ecco un mix tra immagini e scienza

Physical Influences of a UFO on Water

       This page is dedicated to Lucius Farish and Dale Titler who, as pioneers in this field, began to recognize the physical effects of unidentified objects on water.

Physical Affects on Water - Tying It Together

By Carl Feindt © 2005

       The following proposes a possible explanation for the observed interaction between unidentified flying objects and water. Wrested from seemingly divergent eyewitness accounts, it posits that the reaction of the water around an emerging craft implies the existence of a displacement field, one that exhibits electromagnetic tendencies. What at first seems like a series of unrelated accounts is shown to illustrate consistent behavior when the distance between the object and the body of water is considered.

       My interest in water-related UFO sightings came long ago while reading the books that have interested all of us. However, those books usually had only one water-related case in them. The mystery to me was: How something so profound could be neglected? Why was there no book – or even a chapter – exploring the UFO’s ability to operate in and out of water? As time went by, books were published with short chapters on the subject. Finally in 1970, Ivan T. Sanderson published Invisible Residents, which described water UFO cases from front to back. However, the idea of how they accomplished their penetration and emergence from water was once again overlooked in favor of the concept of another civilization residing underwater on our planet.
       Scientists use repetitive results as proof of the conclusions of their experiments. Ted Phillips’ investigation into trace cases does a similar service to UFOs. Water, unfortunately, dissipates any physical evidence due to motion of the liquid or dilution of residual traces. However, could there be solid evidence in the form of repetitive verbal testimony? On starting the collection process of UFO cases I had no concept of what I might find. I only wanted to gather all the cases I could to see if they fit any physical pattern

        Why should we get excited about a few water-related reports scattered amongst our ever-popular UFO cases? Because in these cases we can see the path of what we must accomplish in order to actually travel to the stars. A new propulsion system… and a field surrounding the craft protecting it from micrometeorite hits, acidic climates, hostile gunfire, and whatever else the craft encounters. If we wanted to send men to Venus, material would have to be developed to withstand the heat and the acidic atmosphere of the planet. However, if we could design a vessel based on the “alien” craft we have experienced over the past fifty-plus years, no further modifications would be necessary.

       An analogy to a light bulb can be drawn here: If we think of the filament as the functioning craft and the glass bulb representing the UFO field, we can see that this bulb protects the fragile filament from atmospheric intrusion and other damage. In the majority of UFO cases it is undoubtedly the function of the field to protect the UFO; the speeds that are recorded would cause a tremendous heating of the surface of the vehicle due to atmospheric friction, not to mention the possible collision with other aerial craft or life forms. The function of the field may not be limited to protection. The field might also be a part of the propulsion source, although nothing has been proven or observed along this line. Paul Hill’s book Unconventional Flying Objects just about cinched the idea of how this craft could do what it does in water. In Chapter 13, “Silent Supersonic Operation,” he explains that the field moves the molecules of atmosphere it contacts to its rear. A molecule of water could be moved in the same way; in physics, our atmosphere and water are both governed by the one physical principal, that of “Fluid Dynamics.”

       As I continued my collection of reports, the major problem was not the lack of incidents, but the lack of text on what the water was doing during those incidents. For the most part, the cases report UFOs going into or coming out of water and then go into detail about the craft or its travel. This is understandable as the craft is the unusual thing, not the water. I eventually became frustrated that there was no clear correlation between what was occurring with the water in the different reports and began to think that perhaps all these disjointed cases were leading me nowhere. One night I sat at my drafting board and decided to draw each case group as a filament surrounded by a bulb. The resultant drafting work came as quite a shock to me.

       It should be noted that this hypothesis is based on what could be considered a small percentage of the more than 850 cases contained on this site, and does not take into consideration any testimony concerning UFOs entering bodies of water.

       The following sections will illustrate the various phases of UFO reaction with water.

