It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Volcano objects ~ UFOs or Plasmoids ?

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2021 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Are plasmoids the only explanation for UFO's reported near volcanoes ?

New video recently published explores these ideas ....



In 1956, Winston Harper Bostick demonstrated that an amorphous mass of high-velocity plasma has a natural ability to convert a large proportion of its kinetic energy into magnetic energy, contained in an organised toroidal structure. He called this structure a ‘plasmoid’.

Archaeologist and Thunderbolts colleague Peter Mungo Jupp details the criteria of eyewitness accounts that some UFO sightings may in fact be plasmoids. They seem to possess an intelligence, rise and fall to the ground as though being flown, seem to fly in the direction of either magnetic pole, change shape, pulse, and can blink with multiple colours. This ubiquitous property of plasmoids is often recorded as UFO sightings.





Peter Mungo Jupp: UFO or Plasmoid? | Thunderbolts
Link - www.youtube.com...









Some people believe this is indeed the explanation for many UFO reports, especially the objects reported near volcanoes and for many of the reports I have to agree, but I think this is a double edged sword because it may also explain the propulsion methods of the intelligently controlled objects (the real ufos)


Posting this to share the info with everyone and see what others might say about it

So the question is, are plasmoids the only explanation for the objects seen around volcano's ?



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: easynow

Plasma has been popping up on every thread I read that somehow touched on the UAP theme. Not that i read that many of them...

some guys thesis...


Minerals contained in some rocky areas and mountains, especially near fault lines are sometimes able to indirectly produce “luminous plasma balls” of long duration at low height. This can be due to piezoelectric effects when rocks are under stress (especially if of seismic nature) or due to effects similar to a natural battery: both geophysical phenomena have also been simulated in a laboratory


Bold mine

He goes on proclaiming there seems to be indication of conscious behaviour in or by plasma...



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Terpene

Yes indeed both subjects are relative and luminous plasma is also known as Earthlights

I do believe this phenomena does in fact explain many ufo reports but not all.

It's definitely a fascinating subject especially when considering the hypothesis that plasma can become intelligent !


Thanks for that link it's certainly an interesting read massimoteodorani.com...


Makes you wonder what's out there ...




According to this scenario Life forms based on plasma might truly live everywhere in the Universe



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: easynow

Thanks for posting this easynow
That was a very interesting watch and at 12 minutes just spot on.

The plasmas have been confirmed as to being real by the British MOD in 2006 and it does look like they account for many UFO reports.

Interesting that they reckon they are native to this Planet Earth rather than coming from up there.

What is also interesting is the "seems to be indication of conscious behaviour in or by plasma" part.

Yeah they really do seem intelligent, far more than mere ash or lava thrown into the air. They can group together into perfect circles of same coloured pairs, some even have a plasma type beam that they scan the ground with. Red types that is.

The amber orange type also does look a bit like lava as it swirls around in its insides in a clockwise rotation.

Very interesting video, highly recommended



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: easynow

Some people believe this is indeed the explanation for many UFO reports, especially the objects reported near volcanoes..



Good to see you mate and very interesting video - here's a possible candidate from Mexico.







originally posted by: easynow

I think this is a double edged sword because it may also explain the propulsion methods of the intelligently controlled objects (the real ufos)



Lots of speculation about plasma and colour change during acceleration mate - NASA's Paul Hill also thought it may be an artefact of propulsion.





All UFO colors stem from energetic, ionizing radiation or radiations, generated by the UFO, which ionize the air.
Of all the visible colors, red and orange correspond to the least energy.


UNCONVENTIONAL FLYING OBJECTS, A Scientific Analysis by Paul R. Hill



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: karl 12

Nice vid mate


Just going from past experience I'd lean towards the amber orange types as seen in the video being sort of different to the other colours in their make up.

The amber orange as seen in volcano vids is quite similar to lave, plus it swirls around inside, they are almost on fire and their outer shape distorts constantly.

You don't get the inner swirl or the shape distortion with the other coloured types. Greens, yellows, whites, reds, they are just pretty perfectly shaped. No swirl either.

I'd say the amber orange are pretty much a separate species to the others. They're different.

So we get the amber orange type connected to the volcano, but the others? They coming from somewhere else maybe?

