New Triangular UFO Found: Red Lights in Pacific Ocean (2014)

a reply to: peacefulpete

Meh. Still boats.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete

Meh. Still boats.

Meh. Still uneducated forums banter versus:

The educated analysis of the 25-year veteran pilot, photographer, and web host.

Still not boats.

a reply to: peacefulpete

That he said could be boats.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete

That he said could be boats.

*that he said were NOT boats, and COULD NOT BE boats.

a reply to: peacefulpete

The only reason he said they might not be was because of the colour.

Could explain the overall size of the group of lights and the stability of them.

Fishing boats tend to use red, white and green lights, but “dangerous cargo” boats use all round red/orange or flashing red/orange lights.

So, boats.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete

The only reason he said they might not be was because of the colour.

Could explain the overall size of the group of lights and the stability of them.

Fishing boats tend to use red, white and green lights, but “dangerous cargo” boats use all round red/orange or flashing red/orange lights.

So, boats.

"They initially appeared as a distant city or group of typical Asian squid fishing boats, but this did not make sense in this area."

"The lights we saw were much larger in size than your average city or group of boats, but they also

glowed red and orange, instead of the normal yellow and white that cities or ships would produce.

The closer we got, the more intense the glow became, illuminating the clouds and sky below us in a scary orange glow that you would expect with a massive fire on the ground.

In a part of the world where there was supposed to be nothing but water."


He even states that he could tell that the lights were coming FROM THE WATER SURFACE ITSELF:




"...the very creepy unexplainable deep red/orange glow from the ocean’s surface."


"Fishing fleet:

Could explain the overall size of the group of lights and the stability of them.

Does not explain the red color and the size of the individual lights.

Also, the position so far out in the Pacific does not make sense."

a reply to: peacefulpete

Like i said, boats.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete

Like i said, boats.

Like I said, not boats, for all the reasons that the pilot explains in detail.

And for being an experienced pilot over the Pacific Ocean, which you're not.

a reply to: peacefulpete

The pilot is experienced in planes and, clearly, not boats.

What he saw was, unsurprisingly, boats.

a reply to: peacefulpete

The only interesting thing you posted is that link of a supposed upside-down lightning bolt. I never saw anything described that way but look, even your best example has the lightning shooting DOWN first, and then the upward bolt is only the reaction after that. So that doesn't even fit the pilot's description.

Its not supposed match the pilots description,

that was to show your ignorance posting things that just aren't reality

Now you indicate just how ignorant you really are when reading things.

"The best example has lightening shooting down first" if you read the link is invisible most of the time, so that could have actually fitted the description but it doesn't because the pilot isn't describing a lightening bolt but more of a distant explosion that has the color of lightening, hence why he said a lightening bolt in a distant thunderstorm, so he is describing a flash not a bolt.

He only mentions something looking like a lightning bolt shooting upwards. He never mentions anything shooting downwards, which is normal, and which your link shows.

NO, the pilot doesn't say that.

Stop with your rephrasing that completely changes what the pilot says.

The pilot is describing a flash not a bolt, he says a lightening bolt in a distant thunderstorm, I guess that confuses you because you see the word "bolt" and you cannot understand what being said by the pilot.

and the link says the when you see ground up lightening that in most cases you wont see it from the sky to ground because of the quickness.

a reply to: peacefulpete

What are you on about?

You don't see the lines of longitude or latitude in real life, nobody went and painted these lines on the ocean.

Again you're trying to twist things in order to win an argument, he didn't know the area visually it's the friggin ocean, no defining points and no landmarks.

Already explained how he wouldn't really know what vessels would be below him, when they would be there and how often.

To say the ocean isn't used for fishing is stupid.

a reply to: peacefulpete

They're under a layer of clouds or sea mist/fog.

That means light is being blocked, you can see the clouds being illuminated.

a reply to: RAY1990

To say the ocean isn't used for fishing is stupid.

add that to

Perspective plays no part in observation

and glare isn't relevant because the lights look like dim LED lights, Dim LED lights seen from over 30,000 feet?

That means light is being blocked, you can see the clouds being illuminated.

yep and according to Pete, this looks like dim LED light that can be seen from that altitude and can illuminate any cloud cover above.

Dim LED lights?


Here is what they say and then under that they post the picture from the plane flying at what was it 34000 feet?

Well no, I still say glare is irrelevant because the pilot's photos don't resemble glaring bright lights in the first place. They look like dim LED lights in the water.

When I read that, all that comes to mind is what they post in every 2nd post to any that have differing opinions, that such nonsense cant be taken seriously and one must be trolling.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: peacefulpete

The pilot is experienced in planes and, clearly, not boats.

What he saw was, unsurprisingly, boats.

You don't have any grounds to criticize the competence of a veteran airline pilot who you don't know.

