Of course, I would be totally wrong to make a blanket statement about some country being one way or the other, while not being specific.

All I am trying to say, here is a story about a near plane crash. The airport admits having power interruptions. The official blame points to unkown, uncontrollable factors.

It's called passing the buck to a mythical ball of light (which was ostensibly responsible for EVERYTHING).

No one was fired, jailed, sued, fined. How convenient. Obviously, the problems were fixed, and maintenance applied. Life blood tourism is unabated.

That much seems obvious. A diversion, with a dumb story. Maybe the pilot was tired, the local grid was overloaded, and I don't know what else. I think that is a more logical possibility.

I don't want to insult anybody, and apologize for the general observation. But, I just don't buy some "Major" spouting an explanation involving a white and green light, executing maneuvers 100 meters away from a plane. Did the passengers see it?

Well is not an insult, my country is corrupt thats a fact.

And again you could find any explanation for these sightings, everyone in the plane could have suffered from simultaneous hallucinations, yes it's possible. But then one day you experience this kind of stuff and see your not hallucinating and then your perspective changes.

I'm not saying they are aliens, there's no proof of that, but I can assure you there has been lots of power shortages in bariloche throughout the years and they don't put any excuses for them, less having to do with far off stuff like this case. Then for what would an airplane crew invent something like this? ( imagine how much you are exposed to criticism after exposing something most people believe is a total lie)

How can you possibly "see" that you're not hallucinating something?

I don't think I'd be satisfied with a piece of a "flying saucer"...I want to see the whole thing land, have the alien come out and explain (at least try...not sure how they'd communicate) where they come from. I've seen "evidence" of aliens through witnesses having marks, photographs, video, etc....but nothing ever rock solid. I do believe there is intelligent life elsewhere besides Earth since to think otherwise is pretty arrogant. Have they been here? Who knows, but like I said until there is rock solid evidence...like a public landing in broad daylight with plenty of eyewitnesses and up close shots with video cameras and picture cameras (not too hard nowadays with almost everyone having a cell phone with at least one or both of these capabilities). I guess you could call it a coming out introduction.

I saw a UFO one time, but it only lasted for a few seconds (was real quick dip through the clouds and back straight up). Was it an alien? I have no idea which is why it is a UFO to me. It was a bluish white colored ball of light (I was thinking more like ball lightning maybe?) there was no lightning in the area though so at the time I didn't think it could be ball lightning since I've never seen one in person that I could compare it too. I have a very open mind, but I do not like to jump to conclusions...see a UFO...must be an alien craft...I look at all possibilities. Does that make me a skeptic? Not necessarily...

I am willing to hear the arguments of others as long as they are intelligent and not childish like I've seen on some of these forums. "I'm right and you are all wrong so get over it" or "I KNOW what I saw so either believe me or don't comment" or like a lot of skeptics here that just go into forums and tell everyone not to believe someone without themselves giving up the information they've come across to back up their claims. I love reading through the forums and make a few comments here and there, but I see a lot of back and forth flames coming from a lot of the same people on here...they should just start a whole new section for these people called something like "Flaming Debates" where anything goes...I'm pretty sure it would be a hit since the gloves could come off and if you do not wish to be flamed then do not participate. The forums should be used by people who have some insight to offer on a subject. I think the real reason everyone makes a comment is to up their number of posts. I see some people with a few months of membership who have about 20 times the number of posts as I do, but most of them are empty posts with no real insight I'm sure.

Yeah I agree with you, those UFO's people see are most likely from earth, there is no proof whatsoever that they are alien crafts. Honestly I don't care about the UFO phenomenon that much, even having seen one myself, I think the astronimical discoveries of mankind and the eventual colonization of other planets and interaction with other life forms is what everybody should be looking forward to.

Probably at one point certain races of humanity thought there were no other humans different than them in the earth, think about it. Untill they developed ways of traveling the seas etc, time could have passed while an asian never had seen a negroid or a caucasian person and viceversa.

Rigid thinking people should open up to certain plausible possibilities, otherwise they will be like the ones defending with fist and sword that the earth was the center of the universe, lighten up folks

Nothing changed at all.

Now, how are different types of aircraft identified on radar? In other words, what determines certain signatures in regards to radar reflections?

Why have you been ignoring the facts?