       The drawing at the beginning of each section represents a simplified idea of the UFO field -- which has many times been referred to as “electromagnetic,” and to that end I show the UFO as if a bar magnet had been inserted into its center. This concept was inspired by a sketch of a UFO with a surrounding magnetic field from an older addition of UFOs and Anti-Gravity by Leonard G. Cramp (See the full case with sketch at: 04-??-1958 on this website).

(Put a bar magnet into the water and it will NOT produce the results shown. So while it may have a similar flow of the surrounding field, it is not a simple magnet. )

       Each drawing is followed by a description of that phase, along with a demonstrative excerpt from published eyewitness case testimony. (Additional supportive cases are mentioned at the head of each section; and full text can be found by clicking on the dates shown in blue.)

[Note: All of the text in green was highlighted by me for emphasis]

UFO COMING UP – “WATER BULGES”

Terms used in relevant cases:

09-LL-1954    “Elevated turmoil” and “the water had formed into a plateau”

03-LL-1959    “Water swelled”

06-03-1961   “the surface of the sea was bulging like an enormous ball”

09-24-1961   “The surface was rising in one spot”, “Looked like a round hill”

08-08-1967   “Wrinkled up or stirred up”

09-??-1971    “Producing the normal rise of water”

Figure 1 (Underwater)

Notice how if this idea is correct, the force is pushing upwards, causing a bulge.

****Description****

       In this section we should visualize ourselves in a boat, leisurely enjoying the ocean view, when suddenly we notice a strange sight. A section of the water within our view appears disturbed. At first it is like the water is boiling, with bubbles coming to the surface, but within seconds the surface becomes more agitated and appears to be rising and flowing violently. Suddenly all this ceases as we are faced with a “craft.”

       The following cases display this scenario with greater elegance:

09-LL-1954

ENCOUNTER IN THE GULFSTREAM by Neil Deane as told to George Earley
       Some morning, I’ve forgotten which one, because I have long since lost the log book, I was rudely awakened in that dark, cold hour before dawn, realizing that my forward progress had stopped and that I was taking water. Great sheets of water flung over her forward deck, screaming down the sides of her cockpit foaming, some of it coming aboard. So in under shorts and barefoot, and the rest of me bare, I came suddenly awake, went into the cockpit and discovered she was dead on course, sails drawing. But she was not making any progress while over her forward deck was considerable depth of solid water and a great thrashing up ahead.

       Looking in the direction of the thrashing, I perceived a great glow, like a big school of herring coming near the surface and disturbing luminous bacteria . . . only it was not the right Color. It was more deeply orange. In color it was like the annelids, which are common off Bermuda in certain seasons, but this was one continuous glow and not a collection of nickel-sized blobs of light. The glow seemed to come from a plateau of water, which was causing solid water to flow over my decks, hence impeding my forward progress.

       So, thinking I had gone ashore, even though nothing was

grating under the keel, I charged up her auxiliary engine, slapped in reverse gear, and backed away. In a few yards astern I was in dead calm water so I took in her sails and when I was squared away with power-plant running nicely, I put her into forward gear and went back towards this plateau of glowing water and light...

       On seeing this "windjammer" apparently bearing down on me, l had gone into reverse gear again, backing off once more into calm water . . . perhaps a hundred yards from the disturbance. Even as I realized my "windjammer" was something else, the splashing and sloshing of water stopped, and this vessel, or whatever it was, rose out of the water and the glow surrounding it subsided so that her running lights were much more highly visible. She had lifted off the water and was heading towards the now dimly visible continent of North America in a long, upward slant and going at what seemed to be a tremendous speed.

This reference (Original): BEYOND REALITY #18, January 1976, “Encounter in the Gulfstream” by Neil Deane as told to George Earley.  

UFO JUST ABOVE THE SURFACE – “WATER DEPRESSION”

Terms used in relevant cases:

Indentation of waters surface

06-12-1958   France “see the water being whipped up all around it”, “making waves”

09-24-1961   Poland             “hole in the waves”

03-29-1974   Africa    “sea not flat but dug in the form of a depression.”

Figure 2

Notice that in this position the force upon the water is pushing downward.

