Tectonic Strain Theory and UFOs
Paul Middler
As more and more people move away from the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis
as a reason for unexplained UFO sightings, more and more alternate
theories appear and reappear. The idea that a link might exist between
UFOs and geological faults has been around since 1968.
The hypothesis that earthquake lights might be the source of UFO
sightings has been promulgated by Paul Devereux and Dr. Michael Persinger.
The Tectonic Strain Theory (TST) states that most UFO phenomena are
natural events generated by stresses and strains within the earth's crust.
These balls of light are usually seen during a time period that stretches
from a year before to a year after large magnitude earthquakes. The strain
within subsurface rock at fault lines generates an electromagnetic field
column above the surface in which a plasma appears and is maintained by
the field. The spherical or elliptical ball of plasma travels along the
fault line, making it appear to have intelligent movement. People view the
ball of light as a spacecraft because of their societal conditioning. Dr.
Persinger has performed statistical analyses and found links between
volcanic activity, earthquakes and UFO reports.
The critics claim that the statistical analyses are invalid because the
theory does not account for all UFO reports or provide a means of
separating the 'natural' UFO phenomena from the unnatural. They also say
that since the analyses were complex and multivariate, the observed data
predicts the theory rather than theory predicting the observations. Also,
they believe that not enough strain energy can be generated to produce
many of the balls of light that have been observed.
Does anyone have any comments, information or criticisms about the TST
that they would like to share?
Paul
--
__.,/) ,. "That is the biggest fool thing we have
`(O o) ( O__. ever done...The [atomic] bomb will never
=(_o_)= |<____\ go off, and I speak as an expert in
|U| | \ explosives."
Paul.M...@DeepCove.Com -- Admiral William Leahy to
74064...@CompuServe.Com President Harry Truman
Mr_Happy
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain Theory and UFOs
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
I tend to believe what is being said here. However,as you stated
in your article, the critics say that this does not take into acount all
UFO reports. For instance, how about the reports of UFO's that are
followed by military aircraft. Now i know these could still be thought of
as the plasma balls created by faultlines, but this theory becomes
irrelevant when you take into acount the UFO's that "take off" at high
velocity, away from the vicinity of the military aircraft when there is
confirmation from a ground base via radio that the object may be fired
upon. This, to me, suggests the work of an intelligent force.
Just a thought :) . Waddya think? :)
--
------------------------------------------------------
"You put the aliens in the middle of this
stuff and you've got ALL the answers!"
- Milton William Cooper -
-----------------------------------------------------
Mr Happy.
mail :- c941...@alinga.newcastle.edu.au
-----------------------------------------------------
Paul Middler
Myke Reynolds writes:
In article <34d6vk$8...@kaos.deepcove.com>, paul...@deepcove.com (Paul
Middler) writes:
>> The spherical or elliptical ball of plasma travels along the fault
>> line, making it appear to have intelligent movement. People view the
>> ball of light as a spacecraft because of their societal conditioning.
>> Dr. Persinger has performed statistical analyses and found links
>> between volcanic activity, earthquakes and UFO reports.
> If they "travel along the fault line" how do they account for
> the fact that the UFO phenomenon is not limited to fault lines?
The phenomenon is alleged to appear near bodies of water, mines and
mineral deposits and sharp projections like cliffs, rock outcrops and even
towers. Since all areas of the earth's crust experience varying degrees
of stress, TST UFOs should be found anywhere. But since the stress is
greatest near fault lines, one should expect to see more of them in
earthquake zones. Changes in the strain field or local electromagnetic
disturbances apparently give it motion.
> Why aren't there signifcantly more sightings here on the west
> coast, where the tectonic forces are so notorious? Without
> knowing what the "links" were, it is hard to say very much.
California leads the US in UFO sightings. New York state is far behind.
> BTW, I would like to thank you for posting a message about
> Jose Escamilla on the Compuserve Encounters forum and answering
> my mail, enlightening me to the presence of this forum.
Now everyone will blame me <G>.
Don't forget to visit alt.paranet.ufo, sci.skeptic and alt.conspiracy. :)
Paul Middler
John Stepkowski writes:
[snip]
> For the moment I'd strongly suggest tracking down a copy of the
> _Journal of UFO Studies_' Vol 2. 1990 (ISSN: 0730-5748, and probably
> still available from CUFOS.) This issue contains an excellent series
> of articles on the pros and cons of the TST and is well worth reading.
Yes, I have a copy of that particular issue.
A publication which is trying to elevate itself into the scientific
realm should not publish an "issues forum" consisting of unqualified
people. An investigator and a professor of neuropsychology were the major
proponents of the theory, while a philosophy professor, a history
professor, a museum curator and a science history professor were
generally against the theory. The result included a number of personal
attacks thrown back and forth. That kind of thing belongs on Usenet,
not in a journal that professes to have "scholarly papers". But at
least they published a paper about part of Dr. Persinger's work, even
though it was "non-technical."
Paul Middler
>To: paul...@deepcove.com (Paul Middler)
>Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain Theory and UFOs
>Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
> I tend to believe what is being said here. However,as you stated
>in your article, the critics say that this does not take into acount all
>UFO reports. For instance, how about the reports of UFO's that are
>followed by military aircraft. Now i know these could still be thought of
>as the plasma balls created by faultlines, but this theory becomes
>irrelevant when you take into acount the UFO's that "take off" at high
>velocity, away from the vicinity of the military aircraft when there is
>confirmation from a ground base via radio that the object may be fired
>upon. This, to me, suggests the work of an intelligent force.
> Just a thought :) . Waddya think? :)
The proponents of TST believe all UFOs have a non-ET explanation, except
that their explanation about most of the balls of light is controversial.
Dean Adams
In article <34d6vk$8...@kaos.deepcove.com> paul...@deepcove.com (Paul Middler) writes:
>
>as a reason for unexplained UFO sightings, more and more alternate
>theories appear and reappear. The idea that a link might exist between
>UFOs and geological faults has been around since 1968.
> The hypothesis that earthquake lights might be the source of UFO
>sightings has been promulgated by Paul Devereux and Dr. Michael Persinger.
>The Tectonic Strain Theory (TST) states that most UFO phenomena are
>natural events generated by stresses and strains within the earth's crust.
Yes, I definitely think that something in the area of piezoelectric
phenomona generated by tectonic stresses could be responsible for
"UFO" reports in certain regions. Anything in the way of "glowing
balls of light" are a natural candidate for this sort of explanation.
Dean Adams
In article <34e12m$f...@search01.news.aol.com> myker...@aol.com (MykeReynol) writes:
>No thanks, I think conspiracy theory is a moot point and I'm certainly
>not here to argue with skeptics.
Good, so stop arguing!
> I'm here to clear out the Zoo.
Since you brought it with you, so I can think of
a VERY fast way for you to clear it out
Paul Middler
Thad,
Thanks for re-posting the Mr. Rutkowski's TST paper.
Paul
Thad Floryan
Chris Rutkowski posted his analysis during May 1994. Since Chris' article
wasn't posted to all the newsgroups in which your present query appears, I've
pulled Chris' original article and his 6 followups from the archives and have
enclosed them below for reference.
################################### 1 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6727 sci.skeptic:72144
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
Subject: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 17 May 1994 21:16:29 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 2294
Message-ID: <2rbc7d$q...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
Summary: Long analysis of the TST theory about UFOs
Keywords: earthquakes,UFOs,skeptic
The following is a long treatise and analysis of the Tectonic Strain
Theory. The TST is widely purported to explain UFOs, ghosts, psychic
events, religious ecstacy, spontaneous combustion and pretty well
anything else you might name. Literally hundreds of papers have
appeared in scientific journals, assuming its real existence and
reality. However, there have been very few critical works about the
TST, and when such works have surfaced, the critics have been dismissed
with commentary or discussion about how complicated the issue is and
why it cannot be quantified easily. In short, its proponents appear to
invoke almost identical reasons as defendants of the reality of psychic
phenomena, and this in itself raises concern among some researchers.
This paper was originally written as a geophysical thesis in 1983, and
although more than 10 years old, is still relevant as a critical look
at the TST which is still being invoked as a scientific explanation of
purportedly paranormal phenomena.
The paper has recently been converted into ASCII by David Thacker of
AUFOSG and provided online by Chris Rutkowski.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Tectonic Strain Theory of Geophysical Luminosities
by
Chris A. Rutkowski
Winnipeg, Manitoba, 1984
(c) Chris A. Rutkowski, 1984
Abstract
A new hypothesis, explaining unidentified luminosities,
has been proposed which has received wide attention and gen-
eral acceptance. It incorporates both geophysical and physi-
ological mechanisms in an attempt to explain the wide vari-
ety of characteristics of the phenomenon. This study
examines the feasibility of the theory from an objective
standpoint, and tests the tenability of the interrelations
of its interdisciplinary mechanisms.
- ii -
CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II. THE TECTONIC STRAIN THEORY AND UFOS . . . . . . . . 4
Crustal Strain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Strain-Produced Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Luminosity From Electromagnetic Discharge . . . 12
UFOs as Fracture-Related Luminosities . . . . . 13
Electromagnetic Effects on the Human System . . 15
Temporal Lobe Experiences . . . . . . . . . . . 18
III. STATISTICAL CORRELATIONS OF THE TST AND UFO
OBSERVATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
IV. ANALYSIS OF THE TST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Energy Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Geographical Implications of UFO Sightings . . 29
Earthquake Lights and Dilatancy Hypotheses . . 36
Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
V. OTHER TST-RELATED THEORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Vestigia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Earth Lights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
VI. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Appendix
A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
-- ii --
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
Since their entry into the scientific and lay literature
in the late 1940's, few topics have caused such controversy
as that of UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects). While tradi-
tionally ignored or lightly treated by the scientific commu-
nity, the persistence of the phenomenon over 30 years has
led some researchers to consider them more seriously (Ja-
cobs, 1976).
It is recognized that the phenomenon has drawn to it a
large contingent of unscientific and unprofessional "believ-
ers", many of whom fail to objectively view UFOs without
bias. This is not necessarily surprising, given science's
stance on the matter, but a Catch-22 situation has resulted.
Because the subject is not "reputable", few scientists have
spent adequate time considering the problem in detail. This
has left the study of the phenomenon to laymen, and often to
cult believers. This has kept the "reputation" of UFOs at a
low level, and the circle has been completed.
But probably because of the relatively long history of
UFO reports, some scientists have proposed theories to ex-
plain them. Some scientists advocate the ETH (Extraterres-
- 1 -
trial Hypothesis), which states the most popular UFO expla-
nation: that they could be spacecraft from extraterrestrial
civilizations. Unfortunately, though most astronomers be-
lieve that extraterrestrial civilizations exist, there is no
scientifically-acceptable evidence that such civilizations
have in fact contacted mankind (Hendry, 1979).
Other explanations proposed for UFOs include: "lost" ter-
restrial civilizations; "secret" terrestrial devices; spir-
itual entities; "natural" phenomena; and mass hallucinations
(Jacobs, 1976). None have withstood scrutiny as of this
date.
It should be noted at the outset that one of the few
facts known about UFOs is that about 90 to 95 percent of all
UFO reports are misidentifications of conventional or natu-
ral phenomena (Hendry, 1979). It is the remaining, signifi-
cant percent that is regarded when discussing UFOs - the
"real unknowns". It is generally felt by skeptics that this
percentage of UFOs can be explained if strong effort is
made, or it can never be explained other than in terms of a
"background noise" of spurious data. Proponents of the UFO
phenomenon as a much more complicated mystery disagree with
the skeptics. They argue that the remaining percentage of
reports is unexplainable even after attempts to explain them
have been made. This disagreement is the prime focus of the
UFO controversy.
- 2 -
Natural phenomena have been suggested as an explanation
for UFOs many times (e.g. Klass, 1966). The main drawback
to natural phenomena theories is that UFO reports offer such
a wide variety of characteristics that natural phenomena
fall short of explaining all UFO traits. Recently, however,
a theory has been proposed which seems capable of explaining
many UFO characteristics based on a mixture of mechanisms
and processes. This theory, called the TST (Tectonic Strain
Theory), begins with the suggestion that strain fields with-
in the Earth's crust can produce an electromagnetic dis-
charge that may manifest itself in one of two basic ways.
One way is by the electric discharge becoming visible as a
moving body of light. The other way is by the discharge af-
fecting the human brain so that the observer will "believe"
he or she is viewing a moving body of light. Both scenarios
are consistent with the theory, and are used to explain the
reported appearances of UFOs.
So far, only statistical evidence has been presented in
support of this theory. This has been in the form of covari-
ation of the number of reported UFOs in an area and the lev-
el of seismic activity in that area. Whether this is a
"real" relationship or an artifact is not clear at the pres-
ent time.
