Flashbulb

[JMartJr]

I think the process has more to do with intention than meditation (meditation seems to be a useful component), but as we've all heard 'contact' events don't even require intent. We have a member in our group who has these sightings frequently at home, by just looking up.

That may be telling -- you see things like this when you look for them. That would indicate that maybe they are not anything particularly unusual, once they're called to your attention you see them. Of course, that does not specify what they are... but if they are actually something very common, there are a lot of things more common in the night sky than I'd assume alien visitors are, and things that we know exist.

Keeping it short because it's time to practice poi spinning (no fooling) -- suitably inspired by a good thread from a poster "down even underer."

Keep looking up!

 

[Scaramanga]

Starlink flares may not be rare. The multiple factors described in our observations do seem rare. I'd imagine the contributors here look at the sky more than the average person. So far, no one has chipped in with experiences of making similar observations to the ones we have made - in two outings on the trot.

I think you are trying to insert mystery where there isn't any. A night out under a clear sky will provide all manner of weird and wonderful flashing lights. They are satellites, aircraft strobe lights, etc. Lots of them. Aircraft lights, in particular, can produce all manner of effects. I've lost count of the number of 'UFOs' I've seen that turned out to just be aircraft landing lights.

 

[Ann K]

Keeping it short because it's time to practice poi spinning (no fooling) -- suitably inspired by a good thread from a poster "down even underer."

OK, you did it. You made me go and look up "poi spinning".

 

[davo27]

I think you are trying to insert mystery where there isn't any. A night out under a clear sky will provide all manner of weird and wonderful flashing lights. They are satellites, aircraft strobe lights, etc. Lots of them. Aircraft lights, in particular, can produce all manner of effects. I've lost count of the number of 'UFOs' I've seen that turned out to just be aircraft landing lights.

Perhaps you're right. I look forward to you or anyone else spending 2 consecutive nights out sky watching for half an hour in a rural area, away from flight paths and air traffic, and reporting back that you've seen 6 - 10 of the flashes I've described. No problem right? Should be easy - we're clearly not seeing anything special...

 

[davo27]

OK, you did it. You made me go and look up "poi spinning".

Well, anyone checking out poi needs to check out Poi E.
Source: https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=tq2K8ak47nM&si=4wqdKIfnV9bJPS2_

 

[Ann K]

@davo27 Never been to New Zealand, and at my age I'm never going to get there, but I do have relatives scattered around both islands, including one adopted cousin who's Māori. Thanks for the music!

 

[FatPhil]

Perhaps you're right. I look forward to you or anyone else spending 2 consecutive nights out sky watching for half an hour in a rural area, away from flight paths and air traffic

Quite literally - what planet are you on?
This is my part of the planet:

(via https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp...he-Worlds-Flight-Paths-and-Airports-Full.html )

 

[Easy Muffin]

Perhaps you're right. I look forward to you or anyone else spending 2 consecutive nights out sky watching for half an hour in a rural area, away from flight paths and air traffic, and reporting back that you've seen 6 - 10 of the flashes I've described. No problem right? Should be easy - we're clearly not seeing anything special...

You don't even need to go outside thanks to YouTube live streams. Here's one from Mauna Kea, Hawaii -
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MFWVueLBsk


The Sun's coming out now so I jumped back a few hours and ran Stellarium alongside set to the same time. Well almost, the clock in the stream seems off by a few seconds.
So this is a random moment before sunrise, looking at a random bit of sky (actually a rather ill-suited bit of sky due to Venus' brightness), but over the course of less than 90 seconds,

- a light passes by Venus (Starlink-3089)
- a second light appears moving towards the first light (Starlink-6098)
- a meteor burns up
- a third light appears moving past the spot where the other two lights seemed to meet and then sort of fading in and out of view (Atlas Centaur 2)

It won't be exactly what OP saw but I think it goes to show how many sats are up there these days. There's literally tons of objects in orbit that become visible under the right lighting conditions, particularly since Starlink became a thing. I'd be more surprised to look at the night sky and not see anything move about in odd ways.

