It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show up under a sodium street light.

[G-Unit]

Fascinating;

This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.



This is a magazine in normal electric light;



This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;


http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/

It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.

About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

118

[Robittybob1]

Fascinating;

This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.



This is a magazine in normal electric light;



This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;


http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/

It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.

About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

This from the point of view of photography but the actual perception of the person there is different again,  Jane has not taken a photo but is taking a mental perception where the perception has adjusted the perceived colours. 
I have dabbled in experiments of this type myself, so I know a little about it but I never got as far as doing a scientific paper on it. 
So what I'm saying she still may have been able to perceive the colour pink even if a photograph might not back this up.

[ShiningInLuz]

Fascinating;

This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.



This is a magazine in normal electric light;



This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;


http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/

It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.

About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

For the record, I have 'skulked' outside 5A at precisely the time of the Tanner sighting on some 3rd May or other, with the aim of trying to find out precisely what Jane Tanner could and could not see.

I did not realise at the time that the street lights had been replaced, so I was not successful in replicating the Tanner sighting exactly.

I have no idea how much light the current units provide compared to the previous units, so I can't do some sort of balancing adjustment either.

So all I can do is report what I saw.

At the time of the Tanner sighting, my eyes were changing from the last vestiges of colour vision to black and white.  I could still see and distinguish light colours, such as yellow and pink.  But dark colours such as dark blue, dark red, dark brown, all looked different but I could not tell which was which, only that they were dark.

My eyes are, unfortunately, much older than Jane's.  And I have no idea how good or poor her colour vision is.  So that is open to question.

There is also the matter of the precise timing of the Tanner sighting.  A few minutes before and I could make out even dark colours.  A few minutes later and I could not make out any colours whatsoever.

Personally, I think that sodium street lights are such a common experience in the UK that people have learned how to adjust for them, whereas a camera cannot.

Perhaps you need to conduct a different experiment?  You need clothes similar to Madeleine's (and probably Tannerman's).  And a friend to role-play Tannerman whilst you watch, or vice-versa.

Since Luz is not replete with friends interested in the MBM case, and since I have no idea where the nearest M&S is, I am somewhat stuffed on this one.

[Alfie]

Fascinating;

This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.



This is a magazine in normal electric light;



This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;


http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/

It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.

About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Jane wasn't mistaken as verified by the Met.

[Robittybob1]

For the record, I have 'skulked' outside 5A at precisely the time of the Tanner sighting on some 3rd May or other, with the aim of trying to find out precisely what Jane Tanner could and could not see.

.....

Very much appreciated SiL, for I did a similar thing in NZ where I waited till the exact same time of day to see the effects of the sun rising ... but just at the moment I needed the clouds rolled in.
So you need the same cloud cover, was the Moon in the same place? The movement of cars with their headlights would be another factor which can't be replicated.  A car may have just been leaving the supermarket and the lights shown up the road momentarily  but long enough for Jane to see the pyjamas even though it was generally too dark.

[Alice Purjorick]

It's all very interesting what Jane may or may not have seen.
The MPS seem to believe that whatever it was she saw was not some geezer abducting Madeleine McCann but another geezer with his child.
Pink, yellow or sky blue pink with orange spots becomes a bit of an irrelevance along in this instance with lux lumens, watts or ft candles...

[Robittybob1]

Even Goncalo Amaral questions Jane's memory of the event.  He thought an abductor would go in the other direction.  So in one of my many reports to Scotland Yard I argued that the abductor was walking to the West rather that the East.

But is that possible and still be moving from the "left to the right" in Jane's visual memory?

[ShiningInLuz]

Very much appreciated SiL, for I did a similar thing in NZ where I waited till the exact same time of day to see the effects of the sun rising ... but just at the moment I needed the clouds rolled in.
So you need the same cloud cover, was the Moon in the same place? The movement of cars with their headlights would be another factor which can't be replicated.  A car may have just been leaving the supermarket and the lights shown up the road momentarily  but long enough for Jane to see the pyjamas even though it was generally too dark.

I did not check the moonlight, for the simple reason that I did not know on my simulation that on 3 May 2007 it was a full moon, but the moon had not arisen.  So, no moon on Jane Tanner's night, and while I don't remember any moon-cast shadows on my outing, I was not specifically checking.

The supermarket closed at 8pm that evening (3 May 2007).  Jenny Murat claimed a near-accident in a car after she nipped out to the supermarket to get some bread before it closed that evening, and says 8pm was closing time.  Plus someone on here was kind enough to point out to me that there is an entry on the Wayback Machine for 2 May 2007 showing the closing time of Baptista was 8pm.

Jane Tanner did not report a car or car headlights, so all in all, I have no reason to believe in illumination by a car.

[Robittybob1]

I did not check the moonlight, for the simple reason that I did not know on my simulation that on 3 May 2007 it was a full moon, but the moon had not arisen.  So, no moon on Jane Tanner's night, and while I don't remember any moon-cast shadows on my outing, I was not specifically checking.