- 3 -
Chapter II
THE TECTONIC STRAIN THEORY AND UFOS
The Tectonic Strain Theory (hereafter referred to as the
TST) is a relatively new explanation for the reported ap-
pearance of inexplicable luminosities, sometimes
UFOs. Papers dealing with certain aspects of the theory
have been published in several journals, covering various
disciplines (Persinger, 1975, 1976, 1979a, 1979b, 1980a,
1981, 1982, 1983a, 1983b, 1983c, 1983d, 1983e, unpubl, un-
pub2). The proposed mechanism is interdisciplinary in na-
ture, and carries with it some necessary qualifications to
enable it to cope with a poorly-understood phenomena in
terms of better-known phenomena. The theory is best ex-
plained by its major proponent, Michael A. Persinger:
"Essentially,...normal geophysical processes applied
in unusual space-time configurations are responsible
for electromagnetic phenomena that have direct physi-
cal and biological consequences. These processes in-
volve normal alterations in tectonic (structural)
stresses within the Earth's crust and are mediated by
- 4 -
piezoelectric-like effects. The primary natural analog
of this putative phenomena would be earthquake light-
ning...Whereas earthquake-related luminosities appear
contingent upon large releases of structural strain
(seismic activities), the luminosities and electromag-
netic correlates of alleged close encounters with UFOs
are associated with HIGHLY LOCALIZED, less intense
changes in crustal structures not necessarily involv-
ing major seismic activity." (Persinger, 1979b)
(author's emphasis)
The TST draws upon several processes for its mechanism,
and it is best to examine each of them in some detail. The
physical processes are linked implicitly by logical argu-
ments, although the basis for these arguments needs careful
examination. The major steps involved are:
1) Strain is produced in the Earth's crust.
2) Strain produces an electromagnetic discharge.
3A) The electromagnetic discharge produces a luminosity.
4A) The luminosity is observed as a UFO.
Alternatively, steps 3A and 4A may be replaced by:
38) The electromagnetic discharge affects human per-
eption.
4B) A person believes that he/she has seen a UFO.
- 5 -
In order to understand the TST, each of these steps will be
considered in systematic sequence, in effect testing the
links in the chain.
2.1 CRUSTAL STRAIN
Through various processes, strain can be built up in the
Earth's crust. These include tectonic activity, tidal action
and human activity.
Strain is described in terms of dilational and distor-
tional strain tensors, as it is a vector in three dimensions
(Bath, 1973; Kasahara, 1981; Richter, 1958). The strain ten-
sor is defined by the equation:
[NOTE: In this ASCII version, CX represents the Greek symbol alpha,
^2 means squared, _u represents mu, _[ is the integration symbol,
pi is the pi constant, _B is the symbol for beta.]
E(i,j) = e(i,j) - (1/3)e(k,k)CX(i,j)
and similarly, the stress tensor is:
P(i,j) = p(i,j) - (1/3)p(k,k)CX(i,j)
where the arrays e(i,j) and p(i,j) each consist of nine com-
ponent vectors which define the stress and strain across any
small plane area containing the point in question. The re-
lease of tectonic elastic strain energy is the cause of ma-
jor earthquakes. This energy can be expressed in a function
and form such that:
U = _[_[_[_uE^2(i,j) dV
- 6 -
where _u is the rigidity modulus (the measurement of the re-
sistance of an elastic solid to shearing deformation) and U
is the distortional strain energy, taken through the volume
(Bullen, 1963).
The stress tensor is defined as:
P(i,j) = 2_uE(i,j)
Now, we can also define the stress tensor in terms of the
Mises function:
P^2(i,j) = (CXS)^2
where S is the value P would have if the material was near
the breaking point. CX is a constant that has a value between
0 and 1, and sometimes assigned a value of (sqrt(3))^-1
We can then find E in terms of S such that:
E(i,j) = (CXS)/(2_u)
we can substitute into our equation for U and find:
4_uU = CX^2S^2Q
where Q is the volume of the strained region near breaking
point.
The total energy released in an earthquake can be roughly
calculated by a modified Gutenberg-Richter formula:
log E = 11.8 + 1.5 M
- 7 -
The total energy released in an earthquake of magnitude 8.9
(the greatest on record) is thus about 5 x 10^24 ergs (Bul-
len, 1955; Kasahara, 1981).
The strain energy, U, will be some fraction of the total
energy, E, since there are other forms of energy release
such as the dilational strain energy, heat and sound, etc.
Thus, we can replace U by qE, where q lies between 0 and 1.
Our new equation is then:
z_uE = S^2Q
where z = 4q (= approximately 2).
Experimental results have provided estimates for _u and S:
0.4 x 10^12 dyne cm^-2 < _u < 1.5 x 10^12 dyne cm^-2
S is approximately equal to 10^9 dyne cm^-2
We can then use our equation to calculate Q. The volume
of the region near breaking point prior to an earthquake is
therefore about 10^19 cm^3, with a radius of about 20 to 50 km
in extreme cases (Bullen, 1953, 1955).
But this radius is only for the overloaded crustal re-
gion. The actual volume of rock in which significant strain
exists is obviously much greater than this, but can not be
known precisely.
- 8 -
However, reasonable estimates of the size of the total
strained region can be made by comparing the distances be-
tween earthquake epicentres and precursory effects, indi-
rectly using the magnitudes and energies involved (Brown and
Reilinger, 1983). It is extremely difficult to judge the ac-
tual extent of precursory effects, since they will intui-
tively vary in type, depth and strength for each earthquake.
The determination of the size of the strained region will be
discussed further, at a later point in this paper.
2.2 STRAIN-PRODUCED RADIATION
There are many types of reported Earthquake precursors on
record, including ground deformation, change in the levels
and chemistry of well-water and the unusual behavior of ani-
mals (Buskirk et al., 1981; Rikitake, 1976; Wyss, 1983). A
form of precursor that has received relatively little atten-
tion is that of the emission of electromagnetic radiation.
Although many such reports are spurious or represent other
natural or man-made causes, a significant number are well-
documented, and the existence of earthquake-related EM ef-
fects must be seriously assessed.
- 9 -
On 31 March, 1980, anomalous EM emissions were recorded
thirty minutes before a deep-focus (depth = 480 km) magni-
tude 7 earthquake 250 km from an observatory near Tokyo
(Gokhberg et al., 1982). These emissions were widely-sepa-
rated at 10 Hz and 81 kHz. Other similar emissions were re-
corded for a magnitude 7.4 earthquake in Iran, 1200 km from
the epicentre, at 27 kHz and 1.63 MHz. Other examples of
such emissions have also been reported (Gokhberg et al.,
1980; Sadovskiy et al., 1979).
It has been known for some time that the strain loading
of rocks and minerals produces electromagnetic emission. The
strength of the emission varies with the different types of
substances; the strongest emission arises from quartz and
other minerals with a high crystal lattice energy, while
rocks such as sandstone have a very low ability to produce
emission under strain. It has been reported that there is a
shift to high frequency with an increase in grain size. The
actual mechanism for the production of the emission is not
definitely known, although several theories have been pro-
posed (Lockner et al., 1983; Mizutani et al., 1976).
It has been shown that a rapid drop in the piezoelectric
field when stress is released (i.e. when fracturing occurs)
can produce EM emission. Experiments have shown that the
peak frequency for such a piezoelectric pulse is at about
1.7 kHz, and that the energy release from the fracture of a
- 10 -
small rock specimen with a volume of 50^3 cm is about 10^-18
J. However, there is some doubt that piezoelectricity can
produce earthquake lights because of its rapid decay and the
possibility of its self-cancelling nature (Finkelstein et
al., 1973; King, 1983).
An alternate theory for EM emission during fracturing is
that of RF (radio frequency) emission caused by a charge
buildup across microcracks. During strain processes, there
will be discharges between walls of the microcracks which
can give not only RF emission, but also IR (infrared) and
visible light as well. The energy released by these small
cracks has an average spectral range of between 1 and 10^3
MHz (Perel'man and Khatiashvili, 1981).
The most plausible proposed mechanism involves the propa-
gation of an elastic wave within rock, following fracture.
Demin et al., (1981) have speculated that the wave would in-
duce the growth of microcracks, and, in the case of semicon-
ducting and piezoelectric minerals, the cracking would pro-
duce electrical discharges. But the piezoelectric field
might also create transistors within the rock, using as bar-
riers the layers of semiconducting minerals occurring natu-
rally in the ore. These transistors could be coupled into
circuits, and an EM emission caused by the formation of mi-
crocracks could be amplified, in theory, by these piezoelec-
tric and semiconducting minerals. It is immediately obvious
- 11 -
that in this mechanism the frequency of the amplified EM
wave would be dependent on several variables, especially the
composition of the rock. This frequency could, depending on
these variables, be represented at many points in the EM
spectrum, including radio, infrared, visible and x-ray wav-
elengths. As a point of note, it has been shown that ultra-
sonic pulses can also be generated by rock fractures (Demin
et al., 1981).
2.3 LUMINOSITY FROM ELECTROMAGNETIC DISCHARGE
As was mentioned in section 3.2, EM emission by rock
fracture will probably also include visible wavelengths. The
actual size of the luminosities thus produced is difficult
to ascertain. While luminescence has been reported in the
literature, this has only been in the form of "comet tails"
and sporadic outbursts detected on photographic film in
close proximity to the rock outcrop undergoing fracture.
However, it has been claimed that small, luminous bodies
have been detected on the film of the fracturing of a core
sample in the laboratory (Brady, private communication).{1}
__________
{1} A description of the experimental conditions under which
the luminosities were observed is given by Brady et al(unpub).
- 12 -
These bodies have the reported appearance of sparks caused
by the impact of rocks upon one another, but are believed to
be fracture- and not impact-related. It has been suggested
that if the processes which produce EM emission during rock
failure are scale invariant, then in nature, luminosities
will be produced by the strain and fracture of large or bod-
ies beneath the Earth's surface (Brady et al., (unpub)).
These luminosities produced outside the laboratory will, it
is thought, be much larger than those observed in the labo-
ratory, perhaps reaching 1 m or more on diameter.
2.4 UFOS AS FRACTURE-RELATED LUMINOSITIES
If it is indeed possible that large luminosities can be
produced in nature by crustal stress, then it would seem
likely that they would have been observed and reported. Many
reports of seemingly inexplicable lights in the sky have
been made throughout history, many given the name "UFO" by
default (Jacobs, 1976). But there do exist rare, natural
phenomena that appear as lights in the night sky. These in-
- 13 -
clude ball lightning and earthquake lights, both of which
are still not fully understood by scientists, but progress
is being made in unravelling their mysteries (e.g. Charman,
1979).
In general, earthquake lights are luminous hemispheres,
20 to 200 m in diameter, with a duration following an earth-
quake of 10 seconds to 2 minutes. In addition, radio inter-
ference is reported to occur after the luminescence, strong-
est at about 15 kHz, which is an order of magnitude from the
peak emission for strain release under laboratory conditions
(Derr, 1973,1977; Finkelstein and Powell, 1970).
It has been suggested that the release of stress before
an earthquake could generate large electric potentials, cre-
ating fields of 10^5 V/m (Demin et al., 1981). If rocks can
possess a high enough resistivity (about 10^9 ohm - m), then
earthquake lights might be explainable in this manner (Gokh-
berg et al., 1980).
Ball lightning has been reported infrequently, but enough
cases are on record that some characteristics have been de-
termined (Barry, 1968). It is spherical, with a diameter of
about 30 cm, and may have a contained energy of 10^3 to 10^7 J
(with an average of about 10^5 J) and an energy density be-
tween 10^2 and 10^3 J cm^-3.
- 14 -
2.5 ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECTS ON THE HUMAN SYSTEM
Rather than creating a physical luminosity through the
production of visible photons, an alternate method to pro-
duce a UFO in the TST is the direct effect of EM radiation
upon the human brain.
It has long been understood that both electric and mag-
netic fields affect physiological systems in various ways.
Effects range from dizziness and irritation in weak fields
to severe disruptive effects such as induced epilepsy in
strong fields. Basically, it appears that the electrochemi-
cal responses within the body are interfered with by exter-
nal fields, causing the confusion of signals received and
originating from the brain. Experimental tests have shown
that headaches are frequently reported by individuals ex-
posed to electric fields of 15-25 kV/m for extended periods
of time (Sheppard and Eisenbud, 1977). As well, fatigue and
sleepiness are also reported to be symptoms of prolonged ex-
posure to electric fields, although other studies fail to
support this, possibly due to differing experimental condi-
tions. Medical examinations of individuals exposed to elec-
tric fields have found changes in blood composition and car-
diovascular function (Persinger, 1973).
Since the human body behaves as a conductor, external
electric fields will be internally attenuated except in the
upper-layers of the skin.
- 15 -
The perception of electric and magnetic fields by human
beings has been a topic of interest for many years. Elec-
tric fields of 50-60 Hz, of >10 kV/m can be consciously de-
tected by humans, probably by the erection of body hairs.
Weaker fields of <5 V/m are claimed to produce behavioral
effects, although the physiological mechanism for this is
not fully understood (Sheppard and Eisenbud, 1977).
The problem of magnetic field exposure is not an easy
one, as few studies have been conducted on this topic. So
far, the actual effects are not known, although the strength
at which magnetic fields are thought capable of influencing
biological functions may be as low as 1 Gauss. Magnetic
fields are not attenuated within the body, and also will
tend to induce currents within the body, so their effects
might be construed as being of more significance than elec-
tric fields. Experiments have shown that magnetic fields may
be perceived as low as 10 Gauss in strength (Becker, 1969). It
has even been proposed that the detection of weak magnetic
gradients can explain the "art" of dowsing in humans (Ro-
card, 1964).
Actual changes in the electrical activity of the brains
of animals have been found using low-frequency electric
fields of 100 kV/m. Biological cycles (circadian rhythms)
have also been reported as being affected by exposure to
electric fields, and there is evidence of effects on blood
- 16 -
cell counts in humans following exposure.{2} In all probabili-
ty, the mechanism for the changes is due to the production of
stress from the influence of electric and magnetic fields
upon the human metabolism, encouraging an increase in the
production of steroids within biological systems. There is
also some evidence that electric fields may operate directly
upon the central nervous system, interfering with the normal
transmission of information to and from the brain (Beal,
1974).
