EMBLA 2000 Mission in Hessdalen: Massimo Teodorani Ph.D.

  • Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Project
In summary, the Italian scientists conducted an expedition to Hessdalen in Norway in 2000 in an attempt to study anomalous luminous phenomena. The phenomenon was not found to be related to UFOs, and the scientists suggest that it is some form of energy contained in luminous balls. Although the project was funded, some scientists believe the phenomena does not exist.
  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,154
1,832
Massimo Teodorani, Ph.D.
Astrophysicist
CNR – Istituto di Radioastronomia
Via Fiorentina – Medicina (BO) – North ITALY
E-mail : mteodorani@ira.cnr.it and mteodorani@libero.it

The EMBLA 2000 Mission in Hessdalen
... ABSTRACT. In August 2000 a team of italian physical scientists, working in collaboration with Norwegian colleagues from Østfold College, carried out an instrumental expedition in Hessdalen (Norway), which was just the first of a series of future scientific missions planned by the joint italian-norwegian EMBLA Project. The expedition was aimed at studying unexplained anomalous atmospheric luminous phenomena occurring in the Hessdalen valley since about 20 years, and it was particularly focussed to the study of the radio spectrum in the UHF, VLF and ELF wavelength ranges. The employed radio spectrum analyzers, which were automatically in function all the time for 25 days, permitted to discover highly anomalous periodic signals which were caracterized by a spike-like and a doppler-like morphology and which were mostly detected in the VLF radio range. Moreover, during the many planned skywatching sessions, it was possible to sight repeatedly luminous atmospheric phenomena of both plasma-like and structured types in varius points of the Hessdalen valley; some photographs were also taken and subsequently analyzed. This paper represents a preliminary report on this mission, in which both radio and visual phenomena are described. Some speculative physical models explaining some aspects of the recorded anomalous radio signals are discussed. [continued]
2000
http://www.nidsci.org/pdf/hessdalen.pdf
2001
http://www.itacomm.net/PH/embla2001/embla2001_e.pdf
2002
http://hessdalen.org/reports/EMBLA_2002_2.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This is just silly.
It is no mystery in Hessdalen; just a combination of local pranksters, reflection of headlights of cars and a couple of Norwegian crackpots not willing to face up with reality.

It's about as real as the Seljord wurm (the reputed Norwegian Nessie)
 
  • #3
Do you have any links? On what do you base this claim?
 
  • #4
It has been debunked thouroughly enough in Norwegian publications.


I don't bother to chase down in painstaking detail every counterclaim which exist against every hare-brained idea which gets concocted by some crackpot.

If anything, that ought to be YOUR job, as Mentor of a SKEPTICISM forum.
So, learn some Norwegian, and find the evidence yourself.

In passing, you shoul read what stands in the conclusion in one of your own pdfs:
It goes somewhat like this (was unable to get it out)
"...the light phenomenon remains highly elusive..variable.and unpredictable"

In plain language, this means:
It is only a wishful fantasy to say that these phenomena exist; only the most devoted enthusiasts can attach any significance to the "results".
 
Last edited:
  • #5
If you wish to make claims then you need to back them up. The anti-crackpot claims can be crackpot themselves.

I find it interesting that debunking claims are often expected to be taken on faith.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Yes, I have noted your over-fondness of anecdotal evidence
(for example, in the case of dowsing)
 
  • #7
I never claimed proof of dowsing.

Why are you changing the subject?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
This is widely perceived as a credible effort. If there is information showing this to be nonsense then please post it. Since I'm not exactly equipped to handle Norwegian papers maybe you could help us out? Why are Norwegian scientists allowing this to go unanswered everywhere else?

Next, if the author and everyone else believes this to be nonsense then the project wouldn't be funded. I don't agree with you interpretation of the author's conclusions.

Finally, I have no personal stake in this or most any claim. You shouldn't assume that I do.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
Whoa Arildno, settle down! This is a scientific investigation which may find actual scientific explanations for what is being observed. Their hope is to either expose it as fraud or find a scientific explanation. Ivan is only posting information about the research, he made no claims one way or another.
 
  • #10
...An automatic measurement station was put up in Hessdalen in August 1998.

According to the scientists, it is now clear that the phenomen is not UFO-related, but are luminous balls containing some form of energy. [continued]
http://www.norwaypost.no/cgi-bin/norwaypost/imaker?id=91261
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
The guy in question is a crackpot engineer who has also "investigated" the claims concerning the Seljord serpent, our national version of Nessie.

He is not to be credited, before he publishes something in a peer-reviewed journal.
 
  • #12
Ivan Seeking said:
...if the author and everyone else believes this to be nonsense then the project wouldn't be funded.

Do you really believe that? I can hardly believe every scientist or "scientist" that has spent money investigating the loch ness monster, bigfoot, etc. actually believes it exists, or that they'll find something.
Sometimes people just like attention. Sorry to take the discussion more offtrack.

But I do agree Ivan, if anyone has some information about the debunking of this project then please post some links. I don't trust anyone here's opinion more than the scientists that did the experiment. (I don't truly trust anyone's knowledge of anything really...)
 
  • #13
Ivan Seeking said:
If you wish to make claims then you need to back them up. The anti-crackpot claims can be crackpot themselves.

I find it interesting that debunking claims are often expected to be taken on faith.
As always, Ivan, I object to your characterization of the scientific method requiring an equivalent responsibility between claims and evaluations of those claims. If what you suggest were true, scientific journals would be ethically bound to launch a research project to verify every claim they received instead of doing what they do now if they get something of questionable merrit: throw it directly into the trash.