****Description*****

       In these cases the UFO is seen “just” above the water, its field acting as a plow while it invisibly moves water in the direction of the witness. In several cases where the UFO did not move in the direction of the witness, but simply continued upward, we find the terms “tunnel” or “hole” used to describe what was observed below the UFO. Indeed this tunnel idea was expressed in a story of an abduction where the witness saw “strange walls of the tunnel” as he traveled below an ocean (UFO Contact from Undersea by Dr. Sanchez-Ocejo and W. Stevens).

03-29-1974

A DEPRESSION AND A MINI-TIDAL WAVE
       ...They then were afraid of being dragged away in the water and not being able to regain the shore. A.W. succeeded in grabbing the trunk of a coconut palm. He held on with his right arm, holding on to the woman with the other. At their feet was now a continuous barrage of strong waves, so that one instant before the sea came within 50 m of the dune!

       Suddenly, three bright lights showed on the object blinding the witnesses. It was like three projections pointed in their direction, other luminous beams coming from the sides of the object, perhaps also from its upper side or from the unseen side of it. Certain of the beams seemed oriented upward, but A.W. could not confirm this, so much did the three beams pointed toward shore blind him. In all the light it was white that dominated, but there was also yellow, pink and blue-green. A.W. wore glasses that were lightly tinted. He was struck by the blue and green colors of the waves lighted by the object. The most interesting detail of his recount concerned the surface of the sea under the object. It was not flat but dug in the form of a depression. A.W. estimated its depth at a few meters, 5 or 6 perhaps. Its diameter was comparable to the length of the object, on the order of 25-30 meters.
SEA SURFACE DISRUPTION
       Two elements in the account of A.W. present an import interest for those who try to imagine the physical phenomena accompanying eventually, the UFO sightings:

       These are the descriptions he made, on one hand, the depression dug in the sea under it and on the other hand, of the advancing waves on the beach up to the dune. It is not possible, given the condition of the observations to obtain a very precise description of the profile of the depression (cup), in particular of the bottom of it.

This reference: Phēnomēnes Spatiaux (Space Phenomena) a publication of GEPA, GROUPEMENT D’ĒTUDE PHĒNOMĒNES AĒRIENS (Group for the Study of Airborne Phenomena). Dated March 1976.

ABOVE THE SURFACE BUT CLOSE – “WATER MOUNDING”

Terms used in the text that follows:

04-??-1958    “beneath the saucer the sea water was turned up.”

Figure 3

Notice here the water, assuming the shape of the upward flow of the field apparently entering the UFO.

****Description*****

     This is probably the single most important witness sighting in terms of understanding the total effect of the UFO upon water. There have been similar descriptions in other accounts, but they are usually tempered by terms like “upward swelling” or “raised water,” language that does not clearly show a mounding or mountainous form. We have here a fixed view of an effect, but also the beginning of what might occur when the craft moves farther up vertically.

04-??-1958

Between Maceió and Parapueira, Brasil, April 1958.
On the north-east Atlantic coast a business man and several fishers were witnesses of a saucer-shaped-object, which came down from the sky and hovered above the water in about 40 meters distance from them. Beneath the saucer the seawater was turned up (see picture) and bubbled, as if it was cooking or drawn up by an invisible power. The object was as big as the tent of a touring circus and was about 15 meters above the water's surface. (Cramp 1966)
This reference: Piece For a Jig-Saw, by Leonard G. Cramp, p. 133, London, 1966.