Interestingly, there are phenomena known as magnetic
phosphenes which may be relevant to the subject of UFOs. Un-
der the influence of an alternating magnetic field with a
strength >100 Gauss and at frequencies between 10 and 100
Hz, an individual will observe flashes of light. The peak
frequency for this effect is at about 20 Hz. Whether this
has any bearing on the reporting of UFOs is not known (Shep-
pard and Eisenbud, 1977).
__________
{2} Because of the potential danger in exposure to EM radia-
tion, limits were recently proposed for the maximum recom-
mended level of human irradiation (Cahill, 1983).
- 17 -
2.6 TEMPORAL LOBE EXPERIENCES
Under extreme conditions, it has been speculated that at
high voltages, individuals might experience rather severe
alterations in normal brain functions (Persinger, 1983c).
"Dreamy conditions" and temporary paralysis might be experi-
enced. Other suggested sensations are out-of-the-body expe-
riences (OOBEs), religious "awakenings" and feelings of
"cosmic significance", since these emotions can be produced
by stimulating the limbic structures of the brain (including
the hippocampus) with electric currents. Such stimulation
apparently may induce "false" memories of dreamed events,
making a person "believe" he or she has experienced some-
thing which has not occurred. These "artificial hallucina-
tions" would seem "real" to the individual thus influenced.
In this way, the "bizarre" aspects of UFO experiences such
as seeing an alien entity, conversing with it, etc., might
be explained in terms of an interference in brain functions
(Persinger, 1983e).
The stimulation of the temporal lobe is perhaps the most
interesting of all the effects noted. This stimulation could
produce disorientation and epileptic-like experiences that
might include actual seizures and loss of consciousness.
Upon recovery, the individual might well have amnesia re-
garding certain parts of his or her experience, all due to
electrical interference within the brain (Persinger, 1979b).
- 18 -
The suggestion is that the behavior of the individuals is
not unusual in any way. Rather, it is the interpretation of
the experiences which is unusual, and thus, the UFO phenom-
enon can be reduced to a poor interpretation of the experi-
ences of individuals who have actually been in contact with
geophysical electromagnetic emissions. However, the reasons
for the consistent description of such experiences in terms
of UFOs are not elaborated upon in the TST.
The TST includes some consideration of the separation be-
tween the observer and the geophysical luminosity. At a dis-
tance, only the optical effects would be reported. As a per-
son approached the emission, it would have increasingly
greater effect upon the human system, until finally, in the
event an actual physical contact was made, the unfortunate
individual might be electrocuted, and death would be attrib-
uted by an unsuspecting coroner to lightning or contact with
power lines (Persinger, 1979b).
- 19 -
Chapter III
STATISTICAL CORRELATIONS OF THE TST AND UFO
OBSERVATIONS
In several papers on the TST, its major proponent offers
statistical arguments in support of the theory. The conclu-
sions reached by some authors (e.g. Persinger 1983a, 1983b,
1983c) seem to show that the variations in numbers of UFO
reports vary with numbers of earthquakes:
"In general, UFO report numbers [tend] to increase two
to three years after decreases in geomagnetic activity
and the year after increases in the number of local,
low intensity earthtremors." (Persinger, 1981)
The disquieting aspect of the TST is that the correlation
is said to be due to "as yet unspecified processes associat-
ed with tectonic strain (Persinger, 1981)", but the factors
creating the variance are described as existing YEARS before
an actual detectable seismic event. While this might be true
in the sense that stresses leading up to an earthquake build
over long periods of time, this suggests characteristics for
the "unspecified processes" without clearly understanding
the processes themselves.
- 20 -
In one paper, yearly totals for UFO "flaps" were taken
from Fate magazine, tabulated earlier by the author (Per-
singer and Lafreniere, 1977). Yearly totals for earthquakes
of various intensities (MM: <III, III, IV, V, VI and >VI)
were taken from U.S. Department of Commerce earthquake pub-
lications, and yearly means for sunspot numbers were taken
from the Journal of GeoPhysical Research. The total number
of UFO reports used for analysis over a 15-year period was
214, while the sunspot numbers ranged up to values near 1000
per year, so their values were substituted by their square
roots. Outliers of variables with a skewness greater than
1.00 were recoded (i.e. given alternate values).
The end result was that both the r and the r^2 values were
generally high, with the r^2 values between 0.53 and 0.70 for
the UFO/earthquake correlations (the r value is often called
the "Pearson Product", which is the correlation coefficient
and is an indicator of the dependence of one variable upon
another). It was noted that although there was an overall
trend in the data, some variables did not fall into the same
pattern, showing regional differences. The results provided
a pattern by which UFO report numbers were predicted for
years beyond the study{3} (see figure 1; Persinger, 1981).
__________
{3} More predictions were made, based on studies of UFO re-
ports from the years 1950-1975. "Missed" predicted UFO
flap years were explained from a sociological perspective
(Persinger, 1983d).
- 21 -
Figure 1: A comparison of observed versus predicted values
for total numbers of UFO reports and their square
roots. Reproduced from Persinger (1981).
- -
A similar series of reported calculations was used in the
study of UFO reports from the pre-Arnold period (pre-1947;
specifically, 1820-1920), originally chronicled by a histor-
ical researcher (Charles Fort) and compiled by the study's
author (Persinger and Lafreniere, 1977). The yearly UFO re-
port numbers were compared with yearly numbers of sunspot
numbers and earthquakes. Once again, the correlation was re-
ported as being very high, and that the relation "accurately
classified more than 90% of the luminosity events (Persing-
er, 1983a)." In dealing with the UFO data, several methods
were used to correlate geophysical data. In one method, "all
solar and seismic variables were lagged from 1 to 6
[years]", while the "luminosity variables were not lagged or
lagged 3 [years] (Persinger, 1983a)." The UFO data was also
in a peculiar form: the number of reports per year was usu-
ally less than three, "although [that] type of year was not
very frequent (Persinger, 1983a)." Essentially, correlations
were found between significant numbers of earthquakes (and
sunspots) and one or two UFO reports in a particular year.
Interestingly, the historical UFO reports took on various
forms, including accounts of "phantom armies" in the sky.
All the data were selected from Central western Europe in
this study, including only the countries Germany, Austria,
France, Italy and Switzerland, a geographical span of over
1000 kilometres. The correlation results of this study are
shown in figure 2.
- 22 -
Figure 2: Predicted relative yearly levels of UFO activity
compared with years of actual reports of "odd
luminosities" (arrows). The years within the bar
were used in the calculation of the prediction
function. Reproduced from Persinger (1983a).
- -
Yet another study involved the correlation of different
types of UFO reports, according to the classification system
employed by Saunders (1978). In this system, UFO reports are
categorized by increasing levels of "strangeness" for types
I to IX. A type I UFO report, for example, is merely a
strange light in the sky, with a high probability of a con-
ventional explanation such as that of a meteor, while a type
IX report is a Close Encounter of the 3rd Kind, involving a
reported contact with alien entities. Most UFO reports fall
into types I, II or III.
Each type of report was compared to levels of seismic ac-
tivity with a "temporal increment" of six months, taken
through the specific years examined for the study (Persing-
er, unpubl). The results are shown in figure 3:
"All of the major types of [UFO report] classes were
significantly correlated with consequent increases in
V or less intensity earthtremors."(Persinger, unpubl)
But the maximum r value is only near 0.50, so that the cor-
responding r^2 value is near 0.25. This means that only 25%
of the variance in UFO reports can be attributed to seismic
events in this study. Even its author admits:
"This may indicate that a significant portion of the
[UFO report] variance for all types of classifications
may still involve non-seismic factors." (Persinger, un-
pub2)
- 23 -
Figure 3: r-values for the correlation between UFO
reports and earthquakes, by UFO type. Reproduced
from Persinger (unpub2).
- -
Chapter IV
ANALYSIS OF THE TST
The TST proposes that many UFOs are produced by a strain
field that is caused by crustal stress. This strain field is
visibly indicated by a fracture (earthquake) that might oc-
cur many kilometres distant and many days or even months
separated in time and space from the point where the UFO was
observed. It has been claimed that there is a statistical
correlation between the numbers of UFO reports and earth-
quake activity. In effect, an increase in earthquake activi-
ty means an increase in UFO reports (Persinger, 1983a,
1983b, 1983c, 1983d).
But the statistical correlation works best when UFO re-
ports from large distances are included. This is described
as choosing an "optimal space and time increment". In a
UFO/earthquake correlation study in the New Madrid earth-
quake area, not only were the recognised New Madrid states
included, but also those surrounding them as well. The sta-
tistical study did find a good correlation for some years,
but also found a "lag" for others (Persinger, 1983b).
- 24 -
Hence, this is the source of the suggestion that UFO re-
ports are related to earthquakes through a common strain
field that may cover a large area, so that the UFO may be
observed hundreds of kilometres from the epicentre of an
earthquake and still be related.
But what exactly is the strain field responsible for the
UFOs and the earthquakes? We know that crustal stress can
build within rock through various processes, including tec-
tonic and tidal force-related activities. This stress will
accumulate in a certain area within the crust, the exact
structure and dimensions of this area being dependent upon
the local geology and the physical composition of the rocks
involved. The actual mechanisms of crustal deformation is
beyond the scope of this review, although some basic ele-
ments have been considered in Chapter 2.
Most sources agree that the size of the region strained
to its breaking point prior to a fracture (earthquake) is
about 20-50 km in radius, but this depends on the magnitude.
Naturally, however, rock outside this area will be under
some strain, but not enough to cause failure. There is no
practical method for determining the exact extent of the
strained region,{4} since the strain will never quite be zero,
__________
{4} There do exist some methods for estimating crustal stress
from core samples, such as using the Xaiser effect to mon-
itor acoustic emission, but underground conditions have
been shown to be capable of altering stress determinations
(Yoshikawa and Mogij 1981), so that these measurements
will have their limitations.
- 25 -
even at large distances from the earthquake epicentre.
Therefore, the determination of a "strain field" is quite
arbitrary.
If a "strain field" is in existence, then the TST implies
that its major visible indicator is an earthquake. If this
field is also responsible for the appearance of a UFO, then
one can wonder why the UFO would not appear adjacent to the
fracture site, where the most energy is released.
Earthquake lightning is often observed concurrently with
earthquakes, and although it may be theorized that UFOs are
indicators of smaller fractures, the use of "optimal tempo-
ral increments" to associate UFOs and earthquakes in a
strain field tends to point out a lack of similarity between
the two phenomena. Specifically, earthquake lightning is es-
sentially simultaneous with an earthquake, while according
to the TST, UFOs can appear much before or later. There-
fore, earthquake lights are probably not upscaled versions
of UFOs.
4.1 ENERGY CONSTRAINTS
In terms of energy involved, we can estimate the energy
required to support a luminous, ball-like UFO. Assume that
there is a luminous ball with a diameter of one meter. Sup-
pose it radiates energy at a frequency near 1 x 10^14 Hz,
corresponding to a wavelength of 5700 A, or yellow light.
- 26 -
Let us also suppose it has the power of a common 60-watt
light bulb.
To an observer 100 metres away, the object will have a
flux of:
S = L/(4 pi r^2) = 4.7 x 10^-4 W m^-2
This value is considerably more than that of the threshold
intensity of the human eye, which is about 10^-14 W m^-2
(Haines, 1980). If the object is seen for ten seconds, then
abruptly disappears, its energy radiated is 6 J in the ob-
server's direction.
Now, since the object will subtend an angle of 1.146 de-
grees, which is equivalent to 1.26 x 10^-3 steradians, its
total energy output would have been about 6 x 10^4 J:
(4 pi E)/ W = E = 6 x 10^4 J
and its energy density would have been 1.42 x 10^4 J m^-3.
We can see, then, that even a relatively dim object 100
metres from an observer will still be quite visible, but the
energy requirements for such an object are not insubstan-
tial. Even if an object radiated just at the threshold level
for our 100 metres distance (about 1.25 x 10^-9 W), its con-
tained energy would be 1.25 x 10^-6 J. These calculations as-
sume an entirely efficient energy radiation mechanism, under
ideal conditions. Any mechanism which aims to produce a vis-
- 27 -
ible luminous body will need to overcome the obstacles of
energy requirements.
Several researchers have reported on their results of ex-
periments upon the fracturing of rock. They have consistent-
ly found that electromagnetic emission is produced when rock
is subjected to strain. However, the frequency of this em-
ission varies greatly (Gol'd et al, 1975; Kuksenko et al.,
1981; Perel'man and Khatiashvili, 1981; Sobolev et al.,
1980; Volarovich et al., 1959).
According to Demin et al (1981), the peak frequency of
the piezoelectric pulse in a fracturing rock is 1.7 kHz.
This would mean an energy of 1.12 x 10^-30 J. Its luminosity
would be about 10^-31 W, and its flux would be (at 100 m)
about 9 x 10^-33 W m^-2.
Nitsan (1977) calculated the radiated power of a piezoe-
lectric emission as about 10^-15 W at 5 x 10^6 Hz, and this
would yield 8 x 10^-21 W m^-2 at 100 m.
The problem here, though, is that this energy is produced
within the crust at unknown depths. Radio wave propagation
through rock is of the order of a few meters, unless one in-
cludes such things as "natural circuits" and energy tunnel-
ing. Even assuming that this energy could find its way to
the surface, the method by which it would discharge into the
atmosphere and exhibit UFO-like characteristics may not be
possible.
