| Home > A Comparative Analytical and Observational Study of North American Databases on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena |
|---|
As it has been described in previous pages, the Ontario area, among the three considered in this study, is the one where the accuracy with which data on UAP sightings have been collected and carefully screened, has been of the highest level. Due to the reasons explained in previous sections, it has not been possible to localize intrinsically real areas of recurrence that can come out from the published database, but it has been possible to rely on the long-term experience of a “skywatcher” and investigative ufologist [Refs. 31, 32]. According to this reliable contact since 12 years it has been possible to know of an area (so far not accurately or sufficiently catalogued inside the present UAP databases [Ref. 90]) where apparent “UAP events” have been filmed many times over Lake Ontario. Moreover, the expertise of this scholar and investigator has been very useful and extremely instructive when trying to study in more detail prominent UAP sightings (independently from their recurrence in a given location or not) that occurred in the area North of or around lake Ontario. This scholar, who is skilled in examining very carefully the story told by witnesses, since a long time has been preparing very detailed maps indicating where sightings of importance have occurred in the last decades. It was then chosen to visit some of these areas (see Figs. 23, 24, 25), clearly depending on the available time for the mission (17 days) and on the clemency of the weather. The goal was threefold: 1) to verify if some of these areas show time repeaters and how often; 2) to use off-the-shelf portable instrumentation for measurements; 3) to test the organizational and efficiency level that can be reached both with transfers to the chosen areas and with the use of the instrumentation. Before describing the results of this explorative survey of these areas, it is necessary to list the instruments (see Fig. 26) that have been effectively used (avoiding listing the ones that have not been). The list is as follows:
The area of Lake Ontario was well known to me due to the tireless work that was done quite constantly for several years through the monitoring and videoing operations carried out by Project Orbwatch [Ref. 31]. The many videos that have been acquired from several directions (mostly from Oakville shore and from Niagara-on-the-Lake) by sky watchers of Project Orbwatch show the clear evidence of unstructured light phenomena (more often double and sometimes also triple) apparently entering inside the lake after doing a quite long-duration descent. Several observers pointed out that these are airplanes landing at an airport in distance, but this interpretation seems quite questionable due to the fact that the back of normal airplanes do not use a so powerful light: when an airplane is landing the landing light is obviously pointed to the opposite direction and not towards the observer. The possibility of military VTOL fighters of the Harrier kind landing to a possible carrier quite far on the lake has been ventured by me, not with the intent to quickly get rid of the phenomenon there but to try to survey all prosaic hypothetic possibilities in order to be more able to concentrate on the real phenomenon. After all this phenomenon has been witnessed in the past too, much before Orbwatch operations started [Ref. 10].
Figure 23. Locations (on a World Wind map) that were visited and monitored in the Canadian province of Ontario from July 24 to August 9, 2009. The shores of Lake Ontario and Lake Simcoe and some places of the up-country were the main visited places. (The Niagara-on-the-Lake area, on the southern shore of Lake Ontario, was visited too, but no instrumental monitoring operations were possible due to bad weather).
Figure 24. Photographs of the visited areas by the author. From left to right: Willow Beach (Lake Simcoe), sunset at Willow Beach, Oakland shore (Lake Ontario), Silver Creek – Halton Hills, Mono Cliffs provincial park, Spectrum Airways (close to air field), Cheltenham Badlands (East Caledon), Ajax shore (Lake Ontario), Sibbald Point (Lake Simcoe).
Figure 25. Near-IR high-resolution photographs (out of 8) taken from the shore of Oakland (reached coming from Burlington). Due to the very long exposure times needed (typically: 30 seconds at midday) this kind of IR photography cannot be used at night but only at daytime.
Figure 26. Instruments that were mainly used by this author during his monitoring operations. Up (from left). VLF-ELF spectrometer, Fuji Finepix S-2 Pro digital camera with optical spectrometer inserted on the lens. Down. Computer showing VLF-ELF data during recording, VLF-ELF receiver, Geiger counter, Trifield Natural EM Meter and its antenna.