 

[davo27]

Quite literally - what planet are you on?
This is my part of the planet:

(via https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp...he-Worlds-Flight-Paths-and-Airports-Full.html )

Good grief. Move! Or, perhaps learn that some places of the world have skies that are a whole lot less busy - so when things stand out, there are far fewer opportunities to hand wave them away.

Would still love to see whether you can recreate our observations.

 

[davo27]

You don't even need to go outside thanks to YouTube live streams. Here's one from Mauna Kea, Hawaii -
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MFWVueLBsk


The Sun's coming out now so I jumped back a few hours and ran Stellarium alongside set to the same time. Well almost, the clock in the stream seems off by a few seconds.
So this is a random moment before sunrise, looking at a random bit of sky (actually a rather ill-suited bit of sky due to Venus' brightness), but over the course of less than 90 seconds,

- a light passes by Venus (Starlink-3089)
- a second light appears moving towards the first light (Starlink-6098)
- a meteor burns up
- a third light appears moving past the spot where the other two lights seemed to meet and then sort of fading in and out of view (Atlas Centaur 2)

It won't be exactly what OP saw but I think it goes to show how many sats are up there these days. There's literally tons of objects in orbit that become visible under the right lighting conditions, particularly since Starlink became a thing. I'd be more surprised to look at the night sky and not see anything move about in odd ways.

View attachment 63829

Q: Find me 6 oranges please.
A: Here are 2 apples, a bird, and a stick.

 

[Easy Muffin]

Q: Find me 6 oranges please.
A: Here are 2 apples, a bird, and a stick.

If you wanted oranges then at least we'd have an idea of what you're after. As it though there's only vague descriptions of unremarkable-sounding points of light. That's neither a whole lot to work on nor does it sound very interesting. So until there's footage of something extraordinary I'm just going to note that the skies are full of things that appear like points of light if only you look for them long enough.
That orchard up there grows not only oranges but also apples and pears, possibly even mangoes and bananas.

 

[Mendel]

Q: Find me 6 oranges please.
A: Here are 2 apples, a bird, and a stick.

to us, the exchange goes like this:
Q: I found some round fruit I can't identify.
A: There's a greengrocer around the corner. If you describe the fruit more exactly, we might be able to identify it.

 

[davo27]

This analogy seems to be really pushing up against its design parameters, however I'll persevere -

Q: I was at the greengrocer's yesterday. I got some great fruit. I don't know its name. It was just like a lemon, but *ahem* orange, round, and much sweeter. I got 8, see if you can grab 6.
A: Look, I got a pumpkin, an artichoke and 2 zucchini - is that what you were talking about?

I think I gave a pretty good description of the observations we made:
- time of day,
- general direction(s) in the sky,
- duration of observation,
- nature of observed phenomenon

There have been a number of plausible explanations, largely centring around some type of satellite reflection. I agree that that would be the most likely explanation if the observation was limited to 1 or 2 sightings. We've made a much higher number of observations across 2 consecutive viewing outings, which appear to be statistically unlikely to my (untrained) mind. I'd love to know whether I'm wrong - I've been told a number of times here that I am.

All I'm asking is, if it's accepted that the observations we've made and described here are not unusual (repeatedly I'm being told that they're not), shouldn't it be simple for anyone to recreate them? Not visibly moving satellites, long duration flares, landing lights, or meteors - but a number of definite, bright, sub-second, star sized flashes, some in same apparent location - some in different parts of the sky, within a 30 minute viewing period. And then repeat the observation on a different day.

My suspicion is that this will be very unlikely, but I'd be really appreciative if someone could (dis)confirm this, so I don't have to rely on suspicion. I think the additional data of whether these observations can be recreated in other locations, under different circumstances would be useful.

If I'm belabouring the point or being unreasonable, please let me know. I've been told that I get overly fixated on minutiae.

 

[Landru]

If I'm belabouring the point or being unreasonable, please let me know.

