UFOs invading military airspace multiple times a month, but public won't be told
newsweek.com
newsweek.com
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a14456936/that-tim...
I can think of one more which seems more likely: US government testing secret radar spoofing tech (probably operated from a submarine).
This is one reason why I find stories like this one unlikely. If we assume this object is, say, a Chinese spy drone, why would the Chinese use this amazing new tech for something as mundane and boring as a spy drone? They could turn it in to a commercial engine, mount it on some aircraft, and completely dominate the air travel and air freight. As far as using technology to crush your enemies goes that would have a much greater impact on the US than watching what the country is up to from a drone.
It's entirely possible that some novel propulsion technology would only work with extremely light craft under specific conditions, and either couldn't scale to the size of a commercial aircraft, or would be less efficient or cost effective at that scale than existing technology.
Ion propulsion is only useful in space, for instance.
First, that all UFO reports accurately describe craft that defy known physical laws (discarding the likelihood of hoaxes or misidentifications of conventional craft or other phenomena.) The significance of the fraction, in this case, is irrelevant.
Second, that people are able to accurately gauge the size of objects in the sky (they aren't, see phenomenon like the moon illusion as an example of how difficult it is, and how biased human perception can be.) Just because people see a roughly triangular formation of lights in the night sky, doesn't mean there's a vast, football-field sized black triangle hovering over the city.
And you should have said "A significant fraction of reported UFOs appear much, much larger," for your actual comment to be true, we would need examples of actual UFOs to test against the size of conventional jets.
Third, that the phenomenon on the video in the posted article shows a craft which uses the same or a similar form of technology as "much larger" UFOs, and that this somehow invalidates the premise that novel forms of propulsion exist which cannot arbitrarily scale.
Is jet exhaust distinguishable from hot plasma ball in IR?
I'm thinking a very very big version of this - https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/a-floating-holograph...
Thanks for sharing
Or some other nation. By far the most likely explanation to me is that this is some classified military tech.
And the whole thing just seems weird to me. If you're an alien vessel visiting our planet, it seems like you're either going to try to make contact, or ignore people and just gather samples. But this? Just sort of bothering the US Navy? You could argue it was gathering samples of ocean water or something. But then why go to the CAP point? That can't be to collect scientific data. And that doesn't make sense as their attempt to contact us. As I mentioned above, they'd have to have a lot of knowledge of our language and communication to know where that point is, which means they know enough to simply make radio contact.
Its even possible tests are done knowing other military pilots are in vicinity to guage their reaction to it.
To me this is the simplest explanation (if weather balloons and drones are ruled out).
However, no such conclusions can be made - either pro- or anti- the "But its Aliens" argument - since the entire subject is couched in dire secrecy, with a lot of people whose lives would change, drastically, if it were the case that these UFO's turn out to be non-human in origin.
If it turns out that aliens are on the planet and have advanced technology that could ruin us all, maybe the Pentagon and the Kremlin would find a reason to stop starving their own people for the sake of assumed dominance over the planet, and instead unite to either befriend, or defeat, the common alien friend/foe.
One can imagine the reason all of these events are couched in such secrecy might be, indeed, militaristic hubris. Or, in other words, FOMO at a grand scale ..
I'm not saying I think these things, I'm just trying to point out that your conclusion is not a given.
It certainly means that they have those capabilities as pertains to travel, but it is not a given that they would have those capabilities in a military sense. Of course the argument can be made that you can convert that kind of power into a weapon, but I'd hazard to say that a haphazard conversion does not in fact impart upon you a godlike ability to ignore everything we could possibly do.
I'm definitely not arguing that this means we should increase military spending. I think that is fundamentally not a great idea for us in the first place. Instead, I am arguing that while the things you are talking about are widely used as sci-fi tropes and held as beliefs by a lot of people, I do not think they stand on their own merits.
A well equipped squad of marines would still eventually succumb to a gird of barbarians unless they could resupply.
It's more like neolithic man meets nuclear submarine... but worse. We have 0 tools at our disposal to fight anything that's farther away than the edge of the atmosphere. "They" can take a few decades to accelerate a really massive "civilization ending" object and slam it into us. It's not like we can go anywhere to avoid it.
