Why Do UFOs Have Lights?

[Philo_T]

not to derail the current direction of this thread, but...

what about some sort of gravitational / space-warp lensing effect concentrating light sources behind the craft ?
That could mean it's unavoidably inherent in the propulsion system.


Actually, my current favorite theory are that we're seeing the extension of a platform through a n-dimensional wormhole, not some free-floating craft. But I can't work out how that would require having "lights".

 

[Bigfoot73]

But I can't work out how that would require having "lights".

Neither the @@@@ can I mate. :?:

 

[Jerry_B]

I would dispute the lack of evidence , but you make a very good point about the way UFOs change with the times.

What evidence points to it being a secret project, perhaps of a miltary nature?

However this remains my favourite solution to the triangle mystery. a modern equivalent of the US jet prototype pilot who flew alongside a turbo-prop airliner upside down wearing a gorilla mask and then gleefully listened to the pilot frantically telling air traffic control about the weird plane with no engine flown by a monkey.

IIRC, it flew alongside P-38s out of Muroc. Aside from that, triangles being some effort at psych warfare/experimentation also doesn't really add up IMHO. Unless anyone has information about the purpose about such flights (that isn't itself speculation)? As I've said before, it just all seems to be a modern telling of 'phantom airships'. A great many people claimed to have seen them, and several described seeing them up close and/or with their crews, all of which was described as having what was believed to be exotic hi-tech stuff (for the times). That to me sounds like the same process being applied to triangles nowadays...

 

[Bigfoot73]

A great many people claimed to have seen them, and several described seeing them up close and/or with their crews,

People reported hearing their crews singing in Spanish, leading to suspicions they were doing reconnaissance for an impending war. Then one crashed into a barn outside Aurora , Texas and an alien body was recovered and buried in the local cemetery. So the story went, from Spanish spies to aliens. It was all supposed to be the work of telegraph operators.
But it was all over very quickly and despite all the detail there was little actual consistency between sightings. I am not aware of anyone claiming to have seen triangles land anywhere, nor of alien encounters or abduction stories associated with them. Encounters and abductions seem far more likely candidates for mythological explanations than triangles.
There is a great deal of consistency between triangle sightings, and they have been reported for about 20 years now with no sign of abating.

 

[oldrover]

I am not aware of anyone claiming to have seen triangles land anywhere

Mine did, sorry I know that makes me sound stupid but that's what happened.

 

[Bigfoot73]

Thought yours was a hexagon with 18 lights on it?

 

[Bigfoot73]

Of course if people started seeing hexagons with 18 lights on more frequently then it would go down as being merely mythical, so you wouldn't have seen anything at all.

 

[Jerry_B]

People reported hearing their crews singing in Spanish, leading to suspicions they were doing reconnaissance for an impending war. Then one crashed into a barn outside Aurora , Texas and an alien body was recovered and buried in the local cemetery. So the story went, from Spanish spies to aliens. It was all supposed to be the work of telegraph operators.
But it was all over very quickly and despite all the detail there was little actual consistency between sightings. I am not aware of anyone claiming to have seen triangles land anywhere, nor of alien encounters or abduction stories associated with them. Encounters and abductions seem far more likely candidates for mythological explanations than triangles.
There is a great deal of consistency between triangle sightings, and they have been reported for about 20 years now with no sign of abating.

WRT your point (outlined in bold above) this is simply not true. There was consistency from report to report, in a way that's shared by triangles today. Often as not, when crews were encountered (ignoring the dubious Aurora story), they were often inventors of one form or another. This wasn't just in the US. Today, the inventors have been replaced by the idea of secretive government or military projects - but it amounts to the same sort of theme. That is, hi-tech, secretive, etc..

Triangles may seem modern, the but the circumstances around the way they're reported, what they do, etc is very similar to the old phantom airships.

 

[oldrover]

Thought yours was a hexagon with 18 lights on it?