I believe you are belaboring the point and the issue has been answered adequately but I'll let others weigh in.

 

[JMartJr]

...on the other hand, I think fixation on minutiae, in a good way, should fit in well.

 

[Mendel]

Q: I was at the greengrocer's yesterday. I got some great fruit. I don't know its name. It was just like a lemon, but *ahem* orange, round, and much sweeter. I got 8, see if you can grab 6.

it's some kind of citrus fruit, no reason to assume it's extraterrestrial

could be orange, grapefruit, Hyuganatsu, kumquat, mandarin, satsuma, or tangerine, or maybe a new crossbreed. it would help if you told us the size and shared a photo, but until you do, we'll need to leave it unidentified.

 

[tinkertailor]

Perhaps you're right. I look forward to you or anyone else spending 2 consecutive nights out sky watching for half an hour in a rural area, away from flight paths and air traffic, and reporting back that you've seen 6 - 10 of the flashes I've described. No problem right? Should be easy - we're clearly not seeing anything special...

Growing up, my father and brother regularly went out on our (rural) back deck and looked for satellites. They saw them just about every summer night they looked. So do I, when I go visit. We were away from flight paths, too.

It's pretty normal, from my experience, to see these things.

 

[davo27]

it's some kind of citrus fruit, no reason to assume it's extraterrestrial

could be orange, grapefruit, Hyuganatsu, kumquat, mandarin, satsuma, or tangerine, or maybe a new crossbreed. it would help if you told us the size and shared a photo, but until you do, we'll need to leave it unidentified.

For a number of posts now, I haven't been asking for an identification - I've been asking for the observation to be repeated by someone else.

 

[davo27]

OK, I give up for now. This is starting to get crazy making. From these responses, I'm clearly not able to adequately express myself.

 

[FatPhil]

There have been a number of plausible explanations, largely centring around some type of satellite reflection. I agree that that would be the most likely explanation if the observation was limited to 1 or 2 sightings. We've made a much higher number of observations across 2 consecutive viewing outings, which appear to be statistically unlikely to my (untrained) mind. I'd love to know whether I'm wrong - I've been told a number of times here that I am.

Statistically unlikely, you say? Care to put some numbers out there to show us how you get from "seeing one is likely" to "seeing more than one is unlikely"?

 

[Mendel]

For a number of posts now, I haven't been asking for an identification - I've been asking for the observation to be repeated by someone else.

Yes.
But do you get how identifying it first might make finding similar sightings very easy to do?

It's like you asking, "where else can I find my round citrus fruit", we're going to say, "tell us exactly which one you have and we'll point you to your nearest store". Otherwise you're just getting general directions to the nearest grocery.

Like with the racetrack sightings, identifying them has made it possible to verify and even predict similar Starlink racetracks. This wouldn't have been possible without the identification.

 

[Ann K]

Growing up, my father and brother regularly went out on our (rural) back deck and looked for satellites. They saw them just about every summer night they looked. So do I, when I go visit. We were away from flight paths, too.

It's pretty normal, from my experience, to see these things.

Back when the sky was not yet filled with satellites, the newspapers gave the times at which Sputnik could be seen. When I was a teenager I went out with my whole family to watch it one clear night ...in 1957.

 

[Easy Muffin]

For a number of posts now, I haven't been asking for an identification - I've been asking for the observation to be repeated by someone else.

Well we're still not quite sure what you saw. I'm guessing something like this?


Also a flaring light in the sky, also near Orion, also at first claimed by the person that shot the video to certainly not be a satellite.

On the night of observations of the Orionid shower I captured this strange flare. It increased the brightness until reach the magnitude -1.2 and then returned to fade until disappear.It certainly was not a satellite because otherwise the flare had moved during the time that shone, one possibility would be a meteor whose trajetory coincided exactly with my plan of sight.But in fact I can not identify exactly the nature of the origin of the flare.

Then an update stating that

After an effort to identify the origin of the flare with colleagues of Seesat-L list, Ted Molczan identified the source of the flash as the geoestationary satellite THAICOM 3.