Even if an alien civilization finds our planet, I don't see why that would imply we are inside their logistic operational range.
Assuming they are real, the aliens do not act in a way consistent with a goal-directed intelligence, which means they are not the product of evolution, which means they are something so strange that the idea of befriending or defeating them makes no sense. They're something more like this story: https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/21/universal-love-said-th...
>> Assuming they are real, the aliens do not act in a way consistent with a goal-directed intelligence, which means they are not the product of evolution, which means they are something so strange that the idea of befriending or defeating them makes no sense.
This. If - and that's a big if - we assume previous bizarre aerial activities observed by humans were in fact of ET origin, then it's only natural to think of those ETs more like AI (robots) that don't necessarily share our goal-oriented intelligence, but rather possess higher levels of intelligence and their own agenda. As a result, you're right; we wouldn't even begin to understand their purpose cause theirs just has no counterpart in humans.
Given the distances and ages required for interstellar travel, these things are more likely unmanned probes than busses filled with tourists.
> It has been theorized that a self-replicating starship utilizing relatively conventional theoretical methods of interstellar travel (i.e., no exotic faster-than-light propulsion, and speeds limited to an "average cruising speed" of 0.1c.) could spread throughout a galaxy the size of the Milky Way in as little as half a million years.
They only have a tiny poorly manned outpost?
Or maybe they are scouts that were sent all over the cosmos for the purpose of exploration and they will report back their findings to their home eventually.
There are plenty of rational explanations for their behavior, especially if we are extremely far behind them in our technological development.
Are you sure you know what their goals would be?
The Romans were arguably a flash of insight away from the hot air balloon, they had good uses for it and all the prerequisite techs. Analogously, we might be one really good flash of insight away from technology we'll just actually get a thousand years from now. So the aliens could be otherwise on our tech level, but they just figured out warp drive.
Fictional times indeed. Just don't think too hard about the money.
E.g. how would the major organised religions cope with the revelation (pun intended) that there was life that originated off of Earth/outside of the garden of eden?
For a lot of people who take religion seriously, I feel like this could be a major upset. It might not affect "day to day life" in terms of the lights staying on and there being food on the shelves, but there could be a significant personal impact on a lot of people which may lead to a lot of things like depression/substance-abuse/suicides/general-"fuck it, its the end end of world, I am going to <x>"-sentiment/etc that will have knock-on effects (e.g. not turning up for work, abandoning family/responsibilities, running away to live as a hermit in the woods, gun hoarding etc)
Like they've dealt with every other scientific advancement that killed their beliefs. They will deny it as much and as long as they can until they will be forced to admit it, at which point "god" will shrink to an even meaningful pocket of scientific ignorance. Some of them will keep denying it forever
https://www.theguardian.com/science/shortcuts/2014/may/14/po...
Nearly everyone is fine with this idea, but most everyone also thinks people with religious views different than their own will have trouble with it.
Non-abrahamic religions like Hinduism,Jainism, Buddhism, believes in existence of world systems other than current one.
Buddhism is especially is accommodative in terms of acceptance, of evidences that refutes Buddhist world view[0].
[0]http://www.openculture.com/2016/09/carl-sagan-the-dalai-lama...
The major religions have already shown how they deal with evidence of outside of the garden of Eden. Several don't care, because the garden isn't part of their belief system to start with, and most of the rest have no problem with it (because they don't view the garden as literal), and the remainder just dismiss the evidence and distrust the entire field of science associated with it.
I don't think expanding that to off Earth is likely to change a thing about those responses, though the details of exactly which groups have each response might be a little different (though I suspect not much.)
I doubt it.
If the last few years have taught me anything, it's that no amount of evidence can dissuade someone from believing something they want to believe in.
I don't think it would change anything for them. We're living in a golden age of science, and that did not change anything for them. The existence of aliens would just be one more thing to either reject or literally bedevil.
Humans began in the Garden of Eden, but that's only one species, albeit an important one.
It is easier to square religion with life on other planets than it is to square the odds of evolution happening in a similar way on multiple planets.