- 28 -
Speculations have been made that the monitoring of EM em-
ission could be used to predict earthquakes, interpreting an
anomalous reading as a precursor. Although this may one day
be a useful supplement to other precursory indicators, at
the present time the parameters and the actual mechanism are
both unresolved, so that it can only be regarded as a possi-
ble factor for consideration (Gokhberg et al., 1983; King,
1983; Sardarov, 1981).
4.2 GEOGRAPHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF UFO SIGHTINGS
A persuasive argument presented in favor of the TST is
that seismic activity and UFO reports appear to be statisti-
cally correlated in space and time. That is, seismically ac-
tive areas will have accompanying high numbers of UFO re-
ports. In the TST, however, a "lag" is sometimes introduced
to compensate for the lack of a direct one-to-one correspon-
dence within the data. An earthquake in an area is not ex-
pected to be directlY associated with a particular UFO re-
port. This makes the theory neatly unaffected by complaints
that UFOs might not be observed near an earthquake epicentre
at the time of the event (of course, since the reporting of
UFOs is related to psychological and sociological processes,
the number of variables influencing the eventual reporting
of a UFO over a period of many months and within a large ra-
dius is going to be considerable).
- 29 -
Actually, the existence of UFO reports within a large ra-
dius of an epicentre need not be surprising. UFO reports ap-
pear to be generally related to population density in some
ways, and, as they are a significantly subjective phenomena,
one would expect them to be related to other phenomena that
involve similar subjective limitations. After all, Persinger
(1983b) noted that the best results for the New Madrid area,
for example, were strongest when states surrounding the New
Madrid states were included. Is this because of a real se-
ismicity-UFO correlation or because a larger radius means a
larger population to report UFOs?
It has also been said that: "the more intense the quake,
the longer the lag back"(Persinger, 1980b), when referring
to the TST, consistent with the theory and its strain field
mechanism. But one can wonder, then, if a low intensity
event will really imply a short lag between the event and
the UFO observation. How well-defined is this relationship?
How well are UFOs actually related to seismic activity?
Since attempts have been made to demonstrate statistically
that UFOs are related to seismically active areas, a logical
step would be to determine if this is physically the case.
Can we test the TST using other data? In particular, con-
sistent with the TST is the suggestion that a seismically-
inactive area should not be burdened with a plethora of UFO
reports. Therefore, a seismically-inactive area, such as
Manitoba, should not have a history of frequent UFO sight-
- 30 -
ings. But this is not the case, as there are a large number
of UFO reports on record for the province (Rutkowski, 1983).
The studies of Persinger (unpubl) show that all but the
very-high-strangeness UFO cases could be correlated to se-
ismic activity. The report sample of Ufology Research of
Manitoba should therefore show some sort of relationship to
seismic activity in the province and/or the surrounding
area.
Manitoba, however, is not known to be a seismically-ac-
tive province, and there have been no earthquakes within its
borders (Wilson and Brisbin, 1962). Yet, over 500 Manitoba
UFO reports are on file with UFOROM. How can this be recon-
ciled with the TST?
Persinger (1983b) includes a radius of up to 200 km be-
tween earthquakes and UFO reports in his studies of statis-
tical correlations. we must therefore incorporate this dis-
tance into any comparative map of UFO reports and seismic
events for Manitoba, including the surrounding provinces and
states. However, within a radius of 200 km from the Manitoba
border (not necessarily from UFO report sites), there have
been only eight recorded earthquakes over the last 100
years.{5} These earthquakes are listed in Table 1.
__________
{5} For the sake of completeness, we can include one addition-
al event which occurred in 1880.
- 31 -
Table 1
Earthquakes in and Around Manitoba, 1880-1984
28 Dec 1880* 49.0 N 97.2 W III Pembina
16 May 1909 49.0 N 104.0 W 5.5 VI Westby
8 Aug 1915 48.2 N 103.6 w IV Williston
6 Feb 1917* 47.9 N 95.0 w IV Red Lake
23 Dec 1928 47.6 N 93.9 w IV Bemiji
26 Oct 1946 48.2 N 103.7 w IV Williston
7 Nov 1976* 50.8 N 102.0 w 3.0 IV Esterhazy
4 Nov 1978* 50.7 N 101.8 w 3.1 V Esterhazy
10 Jan 1981* 51.9 N 103.4 w 3.1 V Canora
Of these, only five (*) were considered near enough to UFO-
prone areas to be consistent and viable through the TST
(Gendzwill et al., 1982; Horner and Hasegawa, 1978; Reagor
et al., 1981; Stover et al., 1981)(See Map 1).
With regard to the year-by-year distribution of UFO re-
ports for Manitoba, there were three major "flap years",
namely 1952, 1967 and 1975, when report numbers climbed con-
siderably above the normal background level. These years co-
incide with "flap years" in other parts of the world, as
agreed upon by other researchers, and are considered part of
a world-wide trend (Rutkowski, 1983)(See Figure 4).
- 32 -
Map 1
Earthquakes Near Manitoba
Compiled and Plotted by C. Rutkowski (1983)
- -
Figure 4: Tabulation of Manitoba UFO reports by year.
Reproduced from Rutkowski (1983).
- -
The first observation that we can make is that there were
no earthquakes within real "range" of Manitoba during these
"flap" periods. Only one earthquake (7 Nov 1976) occurred
within a 2-year interval of a flap year (1975), and this oc-
curred 300-400 km away from the area which experienced the
bulk of the reports (Carman). This means that no earthquake
was related to a surge of UFO reports, even through the ac-
tion of a moveable strain field, with the exception of one
event that is more than likely a coincidence. Secondly,
these were all low-intensity events, and highly-localized,
so that they were not felt beyond a small radius.
Given the large number of UFO reports in the province, it
is not conceivable that they are related to seismic activi-
ty. No statistical study is necessary in this case, since
the lack of seismic events and the contrasting abundance of
UFO data are not conducive toward conditions for analysis.
In Manitoba, there can be no "optimal" temporal or spatial
increment in analogue to the New Madrid area studied by Per-
singer (1983b).
In Map 2, the geographic locations of UFO reports in Man-
itoba have been plotted. These represent more than 150
places where over 500 reports have been made within the
province since 1900 (Rutkowski, 1983). Map 3 exhibits the
rural population distribution for Manitoba (Weir, 1960). It
is immediately obvious that, in general, the distribution of
- 33 -
Map 2
MANITOBA
UFO Report Distribution
Compiled and
Plotted by
C. Rutkowski (1983)
- -
Map 3
MANITOBA
RURAL POPULATION
- -
UFO reports within the province is similar, if not identi-
cal, to the distribution of population. This is because the
reporting of UFOs is through a human system. Since UFOs are
reported by people, there will be a strong relationship be-
tween the two elements.
What do these maps tell us about the occurrence of UFOs
in Manitoba? Since there are very few populated areas in
Manitoba north of 52 degrees latitude, the lack of UFO re-
ports means only that few people are present to observe UFOs
if and when they appear. In fact, there seems more evidence
for a UFO-demographic relationship than a UFO-geologic one.
Determining a relationship between faults and/or seismic
events and UFO reports appears geographically untenable, at
least in Manitoba.
We see, then, that UFO reports do not necessarily indi-
cate seismic activity (this is, in fact, stated in the TST).
In the TST, it is even possible that UFOs may be associated
with unknown or undiscovered faults in the Earth's crust. In
considering this possibility, a map of the faults in Manito-
ba needs to be examined as well.
Map 4 is a representation of major geologic fault systems
in the province, showing that with the exception of two
faults in the Whiteshell area, all are well over 200 km from
the bulk of UFO report sites (Manitoba Mineral Resources Di-
vision, 1979).
- 34 -
From 70744...@CompuServe.COM Sun May 15 15:32:48 1994
Return-Path: <70744...@CompuServe.COM>
Received: from arl-img-2.compuserve.com by canopus.CC.UManitoba.CA
(4.1/25-eef) id AA20883; Sun, 15 May 94 15:32:43 CDT
Received: from localhost by arl-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.4/5.940406sam)
id QAA21781; Sun, 15 May 1994 16:32:43 -0400
Date: 15 May 94 16:27:50 EDT
From: David Thacker <70744...@CompuServe.COM>
To: Chris Rutkowski <rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: TST Paper part 2/2
Message-Id: <940515202750_70...@CompuServe.COM>
Status: OR
Map 4
MANITOBA
Geologic Faults
Compiled and
Plotted by
C. Rutkowski (1983)
Adapted from
Manitoba Mineral Resources
Division. Geologic Map of
Manitoba, Map 79-2. (1979)
- -
In an early TST study (Persinger and Lafreniere, 1977),
UFO report numbers were compared with "gravity anomalies",
showing a reported correlation. Map 5 gives the relative
intensities of gravity anomalies in the province. There are
relative gravity highs in the densely-populated prairies,
with large low anomalies in the extreme north and west parts
of the province (Davies et al., 1962).
It is apparent that there is a poor geographic relation-
ship between faults and UFO report areas in Manitoba. This
must mean, then, that there exist undiscovered faults in the
UFO report areas, according to the TST. This is permissible
in the TST, since it is the strain field which is the pro-
duction mechanism for luminous phenomena. It has been pro-
posed that these luminous ball-like UFOs may be earthquake
lights associated with very small, local seismic events,
with a magnitude less than 2 and perhaps even less than 1 on
the Richter scale (Simon, 1983). Since there is always some
amount of subsidence, release and buildup of small strains
within the Earth's crust, the TST might be broadly embraced
to explain all UFO phenomena. Not only could all luminous
lights be explained by strain-related EM emission, but also
all close-encounters where witnesses report bizarre experi-
ences. This is so because EM emission has been shown to be
capable of affecting the human brain, causing hallucina-
tions. It appears that, at face value, the TST can be used
to explain a phenomenon with a wide variety of characteris-
tics.
- 35 -
Map 5
MANITOBA
Gravity Anomalies
Compiled and
Plotted by
C. Rutkowski (1983)
- -
But why, then, if the strain produces UFO reports, is
there not a more direct relationship between earthquakes and
UFOs? Why would there not be a flurry of reports during se-
ismic activity in the area near the epicentre?
4.3 EARTHQUAKE LIGHTS AND DILATANCY HYPOTHESES
The dilatancy model of strain precursors explains that it
is the movement of water into microcracks within a strained
area that causes dilation. Rikitake (1975) suggests it is
even possible to calculate the size of the dilated area as
crustal deformation. The formula for calculating this is:
M = 1.96 log r + 4.45
where r is the radius measured in kilometres. Therefore, an
(unmeasurable) event with a magnitude of 1 will have a radi-
us of about 17 metres.
r = 10^_B
where _B = (M-4.45)/(1.96)
( a magnitude 4.45 event will have a dilatancy radius of 1
km )
The problem of UFOs being small, "local" earthquake
lights is basic: their differing characteristics. Earth-
quake lights are stationary and of very short duration, be-
- 36 -
ing associated with events at the time of the fracture, and
appear at that time. UFOs, on the other hand, come in a
myriad of colors, move erratically and are not visibly asso-
ciated with any crustal movement.
The TST argues that UFOs move as they do because the
strain field they "belong to" moves in the same manner. How-
ever, since UFOs have been reported to move with great
speed, one wonders if a strain field could move with such
velocity. Even fracture propagations (the earthquake mecha-
nism) often take several days to travel short distances.
TST proponents believe that the strain field could, in
fact, react to geophysical processes including lunar tidal
effects and geomagnetic field changes. These reactions could
provide a moving force for the strain field, according to
corollaries of the TST. The exact mechanism is not proposed,
although it is assumed that it involves crustal movement as-
socited with gravitic and magnetic attraction. In effect,
the ground beneath a UFO is said to be affected (probably
dilated) and as the strain field reacts, the dilation
shifts, carrying the UFO with it. These microdilatory ef-
fects are essentially too small to detect (and, in fact,
there are no reported cases in geophysical literature), so
that the only evidence we could have for their existence
would be a visible UFO.
- 37 -
4.4 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
While it is true that there have been precursory dila-
tions associated with shallow earthquakes, a major factor
for consideration is the focal depth of the events. One
would expect, naturally, that shallow earthquakes would show
more precursory crustal deformation than deep events. One
indication is the fact that at depths below 200 km, the na-
ture of the earthquake focal mechanism itself is modified,
so that dilation cannot easily occur (Kasahara, 1981).
If in fact luminous effects caused by emissions are pro-
duced by strain, then their association with deep-focus
events would be very puzzling. Since attenuation of electro-
magnetic waves through rock is often of the order of only a
few metres, it is difficult to explain how emissions within
a strained area could reach the surface and produce detecta-
ble effects.
- 38
Chapter V
OTHER TST-RELATED THEORIES
5.1 VESTIGIA
A group whose work supports that of Persinger and paral-
lels his research on the TST is Vestigia, a group of indi-
viduals who have conducted independent studies into so-
called "spook lights".{6} The group has often set up field
experiments in areas frequented by these lights, using
equipment such as geiger counters, methane detectors, infra-
red sensors and radio detection equipment with several thou-
sand feet of wire attached to an amplifier and an oscillo-
scope. They have reported the detection of radio emission of
40 kHz during the observation of yellowish-white lights
along railroad tracks in areas with small faults or alluvial
soils (Wagner et al., 1978).
Their theory for the phenomenon is nearly identical to
the TST:
"When quartz-bearing rock is subjected to stress...an
immense electrostatic charge is generated. At the
maximum periods of lunar tidal stresses (sic) this
__________
{6} It appears that Persinger has drawn upon Vestigia's re-
sults and theories to some degree.