It is a total puzzler



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Your welcome and good to see you, glad you enjoyed the video.



Interesting that they reckon they are native to this Planet Earth rather than coming from up there



The universe is made up of space plasma and can be anywhere so they certainly could also be from "up there'


Just saying














edit on 9-5-2021 by easynow because: add video



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: karl 12

Thanks karl 12 and yea that's a great video thanks for posting




Lots of speculation about plasma and colour change during acceleration mate - NASA's Paul Hill also thought it may be an artefact of propulsion.



Nice work sharing that quote mate, and that's certainly possible

I think we must consider the possibility that some form of intelligence has the ability to manipulate the plasma pinch and are using it for propulsion. It explains the high speed vectors reported with certain objects. imo


Question is , how will it be possible to differentiate natural plasma lights from the non-human intelligently controlled objects ?











edit on 9-5-2021 by easynow because: text edit



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: easynow
Are plasmoids the only explanation for UFO's reported near volcanoes ?

New video recently published explores these ideas ....



In 1956, Winston Harper Bostick demonstrated that an amorphous mass of high-velocity plasma has a natural ability to convert a large proportion of its kinetic energy into magnetic energy, contained in an organised toroidal structure. He called this structure a ‘plasmoid’.

Archaeologist and Thunderbolts colleague Peter Mungo Jupp details the criteria of eyewitness accounts that some UFO sightings may in fact be plasmoids. They seem to possess an intelligence, rise and fall to the ground as though being flown, seem to fly in the direction of either magnetic pole, change shape, pulse, and can blink with multiple colours. This ubiquitous property of plasmoids is often recorded as UFO sightings.





Peter Mungo Jupp: UFO or Plasmoid? | Thunderbolts
Link - www.youtube.com...









Some people believe this is indeed the explanation for many UFO reports, especially the objects reported near volcanoes and for many of the reports I have to agree, but I think this is a double edged sword because it may also explain the propulsion methods of the intelligently controlled objects (the real ufos)


Posting this to share the info with everyone and see what others might say about it

So the question is, are plasmoids the only explanation for the objects seen around volcano's ?





love the post so far...have a lot of reading to do to get caught up! It reminds me though...seems like there were people who said plasma balls could be seen "making crop circles". will have to go back and look again. I was always fascinated with those and how they were being made. One can easily pick out the fake ones lol



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: easynow
Are plasmoids the only explanation for UFO's reported near volcanoes ?
Like every other video I've watched from thunderbolts/electric universe, this one is also filled with unbelievable stupidity.

Sometimes they have some valid science mentioned before going off on fanciful tangents unsupported by facts and this fits that profile.

The speaker cites some research on plasmoids which sounds valid enough, and he even correctly describes them as "donut-shaped". While it's possible that some plasma phenomena around volcanoes may have something to do with plasmoids, he shows photo after photo of UFOs around volcanoes and none of the photos he shows look like donut shapes to me, hence it's not really clear that they are plasmoids, if they are not donut shaped.

They could very well be another form of plasma called "ball lightning" which is not well understood and I don't think the electrical phenomena around volcanoes are well understood, but just guessing here, ball lightning or variants of it may be a more accurate description than referring to "donut shaped" plasmoids for ufos which are not donut shaped.

You could also discuss semantics. UFO means unidentified flying "object" and I'm not sure if a discharge of ash or charged particles qualifies as an "object". So if asking whether they are UFOs or plasmoids, I think it's a false choice and maybe neither one is a good description.

The crackpottery of the speaker peaks around 8:30 when he says:
"They seem to possess intelligence, in that being heavier than air, they rise and fall through the air as though being flown."

That's a truly idiotic thing to say given he's talking about volcanic eruptions, ash basically does the same thing, it's ejected upward, and then moves horizontally and falls to the ground sometimes a long distance away. If that's a sign of intelligence, then one could claim the ash is intelligent.

I think it's a sign that the speaker lacks rational thought and intelligence, which I have found to be a common thread with Thunderbolts videos. Some are worse than others, and Wal Thornhill makes some especially moronic statements, but that's really a dumb claim of a sign of intelligence in this volcano video.
This volcano stuff is not a main point of electric universe, but this video addresses the general thunderbolts electric universe concepts and what's wrong with them.