The supermarket closed at 8pm that evening (3 May 2007).  Jenny Murat claimed a near-accident in a car after she nipped out to the supermarket to get some bread before it closed that evening, and says 8pm was closing time.  Plus someone on here was kind enough to point out to me that there is an entry on the Wayback Machine for 2 May 2007 showing the closing time of Baptista was 8pm.

Jane Tanner did not report a car or car headlights, so all in all, I have no reason to believe in illumination by a car.

What did you mean by "the moon had not risen"?    I thought at the full moon  as the Sun is going down the Moon is basically rising on the East soon after, so is the view to the East blocked by hills at PdL? 

[sadie]

What did you mean by "the moon had not risen"?    I thought at the full moon  as the Sun is going down the Moon is basically rising on the East soon after, so is the view to the East blocked by hills at PdL?

From memory , the moon rose at 10pm that night.

Somewhere on this forum I have posted moonrise times, weather conditions, sea conditions and tidal times at relatively nearby Faro.

[ShiningInLuz]

What did you mean by "the moon had not risen"?    I thought at the full moon  as the Sun is going down the Moon is basically rising on the East soon after, so is the view to the East blocked by hills at PdL?

Moonrise was about 10pm that evening.  At a full moon, the sun and moon are roughly 12 hours apart.  So they take it turns, not appearing together on stage.

From this and other sources, it is also known that it was low tide about 10pm, going to high tide at about 04:15 on 4 May, thus making body deposition in the sea, on the beach, or on the rocks extremely unlikely.

[sadie]

Fascinating;

This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.



This is a magazine in normal electric light;



This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;


http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/

It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.

About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink.  That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Thanks for these images SIL, but I would point out that in the top image showing sodium light, there is a person who is wearing pink and there is a green area also ... both clearly visible. 

Certainly sodium light is supposed not to show colour, so it seems there must have been a bit of normal light there.

In my theory, I have always felt that as the getaway vehicle pulled out of the little parking area (opposite the Tapas Reception), to pick up Tannerman and Madeleine, his vehicle headlights flashed briefly up the street. 

But there could have been a light in a window, or another vehicle going along the top road that briefly showed the pink up.

I do think that the mind also compensates for missing colour somewhat.  Dont know how.


But well done to you three guys who have sleuthed this out



BTW, it has been decades since I saw sodium lights in the UK.  They may still be there but I never see them ... vile things.

[Robittybob1]

Moonrise was about 10pm that evening.  At a full moon, the sun and moon are roughly 12 hours apart.  So they take it turns, not appearing together on stage.

From this and other sources, it is also known that it was low tide about 10pm, going to high tide at about 04:15 on 4 May, thus making body deposition in the sea, on the beach, or on the rocks extremely unlikely.

http://www.timeanddate.com/moon/portugal/faro?month=5&year=2007 OK Thanks and to Sadie also.

[G-Unit]

For the record, I have 'skulked' outside 5A at precisely the time of the Tanner sighting on some 3rd May or other, with the aim of trying to find out precisely what Jane Tanner could and could not see.

I did not realise at the time that the street lights had been replaced, so I was not successful in replicating the Tanner sighting exactly.

I have no idea how much light the current units provide compared to the previous units, so I can't do some sort of balancing adjustment either.

So all I can do is report what I saw.

At the time of the Tanner sighting, my eyes were changing from the last vestiges of colour vision to black and white.  I could still see and distinguish light colours, such as yellow and pink.  But dark colours such as dark blue, dark red, dark brown, all looked different but I could not tell which was which, only that they were dark.

My eyes are, unfortunately, much older than Jane's.  And I have no idea how good or poor her colour vision is.  So that is open to question.

There is also the matter of the precise timing of the Tanner sighting.  A few minutes before and I could make out even dark colours.  A few minutes later and I could not make out any colours whatsoever.

Personally, I think that sodium street lights are such a common experience in the UK that people have learned how to adjust for them, whereas a camera cannot.

Perhaps you need to conduct a different experiment?  You need clothes similar to Madeleine's (and probably Tannerman's).  And a friend to role-play Tannerman whilst you watch, or vice-versa.

Since Luz is not replete with friends interested in the MBM case, and since I have no idea where the nearest M&S is, I am somewhat stuffed on this one.

Yes. The problem is that the reconstruction by the McCann's was done in complete darkness, but it's unlikely to have been completely dark at the actual time [which isn't certain anyway]. Russell went up at 9.30pm and he couldn't say if it was completely dark or not.

What is true is that you can't see certain colours under sodium lights. It's nothing to do with the eye of the beholder, it's to do with what sodium light reflects. As it contains no pink it can't reflect it, so the eyes can't see it because it's not there. I'm no scientist, but that seems to be what they're saying.

[Alfie]

So to sum up this particular argument - JT says she saw pink, it is scientifically impossible for her to have seen pink, crecheman's daughter was wearing pink, JT was right.  The end.