ABOVE THE SURFACE – “WATER SPOUT”

Terms used in relevant cases:

08-LL-1914    “then rose from the bay surface sucking with it a heavy upsurge of water”

08-27-1917   “it was as if the water was being drawn up to it”

02-??-1955    “a huge geyser of water”

09-24-1961   “a whirlpool of water rushing upward with a loud sucking and gurgling noise”

??-??-1964    “it was like a funnel sucking up water” “It brought the water up with it due to

                             the fact that it was whirling so fast”

08-??-1965    “ a gigantic pillar of water rose as the sphere emerged” “Collapsed – later”

03-26-1966   “greenish volume of light, water or vapor, extended from the underside of the

                             object down to the surface of the water”

08-04-1971   “Three vortexes came out from the sea and from inside them an object

                             appeared”

07-??-1977    “could see the water of the lake surging upward” “as if being sucked into the

                             machine”

10-23-1978a             Column of water “hovered 100 feet high by 15 feet wide before falling fanlike

                             into the sea”

07-17-1992 same as 10-23-1978a “sucking up a column of water almost as wide as the

                             UFO”

04-26-1994   A center plume of water shot up to the bottom of the UFO

Figure 4

****Description*****

This type of case involves a UFO hovering over water. The witness describes a column of fog, mist, haze or water reaching from the surface to the object. The terminology generally used in the description is “sucking up water”. This column, I believe, is caused by the rotation of a field in a vertical plane that encompasses of the UFO. This is best visualized by going back to Physics 101: Imagine a bar magnet running vertically through the center of the UFO, iron filings sprinkled on it so as to observe the magnetic lines of force going up from the top (North Pole), arcing to the sides and down, then back up through the bottom (South Pole) – see figure 4. As this field rotates it causes a friction on the abutting atmosphere, causing an updraft at the bottom. This, in addition to an oft-observed horizontal rotation of one part of the UFO, causes a swirling vortex to be formed below the UFO. This can be similar to a person rotating a finger through still waters in a pot of water at a rapid rate – eventually causing a maelstrom to occur. Could this not be the cause of waterspouts?

Waterspout: 1. a moving, whirling column of spray and mist, with masses of water in the lower parts, accumulated because of a tornado at sea or on other large bodies of water.

Definition – New Illustrated Webster’s Dictionary, 1992

In Ted Phillips’ book Delphos he presents the following from a case from October 10, 1957:

“Witness heard a whistling sound and saw a circular object descend to within 6 feet of the ground. It hovered 2 minutes, sucking up leaves, grass, and dirt. White material was found at the site, covering the grass in the disturbed area.”

Let’s get heavier:

From IUR Winter 2002-2003, p. 9, “Timmermania: A step too far into the Timmerman Files?” by Michael D. Swords; a case in the early 1970s:

       After four or five minutes of waiting, the ball backed away. Across the road, it began creating a vortex at the base of the mountain.

       The rocks started rising into the air.... They would shake from side to side. There were hundreds of them [the largest about the size of melons]. They started going around in a circle, like it had complete control over them... Then the thing went way up in the air and it looked kind of like a tornado and it was all red.... The only noise you could hear was this clickety-clack, clickety-clack when the rocks hit together. Then the light blinked out, and everything crashed down the mountainside and onto the road. The ball blinked back on again at the top of the mountain and meandered away.

And heavier yet:

In Bob Pratt’s book UFO Danger Zone the dresses of a few women are pulled up and over their heads; also in another case, a man dangles below the UFO, without the aid of the usual truncated beam of light that is so prominent in abductee literature.

And more non-water cases:

08-13-1947

Snake River Canyon at Twin Falls, Idaho... On each side there was a tubular-shaped fiery glow, like some sort of exhaust. He said that when it went over trees, they didn't sway back and forth but rather the treetops twisted around, which suggests that the air under the object was being swirled into a vortex.

This reference: UFO FBI Connection by Bruce Maccabee, pp. 13-14, © 2000

02-01-1948

       He noticed what seemed to be propeller-like lights running around the concave bottom of the saucer.

       "One detail in connection with the silver-bottom section I noticed very clearly. There was something whirling around the bottom section, sort of like a big propeller or a series of propellers might do. The movement was clear; the bottom part did not turn. Something kept whirling around the whole thing," he told, the Circleville Herald.

This reference: MUFON Journal #432, April 2004, “Farmer’s report of UFO hovering over buildings still believed 56 years later” By Joel Barrett The Circleville, OH, Herald, 02/02/2004 plus many UFOCAT references.

