Norway: UFO “Hyperdimensional Portal Area” over Hessdalen.

reply to post by jackphotohobby


The rebuttal doesn't state who MATTEO LEONE is, and what his credentials are, other than he is a "scientific adviser", which is very vague. What exactly does he do at ICPH?

Massimo Teodorani is a PHD, and an astrophysicist at the institute of Radio Astronomy and Gloria Nobili is a physicist at Bologna University. One would like think they could identify car headlights. I also find it surprising that they never had binoculars or a telescope to use while making their observations. I would think that binoculars would be a must, and that with binoculars they would see that they were looking at automobiles, not UFOs.

Matteo states that his rebuttal was supported by the ICPH, but that could only mean that they agreed to post a rebuttal to the study, not that they endorse it, or even lend any level of credence to his rebuttal. There seems not to be any real backing of this rebuttal, which, if it is correct, I would think that the ICPH would strongly support it out of desire to maintain their credibility.

If the author of the rebuttal didn't know for certain where the observation site was located off of the road, how did he know exactly where the blinking light was photographed? These two claims seem to be at odds.

The author points out that the azimuth of the direction which the camera was pointing when the pictures were taken was not recorded, so how does he know the exact place where the blinking light appeared? Could he be mistaken as to where the study observed the blinking lights?

His method of determining this location was by taking a photograph of the general area in a southernly direction, and then determining the site of the light in the rebuttal landscape photograph by comparing it with the enlarged photograph. That isn't exactly a good method. Things look a lot different when looking at two different pictures taken on different occasions with different sized lenses when looking at a mountainous landscape like this.

Honestly, to me, it doesn't look like he has the right location. There are definitely four ridges in the photos on the study, and from what I can see in his picture, in the red square, the rounded hill that looks to be the second closest ridge puts a gap between the two most distant ridges, which doesn't exist in the study photographs. If you look about half way to the rights side of the red box in the photo in the rebuttal, where you see the horizon coming in from the right where there appears to be a ridge sloping down, and then another more distant hill behind it, that appears to be the area where the photos in the study were taken. There doesn't seem to have been to much communication between the two authors. It seems that this information wasn't communicated, but determined from available evidence.

Why doesn't the rebuttal have any pictures of these car lights? If car lights from this road look anything like the pictures in the study, why no pictures? That would have been the proof to back up the rebuttal.

I have seen car lights off in the distance in many times in my life, and they look nothing like the pictures in the study. It is pretty easy to identify car lights.

In addition, if they were photographing car headlights driving down a road at night in the original study, the headlights should appear in the exact same place every time, moving in the exact same direction every time, and blinking in the same pattern at approximately the same rates depending on the speed of the auto, and normally last for the same duration. The study states that the duration of the observation in question varied from 1 to 30 seconds but usually around 5 seconds, which doesn't really help much. However, if the average car took 5 seconds to cross that stretch of road, the cars taking one second would have had to been going five times as fast, and the ones taking 30 seconds going one sixth the speed. That is a pretty big variation in speed.

In the study, they clearly point out in a series of photographs that the light did not appear in the exact same location each time, and the different positions do not look like a car descending a hill, because the different photos of the light they photograph appears straight across the hill, not descending. The direction the object is moving changes, but is pretty much heading down to the right or to the left in one photo. How can a car drive down a road in one location on a ridge, then on other locations on the ridge. There would have to be more than one road.

If the car was visible along the length of the road, it should be pretty apparent that it is a car driving along a road.

It seems to me that this is a pretty good indicator that they are looking at different locations.

Now in the discussion of halogen lamps, the author of the rebuttal seems to not take into consideration many variables. Types of car head lamps do vary, so if the spectrum temperature is constant in each photo, then wouldn't we have to be seeing the same or close to the same type of headlight in each photograph.