Very clear, so here is what I would like for you to do!

As for yourself, an experienced aviator with knowledge of atmospheric conditions, tell us all as to why it was impossible for plasma to have been responsible for any of the UFO case files I have presented! Remember, I have stated numerous times that most UFO sightings can be explained, but it's those case files that have no earthly explanations that I am interested in.

Why has plasma now been placed in the same boat as swamp gas?

According to the records, the flying saucer is what caused the pilot to initiate a missed-approach, not the airport lights.

Let's do a recap!

Much of his information came from scientist and engineers who were tracking flying saucers with their observation instruments.

Not to be confused with Naval Commander Robert B. McLaughlin, head of the Naval missile program at White Sands (who unequivocally stated that the flying saucers being spotted by White Sands personnel, including himself, were not only real but extraterrestrial in origin).

[

I see that you are still trying to put a hundred pounds of nonsense into a five pound bag of reality.

Didn't anyone tell you that those same declassified government UFO documents still here after withstanding the hurricane-force winds from the skeptics for decades and still here in very good shape, I might add!

Your comment is just another typical piece of rhetotic with no basis for fact that is on par with those who have claimed the world is flat and why I am adding another notch on the stock in regards to skeptics who don't do their homework.

Just to let you know, those documents remain U-N-R-E-F-U-T-E-D to this very day by the skeptics.

Just thought you would like to know that fact, Jack, so tip off your hat and drop it on the mat next to the sack, and then go do your homework in the back of the shack and when you are finished doing that, come back with the facts, Mac.

Don't tell that to the Air Force! They have already told their cadets that attempts were made to shoot down flyiing saucers.

How can you be so sure that those cases has nothing to do with, what some believe, terrestrial timetravelers!?



I think that plasma IS the new and improved "swamp gas explanation". If you know what I mean. (?)

Oh, indeed your story did change. At first you claimed it returned a soft signature, now you claim it returns a hard one like an aircraft!



Funny thing...they say UFO and not alien spaceship!

Because the future hasn't happened yet and we are talking; the present and past.



Hazzard,

I have an admission to make!

As the debate between the skeptics and myself on plasma was going on, I knew all along that the idea of plasma to explain UFOs, was brought up back in the 1960's by UFO debunker, Phil Klass, so plasma is not new as some skeptics had thought because they didn't do their homework, otherwise, they would have found that idea of plasma to explain UFOs was also rejected by both skeptics and UFOlogist back then, so I was amused during the whole debate knowing the skeptics were unaware of that fact, but I played along because I'd planned to make it a point where they were coming from, and it wasn't from a platform of reality either.

I handed the skeptics a small HINT, and if you missed it, that what they were doing was similar to copying Japanese language characteris and not knowing what they represented, in effect, telling the skeptics they didn't know what they were talking about.

The whole point is, the skeptics didn't do their homework to ascertain the real facts behind the MoD, and the plasma phenomenon, and their lack of knowledge on this issue was clearly evident to me, but I played along anyway to see how far they were willing to go, and now, I hope they understand why the plasma phenomenon is actually decades old and not new as you wrongly suggested and had already been rejected by both, skeptics and UFOlogist years ago.

Given the fact on what the skeptics were posting, they were unaware that even UFO debunker Phil Klass later rejected his own plasma theory in the late 1960s, and afterwards argued that all UFO sightings could be explained as misidentification of normal phenomena (such as clouds, stars, comets or airplanes), and hoaxes.

I could very well have planted a false story about plasma and UFO readar contacts and the skeptics would have used it against me not knowing what was actually going on behind the scenes, and their stance on UFOs is exactly the same as well because either they lack the knowledge and the ability to read between the lines (deceipher details) or just plain too lazy to do their homework, or do it properly if they do.

So now, I hope you see the light as to why plasma, is now known as the "New Swamp Gas."

Which radar "ghost angels III" do!

The bottom line is, you, and some of the other skeptics took the plasma bait without knowing the history of the MoD's deception towards UFOs, its plasma story, and that of the Air Force memo, and that even UFO debunker Phil Klass brought up the idea of plasma and eventually rejected plasma as an explanation of UFOs, and that is saying alot, to say the least!!!