If you look at the supposed Belgian triangle photo you'll see that that's actually a hexagon. The points of the triangle are 'clipped' off.

By the way I checked this photo again to make sure, but I find there are two versions of it, what I'm saying is obvious in one but not the other. I thought there was only the one photo.

 

[Bigfoot73]

I have also seen the 'clipped off' photo, which is very blurry - could it actually be an F117?

ignoring the dubious Aurora story

I should have phrased that better, I in no way meant to imply I considered it a genuine incident.

Jerry you have researched airship sightings more than I have, the only reports I can find are American, late 1890s and don't mention inventors, although they all seem to have had very voluble crews.The papers that published the stories all seemed highly sceptical as indeed they might seeing as neither corroboration nor debunking would have been as easy as it is today.
One site suggested it was all the result of hysteria stirred up by those with vested interests in a war between the US and Spain. That could have been the case, but I don't see anybody suggesting the US should be arming itself to deter an alien invasion in the wake of triangle sightings. However perhaps there is just a propensity for hysteria in American culture.
maybe the airships were just hysteria, and the triangles are real?

 

[Jerry_B]

Jerry you have researched airship sightings more than I have, the only reports I can find are American, late 1890s and don't mention inventors, although they all seem to have had very voluble crews.The papers that published the stories all seemed highly sceptical as indeed they might seeing as neither corroboration nor debunking would have been as easy as it is today.

Well, the papers of the day had a variety of stances - both about the 'airships' and the 'inventors'.

One site suggested it was all the result of hysteria stirred up by those with vested interests in a war between the US and Spain. That could have been the case, but I don't see anybody suggesting the US should be arming itself to deter an alien invasion in the wake of triangle sightings. However perhaps there is just a propensity for hysteria in American culture.
maybe the airships were just hysteria, and the triangles are real?

Why can't the triangles be hysteria also - or, at least, a symptom of some modern ideas mixed in with the human imagination's propensity to weave a whole cloth out of a few basic threads? They share commonality with 'black helicopter' and 'phantom airship' folklore. Maybe because they perhaps seem 'futuristic' or hi-tech now, it's stopping people from stepping back from what's being said and evaluating sightings in terms of common themes? After all, in 50 years time the idea that triangles were seen as hi-tech may seem a little twee, in much the same way that phantom airships or saucers may seem to us today.

 

[oldrover]

Personally the first, and only time for a good few years, that I was aware of any triangular or roughly triangular shaped aerial phenomena was my own sighting in December 1985.

 

[johncbdg1]

Most aircraft can be detected now by radar,to keep them the RAF etc in good working order,they play cat and mouse,now you see me now you dont,then its put down to a UFObject as it was seen by people at low altitude some reports are of craft was under 100 feet thats how aircraft work in terms of their role these would be USA/UK secret crafts.testing craft and defence.

But, again, that's all speculation. And IMHO it doesn't sound particularly realistic even in terms of a military scenario.

JB,take a look around you in the real world,where there more secrets uncovered every other month now,in the real world today we are to believe that Nasa must hitch a ride every time they want to go to ISS? do you believe that?.
All speculation? in terms of a military scenario anything and everything goes,no hold barred unless you want others do it first

The lights you see on the earth crafts ufobjects are from the Infrared Illuminator and from HeatSeeker Thermal Imager,and ion engine use accelerated ionized gas or plasma,
VASIMR is a plasma-based propulsion system.
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/travel ... lsion.html

Stealth aircraft are real
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_aircraft

 

[Jerry_B]

JB,take a look around you in the real world,where there more secrets uncovered every other month now,in the real world today we are to believe that Nasa must hitch a ride every time they want to go to ISS? do you believe that?.
All speculation? in terms of a military scenario anything and everything goes,no hold barred unless you want others do it first

I'm well aware of the world around me, particularly in terms of military aviation. None of the ideas such as 'no holds barred' bear any weight as an argument. It's just guesswork and imagination that have created a mystique around alleged triangle sightings - some people have simply pinned the 'secret project' stuff onto it. There is no actual evidence that traingles are part of any black project.

