Polarized light and UFOs

I enjoy reading the MUFON sightings in the morning. There are usually several interesting reports every day.

Anyway, a report for a sighting in Roseville, CA on May 23 2012 had an interesting clue about UFOs. The witness said he could see the UFO much clearer through polarized sunglasses. Without using the sunglasses the witness could barely see the UFO. (This was in the daytime.)

Maybe photographers should keep this in mind when they try to photograph UFOs. Also, it seems to be an important clue about the light emanating from UFOs.

I can see this being true. You can see alot of things better with polarized glasses. The thing is it is easier to put a pair of glasses on then it is to screw in a polarizing filter if you need to take a quick photo For the sightings that last for minutes then yes if they have one they might try putting it on.

reply to post by cloudyday


It is not uncommon for someone to develop picturres from a modern camera/phone and say, "I didn't see the object in the sky when I took the image." Polarized light or not, cameras evidently pickup and record a greater spread of the light spectrum then our eyes.

These days we also must seriously consider cloaking devices that in addition to a singular "on or off" capability they may also distort or camouflage the body.

I am afraid MUFON has lots of fake pictures too. How do you see UFOs idk, it's like UFOs are mostly in the two Americas and occassionally can be seen in other continents... It's like Americas have a lot more activity than anywhere else and I mean military not alien, I won't be surprised if all these UFOs are some military shlt

Thanks for those comments. I want to quote the entire sighting, because reading the whole report gave me the impression that the polarized light phenomena was not normal:

5-23-2012 Clear day with no clouds in the area, wind is about 10mph from the NW and the time of the sighting was around 2:40pm in Roseville, CA. Oval silver/white object (same shape, color and size as sighting on 2/1/12 case number 35395) but this time it was traveling from a southwest direction to the northeast (more north than east). The oval object just seemed to appear out of nowhere all of a sudden in the sky (it just faded in from the background sky color). It was moving at a moderately steady speed about that as a normal commercial jet when all of a sudden it shot off at “incredible speed” in a perfectly straight line (as if it was fired out of a gun). The object maintained the same level altitude and direction until it was out sight. The object did not produce any contrail or sounds. Total time in my view was somewhere between 30 seconds to one minute before it was out of sight.

Disbelieving what I just saw I continued to watch the same area of the sky and about 5 to 10 minutes later the object returned but this time the object just appeared as if it “blinked in” (like someone turned on a light switch). Disbelieving what I was seeing again I lifted up my polarized sunglasses to maybe get a clearer view of the object but when I tilted up my sunglasses (never taking my eyes off the object) the object would seem to fade into the background sky color. I flipped my sunglasses up and down several times with the same result. With the glasses on I could see the object in the distance but with the sunglasses off the object would fade out into the sky colors and become nearly impossible to see. The oval object just hovered motionless in the same spot in the sky for about 30 seconds before it headed off at a very high rate of speed to the northeast (more east than north this time) until it was out of sight.

About 10 minutes later a large jet passed across my location at about the same altitude as the “oval object” was just seen at. I watched the jet until it reached just about the same distance away from me as the “oval object” and the jet was clearly producing a contrail behind it. At that range the jets wings, tail and the cigar shaped body were still “clearly” visible (The jet still looked “clearly” like a plane/jet) nothing like what the "oval object" looked like at that distance. The “oval object” viewed at the same range as the jet had no wings, no tail section, and it did not produce a contrail when it moved - it was just a symmetrical oval shape. I even flipped my polarized glasses up and down several times just like I did when viewing the "oval object" but with the jet it had no effect what so ever on my ability to see it clearly at that range.

MUFON Case #38615

Yes, polarized sunglasses reduce glare making it easier to see objects in the sky.
That's why I wear them when I'm flying.

About 10 minutes later a large jet passed across my location at about the same altitude as the “oval object” was just seen at.

See, here's the problem. There is no way to determine the altitude or distance of an object in the sky. If the size of an object is known (like an airplane) an experienced viewer can make a guess but if the size is completely unknown it is impossible.

Here's a little anecdote from my experience. It can be related to this case.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Phage
Yes, polarized sunglasses reduce glare making it easier to see objects in the sky.
That's why I wear them when I'm flying.

About 10 minutes later a large jet passed across my location at about the same altitude as the “oval object” was just seen at.

See, here's the problem. There is no way to determine the altitude or distance of an object in the sky. If the size of an object is known (like an airplane) an experienced viewer can make a guess but if the size is completely unknown it is impossible.

Here's a little anecdote from my experience. It can be related to this case.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 6/8/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

My understanding is that light from the sun tends to be polarized. If it reflects off something shiny then it stays fairly polarized, but if it reflects off something non-shiny then it becomes less polarized. (I hope that's right )

Paul R. Hill in "Unconventional Flying Objects" speculates that light from UFOs is created by ionized air around the UFO reflecting off the shiny surface of the UFO. Wouldn't this light reflected from the ionized air tend to be very non-polarized?

Sorry, I'm sure I have the science wrong, but I feel like this is an important clue about UFOs that shouldn't be ignored. The witness seemed to think it was strange, and I'm sure he or she has experienced sunglasses before.

reply to post by cloudyday

Raw sunlight is not polarized in any particular direction. Reflection can polarize light and so can the scattering effects of particles in the atmosphere. Whether or not the particles are ionized doesn't really matter.

the object would seem to fade into the background sky color.

This is exactly the effect to be expected. Polarized glasses block polarized light. By blocking polarized light contrast is increased. Objects in the sky stand out more. That's why I use them when I fly.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by cloudyday

 

Raw sunlight is not polarized in any particular direction. Reflection can polarize light and so can the scattering effects of particles in the atmosphere. Whether or not the particles are ionized doesn't really matter.

the object would seem to fade into the background sky color.

This is exactly the effect to be expected. Polarized glasses block polarized light. By blocking polarized light contrast is increased. Objects in the sky stand out more. That's why I use them when I fly.

edit on 6/8/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

O.k. I know I'm confused on these things. I'll have to do some reading on how sunglasses work. The witness did say that the sunglasses didn't make such a pronounced difference when viewing the jet that later flew through the area. But who knows.

I even flipped my polarized glasses up and down several times just like I did when viewing the "oval object" but with the jet it had no effect what so ever on my ability to see it clearly at that range.

Polarizing lenses or filters are commonly used in photography to cut down glare and increase the contrast in an image. So it's not surprising that the object, whatever it was, would have been easier to make out. It certainly does not mean that there was anything strange or untoward about the object because of this.

Originally posted by FireballStorm
Polarizing lenses or filters are commonly used in photography to cut down glare and increase the contrast in an image. So it's not surprising that the object, whatever it was, would have been easier to make out. It certainly does not mean that there was anything strange or untoward about the object because of this.

Thanks. Maybe I'm getting excited about nothing. I was just hoping it might be a clue.