UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Beam Spewing UFOs: What’s the point?

This is an image from the 1955 movie This Island Earth:

b1.jpg

We think it was the inspiration for this alleged 1966 Wanaque UFO shot, which we’ve addressed here, trying to determine if it is a real photo or a fake. (Tony Bragalia insists that it is authentic, but hasn’t proved that; we think it’s a contrived photo, but haven’t proved that either):

b2.jpg

This is one of the hoaxed Gulf Breeze photos:

b3.jpg

This is one of the art works supposedly showing a UFO or flying disk sending down a beam highlighting an iconographic religious moment:

b4.jpg

This is another (reworked) piece of art, depicting a flying disk beaming another iconic religious event:

b5.jpg

This is an Egyptian image indicating rays (or beams) from Akhenaten’s monotheistic divinity (depicted as an egg-shaped flying object):

b6.jpg

The Vallee/Aubeck book, Wonders in the Sky, has a significant number of reports from man’s earliest writings (and drawings) right up to modern times indicating that beams of light have been seen many, many times emanating from unusual flying objects or aerial phenomena.

This YouTube video alleges to show a UFO (star-like light) shooting beams downward to the ground.

 (We think Tony Bragalia has used it in one of his blog postings.)

http://youtu.be/4NwPwMpou7k

Gilles Fernandez provides Kentaro Mori's web-site which concludes this about the video image:

the beams were “simply pixel blooming or bleeding. It occurs when sources of light exceed the full well capacity (the electron-holding capacity) of the pixels on which they are being recorded. As a light-gathering pixel exceeds its capacity to hold captured photons, the excess energy spills over into the adjacent pixel (or pixels, if the second pixel also fills to its capacity). This spillover, called “blooming,” produces a spike of light.”

http://forgetomori.com/2009/ufos/ufo-photos/ufo-beams-around-the-world-solved/

Our question is, what would be the purpose of beams shooting from UFOs, in fiction or supposed reality?

In the YouTube video the beams or rays are so fractional that they are virtually useless for anything we can imagine.

(In the religious art, we see the beams/rays as a device highlighting, accenting a supposedly significant event, but that’s art, not life.)

The Gulf Breeze photos used beans as an accoutrement to authenticate the hoaxed photos we think.

The Wanaque photo did likewise. (Why would UFOs beam lights down to the waters of Wanaque Reservoir? To see the water, or to extract fish or water from the reservoir? Possibilities, but incomprehensible ones.)

Yet, the clustered reports in Wonders….indicate that beams or rays from aerial craft or phenomena have been seen and recorded hundreds of times over man’s history.

Beams or rays of light shooting to earth from UFOs are as meaningless as the appearance of UFOs themselves.

Why is this?

RRRGroup 

20 Comments:

  • Hello,
    This is one of the art works supposedly showing a UFO or flying disk sending down a beam highlighting an iconographic religious moment
    This is another (reworked) piece of art, depicting a flying disk beaming another iconic religious event

    Concerning UFOlogists stupid BS about "UFO in Art" (like then the two paintings adressed in the topic), allow me to point dear readers to Diego Cuoghi page:
    http://www.sprezzatura.it/Arte/Arte_UFO_eng.htm

    Regards,

    Gilles

    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • Employing "Occum's Razor", I would think that the purpose of "beams of light" from overhead UFOs would be fairly obvious: "they" want to clearly see things and people on the ground. It's hardly a rare phenomenon: there must be dozens of witness cases in the UFO literature. Traffic helicopters at night use the very same technique for the very same purpose.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • Dominick:

    I used the word fractional specifically to note that the beams or rays, in the YouTube video and listed in the Wonders in the Sky accounts, are of such short duration that their use as a lighting device for things on the ground or beneath them is absolutely nil.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • BTW too.

    Here, it seems you, as UFOlogists, are encensing Wonders in the Sky book...
    Dominique Caudron (again!), have devoted an erudit work about some the "cases" pointed in this ufological book or "celestial wonders" in General.
    Caudron's gigantic and amazing work (still continuing) is available in French here :
    http://oncle.dom.pagesperso-orange.fr/paranormal/ovni/catalogue/chron-prod.htm

    Of course, not a page for ETH proponent UFOlogists ;) That's serious, not UFOlogy.

    Regards,

    Gilles

    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • While reviewing the paintings that Since Rich has used paintings to high-lite his theme, it struck me as being odd that none of those portrayed in the paintings seemed to be in the state of awareness of the "event". They go about their daily business as if nothing is unusual.

    Again, the artist is painting (no real time photo) a scene after the fact, that is, being that there was actually a "fact/event" to begin with. Simple artistic interpretation of a religious event?

    The Egyptian scene appears to be that of the sun giving off its rays downward. Ancient civilizations were ethnic/geocentric cultures so the Egyptian sun god Ra would have been sending "beams" down to the Egyptians and not wasting his omnipotence radiating elsewhere.

    This reminds me of the Native American anthropology studies conducted back in the 1930s by the University of Oklahoma. When asked why they (Comanches) worshiped the sun, they pragmatically stated that it was a tangible object that was closer to the Great Spirit. Thus the sun was seen as an intermediate or as a relay to the deity. Easier to pray to something that could be seen vs. what remained out of sight.

