One reason I continue to `believe`.

[Zeke Newbold]

It is no big revelation to say that the UFO-scene these days is in something of a disarray. The core of the field at the moment seems to be made up of conspiracy nuts whose wild claims make up the mainstay of their UFO belief. Or if not that, then there are various types of New Age cultists at large.

It is so easy then, in our era of (apparent) information overload, where it is harder than ever to separate the wheat from the chaff, to give the whole thing a miss - and to refer to it only in terms of self-deprecating nostalgia - as so many are doing.

I, however, continue to believe that there is an exotic core to the thing: something more than odd meteorological phenomena and `black technology`. Here I will set out one of my reasons for doing so. it is someone else's story, not mine - but I trust the source as much as I trust anyone.

About twenty years ago I was studying a Humanities subject on an MA course. Whilst doing so I befriended another student from mainland China who was about fifteen years my senior. He took a bit of a shine to me - seeing me as his protege or something. He would invite me to his home for Chinese meals every Sunday. (BTW - if you ever want to experience real Chinese cuisine, then this is the only way to do it: befriend a Chinese person !)

Then he would tell me of his life - and it was quite a colourful one as he had been caught up in the Cultural Revolution in Mao's time. He also had a hand - so he told me -in the Tianammen square demonstrations.

I am not going to name him because he was then, and no doubt still is, a respected interpreter who is responsible for having interpreted various important novels into Chinese. I feel it would be a breach of confidence.

Anyway, during the Cultural Revolution he was branded as belonging to an elite class family background- and hence was sent out to work with the peasantry in some remote part of China - working on a chicken farm or something (alas, I have forgotten where.)

One night he observed this:a huge glowing teardrop shaped thing (thick side first) flying over the landscape. It made a natural sounding humming noise, followed the contours of the land, and seemed to have a sort of fuselage - like a `sparkler` on the back. Crucially,he also said - and he was very adamant on this point (as I pressed him on it) - that it had windows along the side.

The response of the local people to this event was for them all to come out of their houses banging on pots and pans - the standard peasant response to the appearance of demons. My friend meanwhile wrote a letter to his father, who was an amateur astronomer, asking him if he might have seen a comet !

The event had little, if any press coverage.

I want to stress that my friend, unlike me, had no real previous interest in UFO's - indeed the account had to be dragged out of him somewhat. He had had little, or no, exposure to UFO literature. (Note how his description - the `natural hum`, the `sparkler fuselage` the way it followed the contours of the ground - tally with many other CE 2 reports !)

So there you have it: when I find myself getting jaded about UFO's, which is often, I remind myself of this story told by someone I completely trust was telling the truth as he saw it.

 

[ramonmercado]

Thanks for that story.

I want to believe as well. There is so much crap out there though that I've largely been turned off UFOs.

 

[Ermintruder]

Similarly, I would personally hope there is something measurable and real about the whole thing. However, the full advent of mass-market CGI makes Youtube awash with convincing rubbish. What this will ultimately do to the sensory thresholds of real witnesses (assuming that they, and the putative phenomena itself, do both exist) goodness only knows.

Once Project Bluebeam type 3D holographic projectors become available from Argos, and people start interacting with projected virtual drones that are themselves able to interact with each-other, and possess a level of AI, that should start to confuse the real aliens in the real UFOs.

Unless they, in reality, are actually 3D projections from an alien civilization that's doing a remote massive multiplayer role-play game. In which case, we're almost ready to log-in.

 

[eburacum]

One night he observed this:a huge glowing teardrop shaped thing (thick side first) flying over the landscape. It made a natural sounding humming noise, followed the contours of the land, and seemed to have a sort of fuselage - like a `sparkler` on the back. Crucially,he also said - and he was very adamant on this point (as I pressed him on it) - that it had windows along the side.

The response of the local people to this event was for them all to come out of their houses banging on pots and pans - the standard peasant response to the appearance of demons. My friend meanwhile wrote a letter to his father, who was an amateur astronomer, asking him if he might have seen a comet !

Not a comet, but quite possibly a meteor bolide, or re-entering space debris.

The ZondIV reentry was observed by several witnesses who described it as having windows; it did nor, and was too far away for any windows to be seen. What it did have was a blunt shockwave at the front followed by numerous bright fragments in a train formation, which observers interpreted as windows ~(and sketched them as such - see below).

 

[eburacum]

Here's a photo from Kevin Randle's blog showing what some of these witnesses might have been seeing; a bolide breaking up, with a blunt end followed by numerous particles and sparkles at the end. Remember that all these particles would follow the shock wave more-or-less in formation, giving the illusion of a solid body.

 

[Zeke Newbold]

A good attempt but I'm not sure I buy that explanation.

My friend only mentioned the `comet` hypothesis to show how naive he had been at the time.

I repeat that he was a Chinese young man, in the early seventies, who had not - at that time - been exposed to UFO literature. He had no reason (unlike the above mentioned witnesses) to see `windows` without due cause.