There is only one burden of proof here and it lies on the one making the claim that something is happening.
Next, if the author and everyone else believes this to be nonsense then the project wouldn't be funded.
It is widely accepted that people will fund research (and buy penny stocks, spend venture capital, buy lottery tickes, and hit on the hottest girl at the bar) based on Pascal's Wager alone. You've brought up the DOE's cold fusion research before (NASA has also researched crackpot anti-gravity claims). Research of a subject, even by the most reputable organization does not imply at all that that subject has any merrit.

And certainly the fact that the guy doing the research believes in it means nothing whatsoever. Pons, Fleishman, and Joe Newman all believed in their work as well.
He frequently cites the famous Pascal's Wager, named after the 17th-century physicist who renounced science for a life of faith, saying that one should bet on God's existence-because, if you win, you will win everything. This impulse drives governments and companies to invest huge sums in dubious ventures, because one pay-off could be immense, even if a hundred others fail.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_200208/ai_n9105951

Regarding the article in the OP, it contains some very mundane pictures, no control data for the spectrum analyzer, an awful lot of idle speculation, and no conclusions. There just isn't anything there to debunk - it doesn't say anything useful.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Oestfold College is a very low level institution with minimal prestige.

The only scientific establishments in Norway worthy of mention are our 4 universities, in Oslo, Bergen, Trondheim (NTNU) and Tromsø.
 
  • #15
russ_watters said:
As always, Ivan, I object to your characterization of the scientific method requiring an equivalent responsibility between claims and evaluations of those claims. If what you suggest were true, scientific journals would be ethically bound to launch a research project to verify every claim they received instead of doing what they do now if they get something of questionable merrit: throw it directly into the trash.

What are you talking about? "It ain't true because I said so" is not debunking. That is just blowing off steam, and worth nothing.

There is only one burden of proof here and it lies on the one making the claim that something is happening.

People claim to make observations and bring back photographic evidence. What do you want; the dead body of an orb?

It is widely accepted that people will fund research (and buy penny stocks, spend venture capital, buy lottery tickes, and hit on the hottest girl at the bar) based on Pascal's Wager alone

So how does this relate to venture capital? Are they going to sell tickets to watch the lights? :rolleyes:

Regarding the article in the OP, it contains some very mundane pictures, no control data for the spectrum analyzer, an awful lot of idle speculation, and no conclusions. There just isn't anything there to debunk - it doesn't say anything useful.

Oh my... So are the lights there, or not? Are they explained, or not? I suspect that the real answer is that you don't care, which may be why you chose engineering over science.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
arildno said:
The guy in question is a crackpot engineer who has also "investigated" the claims concerning the Seljord serpent, our national version of Nessie.

What he has examined does not make him a crackpot. Did he posit any theories not supported by the science? Did he make claims not supported by the evidence?

He is not to be credited, before he publishes something in a peer-reviewed journal.

We allow anecdotal evidence, which, unless and until published in a peer reviewed journal, this shall remain. That is always true. If we had a published paper, this might be moved to Earth Sciences.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
arildno said:
Oestfold College is a very low level institution with minimal prestige.

The only scientific establishments in Norway worthy of mention are our 4 universities, in Oslo, Bergen, Trondheim (NTNU) and Tromsø.

That may be true.,but again you expect us to all take your word on faith. You can't be bothered with all of that evidence nonsense to support your claims. But either way, the quality of evidence is not determined by the institution of origin. Science has higher standards than personal preference.

If this is all crackpot, then back up your assertions with more than lemons. Personally, and apparently unlike you and Russ, I don't know or could care if this is all credible or not. I have no personal vested interest. It is what it is, but we are interested in the facts and not just clearly biased opinions.

I asked you to post some of those many Norwegian papers debunking all of this. Where are they?
 
Last edited:
  • #18
And let's be clear here. The objections are not related to crackpot theories or claims. We find that presumably the honest investigation of claims [potentially unexplained phenomena] is what inspires the debunkers to revolt.
 
Last edited:
  • #19
Why should I bother to give credit to a moron?
Why should anyone of Norway's scientists do so?

If his claims are valid, then he will have no trouble whatsoever getting them published in the most prestigious journals in the world.

Until that time, I ignore him.
 

FAQ: EMBLA 2000 Mission in Hessdalen: Massimo Teodorani Ph.D.

What is the EMBLA 2000 mission in Hessdalen?

The EMBLA 2000 mission in Hessdalen was a scientific expedition led by Massimo Teodorani Ph.D. in 2000 to study the mysterious light phenomenon known as the "Hessdalen Lights" in Norway.

What were the goals of the EMBLA 2000 mission?

The main goals of the EMBLA 2000 mission were to gather data and evidence on the Hessdalen Lights phenomenon, to analyze the physical and chemical properties of the lights, and to investigate the possible causes of the phenomenon.

Did the EMBLA 2000 mission discover the cause of the Hessdalen Lights?

The EMBLA 2000 mission did not definitively determine the cause of the Hessdalen Lights, but it did provide valuable data and evidence that could help in future studies and investigations.

What were some of the findings of the EMBLA 2000 mission?

The EMBLA 2000 mission recorded various types of light phenomena, including plasma balls, plasma tubes, and light pulses. It also detected unusual radio signals and magnetic field variations in the area. Furthermore, the mission ruled out the possibility of the lights being caused by natural phenomena such as meteors or ball lightning.

What is the significance of the EMBLA 2000 mission in the study of the Hessdalen Lights?

The EMBLA 2000 mission was one of the most comprehensive and scientific investigations of the Hessdalen Lights phenomenon to date. Its findings and data continue to be analyzed and studied by scientists in the field of ufology and atmospheric physics, providing valuable insights and data for future research.

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top