    In closing, I tend to agree that the UFO angle, if any, is negligible if not totally nil.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • I don't think the UFO rays became 'harmful' until humanity developed LASERS.

    The lines in the ancient artwork does seem to use the lines as highlighting, or even sometimes trajectory pathing. There are little accents that you can add to 2D art to indicate motion -- trajectory lines, as well as curved lines on both sides, indicating a 'wiggle' movement.

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • Didn't the famous Father Gill case in Papua have the UFO emitting streams of light to the ground?

    One problem with this case is that the UFO appeared in much the same position for 3 (not 2 as usually stated) successive evenings. Would a true UFO really do this?

    Then Gill actually got bored (apparently) and went in to have dinner during one of these!

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • That Father Gill and his minions got bored, Christopher, is one of the troubling aspects of that interesting account.

    The replication over a few nights is also strange.

    Ans yes the object or thing did shoot beams downward.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • Dominick's view about using the rays as search beams seems wrong to me, but they could be, if one is imaginative, a kind of advanced flash bulb for capturing images below or a detecting device gathering data about what the object was over.

    But in the Wanaque sightings, it was obvious that the alleged objects were above a body of water.

    Were the beams meant to determine the chemical or physical make-up of the water or what was below the water?

    Many of the Wonders ... accounts involved water, were near water or over water.

    But that YouTube video, that I think Forgetomori and Bragalia see as authentic, shows spurts that could not be a search mechanism but could be a data gathering device.

    One would have to know the location of that sighting and more about who took it, and when exactly.

    But beam shooting UFOs or UAPs seem as incongruous as all UFOs have been and are.

    Thus making the phenomenon a mere curiosity and not something endemic to human life or meaning.

    RR


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, April 16, 2013  

  • I am imagining an isolated tribe of indigenous people—say in Papua New Guinea—looking up at a Boeing 747 leaving contrails as it moves across the vault of the sky from horizon to horizon. They would wonder why the great silver birds sometimes leave behind themselves mysterious lines of—what? smoke?, steam?, pixie dust? Are the great silver birds alive? Are they flown by demons? Without some knowledge of aerodynamics and thermodynamics, the indigenous people would totally not get it that contrails are simply the unintended consequence of a particular choice of technology (wings and internal combustion engines) used to allow heavier-than-air vehicles to fly.

    A strong case can be made that most of the luminous displays associated with good UFO sightings are likewise the unintended consequence of a particular choice (but a different choice) of a technology (an “acceleration field”, a la Paul Hill) used to allow heavier-than-air vehicles to fly. There often appears to be a nebulous, omnidirectional luminousity seen in the near vicinity of the outer surface of a UFO. This does not require any explanation more mysterious than penetrating (i.e., ionizing) radiation being emitted by the object. When absorbed by the atmosphere and other nearby objects and then re-radiated (“fluorescence”), this could easily create all the different phenomena reported such as: perception of “heat”, singed plants and clothing, delayed symptoms of radiation sickness, interference with electronic devices, etc.

    The directional “beams” sometimes reported beneath hovering UFOs requires a little bit more explanation, but not much. What are their characteristics? 1) Often, they extend down to some finite length and then stop, in mid-air. 2) The “beams” are actually narrow-angle cones. Various different cone angles have been reported in different cases. When the cone angle gets sufficiently small, a cone is indistinguishable from a pencil beam. 3) The beams are invariably pointing down. 4) The beams are associated with physical effects that appear to be mediated by an invisible “force field”. These effects include disturbance of tree branches and leaves, swirled grass, creation of standing wave patterns on water, lifting of loose soil, rocks, cars, etc.

    Consideration #1 says that these “beams” are not simple light beams, like lasers, spotlights, or such, that emanate from or from out of, a hovering object. A light beam emanating from a single source cannot end in mid-air. That’s why the idea that they are “searchlights” fails. What is obviously happening is that there is a region of space below the UFO that has some energetic process going on inside it. The process is energetic enough that it is causing flouresence throughout the affected region. In other words, the entire column of air in that region is giving off light (like a flouresent light bulb). That is why it can appear to end in mid-air.

    Consideration #2 implies that the effect, whatever it is, gets weaker with distance from the object and also diverges with distance. This, again, strongly suggests that the effect is mediated by a field of some sort.

    Consideration #3 says that the “beams” are always pointed (plus or minus a little bit) in the direction of gravity. This would suggest that the beams might be connected with the fact that the objects appear to overcome the normal gravitational attraction, which would normally cause a heavier-than-air object to fall to the ground. (Can anyone come up with a counter example of beams pointing up?)

    Consideration #4 together with #3 suggests that perhaps the “beams” are the unintended consequence of an “acceleration field”, used to allow heavier-than-air vehicles to fly.

    It's actually not that difficult to understand what the "beams' are doing. We just don't know how they do it.

    By Blogger Larry, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Interesting conjectures, Larry.

    And I like your closing certitude:

    "It's actually not that difficult to understand what the 'beams' are doing."