It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that since we didn't have supersonic flying saucers, those flying saucers they were talking about were not ours, and all it took was simple common sense to make that determination.

Actually I believe in aliens. Not because i've seen it. But because I just believe.

Of course there are UFOs. Unidentified Flying Objects? Thousands. But that only means that something is in the sky that cannot be identified.

To build a case for alien life that had contact with the Earth requires an acceptance of possibilities, not the demand for irrefutable evidences that can never be provided. We cannot explain how early civilizations had extremely advanced sciences, construction techniques, written languages, music, poetry, laws, arts and astronomy so sophisticated that they could predict eclipses.

To ask from where that knowledge came produces such possibilities but certainly not evidence.

I seem to have hit a nerve... Ok, so a newspaper report is unrefuted evidence, suck my dogs tail. Thats a load of crap if I've ever seen any. Some sleezy guy from the sun newspaper comes out to a supposed crash site and goes: "OK, 300 words, how am I gonna do this?" As I have said before, reporters axe facts to make them fit a word deadline. Your irrefutable facts, oh please, more like something you hear people at a pub talk about: "Hey, you hear about that place in that country, yeah, I heard there was a massive alien there, and there is document to prove it!! The document is called a comic book!!!" Skyeagle, if your evidence is unrefutedable, I am from france, and my cat lives in a kentucky fried chicken box!!


Good day to you sir!!!


Thanks, GUNNARYSEARGENTHARTMAN

Ok, so Skyeagle, you think that EVERY SINGLE unidentified craft in the sky is a UFO? I seriously hope you don't!! You come out with things like 'dont tell the air force!!' Who the hell would? You seriously need to look at other peoples views before considering what you will say. There are some on here who agree with you, the majority don't. Until you can show more than crappo documents and blurry articles, I seriouswly think that you are hell bent on trying to convert others here!! You won't with this type of evidence!!!


Thanks, GUNNARYSEARGENTHARTMAN

You go by original sources that were used by the newspapers.



The fact those case files are still unexplained to this very day proves me correct, and you, W-R-O-N-G!!!

No, and I am on the record as stating that the majority of UFO sightings can be, and have been explained.

In fact, there have been times when I have disgreed with other UFOlogist and even pointed out descrepancies in the obviously faked photos of Billy Meier and disagreed with Stanton Friedman on the MJ-12 documents.

In addition, I have also stated that I am skeptical of UFO reports until I have examined the cases in detail.



I want folks to do their homework, and do it properly, and let them make their own decision.

Isn't it weird how new knowledge, as ascertained during the 1990's can change such. Maybe if you actually had the means to read and understand the technical details I have posted over and over again you would have understood that:

1) Plasma can be very luminous
2) Plasma can move very fast (hypersonic) and have erratic trajectories
3) Plasma can refelct radar energy just like a metal object.

Where is you technical rejection of that?! Do you dispute that?!



No. See plasma above that you still haven't given a satisfactory explanation to why couldn't be the cause in the Belgian case.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Just face up to the fact that you guys got conned and understand why none on those case files had anthing to do with the plasma you are talking about and why it is now known as the "New Swamp Gas."

Honestly, Sky, it is very obvious who knows and who doesn't - especially when we come to the intricacies of radar and plasma physics. Sure, it was rejected as there wasn't the means to do the measurements required, but guess what, now we do. And we can make our own plasmas if we want to. You can even make one yourself in your own microwave oven, if you want to.



Oh, I am sure the "skeptics" did. Of course plasma has existed for many years, it's not like it winked into existence yesterday. High atmospheric plasma phenomena has been known for decades. Again, it is not the knowledge of it's existence, but the ability to probe and prod it that was the key factor. And especially now where we can make high energy plasmas ourselves, replicating ball lightening and other phenomena we are really learning about nature's wonder - but I guess that evolution in experimental atmospheric physics eluded you altogether.



See above and new developments in science instead of clinging to 40 year old reports that are hopelessly outdated.



See, that's the difference between the skeptics and you here, as that is exactly what you do. A skeptic would read that report, look at the physics behind it and correlate it with otherm independent sources. You, on the other hand, post all this old stuff, most without in link reference, and when some tedious searches reveals the text you picked your quote out of, it is typically out of context and the conclusion if not altogether wrong from what you post, then misleading and includes several caveats.