- 39 -
effect would be more pronounced. If sufficient
electrical fields are created close to the surface, a
portion of the spherical field would be above the
surface. In a region where either faults or loose-
packed alluvial soils are present, radon gas would be
emitted into the air at the surface. This radioactive
gas would create partially "ionized" pockets of air
which would be enhanced by the highly electrified
fields in the region. This would, in turn, start a
low-energy plasma of small size which would be pre-
dominantly near railroad tracks or power lines that
traverse the terrain." (Wagner et al., 1978)
The Vestigia group goes on to describe details such as
colors of the lights, the effect of changes in atmospheric
and the effect on humans in the proximity.
Although the theory is well-described, little in the way
of supporting physical mechanisms is given, showing more
similarity with the TST. Vestigia has produced photographs
of the lights and records of the instrumental detection of
the events, as well as numerous witnesses' accounts. In sup-
port of Vestigia, it should be noted that although many
"spook lights" have been reported around the world, no sci-
entific investigation of them has been conducted by the sci-
entific community. Vestigia has gone to considerable length
to document the phenomenon, and has produced a theory which
- 40 -
is consistent with the observations, although a quantitative
assessment is certainly in order. The theory is subject to
considerable constraints.
Once again, it would be desireable to know the relation-
ship between stress and energy production, and the energy
requirements involved. Also, one would have to question the
observations themselves, since Vestigia has described in one
instance a "spook light" that was visible and detectable
from only one direction (Wiedemann, 1977). The TST would
here invoke the influence of EM emission upon the human
brain to explain the appearance of a UFO to one person and
not another, but the Vestigia theory leaves this question
unanswered, although it has commented on animal precursors
of earthquakes (Wagner et al., 1978).
The Vestigia group has also expressed its view that
electrostatic fields of the order of 10^5 V m^-1 could be gen-
erated in quartz-bearing rock under stress. They include
piezoelectricity in their approach as well, and describe a
relationship between earthquakes and "spook lights". Specif-
ically, they found that 80% of recorded "spook lights" cor-
respond to "regions of extensive earthquake activity". But
they realized that the other 20% would constitute a problem.
They were encouraged, however, by the finding that a light
in South Carolina not on a previously recognized fault was
in fact on a fault discovered after the light's documenta-
tion.
- 41 -
In April of 1978, some of Vestigia's consultants present-
ed a paper to the American Geophysical Union meeting on
"earth stress lights", and as a result of their studies, an-
nounced: "we now [have] introduced to the scientific commu-
nity a realistic explanation for luminous occurrences in
earthquake regions" (Wagner and Visvanathan, 1978).
As well, based on their "spook light" research and proba-
bly also due to the success of a light "predicting" a fault,
Vestigia commented that:
"Possibly within the next 10 years, THERE WILL BE AN
EARTHQUAKE in Florida, S.E. Texas and S.E. Maryland."
(Wagner et al., 1978)
(emphasis in original)
Vestigia's theory is actually preferable to the TST in
some ways because it focusses on only one type of UFO, the
"spook light", which has its own individual characteristics.
Statistical studies involving the TST have used raw UFO data
from UFO report catalogues, incorporating a wide variety of
characteristics, and hence may involve several different
phenomena.
- 42 -
5.2 EARTH LIGHTS
Another group of researchers doing independent research
into strain-related luminous phenomena are involved in the
Dragon Project. Involved are: Don Robins, an inorganic che-
mist; Paul Devereux, an archaeological researcher and writer
about UFOs; and Paul McCartney, a geochemist. The Dragon
Project cites the work of Persinger and Brady{7} in support of
their own research into the relationship between UFOs and
geophysical phenomena. But these two groups of researchers
have rather marked distinctions.
Firstly, the Dragon Project is primarily interested in
the petroforms of England, including Stonehenge, Rollright
and other megalithic sites (Devereux and Forrest, 1982).
The researchers believe that they have found that "stone
circles...emit anomalously high and anomalously low lev-
els... of radiation. (Robins, 1982)" Combined with this ra-
diation is also ultrasound production, detected at some
sites (Robins, 1982). What has been found is that certain
sites give geiger counter readings at levels above the nor-
mal background, while at some sites, the background is unus-
ually low. The Dragon Project has put forth the concept of
"Earth energy", which is more mystical than mechanical. This
"Earth energy" is reportedly detected by dowsers and psy-
chics, and permeates all things in analogy to the famous
__________
{7} Specifically, Persinger and Lafreniere (1977) and Brady et
al (unpub).
- 43 -
"ether" of the ancient philosophers (Robins, 1982).
One of the proponents of this energy, Devereux (1982),
combined the concept of radiation emission with that of
UFOs. Devereux and his associates carried out several ex-
periments (all with unpublished details and results) in
which they crushed a specimen of rock and observed lights
produced during the process (Devereux et al., 1983). In
this way, they were able to "confirm" the results of Brady
et al (unpub).
Frequently referring to Persinger's research, Devereux
(1982) found "the best UFO-geology correlations yet pub-
lished". He found that many UFO sightings in Wales occurred
within a few hundred metres of a fault. But he makes a
quantum leap from faults to earthquake lights at one point
(citing Derr (1977)), and links the TST with his research
(Devereux, 1982).
Devereux, however, makes one distinction in that he disa-
grees that piezoelectricity is the causative mechanism for
UFOs. He suggests triboluminescence "as a more likely candi-
date" (Devereux et al., 1983). The two processes are differ-
ent mechanisms, but both produce luminous phenomena in min-
erals. Piezoelectricity is created when certain crystals are
subjected to pressure, while triboluminescence is the effect
caused by mechanical friction upon two mineral surfaces.
- 44 -
Devereux, although claiming to have duplicated Brady's
experiments, describes a photograph of "triboluminescence in
rock crystal...after it has been subjected to friction (Dev-
ereux et al., 1983)." But Brady (Brady et al., unpub) sub-
jected his granitic core sample to pressure, a different
mechanism. There appears to be a lack of distinction here,
and a probable contributing factor to this confusion is the
fact that the experimental results of neither Brady nor Dev-
ereux have been formally published.
A further similarity between the TST and EL (Earth
Lights) theories is that the latter includes the possibility
that the energy that "creates" the EL may effect the human
brain. In this regard, the EL theory claims that psychics or
"sensitives" might be more apt to perceive these energies
than other people (Persinger, 1975). Although no actual
mechanism is proposed, the implication is that the "Earth
energy" acts upon the brain in a method in agreement with
that proposed by the TST.
It is clear, then, that the EL theory parallels the TST
in many ways. A significant difference is that the EL theo-
ry restricts "Earth energy" effects upon human systems to
distances generally less than 1 km, whereas the TST involves
faults and/or events up to 200 km away from an observer.
- 45 -
Chapter VI
CONCLUSIONS
The TST (Tectonic Strain Theory) is a theory with minimal
supportive evidence, but with wide appeal for individuals
wishing to explain a persistent phenomenon in terms of known
mechanisms. While elements of the TST appear to include doc-
umented geophysical phenomena, the main thrust of the theory
hinges on its unproved relationship with a controversial
phenomena, namely UFOs. For a theory of its kind, the TST
has received a large amount of publicity and a generally un-
contested entrance into published scientific literature.
This situation has resulted in an apparent acceptance of the
theory's "principles" without proper scientific comment.
Although statistics on UFO reports have been kept for
nearly forty years (and much earlier, if we include pre-1947
reports), the data are without many redeeming features. Data
sources such as UFOCAT and MANUFOCAT contain many reports
with poor investigation or insufficient information due to
the methods used in obtaining the data. For example, many
entries in UFOCAT are from published articles or newspaper
clippings, and not necessarily from an investigator's re-
port. Many reports are therefore anecdotal rather than fac-
tual (Rutkowski, 1983).
- 46 -
Even in the case of entries copied from investigators'
files, the problem of consistency remains. The quality of
investigative effort is expected to vary, since essentially
anyone could call his- or herself an "investigator", regard-
less of qualifications, and submit reports for entering into
the file. Although this is not as true today, with efforts
for standardization in preparation, the lack of training
could easily account for judgement errors in early case
files. Admittedly, this was not always so; the files contain
many greatly-detailed reports from good investigators (in-
cluding law enforcement officials) (Hendry, 1979).
They may, in fact, have been good reason for lower-stan-
dard investigations. Most UFO investigators and researchers
are not funded for their efforts, so lack of travelling ex-
penses might preclude many investigations. Some might lack
the experience to identify high-flying aircraft and their
descriptions. Others might include their own personal bias
in their report (e.g. by asking a witness: "How big was the
craft?" rather than "What was the angular size of the ob-
ject?"). Still others might just make a judgement error.
All of these problems with UFO data are found in all UFO
report listings. It is details such as these which have led
one UFO researcher to comment that UFOCAT is not useable for
statistical studies of UFO data because of inherent flaws in
its design (Hendry, 1979). Yet, the TST uses several UFO
- 47 -
data sources for statistical correlative studies, with very
vaguely-defined parameters.
There is no question that some of the geophysical pro-
cesses invoked in the TST are sound. Rock undergoing strain
can indeed give off EM radiation that can be detected by
sensors near the event. Whether this EM emission is scale
invariant is an entirely different matter.{8} There is also no
question that earthquake lights exist, and that their mecha-
nism is not fully understood. The TST suggests that UFOs are
essentially the same phenomenon, and it has been proposed
(in a questionable manner) that the statistical correla-
tion between UFOs and earthquakes is supportive of the theo-
ry (Persinger, 1983a, 1983b, 1983c, 1983d).
But the existence of UFOs in aseismic areas seems to con-
tradict this correlation. To suggest that the seismic activ-
ity exists in these areas with magnitudes less than 2 (or
even 1) on the Richter scale is perhaps grasping for straws.
Certainly, activity in the range of magnitude 1 can occur
frequently in many areas, so that the observation of UFOs
should be at a constant value. While it is true that UFO re-
ports have a "background" level, this is more the case of
reporting rather than the reports themselves as the main
contributors.
{8} Brady (1973, 1974), has given evidence to show that strain
itself may be scale invariant. Whether this might include
EM emissions is not clear.
- 48 -
Also, there are different characteristics of earthquake
lights and UFOs that need to be considered. Earthquake
lights are reported as generally stationary hemispheres of
white light, in contact with the ground. They are 20 to 200
metres in diameter, and follow an earthquake, with a dura-
tion of 10 to 100 seconds. They do not occur at an epicen-
ter, but in areas around it at varying radii (10 to 50 km),
and frequently on mountaintops (Derr, 1973, 1977; Hedervari,
1982). UFOs, by definition, are seen in the air, and are
observed in areas where no earthquake is felt. They are most
often described as spherical, with the next most frequent
shapes reported being point sources, discs and cigars.
There are two main distributions of sizes: <1 metre, and >4
metres. Red, white and orange, in that order, are the most
frequently- reported colors of UFOs. The duration of a UFO
sighting ranges between a few seconds up to an hour or more
(Hendry, 1979; Rutkowski, 1983).
A comparison of the characteristics of the two phenomena
shows they do differ significantly and that any attempt to
reconcile these differences needs to properly address the
dissimilar features.
In an early study where a form of the TST was first de-
scribed, not only were geophysical events correlated with
UFOs, but also unusual objects falling from the sky, EM ef-
fects, unusual human talents, telekinetic events and ghost
sightings. In the early study, it was said that:
- 49 -
"Transient and unusual phenomena should occur in areas
where tectonic stress is accumulating. Episodes may
not necessarily involve areas of well-known seismici-
ty, since these areas may only reflect structural
weakness along the stress axis." (Persinger and Lafre-
niere, 1977)
It was implied that most unusual phenomena were related to
geophysical processes.
Interestingly, Devereux (1982), himself a proponent of a
form of the TST, asks of Persinger's research:
"Why attempt to explain other, possibly more complex
and perhaps unrelated mechanisms under the same con-
ceptual umbrella?...This approach to the UFO problem
cannot sensibly be conducted over the entire USA in
any case - the area is so vast that untenable numbers
of UFO events would have to be involved. And how would
one cope with the detailed geological data of such a
continental area, even if it is available?" (Devereux,
1982)
(emphasis in original)
He concludes:
"...despite all the scientific trappings [the] work
displays, the conclusions drawn owe as much to intui-
tion as to the computer..."
- 50 -
This represents perhaps the most succinct published crit-
icism of the TST on record.
One of the few other criticisms of the TST, this time di-
rected at Devereux et al. (1983), was by Campbell (1983). He
pointed out that "since Britain is criss-crossed with geo-
logical faults, it is not surprising that 'many reports of
UFO sightings come from areas close' to them." He cautioned
that Devereux "should be as concerned with the UFO data as
[he is] with geology," since Persinger's data base was
flawed, and that "the geological jargon conceals a poverty
of hypotheses."
Devereux quickly countered by saying that surface fault-
ing does not cover Britain as Campbell implies, and that he
did not think that the UFO/fault relationship was coinci-
dence. He also came to Persinger's defense by calling his
work "meticulous", and saying that:
"If [UFOs are] all hoaxes or hallucinations, then we
had better start wondering why figments of the imagi-
nation correlate with faulting."(Devereux, 1983)
Of course, the problem is not that UFOs are hoaxes or hallu-
cinations (few are), but that the majority are misidentifi-
cations.
In the end, the major problem is that of the data itself.