And here's your sky that night. There's Orion rising and moving right along the belt of geostationary satellites.

So based on what there is to work with from the data you offered I can't really say much more than 'yeah, sure sounds like sats.' If you had a precise time and location someone here could probably tell you if and what satellite may have caused it, or maybe rule it out if there are no obvious candidates. But something like 'around 9 in the SE' isn't enough for that.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Quite literally - what planet are you on?
This is my part of the planet:

(via https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp...he-Worlds-Flight-Paths-and-Airports-Full.html )

He already explained that he's in New Zealand. New Zealand is geographically remote. Air traffic in this quiet corner of our planet is limited.

Additionally, I don't think aircraft lights are relevant. They really don't fit the descriptions.

 

[davo27]

Statistically unlikely, you say? Care to put some numbers out there to show us how you get from "seeing one is likely" to "seeing more than one is unlikely"?

No, I can't attach numbers to this, but I've previously outlined my thinking here: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/flashbulb.13214/post-303843

 

[davo27]

Yes.
But do you get how identifying it first might make finding similar sightings very easy to do?

It's like you asking, "where else can I find my round citrus fruit", we're going to say, "tell us exactly which one you have and we'll point you to your nearest store". Otherwise you're just getting general directions to the nearest grocery.

Like with the racetrack sightings, identifying them has made it possible to verify and even predict similar Starlink racetracks. This wouldn't have been possible without the identification.

Well, not really. Identification is a different issue to making the observation. I've been told multiple times that the observations we've made are not at all uncommon.

If the claim is that the observations are not uncommon, I've asked for a demonstration of this. We did not set up any parameters for the observations, just went out and looked up.

 

[davo27]

Well we're still not quite sure what you saw. I'm guessing something like this?


Also a flaring light in the sky, also near Orion, also at first claimed by the person that shot the video to certainly not be a satellite.

Then an update stating that


And here's your sky that night. There's Orion rising and moving right along the belt of geostationary satellites.
View attachment 63911

So based on what there is to work with from the data you offered I can't really say much more than 'yeah, sure sounds like sats.' If you had a precise time and location someone here could probably tell you if and what satellite may have caused it, or maybe rule it out if there are no obvious candidates. But something like 'around 9 in the SE' isn't enough for that.

Well we're still not quite sure what you saw. I'm guessing something like this?


Also a flaring light in the sky, also near Orion, also at first claimed by the person that shot the video to certainly not be a satellite.

Then an update stating that


And here's your sky that night. There's Orion rising and moving right along the belt of geostationary satellites.
View attachment 63911

So based on what there is to work with from the data you offered I can't really say much more than 'yeah, sure sounds like sats.' If you had a precise time and location someone here could probably tell you if and what satellite may have caused it, or maybe rule it out if there are no obvious candidates. But something like 'around 9 in the SE' isn't enough for that.

The very first post in this thread gives as good a description as I can manage of what we've been seeing. Your example falls outside of what was described.

 

[davo27]

Back when the sky was not yet filled with satellites, the newspapers gave the times at which Sputnik could be seen. When I was a teenager I went out with my whole family to watch it one clear night ...in 1957.

This is very interesting! I'd have thought a 58cm sphere would have been far too small to see. You lot here are alternately frustrating and revelatory!

 

[JMartJr]

alternately frustrating and revelatory!

As concise a description of figuring this stuff out as I've seen!

 

[Mendel]

This is very interesting! I'd have thought a 58cm sphere would have been far too small to see. You lot here are alternately frustrating and revelatory!

technically, stars are too small to see. they're just very bright.

this is also why signaling with a small mirror (and sunshine) works. And lighthouses.

 

[Easy Muffin]

The very first post in this thread gives as good a description as I can manage of what we've been seeing. Your example falls outside of what was described.

