• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Things That Are NOT UFOs

When I saw the Northern Lights (here, in my back garden, twenty-five years ago or thereabouts) there was a very impressive period where the sky turned blood-red for a few moments.

Apparently the red colour is quite rare, but from the UK it is slightly easier to see at times because it is higher in the sky( 200-300km) , so can be seen from further away.
Interesting insight, thks
 
Absolutely they greatly enhance the northern lights (Aurora Borealis).

Ah, I see what you mean.

I was thinking you meant that a solar flare up might create discrete phenomena here on Earth, rather than enhance a pre-existing phenomenon.
 
Ah, I see what you mean.

I was thinking you meant that a solar flare up might create discrete phenomena here on Earth, rather than enhance a pre-existing phenomenon.
Never research or seen it but it certainly wouldn't surprise me. Particularly for solar flares of unusual intensity with just the right atmospheric conditions?
 
Never research or seen it but it certainly wouldn't surprise me. Particularly for solar flares of unusual intensity with just the right atmospheric conditions?

Good thought.

Plasma phenomena are both interesting and very little understood (and could have great significance to many UFO sightings). One wonders if solar conditions could be relevant to their process of creation.
 
From my Twitter - female scientists - cool!

[B]Erin Biba[/B]‏ @[B]erinbiba[/B]
Ok so I googled. The sky over NYC looked blue because when electricity flows through gas it rips off electrons, which then recombine with atoms to produce energy as light. The light color depends on the gas that is being reconfigured. Nitrogen, which is common in air, burns blue.

[B]hannah[/B]‏ @[B]DrDoctorHannah[/B]
I'm almost certain it's about the emission spectrum of nitrogen
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim
I'm so pleased to see a Forum topic I set up ages ago still going strong! I've not had access under my old details for a long time, what with issues with an ageing PC and intermittent internet access, but that is now all sorted and I'm back!
(Oh and if anyone knows of a way to link all my old posts as trevp66 into my new log on it'd be appreciated)
 
Good to see the hypnotoad back.
 
Thanks. Good to be back. Had to go with the same old pic!
 
While reading Devereux's Earth Lights Revelation, I was struck by how many of these reports would be called UFOs in most other contexts. And, now, when UFO reports describe "lights", I can mostly see them as potential earth lights (because I prefer the possibility of earth lights over extraterrestrial visitation). MANY ball lightning accounts describe balls of light falling from clouds. Technically, I guess, a UFO could be an earth light or BL (and vice versa) because it's unidentified and flying, but popular culture has conditioned us to think UFO = "alien spaceship" or some such paranormal explanation. I'm flummoxed as to how to tease these overlapping object descriptions apart. I don't know that you can. This problem of making interpretative descriptions (including the conclusion within the account) could mean that we are missing stuff or heading towards a dead end. This is one reason why I wish ufologists would get back to following up accounts of lights in the sky instead of business about disclosure and exopolitics garbage. There may be something interesting yet to discover.
 
This is one reason why I wish ufologists would get back to following up accounts of lights in the sky instead of business about disclosure and exopolitics garbage. There may be something interesting yet to discover.
^this^
 
While reading Devereux's Earth Lights Revelation, I was struck by how many of these reports would be called UFOs in most other contexts. And, now, when UFO reports describe "lights", I can mostly see them as potential earth lights (because I prefer the possibility of earth lights over extraterrestrial visitation). MANY ball lightning accounts describe balls of light falling from clouds. Technically, I guess, a UFO could be an earth light or BL (and vice versa) because it's unidentified and flying, but popular culture has conditioned us to think UFO = "alien spaceship" or some such paranormal explanation. I'm flummoxed as to how to tease these overlapping object descriptions apart. I don't know that you can. This problem of making interpretative descriptions (including the conclusion within the account) could mean that we are missing stuff or heading towards a dead end. This is one reason why I wish ufologists would get back to following up accounts of lights in the sky instead of business about disclosure and exopolitics garbage. There may be something interesting yet to discover.
I've always wondered why extraterrestrials would want to advertise their presence with lights on their saucers anyway.
 
Ms Hill: This is one of the reasons why some have taken to calling it UAP instead, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena.
 
I’ve said it a few times here but many of the UFO accounts I’ve seen mention the witness being attracted firstly to a bright light. Then, a paranoic or fear-based response occurs. Pilots are outmanouvered, people in isolated locations are reportedly abducted etc. Put these two things together and there’s a possibilty that what’s actually happening is an electromagnetic effect is causing the light while also affecting the brain to induce a feeling of unease, dread or terror.

While the mind can trick itself, I’ve always wondered why it would wish to terrify itself producing UFOs, monsters and ghosts. Maybe it’s localised fluctuation in electromagnetic fields causing this.
 
