Mysteries Department
Sign inRequest access
0

Do the Hessdalen lights include a natural phenomenon not yet explained, once known light sources are removed?

Asked 26 Oct 2026 by ·4 answers·0·0 following
Most likely: no; the lights are misidentified vehicles, aircraft, astronomical objects and instrumental artefactsAhead on the evidence, not yet confirmed. It needs two reviews to be accepted.

Where it stands

Four answers have been proposed. No; the lights are misidentified vehicles, aircraft, astronomical objects and instrumental artefacts. leads, with evidence 2 for, 1 against: partly supported by its tests. Three are still possible. Of the two narrower questions under it, one is answered.

Why it matters

Every mechanism depends on there being something to explain. Some recorded lights have been shown to be car headlights⁠[1], while the 1984 radar and magnetometer records and the residents' close-range reports are harder to account for⁠[2].

Answers 4

Evidence: 2 for, 1 against
Most likely
Evidence: 1 for
Still possible
None of these.
Not tested enough to call either way
Evidence: none yet
Still possible
Evidence: 3 for, 1 against
Still possible

History

  1. Strand: residents reported lights hanging still for over an hour just above roofs and below the hilltops.For: Yes; a residue of the lights is a distinct natural luminous phenomenon of the valley.
  2. Teodorani & Nobili: the EMBLA 2002 spectra had no resolved lines and a feature that could be artificial lighting.For: No; the lights are misidentified vehicles, aircraft, astronomical objects and instrumental artefacts.
  3. Teodorani puts forward: yes; a residue of the lights is a distinct natural luminous phenomenon of the valley.
  4. Teodorani: in 1984 a radar tracked a light at about 8,500 m/s, and magnetic disturbances often coincided with sightings.For: Yes; a residue of the lights is a distinct natural luminous phenomenon of the valley.
  5. Leone puts forward: no; the lights are misidentified vehicles, aircraft, astronomical objects and instrumental artefacts.
  6. Leone: the recurrent light of the 2002 survey was identified as car headlights.Against: Yes; a residue of the lights is a distinct natural luminous phenomenon of the valley.
  7. Leone: leone accepts that some anecdotal residents' reports remain unexplained.Against: No; the lights are misidentified vehicles, aircraft, astronomical objects and instrumental artefacts.
  8. Leone: the EMBLA 2002 blinking light matches car headlights on a road 11.5 km away, seen through a telescope.For: No; the lights are misidentified vehicles, aircraft, astronomical objects and instrumental artefacts.
  9. Pascoli puts forward: both; a small number of genuine anomalous lights among many misidentifications and illusions.
  10. Project Hessdalen: the 2026 skipping-orb case was matched on camera but appeared smaller and briefer on video than to the…For: Both; a small number of genuine anomalous lights among many misidentifications and illusions.
  11. Asked on this site
Add evidence
1What it bears on2What you found3Where it comes from
Which answer?
Does it count for or against it?
In a sentence, what did you find?
What you found optional
Where it comes from optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Propose an answer
Your answer, in a sentence
What would rule it out? optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Ask a sub-question
Your question
Why it would help optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Add a source
The source
What it shows about this question optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.

Discussion 0

Add to the discussion