It is either US or Chinese skunkworks and given it was in US airspace I doubt the Chinese would do this. Also it has to be US because otherwise military brass would be freaking out the Chinese are penitrating us airspace with advanced tech.
Thus it is a us skunkworks project.
It is probably just advanced drone techonology. Probably really cool tech.
Occaam's Razor claims that terrestrial technology is more likely than extraterrestrial because it relies on fewer unproven assumptions, namely the existence of extraterrestrial life, its presence on Earth, and everything we know about physics being wrong, despite the math somehow working out to describe the universe incredibly well.
That said I think there are other alternatives that are even more likely: that these sightings are sensor malfunctions or natural phenomena that have been blown out of proportion by popular myth and deliberate disinformation -- (which is certainly the case with all other UFO sightings).
https://web.archive.org/web/20121214172708/http://ancientali...
It seems much more likely that these assumed acts of God were a misunderstood natural phenomenon rather than extraterrestrial beings who we have yet to capture on camera. Considering how closely the depictions of the event match pictures of sun dogs leaves it as the most reasonable solution.
Yeah... sundogs are weird, leaping sundogs are weirder[0].
(I quite like the idea of aliens drawing ideas from their spacecraft from our popular culture as a storyline, but not as an explanation for the phenomena!)
And stories of abduction by aliens often involved those aliens claiming to be from Mars or Venus before it was commonly known that those planets didn't harbor life, much less advanced civilizations.
And the archetypal "grey alien" didn't really become the template for modern alien abduction stories until Whitley Strieber popularized them in a book - many descriptions of alien encounters until that point were of "Nordic" human type aliens.
So yeah, either aliens are being careful not to appear more advanced than popular culture would allow (maybe to the point of appearing as angels and demons to humans when their view of reality was entirely dominated by religion and not science) or much of the UFO phenomenon is basically a meme.
I don't mean anything supernatural.
The US has lots of boring drones, but perhaps there is a secret drone fighter program. It would surprise me somewhat if the US weren't working on something like this, perhaps with a goal of keeping it secret until it needs to be deployed operationally. Plenty of military technologies have been kept secret for decades, such as the SR-71 and the spy satellites on which the Hubble Space Telescope was based. On that note, did you know that the Hubble was basically an extra spy satellite donated to NASA by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the US had a fleet of them pointed downwards toward earth? For more on this, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_Kennen
So, consider: what kind of reconnaissance satellites does the US have today, that resulted in the retirement of the "Crystal" series? (Obviously something digital) Did the US's investment in supersonic spycraft end with the SR-71? If the US were going to design such a craft today, would it have a pilot or would it be autonomous?
On the other hand, if this were a top secret US technology, then I suspect all of the people who observed these phenomena would simply have been sworn to secrecy. I doubt it would be treated as a UFO and I doubt these officers would be speaking publicly about it. Unless this is all some kind of cover for the program. Who knows!
For decades, he worked as a civil servant in the DoD as an instrumentation and test engineer on a few well known weapons programs (and some not so much). I think he based his comment on the trajectory military technology was taking, as he commented similarly to you (referring to Pyxl101) regarding the human problem. i.e. if you remove the humans, you can save weight on life support, and you can do things you otherwise can't when you're limited to keeping the pilot alive and (mostly) functioning.
Part of me wants to believe he might've seen what we'd now call UFOs, but I'm confident that's wishful thinking. His remarks were offered based on his own experiences, and I'm sure he extrapolated from there. Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if some of your predictions did turn out to be true in the near future.
Your last statement also reminded me of Project Mogul[1] and the use of UFOs as a cover story (or rather not, as the case might be). In all likelihood, the Roswell "UFO crash" was an errant Mogul balloon--a project shrouded in secrecy to some degree or another, mostly because we knew the Soviets had stolen our technology but we didn't want them to know we had ways of detecting their tests. I don't believe the USAF instigated the UFO theory, and neither do I believe the air force particularly cared. After all, if I understand the timeline correctly, it wasn't until the mid/late 1970s when the UFO researcher Stanton Friedman began perpetuating the myth, long after the actual event in 1947. As a cover story, that would've come far too late to be useful enough to cover for Project Mogul. To an extent--at least in the early days--I suspect early UFO "research" was largely the outcome of a means to pursue fame or money via book sales and speaking engagements more than a theory perpetuated by the government.