We know that seismic activity exists, and that earthquake
- 51 -
lights exist, and that UFO reports exist. But the data for
these phenomena is taken from a variety of sources and cov-
ers a variety of disciplines.
The handling of data has always been a problem, and sev-
eral statisticians have cautioned against its misinterpreta-
tion.
"When...probabilistic considerations seem to be called
for, we now feel more hesitant about postulating sim-
ple parametric distributions. We are not now so sure
that there is a likelihood function, or a set of suf-
ficient statistics, or an exact test of signifi-
cance...Thus we view data with greater respect, with
greater curiosity about what is there; and we have
less confidence that we know just what questions
should be answered and in what way." (Anscombe,1982)
While the TST is very appealing in its description of UFO
phenomena in terms of "terrestrial", rather than "extrater-
restrial" mechanisms, it provides little in the way of sup-
portive evidence that its mechanism actually exists. As a
hypothesis, it cannot be discounted; only the evidence in
its support can be evaluated as either favorable or not fav-
orable. But using one poorly-understood phenomenon to ex-
plain another using an unknown mechanism is perhaps too much
to expect at this point (Rutkowski, 1984).{9}
__________
{9} The text of this paper is given in the Appendix.
- 52 -
It is possible that the TST may explain some aspects of
the UFO phenomenon, but the theory needs a great deal of re-
fining and rethinking before it can be applied in general to
the phenomena it incorporates.
- 53 -
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anscombe, F.J. (1982) "How Much to Look at the Data"
Utilitas Mathematica, 21A, 23-28.
Barry, J. Dale. (1968) "Laboratory Ball Lightning". Journal
of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics, 30, 313-317.
Barsukov, O.M. (1979) "A Possible Cause of the Electrical
Precursors of Earthquakes". Izvestiya, Academy of
Sciences of the USSR, Earth Physics, 15(8), 588-591.
Bath, M. (1973) Introduction to Seismology. John Wiley &
Sons, Toronto.
Beal, J.B. (1974) "How Fields Affect Us". Fields Within
Fields Within Fields..., 14, 46-57.
Becker, R.O. (1969) "The Effect of Magnetic Fields Upon the
Central Nervous System". In: Biological Effects of
Magnetic Fields, V.2, M.F. Barnothy, ed., Plenum Press,
NY, 207-214.
Bishop, J.R. (1981) "Piezoelectric Effects in Quartz-Rich
Rocks". Tectonophysics, 77, 297-321.
Brady, B.T. (1974) "Theory of Earthquakes". Pure and
Applied Geophysics, 112, 701-725.
Brady, B.T., Duvall, W.I. and Horino, F.G. (1973) "An
Experimental Determination of the True Uniaxial Stress-
Strain Behavior of Brittle Rock". Rock Mechanics, 5,
107-120.
Brady, B.T., Rowell, G.A. and Yoder, L.P. (unpub) "Physical
Precursors of Rock Failure: A Laboratory Investigation".
(unpublished manuscript)
Brown, L. and Reilinger, R. (1983) "Crustal Movement".
Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, 21(3), 553-559.
Bullen, R.E. (1953) "On Strain Energy and Strength in the
Earth's Upper Mantle". Transactions of the American
Geophysical Union, 34(1), 107-109.
Bullen, K.E. (1955) "On the Size of the Strained Region
Prior to an Extreme Earthquake". Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, 45, 43-46.
- 54 -
Bullen, K.E. (1963) Introduction to the Theory of
Seismology. Cambridge University Press, NY.
Buskirk, R.E., Frohlich, C. and Latham, G.V. (1981) "Unusual
Animal Behavior Before Earthquakes: a Review of Possible
Sensory Mechanisms". Reviews of Geophysics and Space
Physics, 19(2), 247-270.
Cahill, D.F. (1983) "A Suggested Limit for Population
Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation". Health Physics,
45(1), 109-126.
Campbell, S. (1983) "UFO Data". New Scientist, (15
December), 799.
Charman, W.N. (1979) "Ball Lightning". Physics Reports,
54(4), 261-306.
Davies, J.F., Bannatyne, B.B., Barry, G.S. and McCabe, H.R.
(1962) Geology and Mineral Resources of Manitoba.
Manitoba Department of Mines and Natural Resources, Mines
Branch, Winnipeg.
Demin, V.M., Sobolev, G.A., Los', V.F. and Maybuk, Yu.Ya.
(1981) "Nature of Mechanoelectric Radiation From Ore
Bodies". Doklady, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth
Science Section, 260, 9-11.
Derr, J.S. (1973) "Earthquake Lights: a Review of
Observations and Present Theories". Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, 63(6), 2177-2187.
Derr, J.S. (1977) "Earthquake Lights". Earthquake
Information Bulletin, 9(3), 18-21.
Devereux, P. (1982) Earth Lights. Turnstone Press,
Wellingborough, England.
Devereux, P. and Forrest, R. (1982) "Straight Lines on an
Ancient Landscape". New Scientist, (23/30 December),
822-826.
Devereux, P., McCartney, P. and Robins, D. (1983) "Bringing
UFOs Down to Earth". New Scientist, (1 September),
627-630.
Devereux, P. (1983) "UFOs and Faults". New Scientist, (20
October), 217.
Finkelstein, D. and Powell, J. (1970) "Earthquake
Lightning". Nature, 228, 759-760.
- 55 -
Finkelstein, D., Hill, R.D. and Powell, J.R. (1973) "The
Piezoelectric Theory of Earthquake Lightning". Journal
of Geophysical Research, 78(6), 992-993.
Gendzwill, D.J., Horner, R.B. and Hasegawa, H.S. (1982)
"Induced Earthquakes at a Potash Mine Near Saskatoon,
Canada". Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 19(3),
466-475.
Gokhberg, M.B., Gufel'd, I.L., Dobrovol'skiy, I.P. and
Nersesov, I.L. (1983) "Preparation Processes, Indicators
and Precursors of Crustal Earthquakes". Izvestiya,
Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Physics (2),
113-118.
Gohkberg, M.B., Morgunov, V.A. and Aronov, Ye.L. (1980)
"Radiofrequency Radiation During Earthquakes". Doklady,
Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Science Section,
248, 32-35.
Gohkberg, M.B., Morgounov, V.A., Yoshino, T. and Tomizawa,
I. (1982) "Experimental Measurement of Electromagnetic
Emissions Possibly Related to Earthquakes in Japan".
Journal of Geophysical Research, 87(B9), 7824-7828.
Gol'd, R.M., Markov, G.P., Mogila, P.G. and Samokhvalov,
M.A. (1975) "Pulsed Electromagnetic Radiation of Minerals
and Rocks Subjected to Mechanical Loading". Izvestiya,
Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Physics of the Solid
Earth, 11, 468-469.
Haines, R.F. (1980) Observing UFOs. Nelson-Hall, Chicago.
Hedervari, P. (1982) "Luminous Phenomena and Other
Particular Events Before, During and After Earthquakes in
the Carpathian Basin". EOS, 63(51), 1258.
Hendry, A. (1979) The UFO Handbook. Doubleday & Co., Garden
City, NY.
Horner, R.B., and Hasegawa, H.S. (1978) "The Seismotectonics
of Southern Saskatchewan". Canadian Journal of Earth
Sciences, 15, 1341-1355.
Jacobs, D.M. (1976) The UFO Controversy in America. Signet,
NY.
Kasahara, K. (1981) Earthquake Mechanics. Cambridge
University Press, NY.
King, Chi-Yu (1983) "Electromagnetic Emissions Before
Earthquakes". Nature, 301, 377.
- 56 -
Klass, P.J. (1966) "Plasma Theory May Explain Many UFOs".
Aviation Week and Space Technology, 85, 45-61.
Kuksenko, V.S., Kil'keyev, R.Sh. and Miroshnichenko, M.I.
(1981) "Interpretation of Electrical Precursors of
Earthquakes". Doklady, Academy of Sciences of the USSR,
Earth Sciences Sections, 260, 19-20.
Lockner, D.A., Johnston, M.J.S. and Byerlee, J.D. (1983) "A
Mechanism to Explain the Generation of Earthquake
Lights". Nature, 302, 28-33.
Manitoba Mineral Resources Division (1979) Geologic Map of
Manitoba, Map 79-2.
Mizutani, H., Ishido, T., Yokokura, T. and Ohnishi, S.
(1976) "Electrokinetic Phenomena Associated With
Earthquakes". Geophysical Research Letters, 3(7),
365-368.
Nitzan, U. (1977) "Electromagnetic Emission Following
Fracture of Quartz-Bearing Rocks". Geophysical Research
Letters, 4(8), 333-336.
Perel'man, M.E. and Khatiashvili, N.G. (1981) "Radio
Emission Accompanying Brittle Fracture of Dielectrics".
Doklady, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Sciences
Sections, 256, 13-15.
Persinger, M.A. (1973) "Possible Cardiac Driving by an
External Rotating Magnetic Field". International Journal
of Biometeorology, 17(3), 263-266.
Persinger, M.A. (1975) "Geophysical Models for
Parapsychological Experiences". Pschoenergetic Systems,
1, 63-74.
Persinger, M.A. (1976) "Transient Geophysical Bases for
Ostensible UFO-Related Phenomena and Associated Verbal
Behavior". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 215-221.
Persinger, M.A. (1979a) "Limitations of Human Verbal
Behavior in the Context of UFO-Related Stimuli". In: UFO
Phenomena and the Behavioral Scientist, R.F. Haines, ed.,
Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, N.J., 164-187.
Persinger, M.A. (1979b) "Possible Infrequent Geophysical
Sources of Close UFO Encounters: Expected Physical and
Behavioral-Biological Effects". In: UFO Phenomena and
the Behavioral Scientist, R.F. Haines, ed., Scarecrow
Press, Metuchen, N.J., 396-433.
- 57 -
Persinger, M.A. (1980a) "Earthquake Activity and Antecedent
UFO Report Numbers". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 50,
Persinger, M.A. (1980b) "New Explanation for Some UFO
Sightings". In: Quirks and Quarks (transcript), Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation, Nov. 8, 1980.
Persinger, M.A. (1981) "Geophysical Variables and Behavior:
III. Prediction of UFO Reports by Geomagnetic abd Seismic
Activity". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 53, 115-122.
Persinger, M.A. (1982) "Geophysical Variables and Behavior:
IV. UFO Reports and Fortean Phenomena: Temporal
Correlations in the Central USA". Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 54, 299-302.
Persinger, M.A. (1983a) "Geophysical Variables and Behavior:
VII. Prediction of Recent European UFO Reports by
Nineteenth-Century Luminosity and Solar-Seismic
Measures". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 56, 91-95.
Persinger, M.A. (1983b) "Geophysical Variables and Human
Behavior: VIII. Specific Prediction of UFO Reports Within
the New Madrid States by Solar-Geomagnetic and Seismic
Measures". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 56, 243-249.
Persinger, M.A. (1983c) "Geophysical Variables and Behavior:
IX. Expected Clinical Consequences of Close Proximity to
UFO-Related Luminosities". Perceptual and Motor Skills,
56, 259-265.
Persinger, M.A. (1983d) "Geophysical Variables and Human
Behavior: XV. Tectonic Strain Luminosities (UFO Reports)
As Predictable But Hidden Events Within Pre-1947 Central
U.S.A.". Perceptual and Motor Skills. 57. 1227-1234.
Persinger. M.A. (1983e) "Religious and Mystical Experiences
As Artifacts of Temporal Lobe Function: A General
Hypothesis". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 1255-1262.
Persinger, M.A. (unpubl) "Tectonogenic Luminosities:
Geomagnetic Variables as Possible Enhancer Conditions for
UFO Reports Preceding Earthtremors Within the New Madrid
States". (unpublished manuscript)
Persinger, M.A. (unpub2) "The Tectonic Strain Theory of
Luminosities (UFO Reports): Determining Optimal Temporal,
Spatial and Intensity Parameters". (unpublished
manuscript)
Persinger, M.A. and Lafreniere, G.F. (1977) Space-Time
Transients and Unusual Events. Nelson-Hall, Chicago.
- 58 -
Reagor, B.G., Stover, C.W. and Algermissen, St.T. (1981)
Seismicity Map of the State of North Dakota. U.S.
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies, Map
MF-1326.
Richter, C.F. (1958) Elementary Seismology. W.H. Freeman &
Co., San Francisco.
Rikitake, T. (1975) "Dilatancy Model and Empirical Formulas
for an Earthquake Area". Pure and Applied Geophysics,
113, 141-147.
Rikitake, T. (1976) Earthquake Prediction. Elsevier, N.Y.
Robins, D. (1982) "The Dragon Project and the Talking
Stones". New Scientist, (21 October), 166-170.
Rocard, Y. (1964) "Actions of a Very Weak Magnetic Gradient:
The Reflex of the Dowser". In: Biological Effects of
Magnetic Fields, V.1, Barnothy , M.F., ed., Plenum Press,
NY, 279-286.
Rutkowski, C. (1983) The UFOROM Datafile: MANUFOCAT.
Ufology Research of Manitoba, Winnipeg.
Rutkowski, C. (1984) "Geophysical Variables and Human
Behavior: Some Criticisms". Perceptual and Motor Skills,
in press.
Sadovskiy, M.A., Sobolev, G.A. and Migunov, N.I. (1979)
"Variations of the Natural Radiowave Emission of the
Earth During a Severe Earthquake in the Carpathians".
Doklady, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Sciences
Section, 244, 4-6.