Debunking the Electric Universe



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: easynow

Thanks for the heads up on plasma being up there too, not got a science background so good to be educated



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Nice analysis Arbitrageur.

UFO has been recently redefined as UAP, apparently to clear up arguments like the one you proposed.

Is fanciful tangents a derogatory way of describing hypothesis? You have quite a bias against a source that mearly offers an alternative to a failed theory.

That would be the one involving ever more complicated additions, like dark matter and blatant blackboard mathematical idiocy such as extremely dense stars, bigger then the sun, spinning faster then a dentists drill. Now that is unbelievable tangential speculation if I ever came across it.

a reply to: Arbitrageur


I don't just feel sorry for blind followers which blind Dave leads blindly away from the truth, I also feel pity for the astrophysical community for failing to set Dave straight in terms of historical accuracy. It shows how little they know and how little they care about historical truth. Since Birkeland first wrote about electric fields in space, there has *never* been time where EU/PC theory was devoid of qualitative and quantitative predictions and empirical supporting laboratory evidence. There hasn't been a day in the last century when EU/PC theory lacked for qualitative and quantitative evidence to support it.


www.reddit.com...

It’s a reddit post but will serve as a rebuttal.
edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Rebuttal of Dave Farina video.

edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Insert Excerpt

edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Don’t know how to quote external source properly

edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 05:21 PM
link   


This volcano stuff is not a main point of electric universe, but this video addresses the general thunderbolts electric universe concepts and what's wrong with them.

Debunking the Electric Universe


Dave Farina even sounds like a chemist trying to explain physics lol

Where did he get his chemistry degree? Tupelo?

To the OP.

That’s a fascinating multi disciplinary resource you quote from mate.

They have a whole series of videos about the electric formation of earths geology that will add depth to your understanding of this phenomena.
edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Things aren’t always what they seem.



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur


I think you answered your own question lol ...


none of the photos he shows look like donut shapes to me, hence it's not really clear that they are plasmoids, if they are not donut shaped.



ball lightning or variants of it may be a more accurate description than referring to "donut shaped" plasmoids for ufos which are not donut shaped.







Apparently the term 'plasmoid' is used to describe multiple shapes ...


The word plasmoid will be employed as a generic term for all plasma-magnetic entities


en.wikipedia.org...






Ummm ...


"They seem to possess intelligence, in that being heavier than air, they rise and fall through the air as though being flown."

That's a truly idiotic thing to say given he's talking about volcanic eruptions, ash basically does the same thing, it's ejected upward, and then moves horizontally and falls to the ground sometimes a long distance away. If that's a sign of intelligence, then one could claim the ash is intelligent.



I think you misinterpreted the context, and he's actually mocking the people saying they're intelligent.



Debunking the Electric Universe

This volcano stuff is not a main point of electric universe, but this video addresses the general thunderbolts electric universe concepts and what's wrong with them.


That is a very misleading video, proponents of the EU do not dismiss gravity .... as the video claims.


They believe the universe can be better explained by electricity and magnetism and gravity.


Just saying



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: easynow
Volcanic lightning like lightning from thunderstorms is somewhat understood though you would think we would understand those better than we do, and both of those are commonly observed, and made of plasma. The causes can be slightly different for volcanoes, like the triboelectric effect is thought to be more of a factor in volcanic lightning than thunderstorm lightning, and could possibly even be a factor in ball lightning around volcanoes:

Volcanic Lightning


The only scientific documentation we have of ball lightning is a video recorded with scientific instruments. Analysis shows it's probably related to a regular lightning strike, but it didn't have a plasmoid or donut shape, or the associated characteristics, so if ball lightning can happen around thunderstorm lightning I would expect they can happen around volcano lightning as well. Note it's roughly shaped like a "ball" though not exactly and it could have other shapes. The ball lightning is on the left and the spectrographic image analyzing the light coming from it is the rainbow looking like to the right of it.

First recorded scientific video of Ball Lightning


There's a report called the Condign report, (not to be confused with the Condon report) which suggests a lot of UFOs are caused by atmospheric plasma. I think that report overestimates how many UFOs have that cause, though I think some do and especially around volcanoes.