I believe it was Fortean Times which talked about how some abduction scenarios, bright light, sense of being lifted, lost time, could be explained by being struck by lightning.
 
Ms Hill: This is one of the reasons why some have taken to calling it UAP instead, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena.
Yes, to differentiate from the name with so much baggage. But is it catching on?
 
I believe it was Fortean Times which talked about how some abduction scenarios, bright light, sense of being lifted, lost time, could be explained by being struck by lightning.

Yet others say UFOs don't appear during rain. I don't think lightning is a good explanation. It's usually obvious that you've been hit by lightning. You are either severely physically affected or, at least, your clothing flies off.
 
I’ve said it a few times here but many of the UFO accounts I’ve seen mention the witness being attracted firstly to a bright light. Then, a paranoic or fear-based response occurs. Pilots are outmanouvered, people in isolated locations are reportedly abducted etc. Put these two things together and there’s a possibilty that what’s actually happening is an electromagnetic effect is causing the light while also affecting the brain to induce a feeling of unease, dread or terror.

While the mind can trick itself, I’ve always wondered why it would wish to terrify itself producing UFOs, monsters and ghosts. Maybe it’s localised fluctuation in electromagnetic fields causing this.

The common thinking that EMFs can cause certain feelings in people is highly overrated. It's not been shown by studies to be so obvious. For regular or strong fields, it doesn't even affect most people at all in blind tests, even if they think they are sensitive to it. It is plausible that complex fields can mess with your brain but what has created the complex field? As a geologist, I can't agree these things just appear via earth energies or such mystical things. Natural field effects, like geomagnetic storms, don't work on people as they do on the upper atmosphere. Simply invoking "EMF effects" is not a satisfying proposal on many levels.
 
maxresdefault.jpg
 
Yet others say UFOs don't appear during rain.

It doesn't have to be raining for lightning to strike. Obviously it -usually is- but there was a case in the UK of a hill walker being struck from a cloudless sky in sunny weather. This was on a TV documentary I saw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim
It doesn't have to be raining for lightning to strike. Obviously it -usually is- but there was a case in the UK of a hill walker being struck from a cloudless sky in sunny weather. This was on a TV documentary I saw.
Sure. Often lightning strikes come before or after the rain has passed. But most often not without storms being nearby. I should have been more specific. I just thought the idea about UFOs and rain was odd. I'd heard that on Astonishing Legends podcast and never had heard anything resembling that before.
 
While reading Devereux's Earth Lights Revelation, I was struck by how many of these reports would be called UFOs in most other contexts. And, now, when UFO reports describe "lights", I can mostly see them as potential earth lights (because I prefer the possibility of earth lights over extraterrestrial visitation). MANY ball lightning accounts describe balls of light falling from clouds. Technically, I guess, a UFO could be an earth light or BL (and vice versa) because it's unidentified and flying, but popular culture has conditioned us to think UFO = "alien spaceship" or some such paranormal explanation. I'm flummoxed as to how to tease these overlapping object descriptions apart. I don't know that you can. This problem of making interpretative descriptions (including the conclusion within the account) could mean that we are missing stuff or heading towards a dead end. This is one reason why I wish ufologists would get back to following up accounts of lights in the sky instead of business about disclosure and exopolitics garbage. There may be something interesting yet to discover.

I think it very likely that plasma and electromagnetic phenomena have a great deal to do with many UFO sightings (both night time lights and daytime shiny/metallic sightings). The UK MOD's Condign Report came to this conclusion to explain at least some UFO phenomena and I think it has a great deal of merit.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jim
I think it very likely that plasma and electromagnetic phenomena have a great deal to do with many UFO sightings (both night time lights and daytime shiny/metallic sightings). The UK MOD's Condign Report came to this conclusion to explain at least UFO phenomena and I think it has a great deal of merit.
Except there are no good explanations involving plasma and EMFs. Nothing ticks all the boxes for what has been reported. Explaining UFOs as, for example, ball lightning just pushes the problem down the road a bit.
 
Except there are no good explanations involving plasma and EMFs. Nothing ticks all the boxes for what has been reported. Explaining UFOs as, for example, ball lightning just pushes the problem down the road a bit.

It seems to me that there is no reason to expect explanations to be resolutely fixed within current scientific knowledge. And so, yes, the plasma/EMF hypothesis does push the problem down the road a bit, but at least there's a road. There is a direction to investigate.

There is a lot more to discover with plasma/EMF/ball lightning. And at least ball lightning is, at very long last, being taken seriously by science.

We're getting somewhere -- slowly.
 
Back
Top