06-??-1963

Costa Rica... The second object moved towards the far side of the crater and, having crossed the column of ashes, performed similar manoeuvres before disappearing behind the volcano, in full view of the principal engineer, who was some distance away from Castillo and his colleague. Both craft seemed to induce a kind of whirlwind effect, as though 'produced by a propeller rotating at high speed', Castillo reported.

This reference: Unearthly Disclosure by Timothy Good, pp. 58-59, © 2000

05-20-1967

The Steven Michalak Incident at Falcon Lake, Manitoba, Canada.

Paragraph 6. The attached photographs were taken at the site.

No 1. Taken from approximately 12 feet up in a tree facing in a south-westerly direction, showing the outline of an approximate 15 foot diameter circle on the rock surface where the moss and earth covering has been cleared to the rock surface by a force such as made by air at very high velocity. For comparison, the prospectors ax and Beta counter were left in the approximate circle center. 

This reference: From documents of the Canadian Department of National Defence, Training Command Headquarters, Westwin, Manitoba. Dated: 1 Sep 1967. With Thanks to researcher Don Ledger, for forwarding to me.

09-02-1967

England. Staffordshire, Stoke-on-Trent, bentilee... it flew low overhead and apparently landed in a field about 400 yards away. No sound was heard, but one witness felt "wind" as it passed overhead. 

Reference: Alien Invasion or Human Fantasy? The 1966-67 UFO Wave by Richard H Hall, p. 107 © 2004

       This “suction” on the surface of the water is exactly the same as if a tornado was to pass from land over a body of water. The bottom part would be viewed as a mounding of water; as we look vertically up the column, the water is more molecular and appears as fog, mist or a continuation of the water itself. The vertical movement of this water or water vapor gives the impression of water being sucked into the UFO. An example of this column can be seen in a photo by Ed Walters from Gulf Breeze, Florida, which was published in a book by him and Dr. Bruce Maccabee, entitled UFOs Are Real and Here’s the Proof. One has to look closely to see the column, but it is there, silhouetted against the darker water (See 04-26-1994 on my website for sketch and photo kindly provided by Dr. Maccabee).

As the UFO gains altitude, the column of water is seen to collapse, or in the case of night sightings – disappear.

Separation of this column is almost predictable, as the height of the UFO above the water and the size of the UFO (governing the width of the field) itself, probably determines how much water weight the vortex can sustain. It would be interesting to compose a table with these figures, however due to fright or awe on the part of witnesses, most of the time these details are lost:

07-17-1992
Taking on Water
       They pulled their sail down to slow their boat to avoid a collision, but when the ship approached their boat they realized it wasn't a ship. It was a UFO with a lot of lights on it. It was sucking water up into it and passed slowly within twenty meters of the boat, but the fishermen don't think the UFO saw them. It just went by them about six meters above the water, sucking up a column of water almost as wide as the UFO. The water didn't fall back into the ocean. The UFO went past them and disappeared in the distance.”
This reference: UFO Danger Zone, by Bob Pratt, Published 1996, pp. 231-232.

04-26-1994

UFO "TAKES A DRINK

Below the UFO the water began to chum. Mist swirled into the air. A center plume of water shot up to the bottom of the UFO. It was a waterspout. The UFO moved slowly to the left and I aimed the camera and took Photo 49. (See case 04-26-1994 –CF-) Ten to fifteen seconds passed while I stared at this amazing scene. Suddenly the waterspout collapsed. The UFO angled off to the left, climbed at a sharp angle, and disappeared into the hazy sky.

This reference: UFOs Are Real And Here's The Proof by Edward Walters and Bruce Maccabee, Ph.D., pp 56-57, 100-105 © 1997. Reprinted on my website with Dr. Maccabee’s permission.

A FUNCTION OF HEIGHT?