Now, that's not to say that the government isn't using it now that UFOs have long been established in popular culture. That may very well be a strong possibility.
Aside: I once attended a talk with my father that Mr. Friedman gave in the 1990s on UFOs. I also recall Friedman was made somewhat uncomfortable with the fact my father was not only aware of Project Blue Book but had access to the archives when he was at the air force academy. The brief exchange between the two was made when Mr. Friedman asked the audience if anyone had heard of the project and were familiar with (IIRC) volume 13.
Friedman quickly changed subjects away from "government cover up" for reasons that escape me. :)
That's a little misleading. Acceleration hasn't any effects on human body. You can't sense gravity: free fall is the same as ingravity. What you can feel is forces being transmitted by matter contact.
If you can create a field that transmits a force similar to gravity uniformly, there would be no pressure.
Now you're moving again goal posts just "to be right". That's incredibly childish.
Of course you haven't adressed my core point, possibly because you can't understand it.
Edit: try stating my point and we'll see what's on your mind.
I believe your core point is that humans can't detect a force which acts identically on their whole body. Have I understood? This statement is true, of course, but does not seem relevant in context, as it seems to ignore all but the one sentence you quoted, which itself is true in its own context. I don't consider Pyxl101's ignoring of magical-seeming hypothetical technology to be misleading.
Pyxl101's comment [1], which you replied to, is all about practical technology. In that context, your comment seems like an irrelevant technicality (I think this is why you got downvoted), as no practical mode of transport can move someone without physical contact, which transfers force unevenly (just to the parts of the body in contact with the vehicle).
More than "detect", a uniform force simply doesn't affect us.
This statement is true, of course, but does not seem relevant in context...
On the contrary, the thread was started discussing if we could be facing a far superior technology, continued by Pyxl101 speculating UFOs could be drones because enormous accelerations prevent manned ships, and then I pointed that, if it's really a futurist technology, acceleration in itself could not be a problem.
... no practical mode of transport can move someone without physical contact
The "practical" thing has been inserted by yourself. Also it's not about "practical" it's about "known by us".
That would be pretty bulky and costly to include in an aircraft cockpit, but I wonder if it would solve the G-force problem.
I'm not sure if this would actually be better, though. 7 Gs of acceleration would be experienced as 7 bar pressure, equivalent to water pressure at 60 meters underwater, which is quite deep. Rapid changes in pressure between 1 bar and let's say 7 bar would probably be more uncomfortable to experience than regular G-forces.
That must be some damn nice secret propulsion system.
The predecessor of the SR-71 first flew in April on 1962, the public announcement was July of 1964. Given how much trouble we've had with our hypersonic research programs over the decades, and the lack of need for it given stealth is more affordable, there might have been some cool stuff, but it's not a practical or likely operational tool.
The first launch of a KH-11 was mid-seventies and subject to a lot of media coverage during the spy trials a few years later. Imagery was leaked during the Reagan admin. We don't need better resolution, we need more coverage.
So IMO our secrets are less about silver-bullet platforms and more about exploits. Exploiting their radars, sensors, communications systems, networks and computers. We don't really need a Mach 5 platform or 1" resolution for anything. It would be neat, but it would be unaffordable to buy and maintain.
Increasingly, the picture we are being shown is generated by processing raw sensor data - for example, just compare raw (or partially processed) weather radar data to the processed maps you see in forecasts. Two recent trends -- the synthesis of views from multiple sensors of different types, and their presentation as virtual reality -- have come together in devices such as the F-35 Helmet-Mounted Display [1]. I would guess that this level of interpretation of data and synthesis of images presents an increased scope for artifact generation, and the presentation makes it seem more real.
Second, the proliferation of small aircraft does bias operators (and algorithms) to assume a real contact from small signatures, esp at low altitudes where noise is greatest.