This is an interesting article associating ball lightning with volcanic ash:
Ball lightning and fireballs during volcanic air pollution
edit on 202159 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: easynow

Apparently the term 'plasmoid' is used to describe multiple shapes ...

"The word plasmoid will be employed as a generic term for all plasma-magnetic entities"


But are balls or other shapes plasma-magnetic entities? The donut shape might be evidence of that, do simpler shapes infer magnetic properties?


I think you misinterpreted the context, and he's actually mocking the people saying they're intelligent.
OK, if what he is saying is that is an idiotic thing to say, then I would agree.


That is a very misleading video, proponents of the EU do not dismiss gravity .... as the video claims.
Actually in a way, Wal Thornhill does just that with his pseudoscientific double-speak here:

www.thunderbolts.info...

Where does gravity fit in the electric universe? Contrary to a fairly common misperception, the electric universe does not deny gravity’s existence, nor its role in the cosmos and our own world. Rather, the electric universe theory, as proposed by physicist Wal Thornhill, suggests that the fundamental mysteries of gravity may be explained by the electrical structure of matter.
So to paraphrase that is saying that what we perceive as gravity is really caused by electricity. He claims that's not a denial of gravity, but, if gravity could be explained by electric forces, it wouldn't be called gravity, it would be part of the theory of electromagnetism. So he's in effect denying gravity even though he claims he's not. The Professor Dave video gives examples of all the ways we can tell that Thornhill's hypothesis doesn't explain observations we have of gravity and gravitational effects.

Not that it's a bad idea to look for a connection between different forces, people have tried, but so far nobody has succeeded in explaining gravity in terms of electrical forces, including Thornhill.

edit on 202159 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 06:52 PM
link   

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Viola!
edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Trying to embed video from YouTube



youtu.be...
edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: ?!?

edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: (no reason given)


Or



If you prefer.
edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Alternatives

edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Stupid



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur


But are balls or other shapes plasma-magnetic entities? The donut shape might be evidence of that, do simpler shapes infer magnetic properties?


Occam's razor would imply the answer is yes

Why split hairs and overcomplicate all this ?

Obviously different amounts of concentrated plasma interacting with different magnetic field values will produce different shapes.

Really i think it's that simple but I don't have a million dollar lab to experiment








Not that it's a bad idea to look for a connection between different forces, people have tried, but so far nobody has succeeded in explaining gravity in terms of electrical forces, including Thornhill.


Nobody has yet to fully explain what the "force" actually is ... and yet you say it's not a bad idea to try and explain it ....

but also at the same time demonize them and say they "lack rational thought and intelligence"






I think it's a sign that the speaker lacks rational thought and intelligence, which I have found to be a common thread with Thunderbolts videos. Some are worse than others, and Wal Thornhill makes some especially moronic statements, but that's really a dumb claim of a sign of intelligence in this volcano video.
This volcano stuff is not a main point of electric universe, but this video addresses the general thunderbolts electric universe concepts and what's wrong with them.




Sadly I'm starting to feel that way about your posts.

Maybe you should try looking at things as if ... the glass is half full



Just some advice



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dalamax

a reply to: Arbitrageur
youtu.be...

At time index 14:48 he says he's modeling the Bohr atom, but that's ignorant, we know that model is incorrect, it was proven incorrect nearly 100 years ago. He sort of seems to know it's incorrect but he's using it anyway and making some crazy assumptions.

These Common Models of Atoms Are Actually Totally Wrong


Despite the fact that the planetary, or Rutherford, model was devised more than a century ago, and was very quickly replaced by another, similarly simplistic representation - the Bohr Model - it remains in public consciousness with no signs of fading away.

As the episode of SciShow below explains, in 1913, the Bohr Model improved on the planetary model by doing away with the unsustainable spiralling orbits and replaced them with concentric circles that visualised the various energy levels that electrons are confined to.

But while we often see this model used in high school to teach us about valencies, it doesn't tell the whole story either - even if you're allowing for a simplified version of things.

For one, the model was devised more than a decade before physicists even knew what neutrons where, and they're kind of important if you want to properly represent an atom.