In addition, unless the cars are driving almost directly at the camera, the light you see would be reflected light, not the direct light from the halogen headlight. Now, I am no expert, but I think that would have a considerable effect on the spectrum of the light in the photograph. It would be like the difference between sunlight and moonlight. With the vehicles heading at an angle, and heading down a hill, most of the light you would see would be reflected off the road. In addition, this light wouldn't blink completely on an off, you would have a glow with shadows flitting past. If the road was very curvy, and you were getting points where the headlights were pointing directly at the camera then you would be getting light directly from the headlamp, but with a pulse rate of less then half a second, they would have to be driving extremely fast, too fast. Maybe the 1 second lights are people driving off the road. How many times did that happen?

In addition, it would be unreasonable to think that all the cars driving on this road would all be heading in the same direction. This would result in a large change in the spectrum of the light.

If the headlights are shining directly at the camera, with a 270 mm lens at 2.6 km, wouldn't we be able to see two headlights. Why are see seeing pictures of three strangely placed headlights? Or just one light sometimes. They must have had a lot of cars with burnt out headlights at the time of the study, not to mention a lot of strange custom headlight set ups. Or three cars driving in some strange pack formation?

Once again, why doesn't the rebuttal have any pictures of car headlights on this road to demonstrate that this is what is seen in the original study? The ICPH team went all the way to Norway, up in the mountains to collect evidence and analyze the area, and they didn't even bother to bring a decent camera?

We are just supposed to take this guys word that it was nothing but vehicle headlights?

Or is it more likely that they did take pictures, and the car headlights look absolutely nothing like the lights in the study, so they left them out of the rebuttal.

I notice all three authors give their email addresses, has anyone tried to contact them?

reply to post by poet1b


I didn't evaluate the paper on the basis of who Matteo Leone is, rather on whether the argument he presents is supported, the references check out, and whether those arguments make sense. The arguments regarding the problems with measurement aren't an argument that they're all headlights, rather that the measurement was inadequate (IMHO the problems with the response curves of various films was fairly airtight, among other problems), and that likely many were headlights. He was there.

That said, given it's important to you, IIRC, he was a PhD student at the time, appointed as an independent oversight by the Italian end of the EMBLA project, and here he is now:

www.ing.unitn.it...

The reason people like PhD students and others get appointed as oversights is that scientists get as emotionally involved with their work as people who've made up their mind on message boards.

By all means disagree with the rebuttal, that's ultimately up to you, but I would suggest you haven't understood the paper given your response, which seemed to consist of an ad-hom on the author of the rebuttal followed by a lot of assumptions. There is no point in arguing with that. You clearly know best.

[edit on 31-12-2009 by jackphotohobby]

reply to post by jackphotohobby


All I did was ask who he was, because the original study gave titles.

I made no assumptions, I only asked questions.

It seems that rather than consider the points I made you are the one who has thrown an ad-hoc at me, essentially one one big assumption. Did you bother to read my reply before deciding your superior understanding of the subject?

I would say the whole rebuttal has an ad hoc treatment toward Massimo Teodorani and Gloria Nobili, and overstates their positions on the matter, or at least as they were expressed in the study.

It looks like the mystery has been solved...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Considering that we have respected scientists with extremely convincing proof that this phenomenon in Norway is real, why hasn't there been more effort to document this phenomenon more thoroughly.

It seems pretty evident that there is some taboo against investigating this type of evidence.

What is mainstream science afraid of?

sounds like they are afraid of the proof.

reply to post by DGFenrir


Look on page 4 of this document, and you can clearly see a triangle shape, it would be the picture labeled 5.

hessdalen.hiof.no...

Originally posted by FoxStriker
This might sound strange but what was seen in Norway is usually followed by death and destruction caused by the passing of Nibiru, guess the aliens know its time to get the hell out of dodge

My understanding, extraterrestrials are leaving and once again were left looking for an Ark.

S & F

[edit on 12/16/2009 by FoxStriker]

i really did lol at this post, i just got this image of a emo hiding in a closet for some reason... unbelivable!!!

if indeed nibiru was on its way, lets say hmm around 2012 thats still 2 years away and im pretty sure ET has something abit faster to DODGE so to speak this nibiru? thay would need to be traveling faster than light to get here in the first place, think about it?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


thanks to the OP great thead.

maybe the ROCKIT Theorist can watch these videos and catch up with wots going on in the world, s&f

Originally posted by poet1b

Considering that we have respected scientists with extremely convincing proof that this phenomenon in Norway is real, why hasn't there been more effort to document this phenomenon more thoroughly.

