For your consideration, I would suggest the possibility that the following sightings may be explained by mirages (more of the definition #1 type, from the refraction of air):
1941-1945 WWII "foo fighters"
Mirages are one possibility that should be at least considered even if they do not explain all "foo fighter" sightings.
sped2work.tripod.com...
Interestingly enough, with all the sightings and reports, and all the qun cameras and high altitude photographs, no truly GOOD pictures of Foo Fighters from the period have surfaced.
1947 Kenneth Arnold UFO Sighting
www.ufoevidence.org...
www.astronomycafe.net...
Surprisingly, and significantly, the very first 'flying saucer' report, that by Kenneth Arnold in 1947, can be explained in this way. He reported seeing a chain of nine peculiar 'aircraft' flying near Mount Ranier in Washington state (USA). They all moved together and occasionally flashed very brightly. However analysis shows that the apparent movement was entirely due to his own, just as a low moon will appear to follow you across a stationary landscape. All very distant objects at low altitude will appear to move because their direction does not change as that of a nearer object would. In this case, the source was nine snow-capped peaks in the Cascade Range over 100 kilometers away. In the bright sunlight, mirages of them were formed by temperature inversions over two deep river valleys between Arnold and the mountains. Where the inversions were strong, the mirages of the peaks flashed brightly. It appears that Arnold was not familiar with mirages, but this is true of almost all pilots.
1948-Trinidade Island
ufos.about.com...
www.astronomycafe.net...
Other bright planets at low altitude have also been the source of UFO reports. The most sensational was the mirage of Jupiter reported and photographed by Almiro Barauna from a Brazilian research ship at Ilha da Trindade in the south Atlantic Ocean in January 1958. These are unique photographs, clearly showing the double image which results from the merging of two mirage images (see photo).
1950 Great Falls (Montana) and
1952 Trementon Utah
Courtesy of ufologie.net
www.astronomycafe.net...
This phenomenon explains the lights filmed in 1950 over Great Falls (Montana); two jet aircraft were flying about the area at the time but no one seems to have asked if they had their lights on. It also explains the many lights filmed over Tremonton (Utah) in 1952. In that case, there is evidence of several inversions, one on top of the other.
tvufo.tripod.com...
In a press conference on July 29, 1952, Maj. Gen. John Sanford of the U.S. Air Force stated that the sightings were caused by temperature inversions. The public was easily convinced, and for many, that was that.I think this is a small possibility, but I'm not convinced these sightings were from mirages. But if it was the reflection of airplane lights that would appear to explain why they were determined to be light sources and not reflections. I probably would have left this sighting off the list, if it wasn't for the temperature inversion explanation offered by Major General Sanford.
1952 Washington, DC UFO sightings
www.ufoevidence.org...
greyfalcon.us...
the Civil Aviation Authority's Technical Development and Evaluation Center concluded that the radar images were the result of temperature inversions which could cause radar signals to be reflected back to the ground.
And of course temperature inversions can cause light reflections in the sky also, which could look like the photos.
1986 Japan Air Lines Flight 1628 Over Alaska
www.ufoevidence.org...
www.astronomycafe.net...
On 17 November 1986, a Japanese freighter aircraft had crossed the North Pole and was heading SW toward its next stop, Anchorage in Alaska. Suddenly the crew were confronted by clusters of lights just ahead of them. They assumed that the lights were the exhausts of some unidentified aircraft and tried in vain to evade them. Gradually the mysterious lights shifted to port and the captain was sure he could make out the shape of a huge UFO alongside them. The incident was reported to the (US) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), who issued a report on the incident, but without any explanation.
Because the object's direction appeared to move aft with time, it was obvious that the source lay on the ground only a few hundred kilometres away, and because the crew gave good descriptions and bearings to the lights at various times on their route, it was possible to locate its source. This turned out to be the US Army airfield at Delta Junction. The crew's description of the lights exactly matched that of typical runway lights and the FAA reported that a temperature inversion had existed over the area at the time. The 'UFO' was a mirage of the runway lights.
2007 Multiple pilots witness large object near Guernsey, UK
www.ufoevidence.org...
We have undeniably found some evidence suggestive of an atmospheric-optical explanation. In general “atmospheric-optical” means some effects on the propagation of light either by airborne particles (haze, mist or ice crystals) or by refractive index anomalies (unusual temperature gradients, causing mirage).
However in the Guernsey case, they then go on to say none of the "usual" mirage theories seem to fit so they can't really explain it completely. Therefore it may not be a mirage, as some of the other sightings may likewise not have been mirages, all I ask you to do is consider the possibility that they may have been mirages. Unfortuanlely duplicating a mirage caused by refraction in the air is not as easy as with the Oldfield film where all you have to do is sit in the same plane to photograph the same thing.
What are some characteristics that now immediately make me at least consider the mirage possibility?
- Unbelievably high speeds (as in the rate at which the object recedes in the Oldfield film. In atmospheric sightings objects could appear to disappear similarly at unbelievably high speeds due to changes in the atmospheric conditions or changes in the angle of the inversion layer.
-Unbelievably large objects (as in the mile wide Guernsey sighting).
Maybe there really are objects that large or that can accelerate that quickly but we don't know of them yet so Occam's razor would suggest to consider the simpler mirage possibility before concluding the "unbelievable".
So in conclusion, even though pilots have expertise in flying and tend to make better UFO observers than the general population, even trained pilots don't have training in mirages, so even pilots can mistake a mirage for a real solid object. And if a pilot can misidentify such objects, it's even easier for the rest of us to do so.
Edit: Added JAL 2nd Par.
[edit on 23-8-2009 by Arbitrageur]
