UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2010 > Dec > Dec 17

Re: NBA Star's UFO Not Sky Divers

From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:03:16 -0800
Archived: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:18:24 -0500
Subject: Re: NBA Star's UFO Not Sky Divers

>From: Jim Deardorff<deardorj.nul>
>To: post.nul
>Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:55:22 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: NBA Star's UFO Not Sky Divers
>>News Links - 14-12-10

>>NBA Star's UFO Sighting... Explained

>>Video: Santa Monica Fireball Witness

>That TMZ.com video certainly fails miserably to explain the Dec.
>1st sighting and video of the two Santa Monica witnesses within
>the Examiner.com link, at:


>That's due at least to the following reasons.

>1. Though the Red Bull Air Force sky divers do at times dive
>with a smoke emitter attached to the ankle, the smoke trail
>starts out very narrow -- ankle wide --  while gradually
>widening and continually attenuating 20-40 ft to the rear, as is
>to be expected from any smoke plume.  In contrast, the UFOs'
>sunlit trails start out at full width without widening, and
>remains bright, compact and opaque for a downstream length of 3
>or 4 plume widths, then fade rather abruptly in just 2 or 3
>plume widths. It is even more unreasonable to liken the UFO's
>white plume, illuminated by the light of the sun below the
>horizon, to the light of a flare.

>As pointed out by the Santa Monica video taker, who is turning
>into a competent ufologist, the (so-called) science guy, Bill
>Nye, evidently wasn't aware of the other videos and witnesses
>which prove it was a real event, not a hoax.

>2. As noted also by the Santa Monica video-taker, there was no
>aircraft around at the time out of which anything, such as sky
>divers, could have been dropped.

>3. How high must the two objects have been, if above the coast
>at Santa Monica, for their trails to have been sunlit? Sunset at
>Santa Monica was at 4:45 pm. The video was taken at 5:09 pm.
>According to the NOAA solar position calculator, the sun was
>then 5.1 degrees below the horizon at Santa Monica. So according
>to my arithmetic, this means the objects and their trails were
>at a height of at least 31.8 miles to be in the sun. Hence they
>were not sky divers over Santa Monica. If the objects were
>farther west, they would not need to have been so high, but then
>they would not have been sky divers over Santa Monica. (But
>please check my arithmetic, using 3954 miles as the Earth's
>radius; and the city's latitude of 34.0 degrees, longitude 118.6

Correction. Upon checking with a website such as:


under Section 2 "seeing the sun at night", the correct answer
for the UFOs' minimum height is 15.7 miles (plus or minus a
couple in allowing for uncertainty in longitude and time). This
is still way too high for sky diving.


(a) Red Bull Air Force skydivers are still ruled
out, and

(b) my arithmetic can't be trusted.


Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.