Been a bit of a buzz over the last week about this, with all the main channels running stories on it, and a few ex military giving testimony as to things they've witnessed.
So,little green men, or large red ones ?.
Free membership/noted user bump
Interesting, cheers for posting.
This is quite a good read - https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/05/10/how-the-pentagon-started-taking-ufos-seriously
Is it time to dust of my copy of "Chariots of the Gods" again?
I think I'm more or less here: Do UFOs exist? Yes, pretty sure these are real observable phenomena. Are they aliens from another planet/part of the galaxy? No. I don't think they are.
The alien hypothesis is unlikely, IMO:
1) What are they doing? Flying around in full view of pilots and just zipping around randomly. No evidence of say, a search pattern or some kind of research activity.
2) They're pretty much only visible up in the stratosphere from planes - no credible sightings or evidence anywhere else. I mean - we're scanning the skies all the time looking for aliens and other stellar phenomena, in all sorts of wavelengths; amateur astronomy is a reasonable passtime; and how many people are looking at the sky ever day (billions); and yet it's only airline and military pilots that see stuff.
3) Why no other contact, if they've been messing about for 70 years or more? How long does your 'research' take? If they simply wanted to monitor us, they could easily hack our satellites or internet comms.
4) It is pretty unlikely IMO that faster-than-light travel is even possible. There are lots of ideas, but they all have big problems. The alien hypothesis is dependent on the idea that these problems are all soluble.
All that technology the USA military has at their disposal and the capture a dodgy image on IR and describe a TikTak.
Why are aliens not making contact?
Why are they getting so close to the military when the vastness of the Pacific Ocean they could be totally unnoticed?
How come from another system lights years away and by pure chance head in the right direction to find another inhabited one?
150 years of photography and not one credible image.
How come from another system lights years away and by pure chance head in the right direction to find another inhabited one?
if they are say within, 100 light years and only 50 years ahead in tech they would know we are here (a clever star shading space telescope should be able know this a life bearing planet and probably watching it warmup too, we have this tech in the pipeline). Not that they'd be able to get here.
I think it's Alien teenagers arsing around.
A parent left a spaceship with the keys inside and the youngsters thought it would be a laugh to wind up the earthlings.
This is an interesting take on it.
Claiming at least some of it is foreign forces using drones and electronic warfare methods to probe the US responses.
A parent left a spaceship with the keys inside and the youngsters thought it would be a laugh to wind up the earthlings.
Like some sort of Explorers.
4) It is pretty unlikely IMO that faster-than-light travel is even possible. There are lots of ideas, but they all have big problems. The alien hypothesis is dependent on the idea that these problems are all soluble.
From the perspective of observers on their home planet it would take a very long time. But for the aliens on board the space ship traveling at close to the speed of light, it won't take very long at all, just a few years if they can accelerate at 1g and are only a few light years away.
just a few years if they can accelerate at 1g and are only a few light years away.
accelerating is the problem, the planet volumes of fuel required.
How come from another system lights years away and by pure chance head in the right direction to find another inhabited one?
We can already predict where the habitable planets are likely to be, with our sub-alien level of tech, and I seem to recall that there is a way of observing which ones are probably occupied.
The Fermi Paradox is worth bringing into this discussion, or more simply, Where the Hell is everyone!
https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html
^this link is to the best explanation I've found about whether there is life elsewhere in the universe and whether they may be visiting Earth. It's a long read read but entirely fascinating.
Seems pretty clear that unidentified flying objects are officially A Real Thing. Probably not aliens though. And it seems unlikely that China or Russia have developed some totally new type of aircraft- modern jet fighters and e.g. Spitfires are still recognisably the same thing, and the things in those videos look to be something completely different. Dunno what that leaves!
Coinciding with an unnecessary vaccination rollout.
The aliens have been in charge for a year now and are preparing you all for harvesting.
accelerating is the problem, the planet volumes of fuel required.
You just fire off some H-bombs and use a solar sail to tow the spacecraft. What could possibly go wrong?
Where the Hell is everyone!
Interdimensional, innit.
I've been following this closely, and unfortunately/fortunately, all of these recent revelations in the media would all seem to have fairly innocent explanations.
Eg- the FLIR video. Its an insect inside the camera.
The gimbal video: its a remote object, being tracked by a high-zoom camera.
Etc....