From your first post

- the flashes I saw were in exactly the same place as had been spotted about half an hour previously,
- the flashes I saw were in an unchanged spot, separated by about a minute,
- we saw plenty of satellites - no comparison,
- the others saw exactly the same thing - but a little dimmer - in other parts of the sky,
- other than the very first appearance, all of these sightings happened in a 10 - 15 minute window,
- I spend plenty of time looking at the sky, but have *never* seen this. And it happened right when we half expected to see it, having gone looking for it (well - I actually wanted to see a space ship land in front of me, but you know...),
- while something that looks like a star, only 3 to 4 times brighter (or less) sounds pretty unremarkable, when it happened, visually, it was a pretty amazing 'holy shit, look at that!' kinda moment.

followed by

Two observations in quick succession, and then two more 25 to 30 minutes later? As well as that, a few more of these observations were made in different parts of the sky within a 20 - 30 minute period. This seems like a lot to me, mostly because I look at the sky a lot, and have never seen anything like this. (Admittedly, never seen a flare before).

The observations were a maximum of one second, and then 100% gone. We saw a lot of satellites, including some that were extremely faint and only just perceptible. I agree that a flare sounds like a reasonable explanation, but it doesn't seem to fit because of the overly co-incidental timing (ie. start looking, see something within 2 minutes), the total lack of visibility before or after the flash, the observations *appeared* to be of a static object, and these combined factors repeating approximately 7 times.

Does the south easterly aspect of the observation point toward or away from this being a flare? Although at least one of the observations was also in the south west...

While this occasion was different, anecdotally, a lot of these observations seem to be made in the vicinity of Orion.

So you don't think that a video of a satellite that flashes near Orion could in any way be related to your group's observation of similar flashes near Orion, when Orion was moving along the line of geostationary satellites? Satellites that appear to stay in place and that one by one move in and out of the correct lighting geometry for observable flares? Or that the other video from Hawaii that has objects moving all over the place couldn't possibly help explain why what 'seems like a lot' to you might not really be all that unusual after all?

And as has been said before, you original post isn't all that helpful unfortunately. There's a lot about what you set out to do and how it made you feel but little in the way of detailed, useful information. It essentially boils down to the question 'what could flashing points of light in the night sky be?' - yet you seem to expect more from that than 'well sats can make them and they are very common.' But there's not much more to say if that's all you're giving us.

It kind of feels like you're sending us off on errands until maybe somebody comes back with an example that's close enough to your memories of that night. I've posted two now but all I got back so far was a somewhat snarky two-liner and a handwavey 'yeah that's not it mate.' Frankly I'm not too bothered anymore to go find you something that's more to your liking.

Eh, might as well add another now though.

AllSky timelapse from Central GA. There are 20+ geosynchronous satellite flares that start at ~0:25 on the right side (on the elliptic plane)

You said yourself you don't know what sat flares look like,

(Admittedly, never seen a flare before).

I've seen many all the way back to the days of the bright -8 mag Iridium flares. They can look just like the things you say your group saw. I'm sorry it's so pedestrian.

 

[Eburacum]

Wednesday night, went on a CE5 outing with 2 others, with whom I've formed a group. One of these two has very frequent spontaneous flashbulb sightings at his rural home without any type of CE5 'process' being followed. I'm no fan of Steven Greer, but we used one of the meditations on his app as a starting point. It was a little ridiculous, droning on about wolves and apples or something, but while I was trying to stick with it, one of the others (the regular sighter - evidently having given up with the meditation) cried "Flashbulb!"

I've seen plenty of satellites, and a few flaring satellites as well, and although these phenomena may be the solution to this sighting I'm going to suggest a different solution entirely. I note that your associate frequently sees these things, often after following some 'meditation' ritual that prepares the observer for an encounter. This reminds me of a number of deliberate hoaxes, where a group of believers have been spoofed by a simple flashing light attached to a toy balloon, released by another party nearby. If someone else (not in your party) knows about your associate's obsession with close encounters of the flashing light kind, it would be simple to release a balloon carrying a lightweight flashing light to supply the necessary stimulus.
Here's one from the annals of the magazine Magonia, dating back to the late 1960s.