I would doubt it as there has not been a single post from you to refute it by any technical means!

Cheers,
Badeskov

So, I present technical data that states the above and have scientific reports, well supported by peer reviewed papers, to support my argument and you rebuttal is that we got conned?! That's your argument?!

Cheers,
Badeskov

Since it has already been proven beyond any doubt that plasma was not taken seriouslly then, nor even now, and had nothing to do with any of the UFO case files in question, what's the point?!

Indeed Hazz, I can't rule out ET just as I can't rule out plasma (or some third or fourth or fifth explanation). As it stands we don't know what is it and we simply don't have the data to reach a well substantiated conclusion, however much we would like to.

I think we can let this plasma discussion rest for now until it comes up again. I think it stands for itself and if people want to read through the pages, they can do so and form their own well informed opinion about the matter at hand

I, for one, don't have the time to engage in prolonged discussions over the next couple of days as I have a couple of serious milestones at work I need to get done - but at least that is interesting stuff as well

Cheers,
Badeskov

Proven by whom?! Maybe you can provide me a link to a scientific report that supercedes that of the 2000 Hessdalen report, stating that such wasn't the cause of the Belgian radar data case?

Cheers,
Badeskov

And just where did this plasma derive the huge magnetic field it would require to hold it stable for seconds let alone minutes? And how if there was a huge magnetic field holding it stable how did the Radar function at all.? Given the strength of the field needed to perform such an effect would have undoubtedly caused severe disruption to both the on-board systems of the F16s and the Radar on the ground?

Or, could it be that the *plasma Mantra* is just another one of those cases where sceptics leap on some bandwagon without the slightest true understanding of what they are actually talking about? They hear the word plasma and little light goes on..."ahhhh don't need to give links at all, don't need to prove anything by references to examples.. Just shout Plasma!! Plasma!! Plasma!! and those nasty people questioning my comfy fallacious paradigm of reality will all go away..

What?



The MoDs deception towards UFOS, the airforce memos, Phil Klass, none of them have any relevance to the discussion we were having about whether or not plasma gets picked up on radar like aircraft.



Really? Then just why do their documents not say "alien spacecraft" like you say it is so easy to determine?

Despite whatever conclusions you say are "easy" to make, these documents you hold so proudly mention "UFOs" not "alien craft". Looks like you lose the debate.



I have a feeling that if god himself came down and said "Aliens dont exist" you'd also say that proves you correct.

PROPOSED EARTHLIGHT MECHANISMS

Good reference, Merrill.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Link to Source

Key words being no scientific evidence existed. Not doesn't exist... So in 1966 no scientific evidence existed, but in 2008 some evidence exists. Which is hardly as consistent as the nuts'n'bolts ETH track record (no scientific evidence in from earlier than 1947 to still no scientific evidence in 2008).

And of course the point that will be the crux of the debunking attack, MoD Codign report which proposes a viable explanation for some true UFO events (again contrasted with the n'n'bETH, which states that the only eplanation for true UFO events is alien spaceship. Since those who subscribe to said theory also work on the principle that all is known and recorded about the natural world).


Probably because the data required to back that hypothesis, at that time, didn't exist. Again back to the crux of the debunking argument, noone has claimed that this explains all, only some.
But I'm sure we'll see another UBD map which conclusively proves everyone wrong (despite having little to no bearing on the actual points of the argument).


Who'd have thought that in UFOlogy circles that an unpopular hypothesis would lead to a 'political' style dirty tricks campaign. Never happens in UFOlogy...
Any wonder why there's little to no funding for this field of study? Or why the tax paying public tends to associate it with astrology, tea cup reading and entertainment TV...

Speaking tea cups, I leave you with something that's bound to produce some precipitation and gusts of hot wind...



edit:typo

Earthlites are far more likely related to bioluminescence/Chemiluminescence than plasma.. again, i ask where was the huge magnetic field coming from to keep the lights in Belgium stable for so long?

I have stated before, that undoubtedly, some UFO incidents are as the result of so called Earthlites and some are as a result of other misidentified natural occurrences such as super lightning... The Belgian sightings have a whole different visual side that does not correlate with the typical Earthlite sightings..

Okay, I just wanted to pop back in and say I've been gone the last few days, and just got caught up again on the last 8+ pages.