In a well integrated, multi-vehilce sensor network, a small false positive rate for each individual recognition and classication module produces enough bullshit to trick automated trackers into labelling targets. If we cant assume common sense filtering like "aircraft cant go from hover to mach 3 in one sweep", then the possible associations of sensor data to hypotheses is astronomical, and bullshit propegates.
Its a mess when you integrate so many sensors and systems and try to make sense of the resulting noise.
And if they mastered long-distance space flight and life discovery, what stops them from reverse-engineering how to connect to an unprotected starbucks guest wifi. Or even posting here like you and me sometimes do.
Do you think they would be more perplexed by the stuff we do to each other in real life (micro; prisons, crime, violence. and macro; governments, military, borders). Or with the way we treat each other on line? (scams, trolls, harassment, narcissism, mistreating privacy data)
Eh, my thoughts are immeasurably boring most of the time.
But realistically, once the novelty wears off, it's probably back to ‘how do get through this day.’ History and old art tend to illustrate that people's everyday nature wasn't much strange to ours.
- NO if I wanted real-time aerial data on population and movements and see how Jimmy is doing.
Now when you talk to humans or worse connect to the internet, you get directly dirty with high bandwidth meme transfers. That's really really dangerous for aliens.
My 2 ubicents.
Not many people assume they're "here" to begin with, but yes, if anyone is here it makes sense to scour the internet. Evaluating the data might be more difficult for them than we think though. Physically connecting to the net may be the easiest problem to overcome. Depending on how they perceive time, and how fast their cognition and data mining is, distilling meaningful information could be a long and arduous process.
How perplexing of an experience it is would depend on their own history and value systems. If they think we're nice, we're in trouble.
Bingo. AMA.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation#The_Truth...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bennewitz
Wouldn't be surprised if this is a sequel.
Are most of these UFO sightings witnessed by a pilot and co-pilot? Is radar data recorded so it can be replayed later?
The skeptic in me thinks these experiences might seem ‘real’ but aren’t. If there is some measurable and documented proof then there can be an investigation.
...
345. Topics to consider on Fridays and periods with no really important news.
1. UFO
2. Yetti
...
549. Advances in AI
550. Tesla
....
/s
Someone close to me is former military whose position required a top secret clearance. The work that they did involved analyzing various forms of SIGINT.
After years of me prying, this person admitted to me:
1. Within the Navy (and presumably other armed forces) the UFO stuff is an open secret.
2. The 'official line' used internally is that the craft are extraterrestrial (or at least origin unknown), and ...
3. They're official labelled drones, i.e., there is no reason to believe that they're "manned"
In other words, it's fairly well known within the military (at least where people are likely to encounter them) and the official position is somewhere along the lines of "they're here but not here".
Personally I've never seen anything I'd label a UFO. But the prevailing narrative -- uptick in UFO sightings following the Manhattan Project, interest in our weapons / energy capabilities -- I'm 100% comfortable with.
If it is a military psy-op, it's one playing out on a massive scale over a vast timeframe. That in and of itself is mind boggling.
Don't get me wrong some of these are really fucked up and can't be dismissed as a weather balloon or a sensor error easily, but saying that UFOs are an open secret is simply wrong.
So either the US is unique in the of attention they get or that UFOs ignore the area between the Straights of Gibraltar and the Straights of Aden like a plague which would also contradict the first assumption given the sheer number of US assets in the area.
Having people confirm or deny such allegations doesn't really mean anything anymore.
If "they" do exist, have enough technology to travel to this planet, control somewhat stealthy drones in our atmosphere which are detected every so often, And don't want to interfer publicly with humanity as proven by their lack of public appearances...
Honestly, it's just beyond unlikely. But if they did exist: what does it matter? We wouldn't be able to do anything about it so worrying about them is pointless
However simply having a clearance isn't the same as being read into a specific program, security clearance just means you can be trusted with secret information it does not grant you access to all classified information matching your clearance.
There are 100,000's of radio and radar operators and while a lot of them seen some shit in their life they aren't come out in droves saying yeah the USAF or NAVY thinks knows about UFOs and they are definitely real.