The aim was to launch a number of brightly lit torch bulbs and batteries under a single helium-filled plastic bag from Sack Hill, opposite the watchers on Cradle Hill. Our estimate of the bag's inflated volume and hence buoyancy were not very accurate, however, and it did not take off until we had removed four of its ten battery/lamp packs [8]. It then rose slowly into the sky, drifting silently with the just perceptible wind, crossing the nearby army range at tree-top height.
Even we were particularly surprised by the stunning brightness and spectacular image of the small bulbs against a clear black sky, even when a mile or more distant. (It was in the days before small quartz halogen bulbs were available and we powered 2.5-volt bulbs with 4.5-volt batteries, making the bulbs very white for a short while.) The watchers on Cradle Hill were even more impressed, and it was generally rated the best sighting ever seen there.

Your companions may be entirely innocent in this matter, but bear in mind that some people love producing UFOs to order, especially if there are UFO enthusiasts about.

 

[Landru]

It kind of feels like you're sending us off on errands until maybe somebody comes back with an example that's close enough to your memories of that night. I've posted two now but all I got back so far was a somewhat snarky two-liner and a handwavey 'yeah that's not it mate.' Frankly I'm not too bothered anymore to go find you something that's more to your liking.

I agree with this statement. This exemplifies why it is difficult/impossible to accurately reflect what occurred from description alone. Either the description is poor or the memory of the event has changed.

 

[davo27]

technically, stars are too small to see. they're just very bright.

this is also why signaling with a small mirror (and sunshine) works. And lighthouses.

Yeah, of course. I figured a smallish sphere would be lacking enough of a reflective plane to be visible from a few hundred kilometres.

 

[davo27]

From your first post

followed by


So you don't think that a video of a satellite that flashes near Orion could in any way be related to your group's observation of similar flashes near Orion, when Orion was moving along the line of geostationary satellites? Satellites that appear to stay in place and that one by one move in and out of the correct lighting geometry for observable flares? Or that the other video from Hawaii that has objects moving all over the place couldn't possibly help explain why what 'seems like a lot' to you might not really be all that unusual after all?

And as has been said before, you original post isn't all that helpful unfortunately. There's a lot about what you set out to do and how it made you feel but little in the way of detailed, useful information. It essentially boils down to the question 'what could flashing points of light in the night sky be?' - yet you seem to expect more from that than 'well sats can make them and they are very common.' But there's not much more to say if that's all you're giving us.

It kind of feels like you're sending us off on errands until maybe somebody comes back with an example that's close enough to your memories of that night. I've posted two now but all I got back so far was a somewhat snarky two-liner and a handwavey 'yeah that's not it mate.' Frankly I'm not too bothered anymore to go find you something that's more to your liking.

Eh, might as well add another now though.





You said yourself you don't know what sat flares look like,

I've seen many all the way back to the days of the bright -8 mag Iridium flares. They can look just like the things you say your group saw. I'm sorry it's so pedestrian.

Thanks for the nudge on this one - was trying to get through posts a bit too quickly, and when I saw your mention of 'flare', I skipped over watching the clip. Shortcuts never really work do they...

That clip was actually pretty similar to what we saw, albeit with more of the flare characteristic of fading in and out (even on that very quick appearance). The observations we made had much more clipped appearances to them, which as we've discussed here may match quite closely to a reflection from a tumbling satellite. The AllSky Timleapse clip was exactly how I'd imagined a flaring satellite, and isn't a god fit at all.

In terms of identifying our observations to date, as has been pointed out, our collected details really aren't sufficient to be helpful. I hope to get better at this, but it may take a little practice. At the moment, unfortunately we've got typical spring weather for here - very unsettled and lots of rain/overcast conditions, so we're just not getting opportunities to get out.

Because I accept that we don't have sufficient information from the observations, there's been a bit of speculation on what the 'mights' might be. There've been a lot of claims that it's most likely some form of satellite reflections that would be the best fit for what we've been seeing, as they would fit with the information I've supplied.