The lights you see on the earth crafts ufobjects are from the Infrared Illuminator and from HeatSeeker Thermal Imager,and ion engine use accelerated ionized gas or plasma,

But - again - that's speculation. I'm assuming that you have no direct evidence of such things WRT the triangles?

You see, saying that they have such exotic engines is no different to accounts of the 'electric' engines that supposedly powered the phantom airships (if the 'inventors' are to be believed). It's just reworking an old story and theme. It gives the nebulous a sheen of the hi-tech, super-secret.

 

[Bigfoot73]

Maybe because they perhaps seem 'futuristic' or hi-tech now, it's stopping people from stepping back from what's being said and evaluating sightings in terms of common themes?

Well, yes, if I were to step back from my belief they were nuts-and-bolts real, there are a lot of common themes to triangles and airships.

Maybe because they perhaps seem 'futuristic' or hi-tech now,

Airships were not actually very futuristic though - a quick look at Wikipedia reveals that combustion engine-powered airships had just started flying in the late 1880s, preceded by electric motorized airships a few years before. We already have very angular planes such as the F117, and there is a lot of elaborate speculation about the TR3B, with a small nuclear reactor (such devices are already built and operational), and magnetic field disruption. The TR3B may not be actuality but the technology is at least, as they say, emerging.

So what are we really dealing with here? The existence of triangles may be debatable now, but what if Lockheed roll out the TR3B for the cameras tomorrow? There may have been no spying Spanish airships but there were French and German prototypes.

Here's a new spin - triangles are both myth and reality. The actual Fortean phenomenon related to both airships and triangles could be a combination of hysterical reaction to new and unfamiliar technology and recreational mendaciousness.
So both mythologists and nuts-and -bolts advocates are half right, the correct solution is something like both points of view.

 

[Jerry_B]

Airships were not actually very futuristic though - a quick look at Wikipedia reveals that combustion engine-powered airships had just started flying in the late 1880s, preceded by electric motorized airships a few years before.

Ah, but the phantom airships displayed capabilities (allegedly) that outstripped any designs of the time. They supposedly travelled faster, flew for longer distances, and some had various wings and extra propellors. So, like the triangles now, various capabilities were ascribed to them by the mores of the time.

Here's a new spin - triangles are both myth and reality. The actual Fortean phenomenon related to both airships and triangles could be a combination of hysterical reaction to new and unfamiliar technology and recreational mendaciousness.
So both mythologists and nuts-and -bolts advocates are half right, the correct solution is something like both points of view.

Maybe, but maybe not. Even older stealthy designs were seen leaving and landing at various facilities before they became popular knowledge (i.e. the F-117). There was, to a certain degree, a trail which tended to lead back to the US military. AFAIK, this is not the case with the triangles. Now, people might say 'Well, the secrecy around them is much greater', but that seems a tad pointless if the things spend most of their time hanging about near populated areas with various lights on display. Somehow we have to believe in some sort of florid psy-op mission to have all this work. But that is really just another layer of speculation

 

[Bigfoot73]

So, like the triangles now, various capabilities were ascribed to them by the mores of the time.

Or was it down to the local wags exaggerating to hold the reporters' interest?

Even older stealthy designs were seen leaving and landing at various facilities before they became popular knowledge (i.e. the F-117).

Like Area 51?Triangles could be flying out of there now for all we know, but it's boundaries have been extended so it is no longer possible to see the base from it's perimeter.

Somehow we have to believe in some sort of florid psy-op mission to have all this work. But that is really just another layer of speculation

Doesn't have to be any more florid than flying upside down alongside hapless turbo-props while wearing a gorilla mask. Maybe test pilots' senses of humour expand with the technology and budgets capable of indulging them.

 

[Jerry_B]

Or was it down to the local wags exaggerating to hold the reporters' interest?