It seems pretty evident that there is some taboo against investigating this type of evidence.

What is mainstream science afraid of?

sounds like they are afraid of the proof.

I think are governments are putting there fingers in there ears when it comes to this stuff, stamping up and down on the spot and saying "were not listerning ner ner ne ner ner"

but wot it does go a very long way in proving is that there all in it together.... and there IS some sort of hush hush policy with world governments and thay have all decided WE should not no about it, YET if EVER!! its clear as day because, surely anyone/government would want to know or be fasinated with such goings on?

its clear there is some sort of control over national media/news stations also some of the great and proven not a hoax footage has never been broadcasted yet we see it all the time in local or private owned media, if it does see the light of day on national then it will be a poor fake/hoax,

wot people need to realise is properganda is the most powerfull weapon any government can have, it got even more powerfull with the invention of TV & RADIO

If you tell a lie every so often...

people may start to belive it...

reply to post by BRITWARRIOR


I would say the main reason they would like to keep this secret is because it shreds the belief system of mainstream science and mainstream religion.

It doesn't take a leap of faith, although it most probably will lead to considerable leaps of faith, to think that the existence of Plasma life forms give authenticity to the belief of the soul. Suddenly people are given an option to believe in something between scientific dogma which leads to atheism and insists that once the body stops functioning our conscious ceases, and religious dogma which insists you must follow their strict moral guidance in order to obtain eternal life.

Suddenly people will be free to embrace their own understanding of spirituality. Which means they can start listening to their own internal conscious to define right and wrong.

Religion and mainstream science will lose their edge in their ability to dictate to people how they must live their lives.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by DGFenrir

 

Look on page 4 of this document, and you can clearly see a triangle shape, it would be the picture labeled 5.

hessdalen.hiof.no...

The misunderstanding comes from me seeing it as a formation not a shape.
Sorry for this.


And they are researching this phenomena. Just see the list of papers on it throughout the years.
Also: Scandium reacts with acid and air. Scandium found in the lights. Why shoud they research more?

It does take a lot of leaps of faith to believe what you proposed in your last post.

[edit on 3/1/2010 by DGFenrir]

reply to post by DGFenrir


I really haven't seen much convincing evidence of scandium.

Do you have any links which explain why someone thinks these plasma creatures are made of scandium?

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by DGFenrir

 

I really haven't seen much convincing evidence of scandium.

Do you have any links which explain why someone thinks these plasma creatures are made of scandium?

Do you have any links why anyone thinks these lights are plasma creatures?

www.itacomm.net...
Press Ctrl + F and search Scnadium.

i too, have to say thanks to the OP, facinating clips for a well researched phenomena. the clips where it actually catches it on a motion camera were strange indeed.

[edit on 3-1-2010 by jimmyx]

reply to post by DGFenrir


YEAH, discussed over the last couple of days with links.

Also other source provided.

See Dr Bohm. See earlier study on Hessdalen by Italian team.

edit to add

What ever other material this phenomenon is made of, it is plasma according to your link. Burning gas is plasma.

This report attempts to narrow the possibility as much as possible, but being that there investigations shows what was claimed all along exists, why should their limited observation throw all other eye witness accounts out the window, such as seeing this phenomenon moving at high speeds. In addition, have they provided soil samples showing a large amount of scandium dust in the area to prove their hypothesis.

magonia.haaan.com...

