The Tectonic Strain Theory, or TST may be the best explanation going for the phenomena known as spooklights or ghost lights or earthlights, those localized luminous phenomena that seem to be related somehow to local seismic activity. The proponents of the TST, however, are not satisfied to stop there. They believe that their theory can explain all sorts of unusual phenomena, from UFO sightings to alien abductions to religious experiences. This week and next, we will take a look at the claims made by this theory and at criticisms of it.
UFOs vs. spooklights
Technically, spooklights are certainly Unidentified Flying Objects, but for the purposes of this discussion, let's differentiate UFO reports from spooklights. Spooklights are localized luminous phenomena, appearing again and again in the same area. They are short-lived and are usually seen at night. Their movement is usually erratic and they appear out of nowhere and disappear into nothing. They are more often seen at low altitudes, quite often very near the ground.
UFOs, on the other hand, are often metallic-looking, and may be disc-shaped, cigar-shaped, ball-shaped, triangle-shaped, etc. They seem to be under intelligent control and they often follow aircraft. They may be noticed suddenly, but they usually appear by flying into view and they disappear by flying out of view, either into the distance or behind clouds. They may be seen at any time, often in broad daylight, and at any place. They are often seen by multiple witnesses. UFO sightings often consist of several objects flying in formation. They are often seen at very high altitudes by aircraft pilots and crews.
The failure of the piezo-electric effect to explain UFOs
As we saw last week in our examination of spooklights, the Tectonic Strain Theory is a long way from describing a viable process whereby geological stress might create either earthlights or UFOs. Actual laboratory experiments by Brian Brady of the U.S. Bureau of Mines showed that the luminosities produced by the piezo-electric effect in fracturing rock cannot, in Brady's words, account for 'discrete' light forms seen at high altitude. In fact, Brady's experiments, according to Greg Long in Examining the Earthlight Theory, actually seem to eliminate the piezo-electric effect as a source of earthlights or UFOs because the energy output from piezo-electricity is simply too weak to account for anything more than momentary, diffuse glows of light.
According to Chris Rutkowski, a critic of the TST, the theory is supposed to work like this:
- Strain is produced in the earth's crust.
- Strain produces an electromagnetic discharge.
- The electromagnetic discharge produces a luminosity.
- The luminosity is observed as a UFO.
My take on the TST as an explanation for UFO sightings is this:
- 1) Seismic activity is usually centered around a fault. As an earthquake has an epicenter, then seismic activity has a center from which it radiates outward. The centers of strongest seismic activity in the United States are shown on the maps at the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project. If the TST theory is true, then we would expect to see UFO reports centered around these areas, with more reports in areas with greater seismic activity. I have yet to see a study using reliable data that demonstrates that this is so. Chris Rutkowski, in the paper cited above, shows that the province of Manitoba, Canada is the site of frequent UFO reports, yet is an area with very low seismic activity.
- 2), 3) & 4) As was noted before, the piezo-electric effect has been shown to be a poor explanation for any electromagnetically-caused luminosities associated with tectonic stress. The proponents of the TST have yet to demonstrate a viable physical process by which tectonic stress could produce UFOs.
Unreliable data yields unreliable conclusions
The proponents of the TST have produced several correlational studies that they claim demonstrate a strong correlation between earthquakes or releases of tectonic stress and UFO reports. However, as Rutkowski points out, the sources of UFO data used in these studies are among the least reliable. The reliability of UFO data is shaky at best, and the data used in some of these studies was among the shakiest of the shaky. Two examples of this are one TST study that used the newspaper accounts collected by Charles Fort for the years from 1820 to 1920, and another that used yearly totals from Fate magazine. Both of these sources are worthy reading, to be sure, but neither provides reliable enough data on which to base a scientific theory. One wonders why the TST proponents didn't use the Bluebook Unknowns? At least those reports were collected by the Air Force and have some semblance of reliability about them. Another problem involves the quantity rather than the quality of UFO data. Fort's luminous aerial phenomena included much more than UFOs. His reports included such things as "phantom armies" and other strange aerial anomalies. Not only that, but during most of the years incuded in the TST studies (Rutkowski), the correlation was based on less than three luminous aerial events per year. So the "correlations" were often between ONE aerial anomaly on the one hand and a number of earthquakes on the other! How do you define statistical significance? Not like that.
The sum of the coincidences equals certainty.(Aristotle)
Even using questionable data such as this, the seismic activity - UFO sightings correlations were weak, so the TST theorists introduced time lags into the correlations. They said that the stresses that resulted in earthquakes were building for years before the actual earthquake occurred, and that these building stresses produced luminosities during that time. This allowed them to strengthen their correlations by including UFO sightings for units of time before and after the actual earthquake event. If this weren't enough, they also increased the included distances from the actual earthquake sites to up to 200 km away, saying that the area of stress, or the strain field, extended this far. So now they have a statistical correlation that includes all UFO sightings within 200 km of the earthquake site, and for months to years before the actual earthquake. Even with all these maneuvers, as Rutkowski demonstrates, the TST still fails to produce a good correlation between tectonic stress and UFO reports for areas like the province of Manitoba, Canada. In all likelihood, similarly poor results would be obtained for certain areas of low seismic activity in the U.S. where UFO reports are nonetheless frequent, as well as for high seismic activity areas where UFO reports are infrequent.
Yet another problem with the basic TST and UFOs is that the theory ignores the content of UFO reports, treating them all as if they were nocturnal luminosities. To my knowledge, no one has ever described spooklights or earthquake lights as a number of metallic discs seen in broad daylight flying in formation at speeds greater than any known aircraft.
Being unable to explain the physical mechanism by which tectonic strain produces aerial luminous phenomenon doesn't slow the theory's proponents any. They also offer an alternate hypothesis that UFOs are not necessarily physical objects at all. They say that tectonic strain may create magnetic fields that affect the temporal lobes in the brains of some individuals, causing them to hallucinate UFO sightings, abductions by aliens, or even religious experiences.