Sardarov, S.S. (1981) "Empirical Relationship Between
Anomalies That Are Short-Term Predictors of Impending
Earthquakes and Earthquake Parameters". Doklady, Academy
of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Sciences Section, 258,
Saunders, D.R. (1978) The UFOCAT Codebook. Center for UFO
Studies, Evanston, Illinois.
Sheppard, A.R. and Eisenbud, M. (1977) Biological Effects of
Electric and Magnetic Fields of Extremely Low Frequency.
New York University Press, NY.
Simon, C. (1983) "Looking Out for Luminous Phenomena".
Science News, 124, 412.
- 59 -
Sobolev, G.A., Demin, V.M., Los', V.F. and Maybuk, Yu.Ya.
(1980) "Mechanoelectric Emission by Ore Bodies".
Doklady, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Science
Section, 252, 34-35.
Stover, C.W., Reagor, B.G. and Algermissen, S.T. (1981)
Seismicity Map of the State of Minnesota. U.S.
Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies, Map
MF-1323.
Volarovich, M.P., Parkhomenko, E.I. and Sobolev, G.A. (1959)
"Field Investigation of the Piezoelectric Effect in
Quartz-Bearing Rock". Doklady, Academy of Sciences of
the USSR, Earth Science Section, 128, 964-966.
Wagner, W., Hulse, R. and McGrath, J. (1978) "'Spook
Lights'. The Vestigia Update". Vestigia Newsletter,
2(3), 1-7.
Wagner, W.S. and Visvanathan, T.R. (1978) "'Earthquake
Lights': A Potential Aid in Earthquake Forecasting".
EOS, 59(4), 329.
Weir, T.R., ed. (1960) Economic Atlas of Manitoba. Manitoba
Department of Industry and Commerce, Winnipeg.
Wiedemann, C.L. (1977) "Results of the N.J. 'Spook Light'
Study". Vestigia Newsletter, 1(2), 1-4.
Wilson, H.D.B. and Brisbin, W.C. (1962) "Tectonics of the
Canadian Shield in Northern Manitoba". Royal Society of
Canada, Special Publications, no.4, 60-75.
Wyss, M. (1983) "Earthquake Prediction". Reviews of
Geophysics and Space Physics, 21(6), 1291-1298.
Yoshikawa, S. and Mogi, K. (1981) "A New Method for
Estimation of the Crustal Stress From Cored Rock Samples:
Laboratory Study in the Case of Uniaxial Compression".
Tectonophysics, 74, 323-339.
- 60 -
Appendix A
- 61 -
Geophysical Variables and Human Behavior: Some Criticisms
Through statistical studies of geophysical phenomena and UFO
(Unidentified Flying Object) reports, it has been suggested that
some reports of UFOs might reasonably be understood on the basis
of natural phenomena produced by a geophysical process involving
tectonic strain (Persinger, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1983a, 1983b,
1983c). This theory, hereafter referred to as the TST (Tectonic
Strain Theory) of UFOs, suggests that plasma-like luminosities can
be naturally created and that these can be reported as UFOs. The
TST is laudable in that it attempts to explain the persistent
reports of UFOs in terms of "terrestrial" rather than
"extraterrestrial" causes.
The theory incorporates luminous effects that are a great distance
from the source and temporarily displaced. This theory also
contends that the luminous effects are related to geophysical
variables such as the solar wind and geomagnetism. The geophysical
basis for such a theory, however, is not strong and is extremely
dependent upon recent reports of luminous effects produced by
strain on rock during fracture tests (Demin et al., 1981).3 These
effects are highly localized, of short duration and have not been
demonstrated to be related to other geophysical phenomena such as
the solar wind. Despite this, statistical studies using seismic,
solar and UFO data as variables have been performed, and it has
been proposed that UFO report numbers vary with the seismic and
solar data (Persinger, 1981). These correlations are suggested to
be consonant with the TST.
There are several problems with obtaining adequate data to test
the theory which are worth noting. The statistical studies which
suggest a
...3
correlation between UFO report numbers and geophysical phenomena
show the best relationships between the variables only when the
optimal /\ t and /\ s (increments of time and space) are used. In
particular, it has been proposed that the geophysical cause for
UFOs in the TST is a strain field which may extend hundreds of
kilometers between the locations of the perceived UFOs and
earthquake epicenters. Statistical correlations use these UFO
report numbers and earthquake numbers to define relationships
between the variables, often including a time lag of up to a year.
Essentially, an observed UFO at point p may be the result of a
strain field and may be related to an earthquake at point q, two
hundred kilometers distant and several months previous to the time
of observation. This is intuitively unsatisfying, since if two
variables can occur at any time within a year of observation and
anywhere within a large radius, it would be difficult to determine
a time-geography variable in order to arrange a correlation study.
Countless other variables may be present or occur within the
strain field's perimeter, and these may influence any correlated
effects.
It should be noted that a rare geophysical phenomenon called
earthquake lighting displays some reported UFO characteristics
such as luminous bodies of light (Derr, 1973). However, earthquake
lightning appears generally within a short time before or after an
earthquake, so it has a more readily-apparent cause. In addition,
there exist several theories as to the origin of earthquake
lightning, encompassing geological processes familiar to
geophysicists (Finkelstein, et al., 1973). More serious problems
concern the actual selection of UFO data. The studies make use of
UFO report numbers from several sources with
...4
varying degrees of credibility (e.g., Fate magazine and UFOCAT).
In all cases, there is a great difficulty in trying to establish
whether an object is actually unidentified or merely
misidentified. The two different categories are often within the
same data set in the UFOCAT file, for example. The fact remains
that UFOs are often reported by inexperienced observers, and the
reports are often investigated by inexperienced investigators.
Statistical studies of raw UFO data, including the UFOCAT file,
have shown that about 90% are misidentifications of ordinary
phenomena (Hendry, 1979; Hynek, 1977). It has been stated that the
UFOCAT file cannot be used as a source of data because of inherent
flaws in its design (Hendry, 1979).
The TST is therefore not supported by the statistical studies
involving UFO data. Although geophysical phenomena could account
for some UFO reports, a persuasive covariance has not been
produced. On a more positive side, while the TST may not predict
the presence of plasma-like luminosities, it may say something
about the witnesses who report UFOs. In this regard, it has been
suggested that geophysical luminosities are related to EM
(electromagnetic) radiation, also produced by tectonic strain
(Persinger, 1983c). This EM radiation is thought to be capable of
affecting the human brain (in particular, the temporal lobe) and
creating a variety of effects, including artificial memories. If
the theory can show a relationship between misidentifications of
ordinary phenomena and geophysical effects, perhaps there is,
after all, some interaction between these phenomena and the human
brain, causing individuals to report UFOs.
...5
Care should be taken in further studies of UFO data because their
nature is subjective and collection involves several problems.
Theories such as the TST are quite valuable in their attempt to
explain UFOs from a scientific standpoint. The TST probably could
explain some UFO reports and elements of the total UFO problem,
but the persuasiveness of an empirical scientific argument can be
no better than the acceptability of the data upon which it is
based.
...6
References
Demin, V.M., Sobolev, G.A., Los', V.F., and Maybuk, Yu Ya. (1981).
Nature of Mechanoelectric Radiation From Ore Bodies. Doklady
Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Earth Sciences, 260, 9-11.
Derr, J.S. (1973) Earthquake lights: a review of observations and
present theories. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
63, 2177-2187.
Finkelstein, D., Hill, R.D., & Powell, J.R. (1973) The
piezeolectric theory of earthquake lightning. Journal of
Geophysical Research, 78, 992-993.
Hendry, A. (1979) The UFO handbook. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Hynek, J.A. (1977) The Hynek UFO report. New York, N.Y.: Dell.
Persinger, M.A. (1979) Possible infrequent geophysical sources of
close UFO encounters: expected physical and behavioral-biological
effects. In R.F. Haines (Ed.), UFO phenomena and the behavioral
scientist. Methuen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, pp. 396-433.
Persinger, M.A. (1980) Earthquake activity and antecedent UFO
report numbers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 50, 791-797.
Persinger, M.A. (1981) Geophysical variables and behavior: III.
Prediction of UFO reports by geomagnetic and seismic activity.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 53, 115-122.
Persinger, M.A. (1983a) Geophysical variables and behavior: VII.
Prediction of recent European UFO reports by nineteenth-century
luminosity and solar-seismic variables. Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 56, 91-95.
...7
Persinger, M.A. (1983b) Geophysical variables and human behavior:
VIII. Specific prediction of UFO reports within the New Madrid
states by solar-geomagnetic and seismic measures. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 56, 243-249.
Persinger, M.A. (1983c) Geophysical variables and behavior: IX.
Expected clinical consequences of close proximity to UFO-related
luminosities. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 56, 259-265.
...8
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### 2 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6767 sci.skeptic:72243
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 18 May 1994 18:48:47 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <2rdnuf$m...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
References: <2rbc7d$q...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> <2rbn68$n...@prof.jpl.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
Keywords: earthquakes,UFOs,skeptic
In <2rbn68$n...@prof.jpl.nasa.gov> k...@prof.jpl.nasa.gov (Kevin D. Quitt) writes:
>Has anyone claimed that TS is *the* explanation for UFO's? Somehow, I think
>the only people who say this are those trying to make everyone think that
>"they" claim it. I've never heard any claim except that this phenomenon
>can (not "does") explain some UFO sightings.
Well, in one paper, *all* of the UFO reports from a particular
geographical area were used as data to show a relationship with seismic
events. The data, of course, included many misinterpreted airplanes,
stars, etc. It sure seemed as if *all* UFO sightings were being
"explained" with the theory. Then, a test of the theory was proposed:
find a seismically-inactive area, and it should have few UFOs. The
region chosen was an area more than 500 km from any seismic activity.
It also had a relatively high number of UFOs reported in the area.
The TST was then altered to allow for the seismic energy to "travel" to
the region, underground and through varying strata until it reached the
area. Again, *all* UFO reports (including obvious misidentifications)
were correlated with the events, yielding nice p-values.
If you actually take the time to read the HUGE volume of published
articles on the subject (most of them by only one researcher, citing
his previous research), you *do* get the impression that *all* reports
are being explained.
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### 3 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6898 sci.skeptic:72659
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 22 May 1994 01:31:43 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <2rmclv$o...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
References: <2rbc7d$q...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> <2rbn68$n...@prof.jpl.nasa.gov> <18MAY199...@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> <1994May19....@Princeton.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
Keywords: earthquakes,UFOs,skeptic
>Persinger's sometime collaborator, John Derr, is the one primarily
>responsible for the TS explanatory efforts, which he is careful to limit
>to a certain subset of UFO's, characterized by persistent, often
>dynamic, luminous entities observed and photgraphed in many independent
>instances. His evidence is good, consisting primarily of spatial
>correlations of the luminous events with more-or-less cotemporaneous
>seismic activity.
Correlations are not evidence, I'm afraid. I did note that the data
used was inappropriate, so such correlations themselves are suspect.
While you say that Derr is the primary proponent of the TST
explanations, it is Persinger who has published more than 100 (!)
articles linking everything from ghosts, UFOs, sasquatch and ESP to
geomagnetic indices. He is careful not to claim causality outright, but
alludes to a "mechanism" which links the phenomena. As for the
"subsets of UFOs", no such classification or weeding was done on the
raw UFO data that used Saunders' UFOCAT, for example. It included
nocturnal lights as often as saucers in its list. This, despite the
fact that Allan Hendry advised *against* using the UFOCAT data in
statistical studies because of flaws in its design. In other words, who
cares what correlations came out of it? GIGO!
>Persinger concentrates most of his work (in this general area) on
>geomagnetic field fluctuations, which he believes do affect humans in
>various ways, to "explain" certain subtle and not so subtle phenomena,
>including precognitive perceptions, apparitions, epileptic seizure
>frequency, and, for all I know, UFO and abduction experiences (as a
>subclass of apparitions and hallucinations.) He does have an expansive
>view, but hardly claims to explain all things paranormal. What he does
>claim is that the geomagnetic flux has a very generalized, albeit weak,
>influence on temporal lobe function (as I recall), that translates into
>or is detectable through certain subtle effects, including some classified
>as paranormal.
Define "explain all things paranormal." In his various papers, he's
"correlated" ESP accounts, ghosts, poltergeists and abduction
experiences. This seems to suggest he's trying to explain them, don't
you think?
His claim that there is an EM effect on the temporal lobe is a theory,
that's all. We know that EM radiation does affect the brain, but its
exact mechanism is uncertain. To claim that abduction experiences have
been duplicated exactly (as he is reported to have done recently) is a
bit much. It might be very useful to have independent researchers try
to duplicate his results. Maybe a CSICOP intitiative ...
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### 4 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6899 sci.skeptic:72660
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 22 May 1994 01:39:31 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <2rmd4j$o...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
References: <2rbc7d$q...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> <2rbn68$n...@prof.jpl.nasa.gov> <18MAY199...@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> <1994May19....@princeton.edu> <2rj4sl$o...@swift.rand.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
Keywords: earthquakes,UFOs,skeptic
In <2rj4sl$o...@swift.rand.org> thom...@swift.rand.org (Pamela Thompson) writes:
>>Persinger concentrates most of his work (in this general area) on
>>geomagnetic field fluctuations, which he believes do affect humans in
>>various ways, to "explain" certain subtle and not so subtle phenomena,
>>including precognitive perceptions, apparitions, epileptic seizure
>>frequency, and, for all I know, UFO and abduction experiences (as a
>>claim is that the geomagnetic flux has a very generalized, albeit weak,
>>influence on temporal lobe function (as I recall), that translates into
>>or is detectable through certain subtle effects, including some classified
>>as paranormal.