No. What may have been happening was, like today, people were overlaying their own expectations onto what they thought they were seeing. It's interesting that you wonder if older tales are down to 'local wags', but don't apply the same rules to sightings of triangles.

Like Area 51?Triangles could be flying out of there now for all we know, but it's boundaries have been extended so it is no longer possible to see the base from it's perimeter.

Again, no. The F-117 operated out of various 'standard' air bases, even when the aircraft technically 'didn't exist' but was serving with operational squadrons.

Doesn't have to be any more florid than flying upside down alongside hapless turbo-props while wearing a gorilla mask. Maybe test pilots' senses of humour expand with the technology and budgets capable of indulging them.

But, again, that's a big chunk of speculation. The same sort of thoughts occured to some observers of phantom airships, i.e. that their operators were messing around.

 

[Bigfoot73]

It's interesting that you wonder if older tales are down to 'local wags', but don't apply the same rules to sightings of triangles.

Well, yes it could of course.

Again, no. The F-117 operated out of various 'standard' air bases, even when the aircraft technically 'didn't exist' but was serving with operational squadrons.

Perhaps the triangles just aren't that far along the procurement process yet.

But, again, that's a big chunk of speculation.

Speculation based on precedent isn't that 'big'. The test pilot really was messing around.

 

[Jerry_B]

Perhaps the triangles just aren't that far along the procurement process yet.

They've been buzzing around for 20-odd years - it's a bit doubtful that they're still prototypes after all that time.

Speculation based on precedent isn't that 'big'. The test pilot really was messing around.

I was referring to the fact that it's a big chunk of speculation to have the triangle pilots all messing about over the US and elsewhere, for several decades.

 

[Bigfoot73]

They've been buzzing around for 20-odd years

for several decades

.

Ahem, two decades maybe, you old wag you? :lol:

it's a bit doubtful that they're still prototypes after all that time.

Yes it is a long time, and during that time it's gone from (allegedly) having hydrogen-fuelled pulse jet engines to the TR3B's cutting edge technology. Perhaps, to try and contain the massive costs of the new technology, they put it in the existing triangle airframe, and have been trying to get it to work consistently ever since. Or maybe it does work just fine but is far too expensive for more than a few to be built. Bamboozling ufologists might just be a marginal benefit.

 

[Jerry_B]

Yes it is a long time, and during that time it's gone from (allegedly) having hydrogen-fuelled pulse jet engines to the TR3B's cutting edge technology. Perhaps, to try and contain the massive costs of the new technology, they put it in the existing triangle airframe, and have been trying to get it to work consistently ever since. Or maybe it does work just fine but is far too expensive for more than a few to be built. Bamboozling ufologists might just be a marginal benefit.

But that's another chunk of speculation though That said, it's ideal for some nuts & bolts ufologists, because they can tack on whatever exotic technology they want that may come along once in a while to the triangles, which somehow therefore 'explains' them

 

[eburacum]

A large proportion of sightings of so-called black triangles will be misidentification of mundane lights in the sky;

in the UK, where chinese lanterns are very common, these will account for a good proportion of such sightings.
see this youtube video for an example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QzYmJvA24
(warning; language)

other very common misidentifications include formations of high-flying aircraft (these caused the first set of sightings as Phoenix in 1997
see this article about Mitch Stanley
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... s0312.html

and flares (these caused the second set of sightings at Phoenix)
see this analysis by UFO proponent Bruce Maccabee
http://brumac.8k.com/new_materials/phoe ... ENDUM.html

or misidentifications of single aircraft seen at odd angles
this may explain some of the Belgian triangles- see this .pdf by Renaud Leclet
http://gmh.chez-alice.fr/RLT/BUW-RLT-10-2008.pdf

Some will be hoax reports, and some will be hallucinations, delusions, or poorly remembered events. Not all hallucinations are caused by disturbed mental states, by the way; I have personal experience of someone who hallucinated a UFO due to Charles Bonnet syndrome, a purely non-psychological phenomenon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bonnet_syndrome

Some of the most interesting reports may be caused by exotic hobbyist craft, as I've suggested earlier. Others may be caused by misidentification of exotic, but already declassified triangular craft such as the B-2 or F-117.