With this philosophy in mind I have also ventured the possibility that some of the "bigger light phenomena" that a decade ago were videoed being “parked” just on the water surface might be caused either by sun reflection on some reflecting surface or by some possible flammable gas (such as methane for instance) coming out occasionally from the depth of the lake. Of course these ones are only hypotheses, certainly not the solution of the entire problem. Trying to distinguish the signal from the noise from this anyway spectacular phenomenon is not an easy thing so far, also because at the time of this mission to Ontario these phenomena were not seen, except for possibly (in a very weak and short-lasting mode) once when a monitor was done from Ajax (there was not sufficient time to aim the camera and the light was anyway too weak for getting good optical spectra using a reasonable exposure time). During the skywatching operations carried out at two locations (Oakland and Ajax) at Lake Ontario no (hypothetically permanent or occasional) anomaly was recorded either in the near infrared or in the VLF-ELF radio wavelength range.
These areas – not only the shore of Lake Ontario but also the up-country – are very often subject to the flyby of many airplanes (one after the other), some of which (quite clearly identifiable by the noise that is produced) showed occasionally a triangular or diamond-like light formation. This was clearly only one visual testimony, but the impression that it gave to me was just a suspicion that possibly some or many of the reported "structured lights" that have been passed for "UAP" by witnesses may be in reality airplanes having a particular light configuration. Moreover, the fact that often airplanes seem to stand still for quite a long time in the sky due to the zero apparent speed when they move in the direction of the observer and their very powerful landing light are surely an additional cause of (innocent) suggestion for the occasional observer. Concerning aircrafts having a specific geometric light configuration I am certainly not in a condition to exclude arbitrarily a "mimicry effect" [Ref. 14] due to their apparently conventional sound. I accept the possibility of mimicry by a hypothetical exogenous visitation [Refs. 81, 100] but I cannot demonstrate it yet: unfortunately I couldn’t make an appropriate sound analysis at the time of sighting (being travelling in a highway as a passenger).
The optical spectrum was often recorded (see Fig. 27) when a nightly light was not identified yet as an airplane (thanks also to a radio-scanner promptly used by the Orbwatch person who gently accompanied me always to these locations), and it resulted to be always of continuum kind (no lines present therein): this is typical of halogen lights used by airplane illumination systems. This spectroscopic procedure was not only important to identify lights in the sky but it was also a very useful exercise of “speedy promptness” in the event that something really anomalous was caught. It is in fact expected that an anomalous aerial phenomenon (be it of technological, geophysical or atmospheric nature) present an anomalous spectrum as well [Ref. 77]. A spectral anomaly might be represented, for instance, by some broadening of spectral lines [Refs. 22, 24], such as that caused by the Zeeman and Stark effects (due respectively to a magnetic and an electric field), pressure-collision effect, rotational and/or turbulence effects, gravitational effect, or by red or blue shifts of the spectral lines themselves (if effectively present). Optical spectroscopy can also be very useful to unmask, in case, a prosaic illumination system caused by “light artefacts” (such as military flares, Chinese lanterns, or other causes that are not due to a real (more or less exotic) propulsion system) [Refs. 78, 79, 80]. Taking a spectrum of an object that is moving in the sky, using a dispersion grating (of high quality in the case of ROS), is not an easy operation. The spectrum can be well exposed only if the object is sufficiently luminous and not moving too fast. But it can result to be of basic importance when it is necessary to identify any illuminated object at night both as a diagnostic tool able to unmask fakes in the sky or to promptly identify normal airplanes or to measure important physical properties at the atomic level [Ref. 22] from which it is possible to construct some physics of really anomalous objects. Apart from the promptness and efficiency at any time with all instruments, unfortunately no spectrum of interest was recorded among the ones that were taken, during the mission to Ontario.
