Green Fireballs - UFOs or Meteors?

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
2024-04-15_11-05-04.jpg
Photo: Prasen Yadav

Ufologists often like to make a connection between UFOs and nuclear power, and often quote historical incidents. A recent article by Marik Von Rennenkampff said:

Article:
In late 1948, for example, dozens of pilots, defense personnel and scientists associated with the famed Los Alamos and Sandia nuclear weapons programs began seeing mysterious “green fireballs” in the sky. Such objects were frequently observed flying on a perfectly horizontal trajectory, often moving directly toward nearby aircraft. In 1949, two major Los Alamos conferences on the incidents, which drew the likes of famed nuclear weapons physicist Edward Teller, failed to identify the source of the phenomena.

Lincoln LaPaz, then one of the world’s leading authorities on meteorites, observed the “fireballs” personally and, in partnership with the Air Force, conducted a thorough study of the mysterious phenomena. As Time and Life magazines reported contemporaneously, LaPaz “blasted” the notion that the objects were meteorites, bolides or other naturally occurring phenomena.

The bizarre incidents, along with their apparent connection to nuclear weapons research, remain unexplained.


The "blasted" link goes to a 1952 article in LIFE magazine.
https://books.google.com/books?id=ElYEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA80&pg=PA92#v=onepage&q&f=true
Evaluation. The popular Southwest belief that a strange meteor shower was underway has been blasted by Dr. Lincoln La Paz, mathematician, astronomer and director of the Institute of Meteoritics at the University of New Mexico. He points out that normal fireballs do not appear green, they fall in the trajectory forced on them by gravity, are generally noisy as a freight train and leave meteorites where they hit. The green New Mexican species does none of these
Content from External Source
This immediately seems odd, as we are quite familiar with green meteors.

Article:
Green fireballs have been reported and filmed in New Zealand regularly. Bright meteors often signal the arrival of a chunk of asteroid, which can be anywhere between a few centimeters to a meter in diameter when it comes crashing through the atmosphere.

Some of these asteroids contain nickel and iron and they hit the atmosphere at speeds of up to 60 km (37 miles) per second. This releases an enormous amount of heat very quickly, and the vaporized iron and nickel radiate green light.


And his other objections don't seem to stand up to scrutiny:

"they fall in the trajectory forced on them by gravity" - which can include what looks like horizontal, it depends on the the trajectory of the meteorite/bolide. If it's coming in at a shallow angle, it can traverse the sky. They are most commonly at an angle to the horizon, as they are falling down. But unfortunately we don't have much to go on beside eyewitness accounts.

"are generally noisy as a freight train" - bolides make noise, but it varies, and it's not always audible. The sound is usually more of a boom than a passing train. It depends on distance and the size of the bolide.

"leave meteorites where they hit" - yes, but A) that assumes they hit, and B) you've got to find them. Quite a challenging task even in the modern era of constant recording of trajectories, and the computer extrapolation of impact sites. In that 1950s you'd be very lucky to find a small or broken meteorite by analyzing a few eyewitness accounts. And LaPaz himself said in 1950:

https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3057&context=nmq
unless the extra-atmospheric mass of the invading meteorite is considerable, there is no possibility that an appreciable fraction of survive the fiery ordeal of transit through the atmosphere and fall as a solid mass on the surface of the earth. Meteors are the luminous shavings produced when meteorites pass through the atmospheric planing mill. Like planks, the solid meteorites emerge from this experience greatly reduced in size. If they are quite small to begin with-as are most of the meteorites in inter- planetary space-then nothing endures to escape from the atmos- phere. Indeed, it has been estimated that, on the average, not more than a thousand of the hundreds of billions of meteorites that annually bombard the earth actually drop solid survivors on the land surface of the globe.
Content from External Source
The other link goes to a an FBI collection of UFO documents from the 1950s, the linked portion on page 4 is from 25 May 1950 and discusses a conference on green fireballs (a meeting) which yielded no results, and an upcoming study. The previous paragraph mentions an analysis by LaPas.

3. there is also attached and analysis of the green fireball occurrences in this area made by Dr. Lincoln LaPax. Dr. LaPaz is the Director of the Institute of Meteoritics and Head of the Department of Mathematics and Astronomy at the University of New Mexico. He was Re- search Mathematician at the New Mexico Proving Grounds under an OSRD appointment in 1943 and 1944, and Technical Director of the Operations Analysis Section, Headquarters, Second Air Force, 1944-45. Since 1948, Dr. LaPaz has served on a voluntary basis as consultant for this Dis- trict in connection with the green fireball investigations.

