Re: Misperception of Satellite Re-Entries - Seeing is Not Necessarily Believing.

From: Robert Alessandri (
Date: Mon Jan 20 2014 - 20:24:14 UTC

  • Next message: Brad Young: "BY O 012114"

    Hello Ted…
    I hope my bad english will not make that too unintelligible.
    I read with much interest your work and that of Jim Oberg on “saucerized” testimonies of atmospheric re-entries…
    I studied myself the “French UFO wave” of November 5, 90, being the author of “5 novembre 1990, le Creux de la Vague“.
    I did’t note the dichotomy which you announce between the witnesses who described correctly an atmospheric re-entry and those which speak about gigantic spaceships… Rather a continuity between these extremes.
    And moreover the saucerisation is tiny… It is often limited to speaking about “black body with a shape indistinguishable in the dark of the night” (about 15% of the sightings)… Remove these black shapes on dark backgrounds, remain only lights and luminous trails, perfectly representative of the re-entry.
    Finally, much of drawings presented on Oberg’s file were not made by the witnesses, but by ufologists who interpreted with their way the testimonies… The saucerization comes from them rather from the witnesses!
    Here, I showed that many testimonies that a well known french ufologist regards as proofs of the « UFO-wave » are byway good descriptions of the re-entry:
    Robert Alessandri
    Le 10 janv. 2014 à 06:09, Ted Molczan <> a écrit :
    > Over the past couple of years, I have learned from Jim Oberg about an interesting and useful difference in the way
    > people perceive  meteor or satellite re-entry fireballs. Through their descriptions and drawings, it is evident that
    > some perceive the phenomenon more or less accurately, but others perceive a craft with lights, typically cigar or
    > saucer-shaped.
    > On 1990 Nov 05 UTC, the decay of the rocket body that launched Gorizont 21 was seen over a large part of Europe. Our
    > colleague Pierre Neirinck quickly made the correlation, based on observations made by Daniel Karcher, an experienced
    > satellite observer who happenned to witness the event. The following day, Pierre notified French authorities of his
    > findings, documented here (top of pg.2):
    > The event yielded a large number of sighting reports and drawings, with both categories of perception well represented
    > in Jim's analysis:
    Seesat-l mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 20 2014 - 20:25:22 UTC