He described the object as moving at a leisurely pace, giving off a natural sounding hum and following the contours of the ground (i.e going up a bit when the ground went up and vice versa).The `fuselage` at the back he described as being like a rod that gave off electric type sparks. He made no mention of any impact the thing made on the earth, which would surely follow such a sizeable meteor or space junk entering the atmosphere and reaching such close quarters.

 

[eburacum]

Yes; the 'following the contours of the ground' detail does go against the 'bolide' interpretation. But it could still fit; if the local terrain includes a large, sloping hill which rises and falls quite smoothly, then the apparently curved path of a bolide with respect to the observer might appear to follow the contours of the landscape. And very few bolide observations include an impact (this usually happens many tens, or even hundreds of miles from the observer).

 

[eburacum]

The hum is a difficult part of this observation to explain; any bolide would be many tens of miles away, and the sound from the meteor would not reach him for several minutes. But sounds accompanying meteors are quite common - they appear to be caused by radio-type emissions that travel at the speed of light, rather than the speed of sound.
http://www.meteorobs.org/bagnall/audible.htm

 

[eburacum]

The `fuselage` at the back he described as being like a rod that gave off electric type sparks.

Here's the re-entry of the Jule Verne ATV; at this point it looked a bit like an object with a blunt prow, two or three windows followed by a thinner rod emitting sparks. Admittedly every bolide and re-entry is different, but this looks fairly reasonable to me.

 

[Zeke Newbold]

Oh, come on Ebaracum !

You're guilty of indulging in the very thing that `UFO believers` are forever accused of: clipping the data to fit the hypothesis !

You're starting to remind me of Donald Menzel who proposed that the famous Kenneth Arnold sighting was (i) Snow blown from the mountains, then (ii) orographic clouds and then, (iii) spots of water on Arnold's windscreen ( this despite the fact that Arnold had opened the window !) i.e - any explanation will suffice so long as it's mundane !

The witness was a highly intelligent man whose father was an amateur astronomer with whom he later corresponded with about the sighting. We both got the `meteor` explanation out of the way in the first few minutes of our conversation.

The object, he said, was uniformly lit, which does not resemble any of the pictures you have shown. It was moving at a relatively slow pace. It spooked the local peasant residents enough for them to treat it as though it were a demonic manifestation (one would have thought they might have seen a meteor before, or at least have knowledge of such things).

6/10. Must try harder.

 

[GeorgeP]

Oh, come on Ebaracum !

You're guilty of indulging in the very thing that `UFO believers` are forever accused of: clipping the data to fit the hypothesis !

You're starting to remind me of Donald Menzel who proposed that the famous Kenneth Arnold sighting was (i) Snow blown from the mountains, then (ii) orographic clouds and then, (iii) spots of water on Arnold's windscreen ( this despite the fact that Arnold had opened the window !) i.e - any explanation will suffice so long as it's mundane !

The witness was a highly intelligent man whose father was an amateur astronomer with whom he later corresponded with about the sighting. We both got the `meteor` explanation out of the way in the first few minutes of our conversation.

The object, he said, was uniformly lit, which does not resemble any of the pictures you have shown. It was moving at a relatively slow pace. It spooked the local peasant residents enough for them to treat it as though it were a demonic manifestation (one would have thought they might have seen a meteor before, or at least have knowledge of such things).

6/10. Must try harder.

Nice one!

 

[GeorgeP]

If I hadn't read the title of this topic I`d have thought it was summit to do with comets and space debris

I feel that your right to remain open-minded Zeke, and just like you Im drawn to the obvious conclusion that there are more than just us up there.

When I was a child my best friend and his parents saw something over a field that scared them. They were driving back home after an holiday abroad. It was a sunny afternoon in the countryside and they decided to stop so my friend could answer a call of nature. Around half a mile in the distance came into view what could only described as a golden pyramid shaped object. It turned itself upside down, rotated for a while and hung in the air for several minutes before vanishing. My friends family were Catholic and never had time for such things. But that thing they saw spooked them and remains a mystery to this day.

 

[Xanatic*]

What was it about this sighting that convinced you that this wasn't "black technology"? After all, no alien occupants or similar was spotted.

Also let's not use animated gifs as replies, it's bloody annoying.

 

[eburacum]

The witness was a highly intelligent man whose father was an amateur astronomer with whom he later corresponded with about the sighting. We both got the `meteor` explanation out of the way in the first few minutes of our conversation.

Did the father see this phenomenon? Have you spoken to the father? Bearing in mind that meteors, especially bolides, are very variable phenomena, can your observer be certain that this was not just a particularly unusual bolide, or re-entering debris? I'm afraid that I still tend to favour the bolide explanation for most observations of this kind. The Zond IV observations are particularly convincing (an object with windows and sparks that turns out to be a re-entering satellite).

In fact re-entering debris seems more likely to cause observations of this kind than meteors. Here's another example of a 'structured object with windows'' that turned out to be Cosmos 2335

Note once again the existence of a possible trailing structure, as described in the OP.