From the pilot's own words and educated analysis, he is experienced with planes and with flying over boats, and with flying over different parts of the world that he can identify visually, as well as latitudinally and longitudinally.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: peacefulpete

The only interesting thing you posted is that link of a supposed upside-down lightning bolt. I never saw anything described that way but look, even your best example has the lightning shooting DOWN first, and then the upward bolt is only the reaction after that. So that doesn't even fit the pilot's description.

Its not supposed match the pilots description,

that was to show your ignorance posting things that just aren't reality

Now you indicate just how ignorant you really are when reading things.

"The best example has lightening shooting down first" if you read the link is invisible most of the time, so that could have actually fitted the description but it doesn't because the pilot isn't describing a lightening bolt but more of a distant explosion that has the color of lightening, hence why he said a lightening bolt in a distant thunderstorm, so he is describing a flash not a bolt.

He only mentions something looking like a lightning bolt shooting upwards. He never mentions anything shooting downwards, which is normal, and which your link shows.

NO, the pilot doesn't say that.

Stop with your rephrasing that completely changes what the pilot says.

The pilot is describing a flash not a bolt, he says a lightening bolt in a distant thunderstorm, I guess that confuses you because you see the word "bolt" and you cannot understand what being said by the pilot.

and the link says the when you see ground up lightening that in most cases you wont see it from the sky to ground because of the quickness.

Again, I just don't believe that your input is really saying anything genuine or honest.

We're talking about the pilot's description of a lightning bolt shooting up off the water, you posted something that doesn't look like that, and then:

"Its not supposed match the pilots description."

So... it's irrelevant...

Then you're saying that downward lightning bolts are usually invisible. Wow. Never seen a lightning bolt, huh?

And then your post wraps up insisting that it wasn't a lightning bolt that he described as looking like a lightning bolt. Ah OK.

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: peacefulpete

What are you on about?

You don't see the lines of longitude or latitude in real life, nobody went and painted these lines on the ocean.

Again you're trying to twist things in order to win an argument, he didn't know the area visually it's the friggin ocean, no defining points and no landmarks.

Already explained how he wouldn't really know what vessels would be below him, when they would be there and how often.

To say the ocean isn't used for fishing is stupid.

He would see the lines of latitude and longitude in his plane's dashboard monitor, I expect.

I'm not twisting anything. I'm stating the obvious that a pilot should be expected to know what geographical area he's in, within the scale of hundreds of miles.

To say that some areas of the ocean are not used for fishing, is simply trusting the educated report of the veteran airplane pilot.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: RAY1990

To say the ocean isn't used for fishing is stupid.

add that to

Perspective plays no part in observation

and glare isn't relevant because the lights look like dim LED lights, Dim LED lights seen from over 30,000 feet?

That means light is being blocked, you can see the clouds being illuminated.

yep and according to Pete, this looks like dim LED light that can be seen from that altitude and can illuminate any cloud cover above.

Dim LED lights?


Here is what they say and then under that they post the picture from the plane flying at what was it 34000 feet?

Well no, I still say glare is irrelevant because the pilot's photos don't resemble glaring bright lights in the first place. They look like dim LED lights in the water.

When I read that, all that comes to mind is what they post in every 2nd post to any that have differing opinions, that such nonsense cant be taken seriously and one must be trolling.

Well, glare doesn't seem relevant when discussing photos that don't seem to show glare. The lights don't even look very bright.

And lights don't need to be bright to be seen and photographed in the black emptiness of the Pacific Ocean.

a reply to: peacefulpete

Pilot. NOT mariner.

Boats have red lights. It’s easy to find out with a simple google search.

Boats with red light.

a reply to: peacefulpete

We're talking about the pilot's description of a lightning bolt shooting up off the water,

NO I am not.

as she pilot didn't say he saw a lightening bolt shooting up off the water.

he didn't see a bolt but what looked like a lightening bolt in a distant thunderstorm, he saw a flash of light shoot up.

he uses lightening to explain the intense bright color, more white instead of yellow/orange like normal explosions.

Its not hard to follow and understand what the pilot says, why you keep rephrasing to make it look like the pilot is saying something else is just what?

here is the quote which you have quoted yourself but fail to understand what said by the pilot.

Suddenly, a long way off in the distance ahead, an intense light flash shot up from the ground, just at or beyond the horizon. It looked like a lightning bolt in a faraway thunderstorm, but a lot more intense and of a much shorter duration, as though something had exploded. I have seen countless thunderstorms, shootings stars, lightning bolts and stars but never a flash like this.

Ignorance or trolling?

Well, glare doesn't seem relevant when discussing photos that don't seem to show glare. The lights don't even look very bright. And lights don't need to be bright to be seen and photographed in the black emptiness of the Pacific Ocean.

Dim lights lighting up such a large area and viewable from over 10km?


I'm going with ignorance.

Maybe you are young and its arrogance that stops you from learning, seeing as you make comments about having sex with my mother I would say yes you are very immature and this is where the great displays of ignorance come from.


You can change, learning is up to the individual.

After 10 pages, it's still fishing boats.