There may be a few unexplained sightings left after all this to support the 'secret military project' hypothesis or even the extraterrestrial hypothesis, but they are very thin on the ground and to my mind, not yet convincing.

In order to put the secret military project' hypothesis forward as a realistic possibility, this should only occur when all the other options have been examined, something that is often neglected.

 

[Bigfoot73]

But that's another chunk of speculation though That said, it's ideal for some nuts & bolts ufologists, because they can tack on whatever exotic technology they want that may come along once in a while to the triangles, which somehow therefore 'explains' them

Yes it is, although the TR3B hypothesis is the only speculation about triangle technology I am aware of. If you take the view that it's a secret project, what else can you do? It's a secret after all.

The YouTube video: you can even see clouds in between the lights for pity's sake! I do not set much store in videos by pottymouthed teenagers FFS innit?!

I never believed either Phoenix sighting, which were not claimed as triangles anyway. Bruce Maccabee also thinks triangles are real.

As for M. Leclet's pdf., stone the crows I hope I don't ever find myself in Belgium in need of the assistance of the local gendarmerie!
It's very good, and misidentification of helicopters must explain some alleged triangle sightings, But many sightings last for quite some time, up to an hour, or are of far larger craft than helicopters - even CH53s.

Charles Bonnet Syndrome applies to old people with severely impaired eyesight, and most witnesses do not fall into this category.

Exotic hobbyist craft could explain some, maybe Oldrover's for instance, but I've not seen a sceptic produce a sales advert for one although I have seen American ads for fake disc UFO balloons and videos of them, which were convincing until it started tumbling , just like a balloon. Any non'balloon craft might be expected to produce a radar signature, and flying them at night is illegal in many countries.

In order to put the secret military project' hypothesis forward as a realistic possibility, this should only occur when all the other options have been examined, something that is often neglected.

Job done.

 

[oldrover]

Exotic hobbyist craft could explain some, maybe Oldrover's for instance, but I've not seen a sceptic produce a sales advert for one although I have seen American ads for fake disc UFO balloons and videos of them, which were convincing until it started tumbling , just like a balloon.

I only like the hobbyist explanation because the military doesn’t make a great deal of sense, as for aliens I wouldn’t touch that one with a barge pole, but I do have a problem with it. What I saw was apr 15’ across and apr 4’ thick. It was slab sided un-aerodynamic thing, but the best way to describe its agility in the air would be fly like. It was also very fast, it covered a distance of about two thousand feet very quickly.

Except for the double row of navigation lights, six or eight can’t remember which now, set into the short side faces the entire thing was totally featureless. The lights themselves were big, each about the size of car headlights and extremely bright, and there was either 18 or 24 of them, plus power so that would be heavy.

Also while it in the air it didn’t seem to be making any noise, but later after it came down into a wood there was a truly weird and very loud racket coming from the area. Additionally the call box I tried to use, about 600’ feet away from where I guessed it had come down, on the only open ground there, was unusable due to what sounded like static. Of course this was 1985 and anyone will remember that call boxes were a bit ropey back then anyway so maybe that was just a coincidence.

So my problem is what could have been available to hobbyists nearly twenty six years ago, that could lift in a balloon of that size at least 18 car headlights sized lights, fly them around with such agility and speed on a platform that had no exterior features. I know there must be a rational explanation but I’ve always struggled to think what it was.

 

[eburacum]

Job done.

Well, not really. So far you personally haven't actually produced any sightings which can be examined critically, although it has to be said that Oldrover's sighting is definitely intriguing.

I suspect, however, that if we were able to go back in time and examine Oldrover's sighting together, and perhaps look at it from a different angle, it
may well
a/ look somewhat different to how he remembers it and
b/ be identifiable as something mundane, although I'm not quite sure what that could be.