Lots of commentards on the various sites covering this thwapping themselves over softening up, big announcements and days of reckoning. Holy shit don't people remember the 90's and the propaganda that was the X-Files? 😉
I’ve always had an open mind about aliens and ufos, heck I even posted a thread on here a few years ago saying that I spotted a ufo whilst watching a live ISS spacewalk, but..... The more I learn about our planet and how delicately balanced the various cycles within it are, and how perfect everything is, and has to be, for life to exist, has made me think that the chances of more planets of such perfect balanced conditions being out there is remarkable slim, and then those planets having such intelligent life that are able to travel light years? Nah, I now err on the side that we’re alone..... Which IMO is scarier than thinking there are planets full of alien life
I think it’s Alien teenagers arsing around.
A theory outlined by Douglas Adams (a much cleverer man than most people think) and rather mind-bendingly the only one that fits all the observations perfectly.
that the chances of more planets of such perfect balanced conditions being out there is remarkable slim
I really don't think so. There isn't anything remarkable about our sun, and the processes that led to the formation of our planet quite logically follow on from that. All you need is for it to happen in the right temperature zone. Given the mind-boggling numbers of planets out there, I'm sure it's happened elsewhere loads of times. This, coupled with the evidence presented in the Fermi Paradox, is the strongest hint I know of that FTL travel is not possible. Ditto time travel.
Meh. The Americans fooling themselves with their own R&D programmes and their own over developed secrecy. Paranoia breading paranoia.
Arthur C. Clarke for you Houns
I'll go with the Group 2 (4) solution to the Fermi Paradox, as explored in The Three Body Problem trilogy. There are other beings out there, but the exploitation of less advanced civilisations isn't limited to Earth, and the survivors have learned not to advertise their presence.
I’ll go with the Group 2 (4) solution to the Fermi Paradox, as explored in The Three Body Problem trilogy. There are other beings out there, but the exploitation of less advanced civilisations isn’t limited to Earth, and the survivors have learned not to advertise their presence.
This is just War of the Worlds dressed up in 'hard SF', and has been explored endlessly in books and film. (As mentioned on the SF thread, I've been reading the first one - finished it yesterday. It didn't improve. 🙁 I still don't know why it got a Hugo. )
Underwater sonar contacts from nuclear subs too. Kind of dismisses any aerial drone, balloon or insect theory. "Traveling at several hundred knots"
Curiouser and Curiouser
Underwater sonar contacts from nuclear subs too. Kind of dismisses any aerial drone, balloon or insect theory. “Traveling at several hundred knots”
Or just reinforces the fact that humans tend to look for patterns, and explanations that fit neatly into pre-defined assumptions.
explanations that fit neatly into pre-defined assumptions.
"when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? " 😉
...Is from a work of fiction, no?
Sheerluck Holmes.
🙂
I think it’s Alien teenagers arsing around.
Probably worth probing into that one a bit deeper. Aliens love a good probing. It'll draw em out. ☝️
For Heaven’s sake...
Don’t take them to your leader.
This is a more skeptical take on it.
https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/did-us-government-say-ufos-are-real-an-analysis-of-60-minutes-investigation/?mc_cid=1220582612
Well yeah, but thats the skeptic isnt it, and if you actually take that story and break it down piece by piece it doesnt actually say anything and seems to rel;y on 'truths' or perceived truths beneficial to the skeptics point of view.
Example, from the off " “the Government has already stated for the record that [UFOs] are real.” Startling, that is, until you remember that “UFO” does not necessarily mean alien visitors,but rather something unidentified in the sky"
This we know, U in UFO means unidentified, and doesnt imply alien or little green men., but they propose that as a basis that unidentified is a revelation they themselves are suggesting.
" Obviously, the government would admit such things are “real.” A mylar balloon floating into the range of a Navy jet’s camera is “real”, "
Again more suggestion and supposition that their view is of a balloon. But without seeking any way of confirming their point that it is a balloon.
And on and on, popping in suggestions and key buzz words but without actual evidence or method showing how they arrived at their skeptical findings. Pretty much relying on words that lend to disbelief rather than any actual tangible evidence to debunk it.
Example
"We are then shown two other videos. “FLIR1” is claimed to show physics-defying acceleration, but careful study has shown that the supposed sudden moves are actually the result of the camera moving or changing mode."
What careful study?. What methods were employed in this 'careful study' ?. Obviously we shall never know as again the full facts of the skeptical investigation are never revealed.
And it goes on in the same vein. Debunk, but more disbelief rather than any actual study employing any scientific reasoning or mechanics
Even is "Then we meet Elizondo’s partner in this enterprise, Christopher Mellon, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. Mellon seemingly shares Elizondo’s suspicion that we are being visited by some kind of non-human entity"
But nobody said that, nobody suggested aliens. What was suggested is the unknown of what the phenomena actually is. what is causing it or what exactly they are. The emphasis ,especially with the American military is that of paranoia and worry that its the Chinese or Russia employing technology they dont have and by finding out the truth of it, they can develop it for themselves or arrive at a method of countering it.