4. On 17 February 1949 and again on 14 October 1949, conferences were held at Los Alamos, New Mexico, for the purpose of discussing the green fireball phenomena. Representatives of the following organizations were present at these meetings: Fourth Army, Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, University of New Mexico, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, University of California, U. S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Geophysical Research Division Air Materiel Command USAF, and the Office of Special Investigations (IG) USAF. A logical explanation was not proffered with respect to the origin of the green fircballs. It was, however, ronorally concluded that the phenomena existed and that they should bo stwiied scientifically until theso occurrences have been satisfactorily explained. Further, that the continued occurrence of unexplained phenomena of this nature in the vicinity of sensitive installations is cause for concern.

5. The Geophysical Research Division, Air Latericl Command, Cambridge, Massachusetts, has recently let a contract to Land-Air, Inc., Holloman AFB, Alamogordo, New Mexico, for a limited scientific study of green fireballs. The results of this scientific approach to the problem will undoubtedly be of great value in determining the origin of these phenomena.
Content from External Source
LaPaz's analysis on page 55, dated May 23, 1950. Two years before the LIFE article. Hard to read, but he says they are all either meteorites or misidentified missiles.
https://vault.fbi.gov/UFO/UFO Part 11 of 16#page=55
I have come to the conclusion that, on the basis of the evidence now available to be, I would not be justified in recommending a fireball project. In my opinion, this evidence proves conclusively that the fireballs reported fall in to one to two categories: Those of the first category (the majority) are meteorite falls of unusual, but certainly not impossible, magnitude, frequency, and other characteristic; those of the second category (the minority) are U.S. guided missiles undergoing tests in the neighborhoods of the sensitive installations that they are designed to defend.

This interpretation of the latter category is the one that I proposed in answer to a question raised by Dr. Teller at his first Los Alamos conference on [some month] 17, 1949. It was not taken seriously then and I doubt it will be taken seriously at the present time. However, even if the interpretation of the unconventional fireballs is the correct one, it is obvious that those in position to confirm it should refuse to do so.
Content from External Source
It seems possible that the missiles hypothesis was deemed too sensitive for public consumption, which is why it was not mentioned in the LIFE article.

The article's link to LaPaz's study does not go to the study, but actually goes to an online version the 1960 book, "The Report On Unidentified Flying Objects", by Edward J. Ruppelt. This gives another account of the conference.

https://www.nicap.org/rufo/rufo-04.htm

As happens in any conference, opinions were divided. Some people thought the green fireballs were natural fireballs. The proponents of the natural meteor, or meteorite, theory presented facts that they had dug out of astronomical journals. Greenish colored meteors, although not common, had been observed on many occasions. The flat trajectory, which seemed to be so important in proving that the green fireballs were extraterrestrial, was also nothing new. When viewed from certain angles, a meteor can appear to have a flat trajectory. The reason that so many had been seen during December of 1948 and January of 1949 was that the weather had been unusually clear all over the Southwest during this period.

Dr. La Paz led the group who believed that the green fireballs were not meteors or meteorites. His argument was derived from the facts that he had gained after many days of research and working with Air Force intelligence teams. He stuck to the points that (1) the trajectory was too flat, (2) the color was too green, and (3) he couldn't locate any fragments even though he had found the spots where they should have hit the earth if they were meteorites.

People who were at that meeting have told me that Dr. La Paz's theory was very interesting and that each point was carefully considered. But evidently it wasn't conclusive enough because when the conference broke up, after two days, it was decided that the green fireballs were a natural phenomenon of some kind.
Content from External Source
The book goes on to describe La Paz's objection to meteorites for the minority of cases. He did not actually think that they could not be green, but rather that they were too green.
https://www.nicap.org/rufo/rufo-04.htm#:~:text=common, everyday meteors.-,Dr. La Paz said,-that some people
Dr. La Paz said that some people, including Dr. Joseph Kaplan and Dr. Edward Teller, thought that the green fireballs were natural meteors. He didn't think so, however, for several reasons. First the color was so much different. To illustrate his point, Dr. La Paz opened his desk drawer and took out a well worn chart of the color spectrum. He checked off two shades of green; one a pale, almost yellowish green and the other a much more distinct vivid green. He pointed to the bright green and told me that this was the color of the green fireballs. He'd taken this chart with him when he went out to talk to people who had seen the green fireballs and everyone had picked this one color. The pale green, he explained, was the color reported in the cases of documented green meteors.
Content from External Source
However a lot of the green meteors actually caught on camera seem pretty vivid green.
2024-04-15_14-46-47.jpg

Overally, pretty inconclusive. 70+ years ago there was a spate to green fireballs. Then less so. Perhaps it was just a wave of meteors caused by the Earth passing through a cloud of debris that just had a bit more nickel in it than normal, and so was a bit more green. We know from Starlink and other things that pilot and other eyewitness reports are not very reliable. Nothing was caught on camera. We'll probably never know.
 