 

[eburacum]

I've seen many meteors, but only one daylight bolide; an orange ball trailing lights and black vapour, which was easily visible in the day sky. However these phenomena are quite common, with significant events occuring somewhere in the world practically every day.

 

[eburacum]

Here's another re-entry misinterpreted as a structured craft with windows; a Russian witness to the Kosmos-20 booster re-entry made this drawing

 

[eburacum]

And several more

Top Cosmos 2238, Left middle Proton K, Lower left Zond IV, bottom right Gorizon 21 re-entries.

 

[eburacum]

The Gorizon 21 re-entry sparked numerous observations which have been discussed on this site before. Here are drawings of an object seen over Europe on 5 Nov 1990, the date of the Gorizon event.

 

[eburacum]

So please don't think that I have formed this opinion lightly. Of course I might be wrong about your witness' observation, but whatever it was, it can only accurately be described as unidentified.

 

[Zeke Newbold]

Well I did give it 6/10 Eburacum !

I think your theory is plausible, but needs a little bit too much forcing, and doesn't cover all the bases - not least because the witness was very clear on the `natural hum` sound of the object and of it's following the contours of the ground.

I am now out of touch with the guy. I wish to God now that I had got chapter and verse from him as to the exact location and time of this sighting: then if it had been space junk - and I presume there would have been less of this in the early seventies than now - this could have been checked.

Likewise, in how many of the above cases you mentioned have the correlations between space junk and the UFO reports actually been proven - or is it just a case of someone explaining away an awkward sighting by attaching it to some space junk that happened to be around at the general time of the event ?

I ask this because I recall reading in a magazine called Fortean Times (anyone heard of it?) a few years ago a claim put forward, I believe by the self same Ian Ridpath, to the effect that the Rendlesham forest incident was sparked off by space junk re-entry.

Now, I just don't believe this. Whatever happened,or didn't happen, over those few days in December, the reports are quite clear that it was centred around something within the forest. (I am awaiting the book by N-N-N-Nick Po-Po...er, a new book out on the Rendlesham incident - that might tell us more.)

I myself have seen what might have been space junk, or a large bolide coming down. Over ten years ago I beheld a burning fireball over Leicester. It broke up or burned up before hitting the Earth, but was briefly spectacular. Here's the rub though: in spite of being a `believer` my first thought was: `Blimey, guvnor ! That's a big meteor that is!` At no time did I think: `Blimey guvnor! Look at the windows on that mothership from Venus !`

Also I don't recall seeing or hearing of any press coverage of the event, UFO-related or otherwise: this implies that not many people saw it, or that those that did shrugged their shoulders much as I did.

6 out of 10 is not bad, but the jury's still out.

 

[eburacum]

Ian Ridpath might be right about the space debris; something started the whole chain of events off, otherwise Penniston and Burroughs wouldn't have gone into the forest in the first place. That something might have been the debris sighting, although I'm not clear on whether they actually saw it or only responded to reports. It is very difficult to make any sense of Penniston's account, as he has elaborated it into the realms of high strangeness now.

The main correlation between these re-entry events and the eye-witness accounts are that they occurred on the same day, in a region where the event would have been visible; sometimes the eyewitness accounts vary significantly from the actual event, with respect to timing and/or direction or duration, but I suspect that is a consequence of eyewitness fallibility rather than a separate event.

My own current (very tentative) metaphysical worldview is that we live in an infinite multiverse, where almost every possibility plays out somewhere in the multiple timelines. In some of those possible worlds, certain UAP events may be caused by alien spacecraft, or even stranger phenomena; but in most of the possible worlds these events have mundane explanations. I suspect very strongly that we are living in a worldline where the mundane explanations are correct, but in a small but non-zero number of worldlines, my suspicions are incorrect.

 

[GeorgeP]

What was it about this sighting that convinced you that this wasn't "black technology"? After all, no alien occupants or similar was spotted.

Also let's not use animated gifs as replies, it's bloody annoying.

Because I was simply sharing a memory of my childhood friend and his father telling me about it a few days after they had got back home.

Gifs no likey - raspberries to you.

 

[GeorgeP]

Are space debris and shooting stars the new swamp gas/weather balloons.

 

[Swifty]

Is this a meteor ? ..

 

[Xanatic*]

The greenish colouring seems odd, but otherwise it doesn't seem unlikely.

 

[eburacum]

Green is a fairly common colour for meteors; ionised oxygen glows green, and this is also seen in certain aurorae.

 

[skinny]

About 20 years ago I watched a fireball like that slowly drop straight down (from my perspective) into the ocean approximately three km off shore whilst I was standing on the beach in daytime. There was no discernable impact / splash. I pondered what I had seen, rejected the likelihood of a crashed UFO and settled on meteor. I thought "Coool".
Then I went home.

 

[eburacum]

The meteor was probably many tens of kilometers away, perhaps as much as a hundred. They are much higher and further away than they look.

 

[Xanatic*]

With a meteor that glows green sounds like there's a decent chance it could give you superpowers.

 

[eburacum]

Or kill someone who has already got them.