My hat's off to Bad, Evangium, Hazzard, et al for their patience in discussing this with Sky Eagle. They've sacrificed their patience so that others can learn.

I salute you.

I'll continue to lurk in this thread, unless I feel I have something worthy to add (I've long ago come to the conclusion that Sky cannot be convinced of any position other than the one he already has -- in my case in regards to the ancient Egyptian portion of the derailment of this thread -- and so in the interest of my own sanity and emotional stability, I feel it best to let others continue the discussion. In other words, I can bang my head against the wall only so long).

If you think that's bad, try getting abducted by the aliens.

disclaimer- aliens as in 'aliens..'. if they evolved on another planet is beyond verification..

Hey Badeskov,

This is great to see this discussion taking place! Sorry to enter the conversation so late, but I've also been making the same argument for several years now.

Clearly Hessdalen-like phenomena occur globally and have been reported for hundreds of years and these apparently are observations of lower atmospheric plasmas that get reported as UFOs. This potentially explains a statistically significant percentage of "Unknown" UFO reports.

What's really interesting of course is the characteristics and behaviors of the phenomena that are so strange as to actually convince many observers that they are witnessing technology rather than natural phenomena!

Absolutely. And I also have a question for Badeskov... Is it possible that these plasmas are affected by magnetic fields, like these in aircrafts...could that be why they seems to follow them??

By the facts and documents, eyewitnesses accounts of objects that didn't have anything to do with any plasma phenomena. Ever wondered why Phil Klass dropped the ball on his own plasma thing?



It was obvious without any reports based on the description of thousands of people and data and remember, the Belgian incidents took place over a period of many months, not just one night.

I figured you didn't know what it was!



Actually, it does because none of the case files I presented had nothing to do with the plasma phenomena.

Interesting!

And, I agree!!

Where does the energy come from?! It is a very good question and one that still has to be answered (scientists are eagerly hypothesizing about it). Yet it has been observed.



Both yes and no, if we remove the triangular craft sightings and focus on the sightings where only the lights were observed, it could very well be plasma phenomena (not saying that it is).

Cheers,
Badeskov

Nigel,

Thanks for the kind words. Only happy to know that some actually find it worthwhile reading

Cheers,
Badeskov

Hi Lost,

Always a pleasure to see you around

It is a very interesting topic and as it is rather unusual it is very uncommon to actually see (Hessdalen being one of the only places where it really happens frequently). What sparks it and keeps it "lit" is still up in the air. Yet, it is happening.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[quote name='merril' date='Apr 25 2008, 08:16 PM' post='2266190']




Want to see a lot of lights in the sky, then try visiting an international airport at night.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtarded/2364552329/

Interesting.... I'm not sold but I'm very intrigued. It could explain some UFOs.

Edited to add: That's regarding the plasma-thing, not skyeagle's die-hard ET slobberings.

First of all, a plasma as theorized here is highly conductive and living of electromagnetic radiation, like for instance radar (although radar in itself would be too weak to keep it alive). That means that if you for instance illuminate a localized, high density plasma from one side (i.e., a radar beam), you can build up a local difference in the degree of ionization and basically nudge or attract such. Likewise, as it is an atmospheric phenomena, it is likely it could be subject to slipstreaming, i.e. be caught in the slipstream of an aircraft. Also, as it is presumed that it is illuminated by electromagnetic radiation (could be radar or otherwise), a current will most like be induced onto the surface of the plasma, which in turns will generate a magnetic field (on top of what it already have) and as aircraft nowadays tend to be big, metallic objects, there will be an interaction between the plasma and the frame of the aircraft as well.

It is a highly complicated equation with many variables coming into play and what will actually happen is highly unpredictable. But in short, the answer to your question is most certainly yes, it is very likely that such a plasma will interact with an aircraft, how is just impossible to say

Cheers,
Badeskov

It is obviously not the omnipotent answer to the whole UFO question, but more than likely, plasma events are the answer to a good part of them. Some are just unexplained and will remain so as we have no way of going back and reinvestigate with more sophisticated measurement equipment and high resolution cameras. Unless, of course, ET pops by and complains about the last time they were around

My point is just that we can't rule it out.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Considering that none of the UFO case files in question involved any plasma at all, what else is there to say?