Last edited:
I should point out that oxygen also glows green at high altitude when excited; that is why many auroras have a green tint (the green and the red glows from aurora are both caused by excitation of oxygen).

I have seen a 'green' aurora, but the colour was insufficiently saturated to look particularly green to my eyes. However, the red aurora was stunning.
From NASA's website;
https://blogs.nasa.gov/Watch_the_Skies/2023/12/05/gorgeously-green-geminids-peak-next-week/
Depending on the meteor’s chemical composition, the meteor will emit different colors when burned in the Earth’s atmosphere. Oxygen, magnesium, and nickel usually produce green.
 
"they fall in the trajectory forced on them by gravity" - which can include what looks like horizontal, it depends on the the trajectory of the meteorite/bolide. If it's coming in at a shallow angle, it can traverse the sky. They are most commonly at an angle to the horizon, as they are falling down. But unfortunately we don't have much to go on beside eyewitness accounts.
If they happen to pass over your position, they'll seem to go UP the sky if you are looking at them as they approach your position.
 
This was the early days of rocketry. I've had a notion for years... Could these have been experiments? Was some government/military agency sending up suborbital flights to study the dynamics of reentry? Did they send up bits of nickel that would put on a light show and be easily photographed?

It's just a thought.
 
Last edited:
Since meteorites can often be seen from MANY miles away, I really doubt that "are generally noisy as a freight train" statement. I'd expect that to be true only for the very final portion before impact. I'll also question "they fall in the trajectory forced on them by gravity". Having witnessed the "Peekskill meteorite", the most striking feature I noticed was the flat trajectory that first alerted me to the fact it was much faster and much further away from me than I had first assumed. I can only conjecture that LaPaz's expertise might have come from a textbook more than from actual sightings, but in the days before near-ubiquitous cameras, perhaps that's not surprising.
 
I have seen a 'green' aurora, but the colour was insufficiently saturated to look particularly green to my eyes. However, the red aurora was stunning.
The UK has had some stunning auroras this last year. Here's a red one for your enjoyment, photographed by "Stonehenge Dronescapes".
IMG_0512.jpeg
 
This was the early days of rocketry. I've had a notion for years... Could these have been experiments? Was some government/military agency sending up suborbital flights to study the dynamics of reentry? Did they send up bits of nickel that would put on a light show and be easily photographed?

It's just a thought.

The Jimmy Carter UFO was recently solved as a rocketry experiment which was releasing Barium into the atmosphere:

Jimmy Carter, United States president from 1977 until 1981, reported seeing an unidentified flying object while at Leary, Georgia, in 1969. While serving as governor of Georgia, Carter was asked (on September 14, 1973) by the International UFO Bureau in Oklahoma City to file a report of the sighting, and he filed a statement on September 18, mailed September 20.[1] Since its writing, the report has been discussed several times by both ufologists and by members of the mainstream media.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter_UFO_incident
Content from External Source
It wasn’t until 2016 that a researcher finally solved Carter’s sighting and proved him correct — in fact, he was only off by a few minutes and the sighting would have appeared at the almost precise location in the sky he’d recorded. That year, former Air Force scientist Jere Justus read Carter’s description and knew almost instantly what the future president had seen: a high-altitude rocket-released barium cloud.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/11/17/us-presidents-ufo-obsession-00127519
Content from External Source

Video here by @Brian Dunning ...



Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hy7A0yO6gA
 
If they happen to pass over your position, they'll seem to go UP the sky if you are looking at them as they approach your position.
And it is really weird when you see one.

The sound thing is always interesting to me. Back when the Peekskill Meteor streaked across the Mid-Atlantic in 1992, I was one of the hundreds of thousands of high school football fans that saw it. My memory includes no sound, but others that I was with are certain that it made a sizzling sound. It was fairly glittery compared to other fireballs I've seen and I can see how people fill in the blank that it kind of looked like a sparkler, so it should sound like one.
 
