1880 very descriptive UFO sighting

reply to post by Chadwickus


lol, OK..

Can you show me proof of these marine phosphorescent wheels that apparently exist please??

reply to post by CynicalM


Actually incandescent or electric lighting predates the 1890s.


Source

[edit on 9/5/10 by Hefficide]

reply to post by Hefficide


Link not working..

reply to post by CynicalM


I can and have shown witness reports of them.

That's about as much as I can find right now.

That's where it stands.

Can you or anyone else show proof that this wasn't a marine phosphorescent wheel?

reply to post by Hefficide


i think this is the link you wanted to post

incandescent light bulb

reply to post by toreishi


Thanks Toreishi!

My virus scanner decided to update right as I was posting and caused utter havok!

reply to post by CynicalM


They did of course have a very good grasp of directional lighting back then, and how it would look in the water. See for example this image:


So if it looked anything like that, I think it would have been described like that. Besides, I think you are a lot less biased if you have no explanation, and just describe what you actually see instead of making assumptions based on knowledge you already possess.

So I think whatever it is that is described, it is not an UFO.

reply to post by Hefficide


Ahh mate, I see your point but how common would they have been at the time of the OP's event??

All I was saying was any lighting to most people back then would have been strange and hard to describe..
Especially so if they were brightly coloured lights..

reply to post by Chadwickus


No, thats why I would consider it unidentified..

It's still a mystery and probably always will be because we can't add anything with any conviction..

It certainly could be what you have said, but it could easily be something completly different..

Can you or anyone else show proof that this wasn't a marine phosphorescent wheel?

This isn't really a fair request (but you are probably not serious). Much more interesting is to ask what it could alternatively be, and what evidence is supporting that explanation. Then we can weight the evidence and come to a conclusion which explanation is more likely.

But so far there isn't really an alternative explanation. Except the UFO explanation that does not seem to fit the witness report.

reply to post by -PLB-


It is a fair request, it was written in a UFO book by a UFOlogist and posted in the UFO forum, so the burden of proof rests on those that claim this to be a UFO.

Originally posted by CynicalM
reply to post by Hefficide

 

Ahh mate, I see your point but how common would they have been at the time of the OP's event??

All I was saying was any lighting to most people back then would have been strange and hard to describe..
Especially so if they were brightly coloured lights..

I'm trying to find information about what exposure the population might have had to electric lighting in this period, maybe via expositions, fairs, and the like. So I'll post what I find when I find it.

But it may take me awhile as it's nearly time for me to start doing my Dad duties.

reply to post by Hefficide


I'd say they have a fair idea about light, the description mentions Phosphorescence:

"The Phosphorescent gleam seemed to glide along flat on the surface of the sea, no light being visible in the air above the water."

reply to post by Chadwickus


You are not asking for proof it is a UFO, but for proof it was not marine phosphorescent wheel. So you are asking someone to prove a negative. Just pointing that out. For the rest I agree that if anyone claims its a UFO, they have to come with convincing evidence.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by -PLB-]

Great stuff on bioluminescence, I did a bit of research on 1 of the names mentioned in the stories and found some interesting info.

I was inclined to believe both stories but had some thoughts on the lines of we made our own entertainment back then and a couple of incongruities in the tales.

Still on the fence on this one.

reply to post by Chadwickus


Was there not Phosphorescent materials around before electricity was invented?? I'm pretty sure there was..

reply to post by CynicalM


What I'm saying is it is a very specific word to use.

It shows that it wasn't just some light, but an identifiable type of light and that the person who wrote the description knew what they were talking about.

[edit on 5/9/10 by Chadwickus]

reply to post by Chadwickus


Hmm, pretty hard to prove something is "unidentified"..

Thats a real catch 22

Originally posted by -PLB-
Except the UFO explanation that does not seem to fit the witness report.

To be honest, i thought the UFO (or USO or whatever) explanation is pretty strong. In fact, i cant really think of any alternative explanation - with the exception that the whole story is fictional (which i do not think).

The witness gives a detailed account of large 'spokes' revolving around 360 degrees that keep up with the ship for 20 minutes.

Chadwickus's luminous wave video's were interesting, and i know he is just speculating on a possible explanation, but i cant see how this phenomena can stretch so far in scope and size so as to provide an answer to what was seen.

reply to post by Chadwickus


At a time when there would have been little "man made" light other than candles and kerosene lamps, maybe thats how someone would describe it. Like some other light source they had seen in nature..

It would certainly have been strange to them..