And then there's the weirdness of quantum mechanics, which states that a) electrons don't necessarily orbit the nucleus at all, and b) they don't even really exist in a specific place at a specific time.


Plus his example is not realistic for other reasons, hydrogen atoms don't interact the way he shows in his model, we know from experiment how they interact, they form hydrogen bonds which is something taught in middle school so how can he not know this? This is the middle school lesson plan showing how hydrogen atoms actually interact which his model shows no appreciation of and seems to have no connection with real world observations like this is what actually happens:

www.middleschoolchemistry.com...


Then read the conclusion of his paper here:

principia-scientific.org...

Conclusion

This exercise attempted to interject some mathematics, greatly simplified, into the paradigm of the EU theory that gravity can be attributed to an electromagnetic effect, albeit almost inconceivably smaller, due to the distortion of atoms by their neighbors into electric dipoles. While we have not attempted to address the mathematics that would be involved in explaining the 1039 factor difference between the respective strengths of these forces, the possibility of an electromagnetically-induced distortion to create an atomic dipole appears at least plausible.


We know water molecules make electric dipoles. It's actually because of those dipoles that microwave ovens work, the microwaves wiggle the dipoles.
So the fact he thinks he's proven dipoles are possible means nothing, even if his analysis was valid (which it's not because he admits he's using the known to be incorrect Bohr model of the atom).
But water modecules do have electric dipoles, can water be shown to fall at a different rate than other substances which do not have electric dipoles?

But notice what's completely absent from his conclusion...there's no connection to gravity, he explicitly says he's done no math to show any such connection, typical for electric universe theory which is NOT a theory. A theory has math and his theory has no math linking gravity to his obsolete and incorrect model of the Bohr atom.


originally posted by: easynow
Nobody has yet to fully explain what the "force" actually is ... and yet you say it's not a bad idea to try and explain it ....

but also at the same time demonize them and say they "lack rational thought and intelligence"
Sure we'd love to have a better explanation of gravity. But a stupid explanation that is easily proven wrong doesn't help. A former believer in electric universe actually looked into the idea, and finally realized how easily it can be proven false:

The People Who Believe Electricity Rules the Universe

The gaps in electric universe theory do drive followers from the fold. David, a former enthusiast who now calls EU an "anti-science cult" and wished to use only his first name, was undone when someone asked about Thornhill's latest electric explanation of gravity.

"When I looked into it, I was literally flabbergasted at how stupid it was," he said. "I really was ashamed that I had ever listened to a word Thornhill said."

Now he tries to de-convert others in the Thunderbolts forum, a process that he calls his "work."
Maybe some day some of the other "believers" in Thornhill's nonsense will actually think about it like David did.

Also note the complete absence of any connection to reality in the "electric gravity", typical for electric universe which always lacks quantitative modeling, something scientific inquire demands.


In physics, theories need math. That's how you predict, gather evidence, verify, disprove, and support. But EU theory isn't big on math. In fact, "Mathematics is not physics," Thornhill said. While that equation aversion makes the theory pretty much a nonstarter for "mainstream" astronomers, it is the exact thing that appeals to many adherents.


edit on 202159 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 9 2021 @ 11:21 PM
link   
If you want math check out my other link, same post.

Somehow you missed that one buddy.

My first link was really thrown out there just to show that inquiring minds want to know.

I’m sure when ‘David’ grows a pair and drops his pretensions about being a former ‘believer’ his opinion will hold more water.

Like the chemist in your debunking video, admitting that some of the people he is arguing don’t know physics have physics degrees, duh.

A theory doesn’t have to contain mathematics. You can throw a rock at your sister and develop your results into a physics theory.

Your link related to the Bohr model doesn’t mention what replaced it, neither does it say the model is obsolete, just incomplete, still taught and that it replaced an older model.

I don’t see what your point is? Anywho check out the other link for some mathematics and do the sums along with him.

Happy debunkum bud.

a reply to: Arbitrageur


edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: (no reason given)


principia-scientific.org...

Could have sworn this paper was riddled with formulas and equations?

Perhaps their not involved in middle grade maths.
edit on 9-5-2021 by Dalamax because: Maths seems to be evident, evidently.




top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join