Figure 5

       These cases of witnessed effects on water inspired the idea that these effects might be tied together in relation to each other. Some of the cases are of a UFO apparently “taking on water” not by means of tubes, pipes or hoses (as is the case in several reports), but by a column of water lifted by an unseen force directly to the craft. In the other scenario the UFO causes an observed “indentation” of the water. It would appear that these reports are contradictory of each other because of the differences in the effects; however, I believe that the differences are only the result of distances between the field of the UFO and the water.

       In figure 5, we have what could be an illustration of the complete steps of the UFO’s exit from a body of water, and the water’s reaction as it does so.

       These craft operate by physical principles! Though the details behind their operations are unknown to us, they should not be considered beyond our understanding. Excusing the craft’s functions as paranormal, or that of holographic projections, or the result of some other impenetrable obfuscation is not the way to understand the physical principles governing its technology. We should concentrate on the craft’s mechanics – because it is clearly a machine.

MARINE LIGHT WHEELS ( PHOSPHORESCENCE )

METEORS

IONIZED FIELDS ( See Journal Every-Eve, 8-06-1952)

ODORS

MARINE LIGHT WHEELS
By Robert Hendrickson, PhD.

Robert Hendrickson is a MUFON consultant in entomology and Delaware state director.

       Anomalous lights under and on the sea are diverse phenomena summarized in Corliss (1982), Fort (1974), and Sanderson (1970). One of the most peculiar forms is wheels of light; These are hubs around which spokes of light revolve. Corliss (1982) synthesized many reports, "The spokes, may be straight, curved, or S-shaped. Rotation is in either direction and may change during the display. In some cases, the outer part of the wheel seems to spin in a different sense from the central part. Illustrating the illusory character of the phenomenon, different observers sometimes see the same wheel rotating in opposite directions. Wheel sizes range from tens of feet to several miles, with spoke widths of 5-50 feet being common."

       As an example, Evans, hydrographer aboard the H.M.S. Vulture observed light wheels near Bahrain which were reported by Pringle (1879). "On looking towards the east, the appearance was that of a revolving wheel with centre on that bearing, and whose spokes were illuminated, and looking towards the west a similar wheel appeared to be revolving, but in the opposite direction." The spokes were about 25 ft. wide, separated by a dark interval of about 75 feet, and appeared at a rate of 74-75 per minute.

       Light wheels may have been described in ancient Indian literature (Sanderson) and sightings continue into the 1980's (Corliss 1986). They are most commonly reported from the periphery of the Indian Ocean.

       The explanations for light wheels are generally biological or mechanical. Moss (1879) suggested "noctilucae and crustaceans . . . but if so, the exceedingly swift traveling cause of the stimulation would still remain unaccounted for." An observer in Fort, "pulsations of long strings of jellyfish."

Harris (1880), "electro-magnetic currents exercising their exciting influence upon some organic animal

or vegetable substance.” Corliss. (1982), "If the light source is not bioluminescence, as generally

supposed, the anomaly is even stronger." Sanderson eliminated several hypotheses and was

reduced to the "most ‘unpleasant' notion --  i.e. that the source of the triggering energy is mechanical."

General configuration of a typical phosphorescent wheel

       Fort thought extraterrestrial "super-constructions” were involved and his lead will be followed in the analysis of a subset of the observations, i.e. light wheels operating in groups of two or more, moving abreast.

       If the source of light wheels is mechanical and they have been reported for hundreds or possibly even thousands of years, they cannot be of human origin, although perhaps we have the technology now to crudely duplicate the phenomenon on submarines. We assume here they're UFO-related. We have no problem getting UFOs into or out of oceans since there are many reports of these events.

UFO TRAWLERS?

       But what are they doing? Why the lights? One thing undersea lights do is frighten fish. An 1826 account in Corliss (1982) reported, "Long tortuous lines of light in a contrary direction to the sea, showed, us immense numbers of very large fish darting about as if in consternation at the scene."