But a visual sighting of something presumably anomalous did occur from the area of Cheltenham Badlands (a very interesting geologic formation in the off-country, Fig. 24). A sketch of the anomaly seen in the sky at that time is presented in Fig. 28. The sighting dealt with two yellow lights that were moving very close together, first vertically and then horizontally. The object was seen from the car for about two minutes (see Tab. 2) on the return from a monitoring mission on the Oakland shore of Lake Ontario. The impression was that this apparently anomalous object was moving with no acceleration and following a slightly “wavy” motion. No noise was heard. Of course at this time no instrument was in function (they were all packed inside the car after using them for some hours during a monitoring session at Oakland shore that ended two hours before). So it has been only possible to describe this sighting (two witnesses) but not to take any measurement of it. According to a witness reported in the NUFORC database [Ref. 50], a similar sighting was reported 4 days later.
Figure 27. Optical low-medium resolution spectroscopy using a ROS diffraction grating attached to a Fuji Finepix S-2 Pro reflex digital camera. Up. Light trail produced by an airplane. Centre. Continuum spectrum produced by a very luminous moving airplane. Down. Line spectra produced by streetlights (of the Sodium vapour and the Mercury vapour kinds), which are normally used in order to calibrate in wavelength the spectrum of interest (using normally software Visual Spec)
Day 2009
Location
Latitude / Longitude
( ° ‘ ‘’ )
VLF-ELF Recording
Time Slot
Anomaly
Comments / Description
July 25
Willow Beach, Lake Simcoe
441814 / 792622
19:56 – 23:22
Possibly
• poor signal quality • VLF recorded
July 27
Oakville (shore), Lake Ontario
432638 /
793917
21:04 – 22:31
No
• poor signal quality
July 27/28
Cheltenham Badlands, Caledon East
434631 / 795652
Possibly
•
• •
suspect UAP sighting hh:mm 00:51 – 00:53, seen towards South and moving
towards East
no VLF recording no photos or video
July 29
Cheltenham Badlands, Caledon East
434631 /
795652
21:18 – 01:25
Possibly
• good signal quality • VLF recorded
July 30
Willow Beach, Lake
Simcoe
441814 / 792622
21:23 – 22:29
No
• poor signal quality
July 31
Silver Creek, Halton
Hills
433944 / 795627
21:11 – 21:24
No
• very bad signal quality
August 1
Mono Cliffs
Provincial Park
440220 / 800428
20:34 – 20:54
No
• poor signal quality
August 2
Newmarket
440337 / 792721
21:16 – 22:04
No
• very bad signal quality
August 3
Spectrum Airways, Milton
432640 / 795040
20:05 – 00:28
Possibly Possibly
•
• •
poor signal quality
VLF recorded
bright spherical flash (hh:mm ∼ 00:50)
August 5
Cheltenham Badlands, Caledon East
434631 / 795652
21:30 – 01:23
No
• good signal quality
August 6
Ajax, Lake Ontario
434850 / 790000
20:30 –
22:12
No
• poor signal quality
August 8
Sibbald Point, Lake Simcoe
442007 / 791938
15:30 –
17:00
Yes
• good signal quality • VLF recorded
Table 2. Time schedule of VLF-ELF recordings and
skywatching.
Figure 28. Visual sighting of suspect UAP nature reported in Badlands on July 27, 2009.