Like seriously just think about how many sailors have rotated in and out of CIC duty on say an Arleigh Burke class missile destroyer each of which has probably some of the most advanced tracking radar and sensors developed and they aren't tracking UFOs periodically and when they do they sure as hell aren't treating them as LGM.
I'm quite skeptical about alien-natured UFOs, but some videos are just too crazy. Like that tracking video of an object flying really fast and then going under water without slowing down.
He has a really good section on UFO sightings, which he compares to stories about abduction by demons from Medieval times.
His main explanation for the increase in UFO stories in the second half of the 20th century is the decline in other forms of abduction myths, like the demon one. People report seeing what they're expecting to see based on the stories they've been exposed to.
The massive increase in aircraft obviously helped too.
So of course they cover it up, they don’t want competition, for the idea they stole, from the future.
Just assume time travel is possible, what makes more sense, traveling back to our own planet or some other super advanced civilization inventing FTL, finding us, and giving a shit to buzz around and mess with us?
Who doesn’t want a sweet 21st century photo to post on future Instagram!
Anyway I believe that people may sometimes see something, but its much more likely its secret military aircraft. But if there was a good recording of something really fantastical then maybe.
Also, Newsweek is the kind of publication that happily publishes whatever the military asks them to.
CIA records here: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/collection/ufos-fact...
That whole 2004 incident with a video is just one man's story that nobody else in the scene saw the same way. It was not seen as worth of report or anything. One airman in the videos even says "It's a drone".
https://skepticalinquirer.org/2018/05/navy_pilots_2004_ufo_a...
This Newsweek article quotes Gary Voorhis, whereas the pilot in previous reports was Dave Fravor.
“At a certain point, there ended up being multiple objects that we were tracking,” Petty Officer Gary Voorhis, stationed aboard the Princeton missile cruiser escorting the USS Nimitz, testified. “They all generally zoomed around at ridiculous speeds, and angles and trajectories and then eventually they all bugged out faster than our radars.”
By my eyeballs this looks like a CMOS or whatever sensor clipping or processing artifact caused by sunlight glint on the camera housing dome. Google "blackmagic black sun" for a visible light example -- it happens and looks like an issue fixable (or caused) in software.
The white extensions beyond the black blob are where the glinting is below the over-powering threshold. The "rotation" is where the camera and/or dome are rotating relative to the sun as the aircraft orientation changes and cleaning/buffing streaks in the dome are picking up the glint. The camera is clearly not pointing directly forward/aft during the footage, but I'm not sure where it is pointing.
Note how the object stays dead-center below the tracking annotations -- autotracking is good, but I'm not sure it is that good, which again makes me think that the location is determined by camera geometry and is not something flying outside the aircraft.
- the radar contact, from multiple radars, both ships and aircraft.
- the visual contact.
- the fact multiple fighters engaged it, and it seemed to have a position in 3d space.
"@$^#& Glar you were seen by one of their primitive aircraft! Quick, get on thier communication network and claim it's lens flairs and cmos artifacts!"
They are so blatantly trespassing US airspace is very unnerving. It means either doesn't care about being shot down, or simply doesn't think it would happen. For the god sake, we couldn't even identify what this thing is.
In reality how would we even know they are aliens? If you are an advanced race, you would have the technology to either hide your presence or affect the human identification in some way. If you didn't care if humans saw you, why not show up in Times Square? Why would you only show up in the US and only in ways no one but the military or government can see?
Does not follow Occam's razor.
Have you seen Star Trek? The federation exploration missions usually seek to speak first with the leaders and minimize their involvement with civilizations that haven’t matured enough. Not that they don’t still screw it up sometimes.
Too many variables for Occam’s razor to be applied to that question.
They could be as fallible as an emotional being might be and yet generally with benign, exploratory and diplomatic intentions as the federation in Star Trek.
They’re merely adhering to the “most powerful” government’s diplomatic requirements. You know, because they met the US first by chance.
There could be a good story in there somewhere...
However, the realist in me has lots of reasons to doubt all aspects of this reporting - and it's a good default strategy, especially when things seem too "good" or to spectacular to be true.
In any case, there is not really a lot to go on. Even if this went properly public, what exactly does the data say?