I saw day time meteor around 25 years ago, it left a dogleg smoke trail test was visible for a few minutes afterwards, but I recall no sound
 
I saw day time meteor around 25 years ago, it left a dogleg smoke trail test was visible for a few minutes afterwards, but I recall no sound
The liveliest meteor shower I saw was so lively that there were several per minute for an extended period of time. Even better, we had a "they're coming right at us" perspective. The cherry on top was that a fair number of them crackled. That kinda did my head in, as I knew I shouldn't be able to hear them in real time, due to propagation delays, sound simply doesn't travel that quickly. The solution was clear - the crackle of a prior meteor was simply alerting me to look around for a new one - and the density was so high that there was almost always a new one to be found. And you remember the ones that match, writing off the ones with no match as not having looked in the right direction quickly enough. A variety of survivorship bias.

I say "liveliest", but it's the only meteor *shower* I've ever seen (I've almost always been Bortle 8 or worse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bortle_scale , and cloud cover has been a more persistent enemy than just urban haze). At least when I was in a national park in south-east Georgia 2 years back, I managed to see a bunch of isolated meteors: quite a few per hour, definitely not rare. They were all silent.
 
Saw a very bright distinctly green fireball over LAX on approach to RWY 25L on 16 APR 24 at approximately 21:13.

Was a good one that broke into pieces before fading out.
 
I always wondered if Dr. Lincoln LaPaz was misquoted in that article. I doubt that he made the definitive statement “all fireballs are as noisy as a freight train.”
 
The cherry on top was that a fair number of them crackled. That kinda did my head in, as I knew I shouldn't be able to hear them in real time, due to propagation delays, sound simply doesn't travel that quickly.

Concerning the 'sound' of a bolide or meteor; most meteors or bolides are tens of kilometres away from the observer. Any sound from the meteor itself will arrive many seconds after the meteor is visible; if you hear a sound when the meteor is passing by, that sound has almost certainly not come directly from the meteor via sound-wave propagation. In the Chelyabinsk meteor strike, the sound reached the ground about two-and-a-half minutes after the meteor finally exploded. This sound was so loud it acted as a shock-wave, smashing many windows and causing many injuries. But by that time the meteor had disintegrated, and the pieces were falling silently to earth, or had already hit the ground.

Yet many people report hearing sounds which occur at the same time as the meteor is visible in the sky; how can this be? FatPhil's suggestion that the sounds of previous meteors can be mistaken for the ones you can see at the time is a good one. This explanation wouldn't work for single meteors, however. Some people have suggested that there is some kind of near-instantaneous radio transmission that gets picked up by receivers near the witnesses, which might be true in some cases. My own suggestion that the 'cracking' or 'hissing' sounds that some people hear are actually involuntary noises made by other people nearby.

Or they may be completely unrelated noises, or some kind of misremembered impression (false memory).
 
Was I unclear with what I wrote?
Not at all! However, the idea that the sound of a previous meteor might be confused with the sound of the current meteor only really works in meteor showers, and since meteors arrive at random intervals, even this explanation doesn't work very well.

The perceived 'sound' associated with the passage of any meteor is one of the most interesting puzzles associated with astronomical observing, and I think it is more likely to be a largely subjective phenomenon, with a wide range of explanations.
 
This may add nothing to the discussion but I want to tell my green fireball story anyways.

In the 90's I was riding passenger down a road, probably mid afternoon after school and saw up in the sky a green fireball with green tail slowly traversing the sky.

It was actually so slow it resembled an airliner at high altitude, we pulled over and watched it for what felt like minutes, another car watched it as well.

If it was missed above this was in the middle of a sunny afternoon so pretty rare I assume.
 
Whatever it was, it wasn't a meteor. My best guess is that it was an aircraft with contrail. The color(s) might be explained by refraction effects.

011-boeing-777-contrail-small-1.jpg
 
Naturally occurring meteors don't enter the atmosphere at less than 11km/s, because they are attracted by the Earth's gravity as they approach so are falling at that speed (at least) when they hit the top of the atmosphere.

Some re-entering spacecraft (especially ones with people on board) are travelling more slowly when they enter the atmosphere, and may slow down considerably before they impact (or land). After the aerobraking phase of re-entry, spacecraft don't glow, so they are more difficult to see.

Umm - I'm forgetting reusable rockets like Falcon9, which use retrorockets to land softly.
 
Back
Top