After sighting this probable anomaly in the sky it was decided to concentrate the next monitoring session in the area of Badlands. Two days later instruments were then mounted directly on the rock formation and the monitoring was carried out for some hours in the night. No magnetic alarm was recorded, radioactivity was at normal levels, and nothing anomalous was seen in the sky at that time. The same object was not seen anymore (even during a further monitoring session at Badlands, a week later). But that night the VLF-ELF spectrometer recorded occasionally transient signals of variable amplitude, which is not so easy to interpret (see Tabs. 2, 3 and Fig. 29). Of course the suspicion remains that this signal was caused by an interference caused by the used laptop computer (to which the VLF-ELF receiver was always connected), in fact this can happen many times [Refs. 59, 60]. The problem is that such a (sometimes extremely strong) signal manifested itself only during a few minutes in total and only during one single night out of over 20 hours of VLF-ELF registration sessions in more than two weeks and at 9 different locations, where the system configuration has been always the same. Moreover the same kind of signal has been never recorded in the course of previous registration sessions carried out in Italy using the same spectrometer configuration. Possible interference caused by other devices has always been carefully tested and examined in advance. Therefore this case, by my opinion, remains open. Unfortunately the very limited funds available for this mission didn’t allow the use of an infrared device too [Ref. 113]. If something was not visible at that time in the sky it is not certainly possible to exclude that it was effectively present indeed very close to us (as the strength of the recorded VLF signal suggested): an IR thermo camera (properly equipped with a zoom lens) would have caught and identified it almost immediately. This instrument is extremely important when such monitoring operations are done.
Clearly the philosophy of this kind of “instrumented skywatching” is very simple. The main goal is to be able to acquire simultaneously an optical recording (video, photo or spectrum) and a VLF-ELF recording (in case assisted by the Natural EM Meter). This is the only way to validate the possible anomalous nature of a VLF-ELF signal, especially if this can be time-correlated with something anomalous in the sky. Experience shows that being able to obtain such simultaneity of measurements is an extremely difficult task. Probability to see something in the sky becomes very low especially if few occasional hours are dedicated to the monitoring, despite of the fact that this is done at areas where previous sightings have been reported. Clearly an automatic monitoring system, for instance similar to the Automatic Measurement Station used by Project Hessdalen in Norway [Ref. 69], might be an ideal system to increase the probability to catch something, but due to several reasons all this would be limited to video and/or VLF-ELF recording but not to optical spectroscopy (unless a particularly sophisticated automatic system is used). In few words instrumented skywatching operations carried out directly by personnel on site has the disadvantage of offering a low probability to record something but has the double advantage of permitting more complete and accurate scientific measurements and of mobility (a monitoring station is always fixed at a spot).
Therefore all these considerations show that this mission on site has been a further test both of efficiency and promptness (not so different, conceptually, than working at an anti-aircraft post) and of testing on the field what is the value of ratio * results / work done * when one attempts to monitor highly elusive phenomena such as “UAP” apparitions. Experience clearly shows that this ratio may be much higher (namely: favourable) if, instead of UAPs, areas of recurrence of Hessdalen-like phenomena (presumably natural) are monitored [Refs. 69, 77]. There are good reasons to suggest that UAP cases too can be monitored with the same effectiveness only when an “UAP flap” occurring around a given location can be promptly caught [Refs. 14, 61, 68]. But this has not been the case of this mission, where no UAP flap was really reported at that time. In spite of this such a mission has been a very useful (new) test and exercise of promptness and efficiency: this know-how and expertise can be turned to one’s advantage in the perspective of new more favourable occasions.
Figure 29. Suspected VLF anomaly recorded at Badlands, July 29, 2009. Up. The entire registration (20 minutes WAV file) inside which this anomaly was recorded. Centre. A detail of the strongest of these events between 0 and 20 KHz. Down. A high-resolution zoom of one of the strongest recorded signals. Vertical lines are well identified as “spherics”, of ionospheric origin. These data have been acquired and processed using Spectrogram 16 software.
But the recording of VLF-ELF anomalies didn’t lack in the course of this mission. In addition to the strong suspicious signal described above other still unexplained anomalies (more or less suspected as such) were recorded indeed (see Tabs. 2, 3, and Figs. 30, 31, 32), also considering that a quite rich database of known signals (of ionospheric and/or manmade nature) in this wavelength range is available since some years as an important tool to compare the “noise” with the “signal” that is effectively searched for [Refs. 59, 60]. Maybe some of the anomalies recorded in the course of this mission might enter into this data bank in the future if they will be clearly identified. Or maybe not.