       So why frighten fish? Maybe revolving undersea beams of light are used to herd fish, to force them into a particular place in the sea or in relation to light wheels. We limited our discussion to light

wheels in groups of two or more, advancing abreast. If fish swim rapidly away from a disturbing light stimulus, they may tend to more-or-less line up midway between two of them, not knowing in which direction to escape. If a pair of light wheels towed a narrow, tubular net between them, they could rapidly sweep vast areas of the sea for fish, in a form of trawling far more efficient than that of modern day commercial trawlers with their huge, cumbersome, slowly-towed nets.

Three sets of expanding rings – two circular, one elliptical

       Observations supporting the trawling hypothesis are fragmentary but suggestive. Pringle (1879) reported that "the ship passed through oily-looking fish spawn" while observing light wheels. Harris (1880) noted that the water was "studded with patches of faint, luminous, inanimate matter" during his sighting. Perhaps if a substantial catch of fish is dragged through water fast enough, pressure will force fish body contents out, which float to the surface. Possibly the ships crossed the paths of nets.

       Fort compiled a number of reports relating to a fascinating 19th century incident. "Report of the British Association, 1861-30: That, upon June 18, 1845, according to the Malta Times, from the brig Victoria, about 900 miles east of Adalia, Asia Minor (36°40' 56”, N. Lat.: 13°44' 36” E. Long.), three luminous bodies were seen to issue from the sea, at about half a mile from the vessel. They were visible about ten minutes." (Sanderson notes that east in the quote is a typographical error for west.) At about the same time, a witness in Adalia, Asia Minor noted "a body that appeared and then broke up" in a sighting that lasted twenty minutes to half an hour. Other witnesses remarked that two luminous bodies, apparently five times the size of the moon, were connected by "sail-like or streamer-like appendages," which appeared as "large flags blown out by a gentle breeze."

Spinning groups of phosphorescent patches

       A possible scenario for these sightings is that three extraterrestial vehicles had been light wheeling, or trawling, for fish using two nets. They exited from the sea. One of the outside UFOs transferred its net end to the other outside UFO, then went its own way. The remaining two UFOs were then transporting two nets loaded with fish to an unseen mothership when they were observed.

       Indeed it's a wild hypothesis. Perhaps the principal objection to it is that aliens capable of traveling several light years from a nearby star system do not require food from a planet they watch. Motherships are reportedly huge. They can probably transport enormous quantities of food and also grow their own aboard ship. On the other hand, why should they ignore an abundant supply of highly nutritious food which can be easily removed from a planet without disturbing its natives, who don't even know it's happening. Trawling is a way to conserve a mothership's food stores. Maybe fresh fish is a welcome change in diet.

       Probably the reason most sightings are reported from the Indian Ocean is that the water is relatively clear there and beams of light can penetrate great distances before attenuation, at least compared to more murky bodies of water, such as the North Atlantic. In the Indian Ocean they may be able to catch a lot of fish fast.

Groups of phosphorescent crescents were observed rotating about several different centers in the Arabian Sea. The groups averaged 35 meters in diameter.

REFERENCES CITED

1) Corliss, W.R. 1982. Lightning, Auroras, Nocturnal Lights And Related Luminous Phenomena.

       The Sourcebook Project, Glen Arm, Maryland.

2) Corliss, W.R.) 1986. Phosphorescent bars and wheel. Science Frontiers 48: 3-4. The

       Sourcebook Project, Glen Arm, Maryland.

3) Fort, Charles. 1974. The book of the damned. In The Complete books of Charles Fort.

       Dover, NY.

4) Harris, R.E. 1880. A Strange Phenomenon, Nature 21: 409.410.

5) Moss, E.L. I879. Report of an unusual phenomenon observed at sea. Nature 20: 428.

6) Pringle, J.E. 1879. Report Of An Unusual phenomenon Observed At Sea, Nature 20:291.

7) Sanderson, LT. 1970. Invisible Residents. World Pub. Co., NY.                                          

This reference: As indicated at the beginning of the article. My thanks to John Schuessler and MUFON for permission to post this article to this website. MUFON UFO Journal #227, © March 1987

 ufo antigravitazionali aquatici tutto su di loro  a soli

120.00EUR