This is the real problem with the most intriguing unidentified sightings- you can't go back and re-examine them, so they are likely to remain unidentified. There will always be sightings like that, as no system of surveillance will ever be able to achieve total coverage.

 

[Bigfoot73]

I know there must be a rational explanation but I’ve always struggled to think what it was.

Not surprised, that sounds like a completely Unclassifiable Flying Object !
Seriously , I can't even begin to think of what it might have been, though if was somebody's home made radio controlled craft, you might think we would have heard more of it since then.

 

[Bigfoot73]

It wasn't any one sighting, or even several, that convinces me, it's the fact that there are thousands of them, with or without photos or videos, all describing something of similar size, with similar lights, behaving in a similar manner.
I find it surprising that you find their existence so inconceivable when nobody here is claiming they are alien spaceships, when there are similarly shaped craft already flying , when they are most often seen in the country that built those craft (i.e. F117s) and the technology to build them is at least on the drawing board.

 

[oldrover]

I suspect, however, that if we were able to go back in time and examine Oldrover's sighting together, and perhaps look at it from a different angle, it
may well
a/ look somewhat different to how he remembers it and
b/ be identifiable as something mundane, although I'm not quite sure what that could be.

I respect that view very well. Of course I’ve still got a memory of what happened I can still visualise it, what I’m calling to mind though isn’t what I saw but what I remember, which are as you say are by definition two different things.

Also I know that what I don’t remember I’ll fill in, I learned this about three years later through being taught about memory formation visual perception etc, so I decided then to rely only on what I drew and wrote down at the time, or the broad features which I can honestly say I’m sure of. I’ve made a conscious effort to let go of what I can’t recall.

For example I don’t remember the colour or number of the lights, I think it was six per side but all I truly know is that it was more than four and they were arranged in two vertical rows.

I know they were red, white and green not because I can recall it with any certainty visually I can’t , but because I do remember seeing them through the trees at first and immediately thinking they were the navigation lights of a Sea King. Which was what I cut through the small line of trees to watch, the area being a designated landing area for what was then the local A&E.

The size I’m sure of because between me and the object was a busy road, and it was flying so low at times I could use the cars as a guide. While of course I’ve got no memory of perspective now, at the time I remember judging it to be slightly larger than the average saloons passing by, this would be about 15’.

I’m also sure of being totally bemused by what I saw, not least because none of the cars stopped to look. I remember deciding to hang back where I was until someone did, when after a while it was obvious they weren’t going to I remember deciding to move closer alone.

I’m certain of the shape from memory and from a drawing I made at the time. I know the distances because I know the area so well, I’ve also checked on the satellite images which give distance, except for the phone box the area hasn’t changed.

As for the sounds after it came down I mentioned, I remember as I approached the area felling afraid but thinking that they were absurdly corny.

If this was mundane I’d have worked it out by now, it irks me a bit that I haven't.

 

[eburacum]

It wasn't any one sighting, or even several, that convinces me, it's the fact that there are thousands of them, with or without photos or videos, all describing something of similar size, with similar lights, behaving in a similar manner.
I find it surprising that you find their existence so inconceivable when nobody here is claiming they are alien spaceships, when there are similarly shaped craft already flying , when they are most often seen in the country that built those craft (i.e. F117s) and the technology to build them is at least on the drawing board.

The inconceivable thing to me is that these things are supposed to fly both slowly and very fast, while making no noise. No reasonable flight technology can do all of those things. No hint of any feasible mechanisms have been suggested in the media; speculations about antigravity and plasma propulsion are garbage. (Antigravity is a very weak effect, for reasons I am prepared to discuss at length, and plasma is very hot and energetic, and therefore very noisy).

Yes, there are thousands of witnesses, but they are almost all seeing the things I listed in my earlier post. There are very few which fall into other categories.