As far as I recall the sighting was intermittent, as such, Tim Printy broke the sighting into 4 different phases to help with the process of elimination. If there was a 2 hour pursuit, fighters would have gone up wouldn't they? That would be a definite perceived threat.

[Slave2Fate]

psyche101, on 13 June 2012 - 12:20 AM, said:

...which I would like to pursue the possibility of connecting plasmas with meteors.

OK, you have my interest piqued. An intriguing notion and one that I haven't heard before. Have you found any correlation or is this a fairly new pursuit?

[psyche101]

Slave2Fate, on 13 June 2012 - 01:01 AM, said:

OK, you have my interest piqued. An intriguing notion and one that I haven't heard before. Have you found any correlation or is this a fairly new pursuit?

Very new idea, probably more my mind rambling, but I think that the temperature ranges of meteor re-entry should be sufficient to induce plasma. I was thinking if heating gasses can reduce the number of electrons (or increase them) to make a plasma, and meteors come from all places with many compositions, why would a meteor at sufficient speed, with sufficient size to manage re-entry not be able to burn of elements into a gas, which could then in turn be heated further to create an atmospheric plasma? Could the meteor itself turn into a gas at high temps - mini comets if you will? (I am asking myself this in case I am getting confusing) In the Universe, plasma is the most common state for ordinary matter so we see many natural occurrences although on a far grander scale than I am looking at I admit, but it seems to me reasonable that a scaled down version seems rather possible when one can create a pasma in an ordinary lightbulb. Alternatively, could a superheated meteor gather a small amount of plasma, and "build up" in earths natural reserves with it's magnetic properties? I might be way off track, but it seems a reasonable pursuit to consider? It would be a regular source that creates such anomalies, and perhaps might explain a portion of claims. I have a few paths to wander yet in any case

Earth's Natural Plasma Fountain courtesy wikipedia

Artist's rendition of the Earth's

plasma fountain

, showing oxygen, helium, and hydrogen ions that gush into space from regions near the Earth's poles. The faint yellow area shown above the north pole represents gas lost from Earth into space; the green area is the

aurora borealis

, where plasma energy pours back into the atmosphere.

Edited by psyche101, 13 June 2012 - 01:52 AM.

[Slave2Fate]

psyche101, on 13 June 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

Very new idea, probably more my mind rambling, but I think that the temperature ranges of meteor re-entry should be sufficient to induce plasma. I was thinking if heating gasses can reduce the number of electrons (or increase them) to make a plasma, and meteors come from all places with many compositions, why would a meteor at sufficient speed, with sufficient size to manage re-entry not be able to burn of elements into a gas, which could then in turn be heated further to create an atmospheric plasma? Could the meteor itself turn into a gas at high temps - mini comets if you will? (I am asking myself this in case I am getting confusing) In the Universe, plasma is the most common state for ordinary matter so we see many natural occurrences although on a far grander scale than I am looking at I admit, but it seems to me reasonable that a scaled down version seems rather possible when one can create a pasma in an ordinary lightbulb. Alternatively, could a superheated meteor gather a small amount of plasma, and "build up" in earths natural reserves with it's magnetic properties? I might be way off track, but it seems a reasonable pursuit to consider? It would be a regular source that creates such anomalies, and perhaps might explain a portion of claims. I have a few paths to wander yet in any case

Earth's Natural Plasma Fountain courtesy wikipedia

Artist's rendition of the Earth's

plasma fountain

, showing oxygen, helium, and hydrogen ions that gush into space from regions near the Earth's poles. The faint yellow area shown above the north pole represents gas lost from Earth into space; the green area is the

aurora borealis

, where plasma energy pours back into the atmosphere.

I readily admit that my knowledge of plasmas is limited but I don't see any reason why your hypothesis isn't at least plausible. I'd have to look into methods of plasma formation a little deeper to comment further though. This is the kind of stuff I like to see on these boards though, I like the way your brain works. I think you may have inadvertently caused me to have to do some reading though.

[booNyzarC]

Bloody brilliant!  The thought never occurred to me but I must say that I can see your line of thinking and agree that it is entirely possible.  

[TheMcGuffin]

psyche101, on 13 June 2012 - 12:25 AM, said:

I do not think the meteorites are a complete conclusion, but surely a meteor shower happening at the time must add to some confusion? We know the craft had faulty on board electronics to - that pesky relay. I know you prefer the ET option, and going out on my speculation limb, which as you know I rarely do, if ET was coming here, and had nefarious purposes so therefore wanted to remain covert, a meteor shower might just provide the right "cover"?

Also, the plane was not followed for two hours was it? As far as I recall the sighting was intermittent, as such, Tim Printy broke the sighting into 4 different phases to help with the process of elimination. If there was a 2 hour pursuit, fighters would have gone up wouldn't they? That would be a definite perceived threat.

Even the 1947 UFO wave took place during a meteor shower, and there has long been an association between these and increased UFO reports, especially the short duration, lights in the night sky type.

[Slave2Fate]

booNyzarC, on 13 June 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

Bloody brilliant!  The thought never occurred to me but I must say that I can see your line of thinking and agree that it is entirely possible.  

After a cursory search I have found that meteors can attain temperatures of over 1600 C, though I am not sure if that is the upper limit because of physics or if that's just the highest we've recorded. Also, I'm not sure yet what kind of temps we are looking at for plasma formation. One thing of note though is the ionization trail that a meteor generates which would be essential for plasma formation. Interesting stuff.

[booNyzarC]

Slave2Fate, on 13 June 2012 - 02:27 AM, said:

After a cursory search I have found that meteors can attain temperatures of over 1600 C, though I am not sure if that is the upper limit because of physics or if that's just the highest we've recorded. Also, I'm not sure yet what kind of temps we are looking at for plasma formation. One thing of note though is the ionization trail that a meteor generates which would be essential for plasma formation. Interesting stuff.

Extremely interesting stuff indeed and I find the idea to be feasible in the very least.  I hope that Badeskov and Lost_Shaman pop in to offer their thoughts on the idea.  They've both done some extensive study into plasma and I'd bet they would add some thought provoking insight.