Figure 30. Marked VLF anomaly recorded at Sibbald Point (Lake Simcoe), August 8, 2009. Vertical lines are due to the “spherics” of ionospheric origin. Up. The entire spectrogram between 0 and 20 KHz is shown. Down. A high-resolution display is shown in the range 7.4-8.4 KHz. These data have been acquired and processed using Spectrogram 16 software.
Figure 31. Suspected ELF anomaly recorded at the Spectrum Airways air field, August 3, 2009. Precursor “worm-like” signals precede quite strong vertical spikes. Horizontal lines are caused by well known manmade signals due to power lines. These data have been acquired and processed using Spectrogram 16 software.
Figure 32. Suspected ELF anomalies recorded at Willow Beach (Lake Simcoe), July 25, 2009. The unexplained signals are represented by “curved and oblique lines” between 0.4 and 1.0 KHz. Horizontal lines are caused by well known manmade signals due to power lines. These data have been acquired and processed using Spectrogram 16 software.
VLF-ELF RECORDED SUSPECTED ANOMALIES
Day and Location
2009
Frequency Occurrence
( KHz )
S/N Ratio
Frequency Width
( Hz )
Duration ( sec )
Shape
Description / Possible Interpretation
July 25
Willow Beach
0.4 – 1.0 ( distributed )
1.5
∼ 50
0.5 – 1.0
inclined and curved
• very little,
transient and oscillating
• unknown
July 29
Cheltenham Badlands
3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 23 all
simultaneous
0.6 – 3.6
up to 1000
28, 5, 7, 3, 13, 75
(sequentially)
horizontal with slight upward
inclination and occasional very strong intensity outburst
•
•
6 events having different duration and
intensity : duration ∝ intensity
PC interference suspected, but not fully convincing
August 3
Spectrum
Airways
0.4 – 0.8
1.2 – 2.0
400
1.0 – 2.0
inclined, curved, steep, very narrow
•
•
several events, all preceding (1-3 secs) outbursts of strong intensity (vertical spikes)
movement of air mass
suspected
August 8
Sibbald Point
7.85 and 7.88 very close lines
0.8 – 1.6
∼ 30
120
horizontal and irregularly intermittent in intensity
• accompanied with much weaker mirror signals below (up to
7.55) and above (up to 8.15)
• unknown
Table 3. List of recorded VLF-ELF anomalies and their characteristics.
Is there some utility in recording electromagnetic anomalies when nothing is seen in the sky at the same time? Probably yes. The VLF-ELF tool alone might be an efficient method to alert next observers when/if new UAP sightings will be reported in the area from where such signals have been recorded, or it might be a suitable method to “map electromagnetically” a given area, in order to permit to know in advance important information such as the level of EM manmade disturbance (which tends to create a very bad or poor signal quality) recorded when measurements are done at certain specific locations and, of course, to evaluate the possibly persistence at such locations of unexplained EM anomalies, which might be both of geophysical and/or atmospheric nature or of an artificial nature that cannot be easily explained as a manmade one.