And coming back to the space nerd perspective, if these sightings are indeed extraterrestrial, they don't seem to bode well. Why would someone show off like that but don't leave a message? It's because they either don't care that we see them or because they want us to know that they're more advanced.
I just hope our civilization hasn't yet reached a threshold of development where another civilization considers rubbing us out as a preventative measure.
Or the textbooks are wrong (it wouldn't be the first time).
https://mobile.twitter.com/adgpi/status/1122911748829270016
Just to add that the stigma surrounding paranormal occurrences is not universal.
Unless I'm missing some context here
My Quest for the Yeti: Confronting the Himalayas' Deepest Mystery by Reinhold Messner
Yes, that Reinhold Messner. It's a really good book, with an interesting ending.
https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2012/04/space-angels-aliens-o...
If one can't tell the difference then one can't tell the difference.
But it's probably just the US military testing something secret, or just a complete fabrication, either way leaked to project magical capabilities.
Interesting.
I'm thinking of some form of ball-lightning, a self-contained plasma. It's still an unexplained phenomenon with a history of observation (or multiple phenomena classified under one label).
A self-contained plasma could very much be opaque/reflective for radar (depending on the plasma frequency) and also emit light. Maybe it'll even be absorptive to some of the active radars trying to paint it, making some of the involved airplane and ship radars actually stabilize and guide the phenomenon (e.g. it 'escaping' as soon as a painting radar gets closer).
Lots of maybes but infrequent natural phenomena that cannot be easily observed with human senses and where humans usually don't go are still a valid hypothesis in my opinion.
Which is more likely in Occam's razor: a new source of refracted light, or a new kind of aircraft?
Where are the millions of sightings of flying saucers?
I'm sure a UFO would be much harder to capture.
I will be here all day!
"it's a [bleep]ing drone, bro"
An alternative path is to use the inductive research process. In this process, we assume that testimonies are reports of real encounters with Unconventional Flying Objects. These objects flying in our atmosphere must respect the law of physics that we know very well. Could we deduce their propulsion mechanism from the collected data ?
This is the research path followed by the physic professor Auguste Meessen since 1972. The result is the pulsed electromagnetic propulsion system (PEMP) that requires an intense alternating magnetic field. He also suggest a new type of oscillator that can produce this intense field. The outer shell of the UFO must be supraconductive at room temperature and above. The side effect is that it isolate the object and the passegers from the intense field. This theory still needs experimental validation.
Since humans don’t master supraconductivity at room temperature, it would be a strong hint that UFOs are from ET origin.
This is just to remind that ufology can be matter of scientific research and that we don’t have to captured a UFO to start studying it.
1. "Pulsed EM Propulsion of Unconventional Flying Objects" http://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/UFO_Pulsed_EM_Propulsion_of_...
2. "Evidence of Very Strong Low Frequency Magnetic Fields" http://www.meessen.net/AMeessen)/UFO_Evidence_of_Very_Strong...
3. "Production of EM Surface Waves by Superconducting Spheres: A New Type of Harmonic Oscillators" http://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/UFO_Production_of_EM_Surface...
If China succeeds in monitoring all of their citizens and manipulating them into an easy to govern mass of conformity and subservience through their social credit system, it seems highly likely that that will at least make people in the west slightly more willing to move in that direction than if the whole world would just agree that it was far beyond the pale.
What do you think about private companies providing a similar service, for example to potential employers?
There are definitely non-Overton mechanisms that make national policy contagious, though.
Catching a couple of UFOs and getting a hold of some advanced tech might help with that.
previously isolated groups usually don’t do well when meeting other groups who had much wider contact and therefore exposure to more pathogens.
I mean, confirming UFOs are real, not the crashing in your front garden.
2) The military is not going to give you full-resolution video, they keep secrets like that reflexively.
Why not alien spaceships?
Because alien spaceships are not here.
Meteors have the showmanship advantage of being big, bright, high, and visible from a very large area.
Both meteors and UFOs have the problem of "whoa what was that, didn't have time to get my camera out". UFOs additionally have the problem of "too amazed to act".