For UFO witnesses is just what a surprising number of the people of Hessdalen claim to be. Since December 1981 – that is to say, and make of it what you will, commencing immediately after the Arendal sightings – hundreds of UFOs have been reported in the Hessdalen area by several dozen witnesses, several of them being multiple observations. The great majority were nocturnal lights, but a few were seen in daylight and these were all of metallic cigar-shaped objects. The sightings comprised a great variety: distances varied from 10-15 metres to several kilometres, numbers of objects ranged from one to four, movement varied from hovering to great speed, and from a simple trajectory to complex manoeuvres. Only one feature seems to have been absent – a total absence of sound. In this almost unbelievably isolated region, however, this feature takes on a special significance, for any sound such as that of a car or tractor can be heard at many kilometres distance.

[edit on 3-1-2010 by poet1b]

reply to post by poet1b


cheers buddy....

this site might interest you......

“From the smallest particle to the largest galactic formation, a web of electrical circuitry connects and unifies all of nature, organizing galaxies, energizing stars, giving birth to planets and, on our own world, controlling weather and animating biological organisms. There are no isolated islands in an electric universe”. - David Talbott and Wallace Thornhill (Thunderbolts of the Gods)

www.thunderbolts.info...

reply to post by mcrom901


Cool video, absolutely, I agree, the math should only serve to help interpret the observations. While the math can often help predict future results, it can not be be relied upon.

Science really does seem to have lost its way over the last several decades.

Fact, 1 does not equal 1, and 1+1 is not equal to 2, but only approximately, and even then the concept of 1 must be as accurately identified as much as possible.

Sad that mathematics really hasn't evolved much since Newton and Leibniz. I find it hard to believe that max and min resolution as well as field of range are not given far more attention, as well as concepts such as critical ratio. And seriously, zero really only represents a point of origin, and might as well represent infinity. The concept of positive and negative is really only a matter of perspective, and all numbers are imaginary.

Oh well, that's my two cents.

Originally posted by DGFenrir
Do you have any links why anyone thinks these lights are plasma creatures?

check here.....

Originally posted by mcrom901
Plasma Life Forms

Jay Alfred: Life-Like Qualities of Plasma: Bohm, a leading expert in twentieth century plasma physics, observed in amazement that once electrons were in plasma, they stopped behaving like individuals and started behaving as if they were a part of a larger and interconnected whole.

Plasma cosmologist, Donald Scott, notes that "...a [plasma] double layer can act much like a membrane that divides a biological cell". A model of plasma double layers (a structure commonly found in complex plasmas) has been used to investigate ion transport across biological cell membranes by researchers.

Plasma Life Forms in Space
An international scientific team has discovered that under the right conditions, particles of inorganic dust can become organized into helical structures which can interact with each other in ways that are usually associated with organic life. Using a computer model of molecular dynamics, V N Tsytovich and his colleagues of the Russian Academy of Science showed that particles in plasma can undergo self-organization as electric charges become separated and the plasma becomes polarized.

Plasma Life Forms in the Laboratory
In 2003 physicists; Erzilia Lozneanu and Mircea Sanduloviciu of Cuza University, Romania, described in their research paper how they created plasma spheres in the laboratory that can grow, replicate and communicate - fulfilling most of the traditional requirements for biological cells.

Plasma Orbs in Paranormal Literature
In 2004 an experiment was conducted where particles in a plasma crystal arranged themselves into neat concentric shells (or rings - from a two-dimensional perspective), to a total ball diameter of several millimeters.

further reading...... relevant scientific literature.....

Physics and Biology: Bio-plasma physics

From plasma crystals and helical structures towards inorganic living matter

Minimal-cell system created in laboratory by self-organization

First Evidence for Superfluidity in an Atom-Based Fermi Gas

Self-organization scenario acting as physical basis of intelligent complex systems created in laboratory

Self-organized complex space charge configurations at the origin of flicker noise

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by poet1b


interesting thoughts there.... couldn't agree more...... thanks....

i guess... mathematicians need to buzz their brains a bit.....

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


Of course they ARE UFO because we havent got a positive explanation for them yet. It COULD be just an interesting collection of energetic particles interacting with some unique element of the air in Hessdalen, but it might just as well be some alien presence, and until we know for sure the objects will retain UFO status.

Strange "things" happen on Norway skies...

Obama Nobel peace prize, and UFOs over Oslo, december 10-12-2009