    Thanks,

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • I recently posted an essay on what I suspect is happening in this phenomenon which is the storage and transference of information between states. I began with this quote that questions your question in this post.
    "So when I say that the contemporary approach to neuroscience is resting on unquestioned assumptions, I primarily have in mind the idea that consciousness is something that happens inside of you. Look, if I said to you here is a dollar bill, let’s look at it and try to discover its value you’d say that’s crazy because the value isn’t in the dollar bill. Where is it? That’s an interesting question. And then if you came to me and said "Look, I've got the best electron microscope in the world, let’s really study that dollar and try to find its value." No, you’re looking for the value in the wrong place. And the idea I have is that the neuroscience of consciousness has been making that kind of mistake in assumption about where to look for an understanding of what consciousness is and how it happens, how it arises."
    -Alva Noe
    Its a similar situation with wave packets that appear to be material as Einstein said, it's a persistent illusion. Ufologists as a tribal conglomeration are always outfoxed by the framing of their own questions. Nothing more nothing less. This leads to squared obscurities that go nowhere, like trying to make motive power out of a gravy ladle.
    And so it goes..

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Bruce:

    As Charles Ives tells us musically, in his tiny masterpiece, "The Unanswered Question," asking the wrong questions (of the gods) merely causes us (humans) to get frantic when those questions, because they are wrong, aren't answered.

    It's the nature of our humanity, and the reticence of the gods to help us.

    That's The God Game, and UFOs are so inconsequential in that game that one shouldn't get worked up about wrong questions and no answers.

    UFOs are a minor curiosity in our being, and have little or nothing to with The Meaning or purpose of Life.

    So, I'm not going to get lathered up about asking the wrong question(s).

    UFOs are a side trip for me, and many others who visit here...I hope.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Well, it's all a valuation as subjective as it is and while I haven't given up on you yet, probing, as you say, into the "inconsequential" is one such a valuation which I can respect, while at the same time, in terms of this phenomenon there is more inconsequential information than not from inconsequential questions, and the lack of answer to a good question doesn't detract from the value of the query. Personally I think there's a sort of comfort zone where there is no danger of getting an answer that, in our heart of hearts, we don't want.
    As far as the technological beaming light, the question could be worked by reverse causation as we all live under and owe our existence to, on one level, a beam of light. That this beam of light is manipulated by technology as a mirror image of nature, and in that beam of light in our case, it contains enormous possibilities, (some of which have not happened yet)I think it's simply a mixed metaphor that we have in our back pocket and as a result, we organise this into causal scenarios which are effects which we have a hand in, in ways we don't completely understand.
    While we use technology as a tool we are not technological creatures by nature, and so, this unique sort of wave packet that falls between the material and the non-sensate has no workable conceptual model either in consciousness itself or as an open system , what is engaged in without our direct participation, much like our heart rate. If we had to think about it, there would be no one around to read your posts. The fact that there is an unanswered question means that the question itself has value, therefore it was posed.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Per Rich: "UFOs are a minor curiosity in our being, and have little or nothing to with The Meaning or purpose of Life...UFOs are a side trip for me, and many others who visit here...I hope"

    I concur, yet we talk about it in one fashion or another.

    Why does it appear that a segment of Ufololgy looks to the past for evidence of the phenomenon? I suspect it's due to the lack of understanding of the present and the inability to find suitable answers.

    Or simply total disappointment that our perceived visitors have had no logical answers to what ails our collective societies.

    Thus the questions of "beams" from an unknown or indefinable sighting(s) become totally irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Uh. You forgot one of the most famous, or infamous, UFO beam of light incidents, Travis Walton being carried away by one.

    So, maybe UFOs are just trawling for stray humans or cattle. Smile.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Yes. Tim...

    UFOs do hold a subliminal hope for many of us: are they possibly salvational...

    That is, do they have solutions for this earthly vale in which we find ourselves?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • PG:

    Your comments remind me of that classic Twilight Zone show: To Serve Man

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, April 17, 2013  

  • Whatever that is Rich it ain't light. It isn't just it's way too irregular for a cone shaped beam or for that matter two cone shaped beams interfering with each other.

    It's the light doesn't even seem to reach the water there isn't a hint of any sparkles in the surrounding water and where there should a glowing disc shaped reflection there's in fact a quite dark shadow implying it's something much more solid than light.

    What it looked like to me the moment I saw it was 'ectoplasm' which I've seen on a few occasions or rather something which had the appearance of ectoplasm.

    The more I look at the 'UFO' though the more my memories of American kitsch inspired Fifties and Sixties novelty items're triggered off and I find myself recalling things like light fixtures or lamp shades or even a sugar dispenser which'd possibly explain the peculiarities of the 'beam(s') especially the parts which seem to have various hints of shadow to them.

    Good question though why use beams at all?

    Even the helicopters which fly over ours mostly use their beams as psycholigical devices to flush suspects out or make 'em panic or freeze after the infrared detectors've spotted 'em.

    By Blogger alanborky, at Thursday, April 18, 2013  

  • Yes, Alan...

    Those beams may not be beams at all but something totally different.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, April 18, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home