Intelligent life happened here, it must happen again somewhere else. This should be made axiom really. You/we/whatever is not unique in the universe.
So, "If UFO's were real" is not really a question. Whether this was an UFO or something else is a question.
Your other questions "why not spaceships etc" are antrophorphic in nature and not relevant at all.
You don't know that. Maybe there were super intelligent lizards before us. Lets not be ridiculous. We can't even know if it is a current situation because anthropomorphic ideas and agendas (or even timeframe) do not necessarily reflect other life forms - maybe fungi is already connected to other dimensions like in recent star track episodes ?
There is also thinking that merging pre-mitochondria with bacteria into more complex cell giving birth to complex multicelular life was singular event on this planet and so must be very rare, but its unpprovable really and even if true just lowers the odds.
> you'd need new physics to get from any A to any B at an interstellar level and even more new physics to pull right-angle turns at high mach numbers in an atmosphere.
Really ? Aliens having totally different understanding on universe and tech then us sounds amazing ? Just if you had a time machine and get back lousy couple centuries would make us look like aliens.
We don't really know the probability of abiogenesis (let alone artifacts from that process leading to intelligent life). If it is sufficiently improbable -- 1 / 10^22 per star[0] -- it may very well be that we are the only ones in the observable universe.
The universe is pretty darn big, but life is also pretty darn complex, and its emergence from amino acids and "simple" organic chemistry is not very well understood. Unless the factors of abiogenesis are sufficiently well known, we shouldn't make such predictions either...
-----
[0]: once per (100 * 10^9 stars in the galaxy times 100 * 10^9 galaxies per hubble volume).
> We don't really know the probability of abiogenesis
Abiogenesis is only one way to look at it. What about intelligent design ? Probability it is relevant is 100%, given that humans are one of those IDs already (created polio virus).
So again, most are having tunnel vision about this topic given our constraints and limitations on this planet.
>> Yah, cell machinery is also complex yet it emerged number of times independently on this planet alone
That's not even wrong. I don't even know where to begin refuting this claim -- so I just leave it there.
Sometimes it would do us some good to accept the fact that we just don't know it (yet). Yet alone considering the philosophical consequences of ID: who designed the designers? How did the first designers emerge? What were they made of (considering that the chemical abundance of the galactical environment was heavily skewerd towards lighter elements 4.5 Gy ago)?
In the meantime, I stick to the models that don't rely on an allmighty entity to bootstrap biological evolution.
Humans are designers already, what more proof do you need: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2122619.stm
You are confusing ID with creationism. The later is one foolish and easily refutable variant of ID akin to Santa and other fairy tails.
> There is no evidence of god, therefore I don't have any confidence in the flying spaghetti monster.
Comparing life to another life is not the same as comparing life to superbeings.
> who designed the designers?
That is irrelevant for this topic. It didn't stop people researching big bang, did it ?
> In the meantime, I stick to the models that don't rely on an allmighty entity to bootstrap biological evolution
In the meantime, understand it doesn't have to be allmighty :) It can simply be another advanced enough life (remember that one about advanced tech compared to magic?). The topic is about UFOs, not about origin of life or origin of origin of origin ... of life.
Which is fairly impressive at the reported velocity of 2400mph.
But the news of water ice on titan - and a huge band of it - makes me wonder if life hasn’t spawned twice (at least) in the solar system.
Decide for yourself what you think is being shown there. Okay, ready? This is what the picture I just linked actually shows: I googled "grainy photo" and then "first photo ever taken" to get the grainiest one ever. I don't know if it's the first one ever taken, but this photo is one of the oldest ones we have. "Taken in 1824, it shows the view outside of a window in Saint-Loup-de-Varennes France."
How did you do?
The Nimitz videos are a relatively rare category, though, instrument-first observation. Most UFOs are observed with human eyes. Which have good resolution and good light level compensation.
I don't know what I'm supposed to see here, but it looks suspiciously like the first photo ever taken.
Consider the fact that this was a radar incident too. And that the ships were using meshed synthesized radar, not just one ship at a time.
That's an issue in itself if so.
Complex software systems can have quite bizarre bugs when they interact with each other.