>Has anyone ever done a study to see if there are increased "paranormal"
>incidents after significant earthquakes? (A recent 6.7 event comes to
>mind.)
Very good question.
It would seem logical that the release of such an amount of energy
would have manifested as an increase in UFOs or psychic phenomena, if
it was true. Since there was no such increase in UFOs (as noted by
MUFON reps and media outlets) before the event or during the event, I
would say that it was perhaps absent.
I inquired about earthquake lights during the LA quake, BTW, but there
were only a handful of vague and possibly misinterpreted reports of
"sparks" and "lights." Again, one would think that there would have
been more evidence of ELs.
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### 5 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6901
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 22 May 1994 02:14:37 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <2rmf6d$p...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
References: <18MAY199...@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> <1994May19....@Princeton.EDU> <20MAY199...@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> <1994May20.1...@Princeton.EDU> <Ja2udN6....@delphi.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
In <Ja2udN6....@delphi.com> Jerry Hubbell <hubb...@delphi.com> writes:
>Roger D. Nelson <rdne...@tucson.Princeton.EDU> writes:
>>One more point. The tectonic stuff is separate from the geomagnetic
>>fluctuation correlations, and it is, or was, the latter that Persinger
>>claimed had bearing on apparitions, esp scores, and the like. Except to
>I was just thinking that if these *weak* geomagnetic effects can truly
>be the cause of hallucinatory tendencies, then why doesn't MRI (Magnetic
>Resonant Imaging) cause a large hallucinatory tendency since the magnetic
>field necessary is several magnitudes larger? Just a thought....
Or what about other weak EM emissions that would outshine geomagnetic
effects, such as microwave transmitters, radios, computer screens ... ?
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### 6 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6925 sci.skeptic:72803
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 23 May 1994 21:23:30 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 108
Message-ID: <2rr6si$m...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
References: <18MAY199...@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> <1994May19....@Princeton.EDU> <2rmclv$o...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> <1994May22.0...@Princeton.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
Keywords: earthquakes,UFOs,skeptic
In <1994May22.0...@Princeton.EDU> rdne...@tucson.Princeton.EDU (Roger D. Nelson) writes:
>[commenting on something I wrote, for which he removed the attribution]
(because it took up too much room in my mail reader's file)
>>>instances. His evidence is good, consisting primarily of spatial
>>>correlations of the luminous events with more-or-less cotemporaneous
>>>seismic activity.
>>Correlations are not evidence, I'm afraid. I did note that the data
>>used was inappropriate, so such correlations themselves are suspect.
>Ah. Correlations are not evidence? I'm afraid you misspoke, or perhaps
>you don't understand whereof you speak. Correlations are evidence.
Correlations are not *incontrovertible evidence*, or *proof* of any
phenomenon.
>As for noting that "the data used was inappropriate," I'm a little
>curious what you mean. I doubt you have read any of Derr's work.
Of course you doubt it. You're being *skeptical*. Too bad you're wrong.
I have an extensive collection of articles on the subject, many of
which were used as references in the major work which started this
cascade of flames.
>>While you say that Derr is the primary proponent of the TST
>>explanations, it is Persinger who has published more than 100 (!)
>>articles linking everything from ghosts, UFOs, sasquatch and ESP to
>>geomagnetic indices. He is careful not to claim causality outright, but
>Jim Lippard already updated me and the thread on this (to me) new thrust
>of Persinger's. Without reading it I can't make any appropriately
>informed judgements, but as I said in response to Jim's comments, it
>sounds as if Persinger has, as it were, suffered from the strain.
... which allows you to forgive him for his earlier work and imply that
only his later work is invalid?
>And, by the way, you are mixing TST and geomagnetic index material in a
>way that makes it sound as if you think they are the same thing. They
>are not. I'm beginning to wonder if you aren't confused by the acronym
>salad that gets thrown together in speculative stuff like Persinger
>writes.
The TST is the Tectonic Strain Theory. It posits an effect of
strain0induced EM radiation and the effect it has on the human body. If
you look at Persinger's other articles, you will find references to
geomagnetic indices, magnetic fields, solar wind and other geophysical
effects. The TS *Theory* seemed to embrace all of these, and more.
You're right in that it is all "speculative stuff," and without much
substance.
I'm not particularly confused by it. I think the *theory* is confused.
>strain theory, supposedly. Dunno if Jim Lippard will read this, but I
>begin to wonder now whether he too is talking about Persinger's temporal
>lobe stuff, and not tectonic strain, as the correlational meat of the
Here, *you're* confused. If you read Persinger's papers carefully,
you'll find some which suggest the strain induced radiation affects the
temporal lobes.
>>"subsets of UFOs", no such classification or weeding was done on the
>>raw UFO data that used Saunders' UFOCAT, for example. It included
>You are apparently referring to something Persinger did. I spoke of
>what Derr did. Don't confuse the two.
Really? Then why did Derr co-author a paper with Persinger which used
exactly that kind of data and spoke about exactly those kinds of
correlations? Check the references. You're nitpicking. I'm suggesting
that the *entire* theory needs re-examination, and is presently without
any solid support. There is presently *no* geophysocal mechanism which
can account for the TST.
>>to duplicate his results. Maybe a CSICOP intitiative ...
>Go for it. But you should know that a CSICOP initiative to do research
>would qualify as an anomalous phenomenon. And in this case, if what you
>are claiming is to be believed, ordinary scientific debunking should
>be adequate.
What is "ordinary scientific debunking?"
Oh, BTW, It's not *me* that's claiming anything. It's Persinger's
claims that are being disputed. In your context, *I'm* the debunker.
I'm the one who is doubting the claims and thinks it isn't what is
cracked up to be.
>(A note on your subsequent post in which you enthusiastically endorse
>pursuing the question whether the frequency of reported wierd
>experiences increases following earthquakes. Jim Lippard, in response
>the same poster, said that's exactly what Persinger has been reporting in
>his recent publications. Makes me wonder if you read the stuff you are
>describing.)
Let's see. Persinger's making all sorts of claims about EM effects on
the temporal lobe. I endorse a suggestion to test his claims by looking
at whether or not paranormal events increased during the LA quake.
Then, you tell me that Persinger's already doing that. Therefore, I'm
not being scientific or really know what I;m talking about.
Does the phrase "independent verification" mean anything to you? How
about "unbiased reporting?" Does it not occur to you that a person with
a controversial claim should not be relied upon for further proof of
the claim?
Nice try, though.
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### 7 ###################################
Xref: netcom.com alt.paranet.ufo:6937 sci.skeptic:72876
From: rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca (Chris Rutkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Tectonic Strain and UFOs (VERY LONG)
Date: 24 May 1994 14:03:17 GMT
Organization: The University of Manitoba
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <2rt1f5$f...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>
References: <2rmclv$o...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> <1994May22.0...@Princeton.EDU> <2rr6si$m...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> <1994May23....@Princeton.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mira.cc.umanitoba.ca
Keywords: earthquakes,UFOs,skeptic
In <1994May23....@Princeton.EDU> rdne...@tucson.Princeton.EDU (Roger D. Nelson) writes:
>>... which allows you to forgive him for his earlier work and imply that
>>only his later work is invalid?
>No. I do not know his earlier work. I do not imply anything about
>its validity. From what you explain later in this post (disentangling
>for me, at last, the TST and geomag notions) it sounds pretty thin.
I would agree that the TST and geomagnetics questions have been
jumbled. Having read 15 years' worth of Persinger's papers (or more?),
I have found he seemed to lean on one or the other as needed.
>>effects. The TS *Theory* seemed to embrace all of these, and more.
>>You're right in that it is all "speculative stuff," and without much
>>substance.
>>Really? Then why did Derr co-author a paper with Persinger which used
>>exactly that kind of data and spoke about exactly those kinds of
>>any solid support. There is presently *no* geophysocal mechanism which
>>can account for the TST.
>Peace, I suspect we agree on more than you think we do.
I concur. Bottom line: Persinger's work is interesting, but needs
further verification and refining before it can be accepted. Trouble
is, he's getting a lot of mileage out of it. Appearances on network TV,
hundreds of publications, etc. That's one reason why I have made some
effort to raise the yellow flag.
Pax.
--
Chris Rutkowski - rut...@cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada
################################### end ###################################
Paul Middler
Kaa Byington <oct...@delphi.com> writes:
> Paul Middler <paul...@deepcove.com> writes:
>> of stress, TST UFOs should be found anywhere. But since the stress is
>> greatest near fault lines, one should expect to see more of them in
>> earthquake zones. Changes in the strain field or local electromagnetic
> We have all kinds of mythology about earthquakes, but we know it's
> mythology. People will say "It's earthquake weather" for instance. But
> I never once heard, living in three different countries that have major
> earthquakes of "earthquake lights." Contrary to the theory that people
> are conditioned to assume that a ball of fire or light "along a fault
> line" is a UFO, anyone who knows anything about earthquakes is
> conditioned to think it's a broken gas main and to get the heck out of
> there.
While the elusive earthquake lights appear to exist, scientists aren't
certain about how they are formed. Here are a few references concerning
electromagnetic emissions and earthquake luminosities:
Derr, John S., "Earthquake Lights: A Review of Observations and Present
Theories", Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 63,
December 1973:2177-2187
D.A. Lockner, M.J.S. Johnston and J.D. Byerlee, "A Mechanism to Explain
the Generation of Earthquake Lights", Nature, Vol. 302,March 3/83:28-33.
N.G. Khatiashvili and M.E. Perel'man, "On the Mechanism of Seismo-
Electromagnetic Phenomena and Their Possible Role in the Electromagnetic
Radiation During Periods of Earthquakes, Foreshocks and Aftershocks",
Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, Vol. 57:169-77, 1989.
R. Monastersky, "Electrical clues precede some tremors", Science News,
Dec 18/93, Vol. 144, n25-26, p407-8
> Oh, one more thing. It's highly possible that California having the
> largest number of UFO sightings, with New York a poor second, is not a
> function of fault lines, but of population.
Population is a factor, but New York state is usually far behind other
less populated states when it comes to reporting UFOs. But that
observation doesn't necessarily support the TST and earthquake light
theories for UFOs.
Paul
--
__.,/) ,. "It is now definitely established that
`(O o) ( O__. a rocket can function in a vacuum. The
=(_o_)= |<____\ Times regrets the error."
|U| | \
Paul.M...@DeepCove.Com -- The New York Times
74064...@CompuServe.Com c. July 1969
Chris Rutkowski
> >> of stress, TST UFOs should be found anywhere. But since the stress is
> >> greatest near fault lines, one should expect to see more of them in
> >> earthquake zones. Changes in the strain field or local electromagnetic
>
>certain about how they are formed. Here are a few references concerning
>electromagnetic emissions and earthquake luminosities:
>Derr, John S., "Earthquake Lights: A Review of Observations and Present
>D.A. Lockner, M.J.S. Johnston and J.D. Byerlee, "A Mechanism to Explain
>N.G. Khatiashvili and M.E. Perel'man, "On the Mechanism of Seismo-
>R. Monastersky, "Electrical clues precede some tremors", Science News,
>Population is a factor, but New York state is usually far behind other
>less populated states when it comes to reporting UFOs. But that
>observation doesn't necessarily support the TST and earthquake light
>theories for UFOs.
Then, of course, there are many critical articles about the TST:
Geophysical Variables and Human Behavior: XVI. Some Criticisms.
PERCEPTUAL AND MOTOR SKILLS, 58, 1984, pp. 840-842.
Geophysical Variables and Behavior: XXXIV. Further Comments.
PERCEPTUAL AND MOTOR SKILLS, 63, 1986, p. 18.
Earthlights, earthquakes, UFOs and the TST; or, Who is Micahel
Persinger and Why is He Saying Those Things About Me?
INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER, 11 (1), 1986, pp. 4-8.
Explaining Everything with the TST: A Response to Paul Devereux.
INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER, 11 (6), 1986, p. 22.
UFOs as Natural Phenomena.
In: Evans, H. & Spencer, J., eds. UFOS 1947-1987: THE 40-YEAR SEARCH
FOR AN EXPLANATION. London: Fortean Tomes, 1987. pp. 273-279.
Geophysical Alternatives.
In: Spencer, J. & Evans, H., eds. PHENOMENON. London: Futura, 1988.
pp. 301-307.
UFOs and Cancer?
[with del Bigio, Marc]
CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 140, June 1, 1989, pp. 1258-1259.
Radiative Processes and the Generation of UFO Experiences.
INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER, 14 (5), 1989, pp. 9-11, 23.
Critical Comments About Earth Lights and the TST.
JOURNAL OF UFO STUDIES (n.s.), 2, 1990, pp. 144-146.
The TST: Down for the Count.
JOURNAL OF UFO STUDIES (n.s.), 2, 1990, pp. 166-168.
..........................................................
Other Critical Works
Mauge, C. "Persinger's Tectonic Strain Theory: Strengths and
Weaknesses". MAGONIA, no. 24, November 1986, pp. 13-18.
Campbell, S. "Lights of Fancy". PROBE REPORT, 3 (4), April, 1983.
Campbell, S. "UFO Data [letter]". NEW SCIENTIST, September 15, 1983, p.
799.
Campbell, S. "UFOS and Faults [letter]". NEW SCIENTIST, October 20,
1983, p. 217.