The other recorded anomalies are quite interesting, and in 5 years of quite constant VLF-ELF monitoring operations [Refs. 77, 78] in other countries (in particular, Norway and Northern and Central Italy), such signals have never been encountered before. The VLF anomaly recorded at Sibbald Point location (see Fig. 30) is particularly interesting and some of the best experts in VLF- ELF monitoring (deliberately consulted among the most skeptical ones) do not have an explanation yet [Ref. 60]. Another anomaly, in this case in the ELF range, was recorded at Spectrum Airways (see Fig. 31) air field location (where some quite important UAP sightings were reported several years ago). It was first suspected that the strong vertical outburst of emission might be caused by wind or by touching occasionally the antenna wires, but after doing several tests it was soon realized that this wasn’t the explanation. What is interesting here is that such very strong vertical clustered spike-like signals were preceded by a sort of “worm-like” signal precursors. This kind of signal occurred several times at the end of the monitoring session. Experts suggest that this kind of signal might be caused by some “movement of air masses” [Ref. 60]. Clearly that one was an area that was very frequently flied over by Cessna-like first-level trainer airplanes (taking off, touching and going, and landing one after the other all the time), and that night this occurred up to 11:00 PM. This might be in itself a possible explanation of this kind of signal, but at the moment of airplane passages (also at very low height) no anomaly was recorded by the VLF-ELF spectrometer (whose antenna was set up to record the electric component of the field). Most prominent anomalies of this specific kind were recorded predominantly after 11:00 PM.
As an anecdote I should remember that after 00:30 PM (at the airfield) when I was about to pack all my instruments in the car towards which I had started to move, I suddenly saw a quite huge and almost blinding “spherical light ball” of white-blue-violet colour on the ground, which was located presumably some kilometres away from the observation point. This phenomenon lasted a few seconds and reminded (as a perceptive effect) an “atomic explosion” seen at its beginning and in distance. What was it? This is impossible to tell, and, once more it must be reminded that this was another totally unpredictable transient light event that, by the way, couldn’t even be photographed in useful time even if the camera had been still in position (unless it had been taking a long exposure catching the specific time lapse of the light apparition). But certainly if the VLF-ELF device had been in function (I was typically recording sequential files that were each 20 minutes long) at the time of this big light flash, something might have been surely recorded. This sighting was seen only by the undersigned, as the other person accompanying me was occasionally looking at a different direction, while this very luminous lighting effect lasted very shortly. Once more, we see how elusive these kinds of phenomena are, especially when we intend to obtain scientific measurements of them. And this one was another very useful test, which might be very instructive for future monitoring sessions. Trying to measure UAP or UAP-like phenomena is not exactly like aiming a telescope at a star... And it must be once more reminded that trying to acquire measurements of alleged UAP phenomena is much more difficult than doing the same of very spatially recurrent “earthlights” [Ref. 86], unless an aimed monitor of UAPs is promptly carried out as soon as a “time flap” occurs in a given area of the world. The success of an operation of this kind depends mostly on the availability of the necessary money funding for this research, which certainly requires necessarily more than two persons working on it and several additional (expensive) off-the-shelf and portable instruments. Nevertheless it must be also pointed out at a quite good level of confidence that being able to acquire simultaneously VLF- ELF recordings, optical spectra and videos of a possible anomalous aerial phenomenon that is in sight would be more than sufficient to obtain scientific data of a certain relevance. That’s the reason why it was decided to carry out this mission even if some important sophisticated measurement facilities are presently lacking. Whatever is the success of this kind of instrumented missions, experience says that trying to do them is without no doubt an important exercise (maybe a bit similar to a military one) of efficiency and promptness, especially if these operations are carried out in the full darkness and at often impervious locations where all the instruments have to be deployed.
This session should be concluded just making a short list of the additional portable instrumentation and support personnel that the experience on the field necessary required (due to the present lack of it). The following elements are necessary in order to be able to carry out a full scientific analysis:
Experience teaches that the full success of this kind of scientific campaigns doesn’t depend only on the availability of sophisticated instrumentation and on the presence of highly technically competent personnel but also on the organizational and logistics capabilities. In addition to the use of the available instrumentation, the last mentioned capabilities have been tested and wholly achieved during the mission carried out to Ontario, due to a quite well harmonized work between a physicist and an investigative ufologist of prominent general culture, specific preparation in the field of ufology (whatever the personal thoughts and beliefs on the UAP phenomenon may be) and excellent cartographic and explorative skills.
| Home > A Comparative Analytical and Observational Study of North American Databases on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena |
|---|