I did feel that the former assistant to the assistant secretary was plumping for some sort of new post where he is in a better paid position, and the ex military and ex navy were possibly also looking for well paid positions too.
I dont believe these are aliens amongst us, but I am interested to know what exactly they are definitively, and that can only be arrived at by study, and not instant dismissal as the skeptics are proposing.
But nobody said that, nobody suggested aliens.
Well, you did (jokingly?) in your first post. And plenty of other people will be as well. Any “debunking” article probably has to address that idea head on. The very term “UFO” brings to mind aliens for many people (hence I presume the use of the alternative “UAP” term used in the video).
Asks if it’s little green men, goes on a rant saying no one mentioned aliens. 😂
Just need to come back on his comments.
I'm at work but I will tonight.
Sorry Drac, etc, it was tongue in cheek the first post, and it was a question to everyone, not a statement. I'd have thought that obvious by way of the question mark. I've no opinion in this. Find it all interesting.
Am I not allowed to do that 😕
Am I not allowed to do that 😕
I'm not a mod, but I would say you are free to take the mickey.
You also make some valid comments on my skeptic post, I have answers, tonight.
Of course you are but do you not see the funny side when you claimed no mentioned aliens, except for you asking ?
I think it was Brian Cox that said something along these lines:
"If aliens have developed the ability to travel interstellar space, either by faster than light travel or by simple virtue of being such long lived species that they don't care if it takes a thousand years, why then, would they go to all that trouble to get here and then just piss about in the upper atmosphere doing a few stunts and then disappear again."
I tend to agree, it would make no sense at all to find another inhabited planet in the vastness of space and then not investigate further/take over said planet/do some anal probing etc.
UFOs are most likely of human origin, military tech etc. Or meteorological phenomena we don't understand.
I think it was Brian Cox that said something along these lines:
“If aliens have developed the ability to travel interstellar space, either by faster than light travel or by simple virtue of being such long lived species that they don’t care if it takes a thousand years, why then, would they go to all that trouble to get here and then just piss about in the upper atmosphere doing a few stunts and then disappear again.”
Yeah but did anyone read that in their head NOT in a Brian Cox voice?
Didn't think so.
More Brian Cox TV on Sunday night at 9pm. Git looks like he gets to have an even better time than normal (hanging out with space programme, fast jets, mountain tops). Git.
Of course you are but do you not see the funny side when you claimed no mentioned aliens, except for you asking ?
Well no, clearly not. And it was a statement in return to the author of the website. I was commenting on the points made on the skeptics site. Wasnt directed at anyone here and the skeptic site cant see my words so not sure why you would mistake one for the other and think it was directed at members here.
" Then we meet Elizondo’s partner in this enterprise, Christopher Mellon, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. Mellon seemingly shares Elizondo’s suspicion that we are being visited by some kind of non-human entity”
Hence the quotation marks 😕
Here the author is interjecting ridicule towards the defence officer and the other guy, sort of directing his audience. When I see that sort of nonsense I feel it only legitimate to call it out.
Internet currently offline, usual maintenance I think, so this post will go in late(12pm,posted)
I would say you are free to take the mickey.
You also make some valid comments on my skeptic post, I have answers, tonight.
I want taking the micky 🙂 Wasnt my intention, sorry. And I wasnt addressing your skepticism post, rather to the article itself. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if i disagree with it. Its the way it works isnt it.
You posted up a skeptics site and I took a read and felt that many points they made were very valid,for example if looking from above at high altitude at an object below, it can look like the object is traveling at tremendous speed, when in fact it is only because of its high altitude that it is crossing great distances. This however is not only their example but they leave out a great deal of information, such as how this is being viewed from above by a fighter jet, what is the working altitude of such a jet, what is the distance between the object and the earth below it, in relation to its ability to 'look' like its moving very fast. Why does the object and the sea below it seem so close, when that itself would lend skepticism as to the point being made that it is altitude. and so on and so forth. Looking and asking questions analytically.
But other times felt they were not being honest, in that they claim 'Oh it must be that' but not explaining why. A bit like doing maths but not doing the workings for it. 😕 if you get my drift.
As to the points, I couldnt really fully reply as the article is huge and to address each point skeptically and ask for definition, or evidence, would be a post akin to a final year dissertation.