My pushback is only aimed at this hypothetical (as we can't be sure of the data). So many observations of flashes in a small window, on 2 separate nights seems to be very unlikely to me. I'm not asking for anyone to run errands, I'm simply asking for those making this claim to back it up - if you're postulating that these observations are not unusual, show me that they're not unusual.

** Lot's of intent here to be snark free. I'm not always very good with social niceties. I'm sure we could have a laugh together if we were doing this face to face.

 

[Eburacum]

Yeah, of course. I figured a smallish sphere would be lacking enough of a reflective plane to be visible from a few hundred kilometres.

Most of the sightings of Sputnik 1 were actually sightings of the launching rocket, which was in a very similar orbit.
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=1957-001B

The Sputnik 1 rocket booster also reached Earth orbit and was visible from the ground at night as a first magnitude object, while the small but highly polished sphere, barely visible at sixth magnitude, was more difficult to follow optically.

 

[davo27]

I've seen plenty of satellites, and a few flaring satellites as well, and although these phenomena may be the solution to this sighting I'm going to suggest a different solution entirely. I note that your associate frequently sees these things, often after following some 'meditation' ritual that prepares the observer for an encounter. This reminds me of a number of deliberate hoaxes, where a group of believers have been spoofed by a simple flashing light attached to a toy balloon, released by another party nearby. If someone else (not in your party) knows about your associate's obsession with close encounters of the flashing light kind, it would be simple to release a balloon carrying a lightweight flashing light to supply the necessary stimulus.
Here's one from the annals of the magazine Magonia, dating back to the late 1960s.

Your companions may be entirely innocent in this matter, but bear in mind that some people love producing UFOs to order, especially if there are UFO enthusiasts about.

I like the idea, but wouldn't place a high probability on it. This would be an incredibly elaborate hoax to pull off given the number of occasions and odd (and unpredictable) times we're talking about. If I'd put in as much effort as this would require, I'd be looking for much better results.

 

[davo27]

Most of the sightings of Sputnik 1 were actually sightings of the launching rocket, which was in a very similar orbit.
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=1957-001B

I noticed that. Even the "while the small but highly polished sphere, barely visible at sixth magnitude, was more difficult to follow optically." part is pretty impressive for such a small little thing!

 

[deirdre]

I'm simply asking for those making this claim to back it up - if you're postulating that these observations are not unusual, show me that they're not unusual.

If we believe you and you see them everytime you go out, then obviously they are not unusual in your location. (and if they were aliens then the amateur and professional astronomers in your location would be telling people.

For a number of posts now, I haven't been asking for an identification - I've been asking for the observation to be repeated by someone else.

Perhaps you're right. I look forward to you or anyone else spending 2 consecutive nights out sky watching for half an hour in a rural area, away from flight paths and air traffic, and reporting back that you've seen 6 - 10 of the flashes I've described. No problem right? Should be easy - we're clearly not seeing anything special...

i don't understand how this makes sense. so the premise here is that you are not seeing extraterrestrials, and you are not seeing satellites...rather your special group are the only ones who can see these things because you are specialer than us?

is this like how only certain people can see fairies? if you want to find out how rare or not-rare it is for people to see fairies, then this is the wrong site for you because 'you have to believe' in order to see fairies and skeptics tend not to believe in magical thinking.

(ps i see flashing lights in the sky all the time. not as much if i have my glasses on. even with glasses i always figured it was my bad vision, as my prescription isnt 20/20. 20/20 makes me dizzy as i tend to only wear my glasses if driving which apparently i dont do enough to 'get use to' full vision. so my optometrist leaves my prescription just enough to drive safe. Now i know many of those flashes are satellites.)

 

[Ann K]

Yeah, of course. I figured a smallish sphere would be lacking enough of a reflective plane to be visible from a few hundred kilometres.

It was visible when it was in the sunlight, so people saw it in the evening and in the morning. Not only that, ham radio operators all over the country tuned in to listen to its beep-beep-beep signal.